Purpose of front license plate??

[eekay]

^ Forget the consequences.

 

Just make sure that such covers work, in the first place, for the cameras that you want to defeat.

 

No sense bearing the consequences, if the defeat measure doesn't work, in the first place.

 

The only reason I ask is because about 5 years ago, someone had mentioned that it was something like 8 points and a $500 fine. I'm mainly just curious because that seems absurd to me.

[DickDastardly00]

Well excuse me if i don't feel like drilling two holes in my new car.

 

If you bought the car with no holes drilled for a front plate, then technically, it is the fault of the dealership for selling you the car in that condition; therefore you cannot be held liable for not having a front plate.

[grimsleeper]

you could always try one of these - Hide Away Plate Holder

 

splitter would be in the way on usdm bumpers but might work for jdm.

hook it up with a motor and drivers switch and be super stealth:cool:

[silbeej]

If you bought the car with no holes drilled for a front plate, then technically, it is the fault of the dealership for selling you the car in that condition; therefore you cannot be held liable for not having a front plate.

 

lol, i told the dealer i wouldn't buy it if there were holes in the bumper.

[DickDastardly00]

lol, i told the dealer i wouldn't buy it if there were holes in the bumper.

 

Right, but the officer that's pulling you over for no front plate doesn't need to know that......unless you want to volunteer it.

[TSiWRX]

The only reason I ask is because about 5 years ago, someone had mentioned that it was something like 8 points and a $500 fine. I'm mainly just curious because that seems absurd to me.

 

^ Agreed, but given the strong revenue-generation from this type of enforcement, it's easy to see why such harsh punishments would be levied.

 

Certainly, check out your local area's rules/laws, as well as how it's enforced, "on the ground," before you undertake any such modifications.

 

Here in NE-Ohio, Metro-Cleveland, specifically, for example, our enforcers are well aware of such "blurring" covers that obscures plates when viewed at off-angles. Most will simply stop you, and make you take it off the car, right then and there, but I know of a few "fix-it-tickets" having been issued for such. Just a slap-on-the-wrist, but certainly, I can see how in other jurisdictions, it may not be so easy.....

[eekay]

Ah. Good to know. I still see people with them from time to time so maybe the consequences aren't as bad as previously rumored to me. *shrugs* I should take a peek at the law and find out...

[TSiWRX]

^

 

Invariably, I see the occasional local here with one, one day, and then, a couple of days later, without.

 

[bdisco]

MythBusters Episode 87: "Myth Evolution"

 

REVISITED: A speed camera can be beaten by a magnified cover. (From Episode 72)

re-busted

The magnified cover failed to obscure the license plate.

(After the original episode viewers complained that the speed camera was mounted too low at 5 feet instead of 10 feet. For this episode the camera was mounted at 10 feet.)

 

REVISITED: A speed camera can be beaten by a reflective cover.

re-busted

The reflective cover failed to obscure the license plate.

 

REVISITED: A speed camera can be beaten by commercial spray.

re-busted

The commercial spray failed to obscure the license plate.

 

REVISITED: A speed camera can be beaten by extreme speeds.

confirmed

The Mythbusters obtained a race car dubbed “The Beast”, which used a jet engine that could propel it to speeds of up to 300 miles per hour. In the first run, The Beast hit 245 miles per hour and managed to pass the camera so fast that it never took a picture. In the second run, the speed camera was slightly modified to account for the increased speed, but still failed to take a picture of The Beast, which traveled faster than the first run. Even though the speed camera was beaten, the Mythbusters pointed out that only specialized cars like The Beast could achieve those kinds of speeds and would therefore be very easy to find by the authorities.

 

[TSiWRX]

^ Of those above:

 

The retail "distorting" covering can defeat certain types of cameras - more than likely, the MythBusters setup simply was one which could not be defeated by such.

 

Similarly, the retail "reflective spray" can also defeat certain types of camera setups - it's just that their setup happens to be one which could not be defeated.

 

This is why I said what I said, above, in post #44 - that such defeat measures are highly hardware-dependent.

 

What MythBusters have done is to drastically simplify the issue, for the sake of the television viewing audiences' enjoyment.

 

The problem is not really that these various defeat measures do/don't work - it's rather that their effectiveness is based highly upon the type of enforcement hardware that they're met with.

 

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1671945&highlight=types+of+cameras

 

^ Just look at this one sample posting - look at the different types of hardware.

 

Also, remember that "secondary consideration" that I spoke of, before?

 

It's been proven by members of the speed-detection countermeasures community at at least two of the cameras located in Metro-Cleveland can be defeated via the high-gloss "plate spray."

 

But guess what?

 

Yep, that high-gloss on the plates makes them EVEN MORE reflective to police LIDAR than just a naked, untreated, standard state-issue metallic license plate.

 

Every speed-detection countermeasures enthusiast will tell you how much of a liability that highly reflective front plate is, to your vehicle's "profile" to police LIDAR. Trust me, this cannot be over-stated.

 

Now imagine that you've got this spray on your plates...it's now an even brighter beacon.

 

Great idea, right? Particularly as, in most areas, such a camera-enforcement ticket is just a "fee for service" tax, with no points attached....

 

That makes real sense, to be able to defeat these cameras, but make yourself even more vulnerable to police LIDAR enforcement...which typically carries with it not only the ticket/citation, but also the secondary fall-out of points on your record, and as a result, the potential for higher insurance premiums, for years to come.

 

 

----------

 

Oh, and the extreme-speed scenario?

 

Again, that depends totally on the type of enforcement hardware.

 

TopGear demonstrated, in the GB, with one specific type of photo-enforcement hardware that is used, that a production vehicle - albeit a very fast one - can go fast enough to defeat the camera:

 

http://motorsports.broadbandsports.com/node/12483

 

Forget the blurb by the MythBusters crew that you can use a jet-engine powered vehicle to defeat these systems.

 

That's just silly - and is just there to again hype things for viewers.

 

Instead, think of the PRACTICAL limitations to such a scenario:

 

With most of these systems being employed in low-speed-limit, high-traffic, dense-grid areas, even if you can get a car up to the some 160+ odd MPH to zoom through these cameras, in such short spans (we've got some here in Metro-Cleveland that are literally stationed between two traffic lights that are less than a quarter-mile apart, even given a 10-second car, dragstrip launch,, that's still going to cut it close), without crashing and burning after the attempt?

 

 

MythBusters is just a TV show.

 

Do I love it?

 

Yes.

 

But honestly, in this particular instance, it's more about the entertainment value.

[ehsnils]

Don't count on the different "presentation" to defeat cameras.

 

Some utilize video technology, yet others use both front and rear.

 

Here there is only a front camera for the speed cameras and the driver has to be identified too.

 

And with the car plate flipped away under the bumper they won't have the plate number.

[TSiWRX]

^ In that case, I'd think that the TopGear "facemask" trick would work best.

 

The plate being flipped under is, to me, the only valid "plate-only" defense, outside of using the electrochromatic-glass plate-obscuring covers - however, it, as with anything else of this nature, incurs the risk of notice by enforcement personnel - i.e. that you've engaged the unit as you're transitioning through the intersection.

 

To me, the ideal defense setup, technologically speaking, would be to somehow incorporate SpeedCheetah's ActiveStealth countermeasures management (and to use their Trinity database, which is superior, for fixed threats), and couple that with some kind of digital-to-analog output converter (given that ActiveStealth can already manage a radar-detector as well as laser jammer, this should not be difficult), and allow the set distance/speed based actions of ActiveStealth to trigger defensive actuation of any such plate-obscuring/hiding device.

 

Splice in a kill-switch for this action, to be triggered in case you see an enforcer in the area (i.e. so that, when the kill is activated, the plate-flipper/obscuring device will NOT engage), this really should insure protection.

[spolkyc]

In NM we have only rear plates and speeding/red light cameras pointed at the back bumper. I like states with the camera pointed towards the front so they only get a pic of my bumper.

 

Basically they are for extra identification and visibility. In LAX they take a pic of your front plate when you exit the pay parking lots for security and such.

 

Ya I remember playing with a laser pointer near a parked car and the dot was like 10x brighter on the plate then the paint. I have also seen people in CA cut the bottom of the plate off so not to cover the FMIC.

[jeepr]

I've had a mixed experience with no front plate. They are required in MO.

 

When I bought my Vette back in 2000, the dealer didn't put it on, said if he was me, he wouldn't. The Vettes have a nice cover that snaps in covering the hole where the plate would go. I was of the opinion at that time, that I didn't want an excuse to be pulled over.

 

Then a few years later, I had a Jetta, I never put the front plate on, just kinda lazy and (it sounds stupid) but the dealer plate up there was kinda cool looking. Well, I got pulled over for it and given a ticket.

 

But, my Jeep, while I have a plate and bracket for it, it is removable for off-roading. Well, I haven't bothered to put it on in quite a while and nothing has happened. Some think that on the Jeeps, the winch, aftermarket bumper, etc create enough "visual distraction" so the cops don't notice. But, I did have a friend get pulled over and warned in his Jeep.

 

Then, along comes the Subi. I didn't have plates when I bought it, and later, I realized that there was no front mount. I asked the dealer why they didn't put a front mount on, and they said there really isn't one, you screw into the bumper. So, it's only been like 2 months so far, but I've not run one, and probably won't.

 

To add to this whole mystery, my Dodge 3/4 ton truck is licensed as an 18,000 lb truck, and the state only issues one plate and it is to go on the FRONT! (I get questions about it all the time from people that wonder why I have a "vanity" plate on the back). I guess the theory is that there is often a trailer back there blocking it. But still.... how much would another plate cost the state for the many times when you aren't pulling a trailer? I would think a back plate is more important than a front plate, such as when people are running from cops or while the cop is behind them while pulled over on the road? But, I guess that's why I'm not a lawmaker, I think too logically

[09blkL3g]

Defeating the cameras is tough and illegal ofcourse..but very simple and do able..

 

i saw on some site most of those cameras pick up ir light? So this guy made a license plate frame mounted with ir leds, bright ones...bright enough to leave a huge glare on the frame..

 

Since its ir leds, it cant be seen by the human eye when its "on" or lit..but it can be picked up on the speed cams. The glare is supposedly enough to cover up the numbers..

 

Haven't tried this and dont really need to..

[eekay]

I've also heard something of this sort. Not sure if it works though. Might be something to look into.

[StoplightAssassin]

Defeating the cameras is tough and illegal ofcourse..but very simple and do able..

 

http://www.lolwut.com/layout/lolwut.jpg

[TSiWRX]

^ Pretty much.

 

So......

 

Defeating the cameras is tough and illegal ofcourse..but very simple and do able..

 

i saw on some site most of those cameras pick up ir light? So this guy made a license plate frame mounted with ir leds, bright ones...bright enough to leave a huge glare on the frame..

 

Since its ir leds, it cant be seen by the human eye when its "on" or lit..but it can be picked up on the speed cams. The glare is supposedly enough to cover up the numbers..

 

Haven't tried this and dont really need to..

 

and

 

I've also heard something of this sort. Not sure if it works though. Might be something to look into.

 

Actually, this is much harder to do, in-practice, than in theory, with anything but, say, a "plate flipper."

 

Some cameras use IR, others use visible light.

 

Yet others use video.

 

There's unfortunately no sure-fire defeat.

 

RadarRoy recently posted on RD.net about a friend of his who developed a "plate frame" based "plate flasher" that "defeats, 100%," all stationary cameras, and about 50% of mobile ones.

 

There's been a lot of interest on the RD.net Forums - me included - but so far, there's been no answer regarding two specific questions:

 

(1) will this also defeat cameras utilizing video technology

 

and

 

(2) will this also defeat IR-based cameras

 

It's not simple, at all, and aside from "plate flippers" and other such devices to visually, selectively (which rules out the various "lens" devices), obscure the plate, virtually all attempts have failed or have not been completely successful.

[FPerron]

I'm amazed nobody's figured this out.

 

The last time I got busted for no front plate, the officer told me the reason was that the state (NH) wanted to prevent rednecks from running one plate on the daily driver and the other on the mud truck:lol:

[TSiWRX]

^ That's awesome!

[StoplightAssassin]

I'm amazed nobody's figured this out.

 

The last time I got busted for no front plate, the officer told me the reason was that the state (NH) wanted to prevent rednecks from running one plate on the daily driver and the other on the mud truck:lol:

 

I might be missing something here, but if that is the real reason, why would they issue you two plates? And you never would've been pulled over if you didn't have that huge wing on the back.

 

 

I'm pretty sure the real reason is so cameras can simultaneously snap a picture of the front plate and the driver's face.

 

 

Here in Jersey, according to the interpretation of the law, it is illegal to have even just a license plate frame, let alone anything (even clear plastic) to go over it. So something like this is definitely illegal...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS1eW3QlaQM]YouTube - Bullrun 2006: License Plate Test[/ame]

[FPerron]

Yes, I get stopped a lot because of the wing, the numbers on the side and the 3" straight pipe. But then the "arresting officer" ends up with a sheepish look on his face when he realizes that instead of stopping some kid he can intimidate and push around, he's stopped a 64 year upstanding citizen with connections - nyahaha:lol::lol:

 

BTW, check out my latest video at:

http://www.songpull.com/performance/view_video/1210

[TSiWRX]

I'm pretty sure the real reason is so cameras can simultaneously snap a picture of the front plate and the driver's face.

 

^ That's indeed part of it.

 

Systems which use front/facial cameras for ID purposes (legality concern in some areas) certainly benefit from having the plate as another piece of evidence, and we've seen even pictures of such, with the then-DC-area VASCAR-line based fixed speed cameras, posted by a fellow LGTer on these very Forums (the picture is no longer available, unfortunately).

 

But honestly, don't overlook the fact that a metallic, reflective, front plate is a huge LIDAR "retro-reflector."

 

In various speed-detection countermeasures hobbyist testing, conducted in as-quantitative of a manner as currently possible - and with use of actual, current-generation, calibrated/certified, police LIDAR units - the issued metallic front plate, both here in the US as well as in other countries, continues to be the single "brightest" point of LIDAR/IR-energy return.

 

It's no wonder that enforcers in areas which mandate a front plate are taught to target frontal center-mass as the primary target.

 

And even with various passive and/or active protective measures, the front plate continues to be the biggest concern, and can often sway the balance of the battle.

 

Here in Jersey, according to the interpretation of the law, it is illegal to have even just a license plate frame, let alone anything (even clear plastic) to go over it. So something like this is definitely illegal...

 

^ The biggest problems with such a system (both in terms of "obscuring" the rear plate, as seen above, as well as various "flash/overexposure" devices), aside from places like NJ and TX, where such plate covers are outright illegal, is that (1) it's not "automatic" (i.e. it does not trigger when it comes to a threat) and (2) that, if "active," many forget to wire-in a user-activated "defeat/bypass" so that, should you be cruising through such a threat area, and there are actually live enforcers within proximity, you can choose to disengage/override.

 

The former can potentially be solved via advanced integration - things like SpeedCheetah's ActiveStealth or a DIY-integration of a GPS-based POI system, linked to a trigger for this type of device, can make such a system "active" instead of passive or reactive.

 

The latter is just a matter of simple foresight during the install.

 

As for that specific electrochormic-type "smart-glass" plate-cover above?

 

Many of us in the speed-detection countermeasures community have come across such ads in the past. The names "FoxPlate" and "HideAPlate" should ring a bell for anyone who has been in the speed-detection countermeasures hobby for the last 5 or so years.

 

However, despite many of our best and sincere attempts to actually make contact with individuals marketing such devices - including hobbyists physically visiting the addresses - those products have never been anything more than Internet VaporWare or, alternatively, true custom-one-offs, and not readily available for retail purchase.

[TSiWRX]

Yes, I get stopped a lot because of the wing, the numbers on the side and the 3" straight pipe. But then the "arresting officer" ends up with a sheepish look on his face when he realizes that instead of stopping some kid he can intimidate and push around, he's stopped a 64 year upstanding citizen with connections - nyahaha:lol::lol:

 

BTW, check out my latest video at:

http://www.songpull.com/performance/view_video/1210

 

:lol: Sweet!

 

More funny songs? I liked that!

[ClimberDHexMods]

TSI+WRX (you are the man by the way), will using a high quality photocopy license plate on vinyl or whatever help desensitize me to lidar (would do front plate only, rear I'm screwed either way )?

Does angling the front plate down do anything to help with lidar? Why do people do that?

Why do you RD guys have CR8APLATE? Something I'm missing here?

 

Thanks in advance!