Hmm I surprisingly have never thought of this. The OSHP website states that the front plate is required for public safety, crime prevension/criminal apprehension, and as a law enforcement investigatory tool. However, we all know it is there just so they can clock speed.
Yep, it's mainly to clock speed - yes, there's a part of true public safety involved, but the issue metallic plate is a *huge* point-weakness, and in all hobbyist tests have proven to be a tremendous liability in terms of the amount of LIDAR return it generates.
Quote:
Do you have any proof? I looked into it further - in Ohio this specifically violates ORC 4549.08, most notibly subpart A2.
No proof other than that that there's more than one set in-use in Ohio. And there's also more than one set which gets enforcement scrutiny nearly every day, with no issues.
The plate is a very, very close cosmetic match - with only the retro-reflective portion absent (which, itself, is easily obscured with road-grime if the plate is at all left unattended for just a couple of days), and with raised text that is not quite of the same size as those of the issue.
Unless you put one plate up against the next - identical ones, at that (as text font and impression varies slightly, even from one issue plate to the next - it's virtually impossible to spot on a "one-off" basis. It took someone with very good spacial/graphical talent to notice such a plate, after nearly six months of daily exposure.
Given that your valid and genuine BMV issued registration sticker matches the plate, there's no reason for any enforcer to suspect any less.
If you get pulled over for the plate, it'll be for a reason other than the fact that it's a replica, provided that you've dressed the edges of the replica properly, as it is not sized precisely as that of an issue metallic.
OK, enough with non-specifics. Here's the real-deal -->
I once posted the following on the Laser Interceptor Forums, in discussing, with another hobbyist, gadgetman, of FL, the topic of "plate protection" as a specific point.
Quote:
gadgetman - VEIL'ing or otherwise dressing the front plate, if you must use one (a front plate, that is), is always a good idea.
I'm among those who believe in the synergy of passive as well as active countermeasures - I like to take after Dieter, and call it the "Circle of Defense," others call it by yet different military terms, such as The VEIL Guy's reference to "Defense-in-Depth, which also implies both synergy and redundancy, as well as defense-through-attrition.
Whether or not any of such plate-dressing measures, to include (but not limited to):
- using commercial non/less-"retroreflective" replica plate(s)
- constructing such alternative plate(s) of your own (i.e. color photocopy on heavy stock)
- VEIL'ing plate(s)
- dressing plate(s) with 3M Clear Duct Tape
- physical alteration of issue plate(s) via "dereflectorization" (sanding/buffing, clearcoating/painting, etc.)
- using LaserShield or other such device on plate(s)
- removing the front plate (if issued/required)
What one ends up choosing will be heavily dependent upon the perceived risk-reward ratio, and for each person, their own comfort level interms of "legality," as well as how much enforcement in said area pays attention to the "dressed" plate.
The standard tricolor Ohio issue is rather easily duplicated by the CR8APL8 fiberglass offerings. Luckily, we've got only very, very small holographics (which are barely visualized, and with any amount of dirt on the plate at all, is easily obscured), and the visible graphics and test are very simplistic. Yes, the font for the raised/embossed lettering is slightly off, but unless you've actually got another identical plate sitting directly off to the side, it's pretty much impossible to discern this difference. It took my sister-in-law, who's rather gifted in terms of "visual/spacial" stuff, nearly 3 months before she finally said: "Allen, is something different about your plate?" With authentic issue registration stickers - there's honestly no reason for any enforcer to be upset about it, and truth be told, I haven't even been given a second glance.
For states with higher complexity of graphics (i.e. the NY "blue" plate, with the intricate upper border) or holographics (i.e. TN plate, which, at an angle, appears nearly "fractured" from the midline hologram), I cannot recommend the CR8APL8. Similarly, as the fiberglass replica is not an exact size-match, and will require the use of a plate "frame/surround" in order to conceal this fact, I also cannot recommend it to those whose local area forbids the use of such frames.
My front replica plate is also dressed via a LaserShield, which, at about 30 ft. away, is rather "invisible" to the naked eye. My local area has no restrictions for the use of plate covers, and this one, which does not obscure the plate, isn't unfavorably looked upon by area enforcers. In states such as VA, however, enforcers can be very strict as well as knowledgeable, and can cite you for the use of such devices - which is why in such areas, dressing said plate with VEIL, buffing/sanding it, or using 3M Clear Duct Tape may be a better idea.
For me, I chose to still use my front plate because local enforcers are strict on front-plate laws, which is an Ohio requirement for passenger vehicles. Although such a citation is only a "fix-it-ticket," one of my goals is to specifically avoid any kind of enforcement scenario - period - and as such, having the plate in-place allows the vehicle to be "overlooked" as just another typical family-sedan by enforcement personnel. Furthermore, a front plate dead-center is also good "bait," offering the enforcer direct sight of their trained-preference target - which can hopefully buy me more time to slow-to-PSL/reasonable.
The rear plate is "naked." This is also in-part due to my local enforcement habits. As I live in a densely urban area, normal traffic flow often has an enforcer parked at my rear 3/4s or even directly behind. This would make such rather obvious treatments of the rear plate (including other means of dressing the rear plate, such as 3M Duct Tape), too risky - as the plate is very much in line-of-sight.
With me, the issue of buffing/roughing the plate(s) is problematic - I'm in the rust belt, and unless I clearcoated the plate afterwards, which would be self-defeating - the plate would likely rust through. Similar problems exist with VEIL -> dressing with VEIL, as the car's decently clean, most of the time, a rather dirty appearing plate would seem out-of-place, and itself may spur more enforcement attention.
So there you have it.
There's a lot of things to consider when it comes to "plate dressing." Everyone's unique considerations and situation will impact what they choose to do, or not do, for this most headache-inducing area.
And this was supplemented by:
Quote:
The biggest problem with the plate, IMveryHO is not the physical item itself, but rather, the varied rules as well as the even more subjectively affected enforcement of such rules that governs what is "acceptable" in one area, versus the other.
This is why instead of pushing one product or another, I like to present *all* possibilities to our fellow hobbyists and motorists, and allow them to - based on the specific rules/laws of their area as well as their local enforcement practices and preferences - decide for themselves what, if any, method of such passive "point protective" measures can be utilized, and to what degree "hassle" there might come, from their use.
For example, Stealth Stalker, a fellow hobbyist on the RD.net Forums, is a former LEO, and cites well that in his area, the first thing that would draw his and his fellow enforcers' attention would be a "darkened" plate cover, either commercially bought, retail aftermarket, or, for example, a VEIL'ed LaserShield or VEIL'ed "clear" cover. He repeatedly cites that in his local area, a LaserShield, without VEIL treatment darkening/tinting it, would not attract any undue attention - and he himself uses, as his .sig declares, an On-Track (the same maker of the LaserShield you pointed to above) TotalEclipse.
Yet, if you searched around RD.net a bit, you'll also find other motorists/hobbyists stating, plainly, that their local enforcers are wise to the use of LaserShield - and will stop and cite the user of such a device. And similarly, I can tell you well that although the LaserShield is not regarded with any scorn in my area, the TotalEclipse would definitely be a cite-able offense.
With such variability in enforcement - not just rules - I find it very hard to say to anyone "this is what I do, it works for me, so you should do it, too."
So there you have it.
I've driven with this configuration of replica plates since, to estimate conservatively, 4th quarter, 2006.
That's a little over 2 years of daily driving, in and around Metro-Cleveland, in some of the most densely-enforcement-packed (enforcer density per area) and the most "picky" about the front plate code: Cleveland Heights, Highland Hills, Woodmere Village - these names should be sufficient to throw up some warning bells. :lol:
There's also erickonphoenix, a known name in our community and a fellow brother, in TX - who relates his use of the standard Tri-Color TX plate in his local area, where, in one instance, an enforcer closely scrutinized the plate at a local coffee shop, with no ill effects, and in another case, where his MISMATCHED front plate (he'd gotten a new vehicle, and decided, for the moment, to risk running his previous CR8APL8 replica tag, to keep his new vehicle's LIDAR reflectivity low, while his new replica plate was being made), when he was pulled-over for an unrelated issue, was noted, but still did not cause him any grief.
I as I've said up above in this post, I certainly won't say to you that this is something that you *should* do.
As with anything else in this hobby, I'm merely presenting this as a viable defense - but you have to be the one who makes the call of whether or not you think that the risk-to-benefit ratio is acceptable.
Just as some people do not think that a plate cover is acceptable risk or do not think that using VEIL and/or LaserShield on the plate(s) represent an acceptable risk, there are also those who think that using replica plates - be it commercially made or self-made (i.e. high-quality photocopies on weatherproof stock, laminated) - or in "prepping" the plate in other ways (i.e. using 3M Clear Duct Tape, buffing-down or roughing-up the surface, leaving it dirty, etc.), this is a very unique concern, and requires a lot of soul-searching by the specific end-user, to decide, for themselves, if the risk-ratio is worth it.
Wow great information! I am definitely going to look into the novelty plate. I might email the guy for a few pics and dimensions. Can you tell me how close yours is to the real thing? Apparently it is just a bit off.
Also - would you recommend a clear plate cover with a light VEIL to avoid any suspicion? I was thinking that the smoked plate that I have on there with a light VEIL may turn out very dark, raising suspicion.
Secondly, if I did find myself on the other side of the law with this, it is CLEARLY premeditated. I might get a hold of a few lawyer buddies of mine to review this. The only way they could prove this would violate ORC 4549.08 would be if I was forced to take off my plate at the traffic stop so he could have a closer look, on the basis of probable cause. The definition of probable cause states that of a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime." Another common definition is "a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts are probably true.
It would seem to me that just because the guy couldn't get a reading on me does not give him probable cause, as there are too many other factors involved. Yet if looking closely at the plate looks at all false, I would say that that is probable cause.
Wow great information! I am definitely going to look into the novelty plate. I might email the guy for a few pics and dimensions. Can you tell me how close yours is to the real thing? Apparently it is just a bit off.
Some states/designs are better replicated than others - those that are graphically simple (as opposed to graphics-intense, such as that for NY) and do not incorporate obvious holographics (like the TN plate), for example, are better replicated.
The standard Ohio Tri-Color, as well as that for TX, are of the "better" examples, due to their graphical simplicity and standard coloration (and this is also why those with more graphically complex plates, such as NY, have taken to using high-quality color photocopies of their front plate, printed on quality, UV-resistant stock, and then laminated, as their chosen method of producing a "non-LIDAR-cooperative plate").
Of course, there still exists the problem of text font match, but unless there was a side-to-side comparison of the issue plate with the replica, there's just no telling - particularly given the fact that even with the issue plates, there's still a little variability.
The biggest problem for the standard Ohio Tri-Color is the sizing of the actual plate itself. Without a "plate frame," there's virtually no way you can disguise the fact that the plate is a replica, as the physical sizing of the CR8APL8 replica is typically well off that of the genuine article (however, this is only in terms of the edges not extending as far - it's not to say that the plate is of distorted proportions).
Quote:
Also - would you recommend a clear plate cover with a light VEIL to avoid any suspicion? I was thinking that the smoked plate that I have on there with a light VEIL may turn out very dark, raising suspicion.
Hard to say.....
Here in the eastern suburbs of Metro-Cleveland, such plate covers are a fact of "urban fashion," and our enforcers do not typically harass anyone about them unless it is so opaque as to make the plate non-readable. This, of course, includes night-time scenarios for the rear plate.
You'll have to judge how your area enforcers view such cosmetic modifications, as well as how they take to Import Sport Compacts (modified ones, particularly, if your vehicle is so), and make the call yourself.
Quote:
Secondly, if I did find myself on the other side of the law with this, it is CLEARLY premeditated. I might get a hold of a few lawyer buddies of mine to review this. The only way they could prove this would violate ORC 4549.08 would be if I was forced to take off my plate at the traffic stop so he could have a closer look, on the basis of probable cause. The definition of probable cause states that of a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime." Another common definition is "a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts are probably true.
It would seem to me that just because the guy couldn't get a reading on me does not give him probable cause, as there are too many other factors involved. Yet if looking closely at the plate looks at all false, I would say that that is probable cause.
In not being an attorney ( I'm a biological scientist by trade and training ), I would agree with how you are reading the law.
However, that's my layman's interpretation.
I think that if your use of the vehicle does not include any outright acts of social abandon (i.e. street-racing), it is very unlikely, particularly if you only used a replica on the FRONT of the vehicle, where all but the most intensive and INTENTIONAL of examinations would otherwise be "in-passing" and very cursory.
Similarly, the use of such an item only on the front of the vehicle, particularly here in NE-Ohio, carries with it the ability to explain that your plate was damaged by road-debris/parking damage - or even simple rust - and that you bought the replica off the Internet because you didn't want to have to memorize a new plate number (be sure you know your plate number, then!) - and seeing as your rear plate is authentic/genuine issue, the enforcer should be more lenient.
Overall, again, I am not trying to say, by any of the above, that you should follow my example - or even, for that matter, use a replica (be it home-made or commercially obtained) for just the front plate.
I think that this is a more extreme measure, on the scale of things, and one that does carry with it a certain amount of culpability.
As with any other countermeasure, you have to decide, for yourself, whether or not it is acceptable for you, in terms of the risk-to-benefit ratio.
And there's also more than one set which gets enforcement scrutiny nearly every day, with no issues. 
Here's the real-deal -->
Linear Mode
