PDA

View Full Version : Legality of no doors and top in Denver


dirtyXplorer
04-09-2010, 03:22 PM
Hi All,

I did some googeling and didn't come up with anything. I am assuming it is OK but is it illegal to run a FJ40 without doors in Denver? I have seen a lot of jeeps around with out doors and a top but I hardly ever see any FJ40s.

Its warming up outside! :D

TIMZTOY
04-09-2010, 03:38 PM
I belive it's legal as long as you have mirrors and seat belts.

FJBRADY
04-09-2010, 03:52 PM
The law does not cover one model vs. another. I have my doors off! Take um off.:thumb: :drumsticks:

Dr. Schlegs
04-09-2010, 04:00 PM
Are you allowed to go Topless? I've been known to go topless in my 40.

nattybumppo
04-09-2010, 04:05 PM
Denver traffic code refers to the State traffic code in this area. State code does not require doors.

FJBRADY
04-09-2010, 04:05 PM
I've been known to go topless in my 40.

Now that's dead sexy Schlegs! :eek:

Air Randy
04-09-2010, 04:07 PM
If the vehicle was available from the factory with removable soft doors as an option, like Jeep CJ's, FJ40's, etc, then it's legal. Even if your particular vehicle shipped with a hard top & doors, it's still legal as long as it was a potential option on your vehicle.

So, an FJ40 can legally run without doors. An FJ55,60,62,80, mini-truck etc technically cannot. However on those vehicles you could run tube doors and still be legal.

On the other hand I've never seen a cop stop someone for this and in my 13 years as a cop I never did. If you had an accident or were stopped for some other reason and you ticked the cop off so he was looking for everything he could write you for, this might come up.

Red_Chili
04-09-2010, 04:52 PM
If your empty beer can rolls out because you have no door... all bets are off.

nakman
04-09-2010, 04:54 PM
If your empty beer can rolls out because you have no door... all bets are off.

One of the reasons a 40 is superior to any 4Runner or wagon... there's a good 4" lip down there, unless you're up on two wheels there ain't nothin' rolling out of the floor area! :D


edit: but I can remember following Perry in Moab and watching him stop a few times to run back and pick up his sun glasses.. :lmao: :perry:

Corbet
04-09-2010, 07:51 PM
I think the 'lip" at the bottom of the door is what makes it legal. If you ad a lip to a runner you might be "legit" But I'm no expert. Randy is closer to one in this dept.

dirtyXplorer
04-09-2010, 07:52 PM
Sweet! The top and doors are coming OFF!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek:

What have some of you done to have mirrors? It doesn't look like the factory ones would fit by the window hinges.

Thanks all.

MDH33
04-09-2010, 08:18 PM
Sweet! The top and doors are coming OFF!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek:

What have some of you done to have mirrors? It doesn't look like the factory ones would fit by the window hinges.

Thanks all.

Most mirrors can be mounted to either the door or Windshield hinges. :thumb:

http://mdhuber.smugmug.com/photos/290189064_4wLXU-M.jpg

theboomboom
04-10-2010, 01:31 AM
'91+ vehicles require a 3rd brakelight, usually mounted to the top even if it's "removable" (damhik)

teamextreme
04-10-2010, 02:06 AM
'91+ vehicles require a 3rd brakelight, usually mounted to the top even if it's "removable" (damhik)

Are you guys manufacturing vehicles or trying to follow CO law when driving them? There is no law requiring a 3rd brake light. There are federal DOT laws requiring manufacturers to install them (which started in '86 for passenger cars and '94 for light trucks, BTW), but no CRS requiring their use.

Randy, care to cite a CRS# that talks about being legal doorless only if said vehicle came with soft doors? Same with the theory on the door lip. I've heard people quote these beliefs but I've yet to see the law. I don't believe it exists.

As far as mirror mounting, I use CJ mirrors on the windshield hinges, works great.

rover67
04-10-2010, 02:15 AM
all I know is my 40 will be topless and doorless this summer no matter what the local constable thinks.....

Red_Chili
04-10-2010, 07:49 AM
I would never even THINK of going topless and doorless... :rolleyes: :D

http://redchili.smugmug.com/4x4/Cruise-Moab-2008/DSCN0097/293510617_zPqUR-L.jpg

DaveInDenver
04-10-2010, 08:36 AM
Randy, care to cite a CRS# that talks about being legal doorless only if said vehicle came with soft doors? Same with the theory on the door lip. I've heard people quote these beliefs but I've yet to see the law. I don't believe it exists.
But good question, I was wondering this, too since I'd always heard only Jeeps, FJ40s, etc. could legally remove their doors and never really much knew why. Obviously a vehicle designed to have removable doors, tops or what-not would have a structure rigid enough that the doors would not be necessary and maybe that is the reasoning.

I'd have guessed that CRS 42-4-203 would be the catch-all. This is the generic unsafe vehicle roadside evaluation that they can use to cite you if they judge your vehicle defective. But without engineering specifics written into the law I don't see how a court could rule without being arbitrary. Just because a rolling heep of junk looks dangerous without doors does not mean it necessarily would be.

AFAIK your vehicle must retain OE glass (e.g. tempered or safety), marker lights, headlights, etc. Another statue that I know from the top of my head is CRS 42-4-1407, which is the one that requires you to have mud flaps.

subzali
04-10-2010, 08:46 AM
I've never been pulled over for not having mudflaps - FJ40s didn't come with them. Hey Bill - I recognize that picture! :hill:

Early Broncos don't have a lip like FJ40s and Jeeps to keep stuff from rolling out, so don't know if they're ok to run without doors technically...

Air Randy
04-10-2010, 08:58 AM
Are you guys manufacturing vehicles or trying to follow CO law when driving them? There is no law requiring a 3rd brake light. There are federal DOT laws requiring manufacturers to install them (which started in '86 for passenger cars and '94 for light trucks, BTW), but no CRS requiring their use.

Randy, care to cite a CRS# that talks about being legal doorless only if said vehicle came with soft doors? Same with the theory on the door lip. I've heard people quote these beliefs but I've yet to see the law. I don't believe it exists.

As far as mirror mounting, I use CJ mirrors on the windshield hinges, works great.

In Utah there is a specific traffic code that requires doors unless the vehicle came factory without them. DaveinDenver is correct, in Colorado there is no specific CRS that specifically refers to doors, however the generic "unsafe vehicle" code would be used to address it.

But the entire discussion is probably moot since no one I know has ever been stopped just for that reason.

wesintl
04-10-2010, 09:38 AM
I would never even THINK of going topless

and we appreciate it :D

nattybumppo
04-10-2010, 10:15 AM
The only thing that would draw the attention of the po po in Denver would be if you were hanging things out of the car while driving. For example, a protruding leg, arm with middle finger extended, etc. During Cinco de Mayo the cops often cite drivers for flag poles being held out to the side of a moving vehicle (state traffic code), or people clinging to the outside of vehicles (municipal traffic code). Another no-no, technically, is running tires too wide to be covered by the fenders or mudflaps.

teamextreme
04-10-2010, 10:33 AM
Another statue that I know from the top of my head is CRS 42-4-1407, which is the one that requires you to have mud flaps.


That's for commercial vehicles over 10k lbs. Doesn't apply to us. Mud flaps are not required, except in City of Denver, which has a specific ordinance.

teamextreme
04-10-2010, 10:54 AM
AFAIK your vehicle must retain OE glass (e.g. tempered or safety), marker lights, headlights, etc.

Marker lights are only required on vehicles over 30' long and 80" wide. At the risk of sounding like a dick, you guys need to research the CRS laws before posting up erroneous info for everyone else to take as gospel. Everyone should read through this to better understand what is and isn't required.

http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=

Here's another big one people always assume; running without a windshield is ok as long as you have eye protection....nope, CRS 42-4-229(4) requires a front windshield.

And another common misconception, side view mirrors are required....nope, CRS 42-4-226 requires "a" mirror allowing unobstructed view for 200 feet behind. I wouldn't want to drive without one, but it's not required. If you're towing a trailer or rear window is obstructed you need one on both sides.

EWheeler
04-10-2010, 10:57 AM
If you have a full cage, here is a mirror option. I will be picking up (or possibly building something similar) for my 40 to use with my Redline cage when the doors are off.

http://www.liquidironindustries.com/product.php?productid=17608&cat=261&page=1

DaveInDenver
04-10-2010, 01:18 PM
Marker lights are only required on vehicles over 30' long and 80" wide. At the risk of sounding like a dick, you guys need to research the CRS laws before posting up erroneous info for everyone else to take as gospel.
Never said I preach the gospel, although Randy's opinion is probably much better having been a Douglas County sheriff and all. He might not be right 100% but I have a hard time disagreeing with him off the cuff w.r.t. citing statue. And sorry I used the wrong term this morning, but besides headlights every car has to have taillights, brake lights, side reflectors and a rear plate light. Not sure what else to call that stuff collectively, accessory lighting?

42-4-206. Tail lamps and reflectors.

(1) Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer and any other vehicle which is being drawn at the end of a train of vehicles shall be equipped with at least one tail lamp mounted on the rear, which, when lighted as required in section 42-4-204, shall emit a red light plainly visible from a distance of five hundred feet to the rear; except that, in the case of a train of vehicles, only the tail lamp on the rear-most vehicle need actually be seen from the distance specified, and except as provided in section 42-4-215.5. Furthermore, every such vehicle registered in this state and manufactured or assembled after January 1, 1958, shall be equipped with at least two tail lamps mounted on the rear, on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable, which, when lighted as required in section 42-4-204, shall comply with the provisions of this section.

(2) Every tail lamp upon every vehicle shall be located at a height of not more than seventy-two inches nor less than twenty inches, to be measured as set forth in section 42-4-204 (3).

(3) Either a tail lamp or a separate lamp shall be so constructed and placed as to illuminate with a white light the rear registration plate and render it clearly legible from a distance of fifty feet to the rear. Any tail lamp, together with any separate lamp for illuminating the rear registration plate, shall be so wired as to be lighted whenever the head lamps or auxiliary driving lamps are lighted.

(4) Every motor vehicle operated on and after January 1, 1958, upon a highway in the state of Colorado shall carry on the rear, either as part of a tail lamp or separately, one red reflector meeting the requirements of this section; except that vehicles of the type mentioned in section 42-4-207 shall be equipped with reflectors as required in those sections applicable thereto and except as provided in section 42-4-215.5.

(5) Every new motor vehicle sold and operated on and after January 1, 1958, upon a highway shall carry on the rear, whether as a part of the tail lamps or separately, two red reflectors; except that every motorcycle shall carry at least one reflector meeting the requirements of this section, and vehicles of the type mentioned in section 42-4-207 shall be equipped with reflectors as required in those sections applicable thereto.

(6) Every reflector shall be mounted on the vehicle at a height of not less than twenty inches nor more than sixty inches, measured as set forth in section 42-4-204 (3) and shall be of such size and characteristics and so mounted as to be visible at night from all distances within three hundred fifty feet to one hundred feet from such vehicle when directly in front of lawful upper beams and head lamps; except that visibility from a greater distance is required by law of reflectors on certain types of vehicles.

(7) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class B traffic infraction.

DaveInDenver
04-10-2010, 01:22 PM
That's for commercial vehicles over 10k lbs. Doesn't apply to us. Mud flaps are not required, except in City of Denver, which has a specific ordinance.
My mistake, you are right. I've been cited in Moab and back when I checked, I read Colorado's law wrong. Sorry.

42-4-1407.5. Splash guards - when required.

(1) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:

(a) "Splash guards" means mud flaps, rubber, plastic or fabric aprons, or other devices directly behind the rear-most wheels, designed to minimize the spray of water and other substances to the rear.
(b) "Splash guards" must, at a minimum, be wide enough to cover the full tread of the tire or tires being protected, hang perpendicular from the vehicle not more than ten inches above the surface of the street or highway when the vehicle is empty, and generally maintain their perpendicular relationship under normal driving conditions.

(2) Except as otherwise permitted in this section, no vehicle or motor vehicle shall be driven or moved on any street or highway unless the vehicle or motor vehicle is equipped with splash guards. However, vehicles and motor vehicles with splash guards that violate this section shall be allowed to remain in service for the time necessary to continue to a place where the deficient splash guards will be replaced. Such replacement shall occur at the first reasonable opportunity.

(3) This section does not apply to:

(a) Passenger-carrying motor vehicles registered pursuant to section 42-3-305 (2);
(b) Trucks and truck tractors registered pursuant to section 42-3-305 (4) or (5) having an empty weight of ten thousand pounds or less;
(c) Trailers equipped with fenders or utility pole trailers;
(d) Vehicles while involved in chip and seal or paving operations or road widening equipment;
(e) Truck tractors or converter dollies when used in combination with other vehicles;
(f) Vehicles drawn by animals; or
(g) Bicycles or electrical assisted bicycles.

(4) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class B traffic infraction.

leiniesred
04-10-2010, 01:25 PM
I thought that technically, you had to run everything that was on the rig when you bought it and very few jeeps/land cruisers etc. were sold without tops or doors.
I agree that it is a dumb rule. so dumb that no one follows it, which is a good thing.

What about UPS and fedex delivery trucks? No "lip" on the bottom of those rigs when they run around with the door off. The lip can't be important. But yeah, today is one of those take the top off and drive around days.

Even if the doors and top are off of your 4runner, you STILL can't fold the windshield down and that's a real bummer! Just not the same. OK, I know I know, but We've tried it on the jeep. max speed is about 25. More than that and you wish you had the windshield up anyway.

Jealous of you guys with no tops or doors today!

nattybumppo
04-10-2010, 01:59 PM
"At the risk of sounding like a dick, you guys need to research the CRS laws before posting up erroneous info for everyone else to take as gospel."

Please don't take as gospel the opinions we express on this forum. If they are useful to you, use them, if not, don't.

"Here's another big one people always assume; running without a windshield is ok as long as you have eye protection....nope, CRS 42-4-229(4) requires a front windshield."

Where does it say it cannot be folded down? That would definitely be worth the argument before the judge if you ever got a ticket!

(4) No person shall operate a motor vehicle on any highway within this state unless such vehicle is equipped with a front windshield as provided in this section, except as provided in section 42-4-232 (1) and except for motor vehicles registered as collectors' items under section 42-3-219.

rover67
04-10-2010, 02:14 PM
intersting stuff here. sounds like there are no problems driving around sans doors and top. I dig it.

Yeah, I tried the no windshield thing.. starts to be annoying at anything more than a crawl.

Uncle Ben
04-10-2010, 02:53 PM
WFC! :rolleyes: Be safe and don't be a jerk on the road and you wont get hassled! My 40's tires stick way out beyond the body, I never run a top and the suspension is radically altered and not of factory design. I'm friends with several Louisville LEO's and they dig my Cruisers! Helps that the sergeant has a built 80 possibly....

teamextreme
04-10-2010, 03:55 PM
[Where does it say it cannot be folded down? That would definitely be worth the argument before the judge if you ever got a ticket!

(4) No person shall operate a motor vehicle on any highway within this state unless such vehicle is equipped with a front windshield as provided in this section, except as provided in section 42-4-232 (1) and except for motor vehicles registered as collectors' items under section 42-3-219.


Oooh, I like your thinking. Yeah, it's got a windshield, it's just folded down! Wonder how far you could push that argument, but it's technically correct. Agreed though, I wouldn't want to drive without one anyway. How many times does the w/s get nailed with various rocks and road debris. Wouldn't want my face taking that abuse.

Back on topic, it's beautiful out and my top is off year round, just need to pull the doors, but doh, there's that trashed t-case preventing me from having any fun, dammit. Pull your tops people, so I can at least see you having fun.

Air Randy
04-10-2010, 06:19 PM
[I]
(4) No person shall operate a motor vehicle on any highway within this state unless such vehicle is equipped with a front windshield as provided in this section, except as provided in section 42-4-232 (1) and except for motor vehicles registered as collectors' items under section 42-3-219.


Well hell, my 40 is registered as a collector vehicle anyways so none of this applies to me no matter what :thumb:

SRT08BUS
04-10-2010, 08:24 PM
:

Would it matter that much if you just wore a helmet?

Uncle Ben
04-10-2010, 11:28 PM
Pull your tops people, so I can at least see you having fun.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3557/3505750392_e95721c397.jpg

Shark Bait
04-10-2010, 11:41 PM
Are you allowed to go Topless? I've been known to go topless in my 40.

Did someone say topless? I go topless almost all the time. :D

Rezarf
04-11-2010, 12:04 AM
I run topless for half the year, no doors either, no mirrors either, once for a whole summer without a mounted license plate, or tailgate...

I have found that if I don't screw around while driving and give an officer a "reason" to pull me over, they don't. We have cool cops here in Louisville, and the only time I got pulled over for no brake lights, the officer wanted to check out my rig.

Gotta' love Money Magazines #1 small town in the USA! :D

Air Randy
04-11-2010, 08:57 AM
The thing you have to worry about, especially in the larger cities, is they are now pressuring the cops to write tickets for anything to try to generate revenue to make up for the budget shortfalls.

There was a story in USA Today this week about how many departments have lowered the speeding "tolerance" from 5-6 mph over the limit to 0. Not because of traffic safety but so they can write you a ticket for 2 mph over:rolleyes:

nuclearlemon
04-11-2010, 10:23 AM
while not colorado, in illinois a cop pulled me over for no windshield (it was folded down), i informed him the law never stated the windshield had to be up and i was wearing protective glasses, and told him to go ahead and write me the ticket...i knew the statute and he apparently didn't. he was pissed, but didn't bother to write the ticket.

i don't see anywhere where the colo statute says the windshield has to be in the up position. i used to drive my 40 all over with the w/s down in colorado and never got stopped.

Air Randy
04-11-2010, 10:26 AM
Since it's legal to ride a motorcycle without a windshield as long as you have eye protection, it would seem to make sense the same would apply to a vehicle. Of course, were trying to use logic regarding a governmental policy, thats a big mistake.

Uncle Ben
04-11-2010, 10:48 AM
while not colorado, in illinois a cop pulled me over for no windshield (it was folded down), i informed him the law never stated the windshield had to be up and i was wearing protective glasses, and told him to go ahead and write me the ticket...i knew the statute and he apparently didn't. he was pissed, but didn't bother to write the ticket.

i don't see anywhere where the colo statute says the windshield has to be in the up position. i used to drive my 40 all over with the w/s down in colorado and never got stopped.

While I like your story thats exactly the kind of disrespect for the LEO that will get you busted for tires outside of fenders, headlights too high, cracked windshield, etc.... I always hold my tongue and regardless of his attitude I try to respect him by my actions. I make sure to ask him a question even if I know the answer and 7 out of 10 times he lets me go with a warning. Simple theory actually.....don't threaten his authority and he wont demonstrate it!

teamextreme
04-11-2010, 07:07 PM
Well hell, my 40 is registered as a collector vehicle anyways so none of this applies to me no matter what :thumb:

That exception for colectors plates in that CRS section refers to "horseless carriage" plates, our collector 40's don't count.

Air Randy
04-11-2010, 08:05 PM
That exception for colectors plates in that CRS section refers to "horseless carriage" plates, our collector 40's don't count.

Trust me, if you drove my 40 you would know just how horseless it is :D

Rezarf
04-11-2010, 09:55 PM
Of course, were trying to use logic regarding a governmental policy, thats a big mistake.


:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

nuclearlemon
04-11-2010, 10:04 PM
While I like your story thats exactly the kind of disrespect for the LEO that will get you busted for tires outside of fenders, headlights too high, cracked windshield, etc.... I always hold my tongue and regardless of his attitude I try to respect him by my actions. I make sure to ask him a question even if I know the answer and 7 out of 10 times he lets me go with a warning. Simple theory actually.....don't threaten his authority and he wont demonstrate it!

i was young and foolish then ;)