There’s been a lot of activity at all the local Taillight Community gathering spots, the bars, workshops, bath houses, abattoirs, gyms, studios and other taillight culture staples, and not all of it has been good. Rumors of DOT raids cracking down on allegedly illegal taillight lumen output and color temperature have put everyone on edge, and even what would normally be considered normal taillight-related discussion has taken on ominous tones. There’s just something in the air.
That’s the only way I can explain why a discussion of a change in taillight design of the legendary Toyota Land Cruiser 70, specifically the fourth major facelifted version, released in late 2023. This machine has been out for quite a while now, and I’m not clear why it’s only now I’m encountering people so invested in its taillight decisions, but holy crap, I’m encountering them.
A whole group took over the banquet room at the Crimson Candela just to discuss these taillights, which were being said to be an example of “taillight erasure,” which struck me as odd, because the Land Cruiser 70 still has taillights. So what is everyone on about?
Just so we are all on the same page, here’s what the taillights on these Land Cruisers look like:
Okay, so at first glance, we just seem to be working with a pair of likely parts-bin, simple rectangular tri-color taillights, inset into the bumper. They’re not particularly inspired, but they get the job done, and remain visible even if the doors are open and aren’t obscured by the large externally-mounted spare tire. They’re a bit vulnerable to impacts, being on the bumper, but they’re also likely fairly inexpensive. Look – here’s one for just $10!
But wait; something’s not right here. What’s going on that corner? Specifically, here:
See that strange corner panel with the weird louvers? Why does that look so familiar, yet strange? Wait – could it be? No! But it seems to be – look, look at this:
Holy crap. So, for reasons I’m deeply unclear about, the older setup, which included taillights mounted at the corners, have now been replaced with those odd body-colored corner caps? With weird, superfluous louvers, even, to, what, vent out all of that former taillight bulb-area air?
What was the thinking here? The old Land Cruiser 70 had bumper-mounted lights as well, incorporating what I suspect are redundant stop/tail/and turn signals, I suppose because the corner units may be obscured if the doors are open? The reverse lamp isn’t required to be visible at all times, so it’s fine only existing on the corner lamp. But maybe it’s to improve taillight visibility in situations like this:
Was this just cost-cutting on Toyota’s part? Why bother with redundant bumper lamp units when you could really just only have the bumper-mounted taillights? I mean, I suppose that makes a sort of cold, rational sense, but the act of replacing a substantial taillight unit – one that once carried, it seems, all functions (though I can’t quite discern if there is an amber turn signal area)–with a blanking panel feels, I don’t know, wrong somehow.
Let’s look at two similar pictures of the Land Cruiser 70 with the corner-mounted taillights and without. First with:
…and now without:
I mean, you can see why the word “erasure” is being thrown around. It’s weird.
I was trying to think of other examples of this – where a car had its existing, integrated taillights blanked out with some sort of body-colored cover and replaced with more tacked-on-looking units, and all I could think of immediately was how old Volkswagen Type 2 Microbuses were adapted to railroad work:
See what I mean there? The actual lights are blanked out. But on a mainstream production car? I can’t think of an example. I mean, a number of Euro-spec cars have blanked out side marker lamps in some silly ways, like these:
…but a full taillight blanked out? I’m drawing a, you know, blank.
Maybe I’m not thinking of something here, and if so, I’m hoping you’ll school me in the comments.
Until then, I think we may be looking at something strange and unique in taillight history; a taillight forcibly removed and relocated to a bumper, with its original dwelling place covered, guiltily, with a body-colored panel.
It’s sort of unsettling. No wonder everyone is acting so weird.
(Thanks for the tip, Dmanww!)
The Bertone Freeclimber 2 did this exact thing. The plates are black, so they still kind of look like tail lights, but they are in reality moved to the bumper.
Not the same, but fun: Zagato kind of did it with the Autech Stelvio. Why put the tail lights where the lines suggest when you can do… weirder.
Some of them have the quarter panel lights installed but they aren’t functional. Only the bumper mounted ones illuminate.
Some of them are just blacked out blanks.
WIth the LC70 Toyota have been adding and subtracting the body mounted tail lights for years here in Australia depending on trim level and purpose.
While considering Toyota and its storied history in tailights. I’m hoping one day the discussion will be on the 1988 Corolla Alltrac / 4wd Wagon and it’s D pillar lights. Years before the Volvo 850 but I understand some amongst us won’t be ready for this sort of exposé.
Here’s one that belongs to the owner of Patagonia. https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-R78iTvgFL74/T-SftBE_KVI/AAAAAAAAAOY/mCXav8eVTGo/s1600/photo.JPG
hilarious to imagine “taillights” being part of an options package.
Also hilarious/sad to have such an obvious exterior giveaway that you bought the cheapest trim.
Cheapest trim can be a badge of honour with people who actually use this model of landcruiser.
fair point.
The ‘73-‘74 Eldorado did something funky with its taillights…and reverted back for ‘75.
What I’m Listening To, In My Head, While Reading This Column:
Erasure: “Light at the End of the Land Cruiser” the whole album.
You can still get them with the normal taillights if you need an ambulance for a UN mission where taillight enthusiast communities are still growing… https://www.toyota-gib.com/en/ambulances/78-hardtop.html
Since the bouncers keep blocking my entrance to the illumination watering holes, let me pose this question to you passer-bys from the sidewalk…
Does anyone else see similarities between the front lights of the new Hyundai Palisade and the first gen Chrysler minivans? I can’t un-see this modern interpretation and may need enlightenment.
I wonder if Jason is aware of Head-and-taillight Tetra’s? Would make a nice gift for him on National Taillight Day.
Still have the fake ones here… https://www.toyota.com.au/landcruiser-70
Different countries, different laws.
The lower bumper lights are for angular visibilty or fex when the doors are open.
The upper side delete are because small vehicles are only allowed one set of lights.
Interesting! The LC70 is one of the vehicles I have the most obsessive knowledge about (Designed a pretty exhaustive modular Lego Technic model that allowed for configuration in any bodystyle/facelift last year), but I had never noticed that taillight change! I just googled “2024 Toyota Land Cruiser 70 Rear,” though, and every clear image of the rear I found does still have normal taillights on the latest facelift. So I’d assume that this taillight delete is only in certain markets/trims? Do we know which market these images are coming from?
Maybe there can be a campaign to let them return as an option?
*REAR QUARTER 70 SERIES IMAGES FLASH, FORLORN VOICE NARRATES*
“Right now, newborn taillights across the world are being forced from their homes, left orphaned on parts shelves as cruel austerity measures transform the places they once shone brightly into barren, slashed-open voids… merely for the sake of marginal profits. For just pennies a day…”
Your wish has been granted. The taillights are now available as a subscription-only option.
So when your subscription expires, does someone chase you down in the middle of the freeway and install those blanking plates at 75 mph?
Somewhat related: the rear lights on the US-spec BMW Isetta were relocated and the original position taken by the upper ends of tubular bumpers.
https://www.carscoops.com/2021/03/take-a-trip-back-in-time-with-this-cute-1959-bmw-isetta/
Oh buddy, I covered this the first month we were alive! https://www.theautopian.com/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-bmw-isetta-taillights-and-wipers-to-join-the-exclusive-taillight-community/
Also, the early Morris Minors sold in the US had their headlights mounted up on the fenders and the original lower headlight openings covered up with a larger sheet metal grille surround
I’m surprised you haven’t heard of this prank before. Usually when any new person comes into Butt Light (A local Toronto taillight bar that only serves non-alcoholic beer) for the first time, someone will sneak out the back with a screwdriver and these panels and blank out their taillights.
If they realize this has happened and complain, they just get teased for having bought the base model of their vehicle without the taillight package.
The new Lexus GX has something similar designed right in. I don’t understand it, I spend way too much time asking “why” when I see it.
https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/2024/03/2Lexus-GX-US-review-2024.jpg
The voice in my head was the horrified Hank Hill “guuuuh!”
Just.. Why make a thing look wrong?
The louvers almost make it more unsettling. They still draw your eye to the cover as if there’s going to be a light there, but no! Just body-color steel!
Thanks for ruining my day, Torch.
It’ll be all right. Have a Mazda.
I bet these photos are mostly from Australia. Australia uses something called ADR to govern vehicle lighting. One of the ADR requirements is that the taillights must be visible from 45 degrees off axis.
With the lights mounted in the quarter panels and the tailgate-mounted spare tire, the lights can no longer be seen off-axis. So manufacturers were essentially forced to put the taillights in the bumper. Some manufacturers left the existing taillights in place, but that was more expensive than designing blanking covers.
Seems to me the cheapest solution would be to not offer an external spare tire mount in that one market.
Thats not going to fly in Australia.
Much like their birds
Curiously, the Australian market J70s don’t use these blanking plates.
The J76 Wagons still use the red+white full-lens lights from 2008, with reverse lights and tail lights (meaning it has 5 tail lights counting the CHMSL).
Originally, SWB, MWB and wagon body styles used the full-lensed taillight with amber indicator and clear reverse strips at the bottom, which allowed them to have no bumper mount taillights at all (including the AUDM LJ70 “Bundera”), but it appears they were dropped in the 2008 facelift, now every variant in every market has some form of bumper mount taillights.
The J78 Troop Carriers still use the old style black plastic filler taillights, with a separate reverse light, tail light, and reflector in the plastic surround.
in some cases the tail light lens is omitted, leaving 3/4 of the panel taken up with black plastic.
in a lot of markets these are mixed assymetrically, probably to use the one extra ataillight segment as a fog light.
Looking at the images above, you can see the newer bumper mounted taillights include a reflector and reverse light in the bumper, allowing them to completely remove the upper assembly.
But is it really that much of a cost saving? now they have to make 2 distinct designs of rear bumper, they have to make 4 different part assemblies for upper taillights and 2 for lower taillights.
I suspect that the reason for the change was probably driven by regulations somwehere, but I think it’s also in part an attempt at restyling it to more closely resemble the J40 land cruiser, as they all had the taillights at bumper level (except for the incredibly rare J45V wagons).
On a tangentially related note, the AUDM Y61 Nissan Patrol infamously had completely fake taillights in the bodywork, the bumper mounted lights did everything. that was a particular kind of evil that makes modern kia indicators seem innocent.
This is the answers I come to The Autopian for. I doff my hat to thee.
This is the right answer.
In some markets the 70-series had kind of a hybrid tail light where only portions were blocked off.
https://www.thedrive.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/70-Series-Land-Cruiser-cabrio-rear-quarter.jpeg
What the hell is that. Reminds me Easter is around the corner.
Better yet, some of them only had the reflector and reverse light on one side, the other side kept the red segment, I think as a fog light.
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5cb443591f3a260001b70ccf/
1557218723871-FFSUXG8MO1DUM19MCAOZ/VDJ78-DIESEL-2-2-600×478.jpg
Bumper mounted tail lamps should be outlawed. They always sit way too low and can be difficult to see in certain situations. Plus, if you get into a fender bender, you’re now replacing a light assembly in addition to your bumper.
ITS A CONSPIRACY: TAILLAMP CANCEL CULTURE!
It’s affecting the left and the right!
But the center is above the fray.
En-light-ened centrists, if you will.
High-mounted above the fray, at that.
They’re trying to force the taillights down!
The Daihatsu Fourtrack/Sportrack did the same thing in the 90’s. May have been something to do with lighting regs in europe
Not taillight, but front signal lights on Canadian Minis were relocated because they would have been obscured by the larger, higher Canadian-spec bumper. Can kind of see it in this picture, but they just tack-welded a blanking plate over the hole in the fender under the headlight.
https://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/1977_austin_mini-1000_1000068036-49077.jpg?fit=956%2C943
Where the signal light moved to varied from year to year.
Those bumper mounting bars are also pretty spectacular in quality
The bottom of the bar is bolted to the front subframe, but the top one is just bolted to the top of the fender. Even better, the rear bumper was just bolted to the trunk lid:
https://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/1977_austin_mini-1000_1000067578-85324-scaled.jpg?fit=2048%2C956
Nothing beats OEM
…look, I’ve seen plenty of Corvette taillight rollpans, but this feels like the lazy, mass-produced version of that. I guess it makes sense with this being for emerging markets and being a really, really old design with a specific level of durability and repairability (especially important!) required. It’s cheaper to make blanking plates than new stampings, or molds for taillights.
This doesn’t make it any less unsettling. Even to someone outside the taillight community like me.
I think also this allows them to make a single body panel that can be used for a new vehicle or for repairs for an older vehicle.
A less extreme example, but on certain versions of the Holden VE Commodore, the original triangular tail lights are replaced with lower-mounted half pill-shaped lights, with the space left over filled in with a body-colored panel.
Saved them $50/truck. Probably some law changed somewhere that was requiring both. But the taillights being obscured when the doors are open is surely why the bumper lights were required.
I agree the blanking plates look terrible.
Terrible but there is something pure about not caring with the aesthetics and stubbornly building the same car model for 40 years and adding just patch panels like this.
Sure wouldn’t stop me from buying one, but it’s rather lazy of them. And it’s not like these things are cheap.
at least they are paint matched?
I’m actually surprised they aren’t plastic.