Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Tech tips and how to's

Moderators: notoptoy, garth, S Allen

User avatar
charlee0620
Roadster Nut-Site Supporter
Posts: 430
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:49 pm
Location: Highland Village, TX

Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by charlee0620 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:21 am

As I’ve been researching and designing the electrical system for my roadster I’ve come across a few things. One of which is wheather or not to have integrated tail lights? What are integrated tail lights you ask...well. An integrated tail is when the brake and turn signal share lights. This is usually denoted by red lenses only and when the directional signal is on (let say the right side for example) and the brakes are on; the brake light on that side (the right side here) will flash as the turn signal. As for the non-integrated there is an independent set of turn indicators, often they are amber in color. Here is the Painless Wiring definition:

In this group of instructions, you will see the term “integrated turn/brake lights.” Most vehicles have integrated lights. This terminology refers to turn signals that also function as brake lights. You can easily tell if your vehicle has integrated turn/brake signals or separate turn/brake lights by looking at the lamp socket(s) on the rear of the vehicle. Only looking at the passenger or the driver side, how many sockets going into red lenses
do you see?
Integrated turn brake signal vehicles will usually have 1 socket per side with a dual filament bulb (brighter filament for turn/brake, dimmer filament for tail lights). You can also have vehicles that have integrated lights but also have multiple sockets and lenses.
Separate turn brake signal vehicles will usually have 2 or 3 sockets: 1 socket with dual filaments (brighter filament for brake, dimmer for tail) and 1 socket with a single filament for the turn signal. Remember to count the bulb filaments or the contacts on the bottom of the bulb, not the wires going to them, as your sockets may or may not have ground wires.

I’m just curious what people here think about one set vs the other on our little cars. I’m on the fence but am leaning towards the integrated set up. Not really hard to build I. Either instance but once you go one way it can be a pain to go back to the other. Looking forward to all y’alls thoughts.

Cheers

Matthew
69-ish resto mod
08 Tacoma Sport 4x4 quadcab
16 Sienna AWD Limited Premium

User avatar
Linda
Roadster Enthusiast
Posts: 6961
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:37 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Model: 1500/1600
Year: High Windshield-68-70

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by Linda » Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:29 am

The LED lights increase brightness also, worth getting, then the flasher cans must also be upgraded.
Linda
68 1600
Los Angeles, CA
Tech Wiki->Parts->Parts Interchange
Archives has it all

User avatar
theunz
Roadster Nut-Site Supporter
Posts: 1344
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 1:54 pm
Location: Catoosa Ok.
Model: 2000
Year: High Windshield-68-70

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by theunz » Sat Feb 02, 2019 6:58 pm

If you go with the intergrated system than you will have two brake lights on the non signaling side and two blinking lights on the signaling side. If you go non intergrated than you will have a brake light on each side and only one blinking light when signaling, the fourth light will go unused unless your tail lights are activated. My thought is that the two blinking lights on one side and two brake lights on the other would be the most attention getting. While it's the total amount of brake lights in either system, keep in mind that when someone sees a turn signal they, at least in city driving, are expecting that you may be getting ready to brake as well. When your as small and low as we are you can't have too many lights! Just my opinion YMMV :D
__________

Mike M
1969 2000 solex mine since 1972, under resurrection. 1969 Porsche 911s -worth more, but not as valuable!

User avatar
fj20spl311
Roadsteraholic
Posts: 4882
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:54 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by fj20spl311 » Sat Feb 02, 2019 7:44 pm

IIRC, 69 and 70 have the proper turn signal switch for integrated lights while earlier cars do not.

I like a hybrid. integrated lower red and non-integrated orange upper plus a third brake light.
Phil
67.5 SRL311-00148 Blue (FJ cruiser VOODOO Blue)
67.5 SPL311 FJ20E teal SDS EFI
69 SRL311 SOLD
19 Raptor SCAB

User avatar
Curtis
Site Supporter
Posts: 2575
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:49 pm
Location: Des Moines, WA

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by Curtis » Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:10 pm

69-70 already do this. That's why the turn and hazard switch are different.
66 stroker
67 basket case, the renewal has begun.

User avatar
sunbeam590
Roadster Fanatic-Site Supporter
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Wingham, NSW, Australia

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by sunbeam590 » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:56 pm

I converted my 69 to all led lighting 2 yrs ago, mainly as I was sick of no dippers on hiway travel, that doesn't happen anymore, with all lights on
my amp meter barely moves into the neg side, very happy with it all..I have switchback bulbs in my indicators, changed to electronic flasher can,
otherwise all wiring is still stock..
KEVIN
69 Datsun 2000, Factory Solexes.

User avatar
bikermike
Site Supporter
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Denver Area, CO
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by bikermike » Wed Feb 06, 2019 9:49 am

I have found that some types of dual filament (1157) replacement LED bulbs don’t have as significant difference in brightness between the dim (tail / running) and bright (brakes) as the incandescent bulbs do.

Choose bulbs carefully or make some modifications so it is obvious to someone following you that you are braking. For example, add a third brake light or modify wiring so that a pair of tail / running lights do not share a bulb with brake lights.


Some old discussions on lighting, including tail lights:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15522

http://311s.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f= ... 0bec88ed14

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15896&hilit=Tristar

My modified setup:


I have since added a 3rd / center brake light

Stock 67.5:


Various trailer / towing taillight adapters can be used to modify the behavior of your rear lights.

My preference is to have the bottom rear lights to be running / brake and the top ones to be turn signal / brake. I like having a brake light independent of the running lights so it is clear to someone behind me when I am braking, especially when using bright LEDs.

The downside of this configuration is that if a bulb burns out there is no redundancy on each side for a turn signal or running light.
Last edited by bikermike on Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
-Mike
1967.5 SPL311
1972 240z / L28
2003 BMW 525i Touring

User avatar
Linda
Roadster Enthusiast
Posts: 6961
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:37 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Model: 1500/1600
Year: High Windshield-68-70

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by Linda » Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:31 am

Got a pic of the added 3rd light, Mike?
Linda
68 1600
Los Angeles, CA
Tech Wiki->Parts->Parts Interchange
Archives has it all

User avatar
bikermike
Site Supporter
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 4:06 pm
Location: Denver Area, CO
Model: 1500/1600
Year: Low Windshield-64-67.5

Re: Integrated vs Non-integrated Tail Lights

Post by bikermike » Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:42 am

Linda wrote:
Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:31 am
Got a pic of the added 3rd light, Mike?
Linda


Some pics and discussions on 3rd brake lights, including mine, can be found here:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=26067&hilit=3rd#p235641
-Mike
1967.5 SPL311
1972 240z / L28
2003 BMW 525i Touring