Rx400H Reversing Lights (Or Lack Of !) Lexus Email.

[Monte]

This is what I've done, no problems even in heavy rain at night. 

[SteveyJ]

My first post here, and my terrible reverse lights brought me here, and thanks to this being talked about I am happy to say I can see my driveway now when I reverse. It may be an old post but it is still of much use!!

Thanks

[Billsykes]

Can anyone tell me where I can buy these LED lights for my 400h thanks.

 

[sorcerer]

These are the ones I bought and they work a treat, but you do need to remove the shrouds in the light fitting for best results.

 

Removing_bulb_cover_from_reverseing__light.pdf

[Billsykes]

Thanks Sorcerer,will give these a try.

[Quarryjmiller]

Sorcerer, this is by far the most helpful post on here, a lot of people who don’t actually have RX400s & who have no idea how terrible the reversing lights are have posted a lot of uninformed observations. 

The purpose of a reversing light is to illuminate the road behind you and (not only) to warn other road users, any suggestion that you do not use them to see what is going on around and behind you is questionable - we should all expect to have the very best view available of what is behind or anywhere around us whether we are driving forward or reversing - it’s a real pain if we reverse into an object that we were unable to see and damage our cars, it’s another thing altogether if that object is a person. 

I have ordered the bulbs and downloaded the instructions, thanks for going to the trouble of doing this. 

Edited December 7, 2017 by Quarryjmiller
Omission of thanks to Sorcerer

[sorcerer]

You're very welcome John, I always like to help if I can. I have to say that I can't take any credit for the instructions on how to get the lamp shades off, that came from someone on the American forum I think, but I'm afraid I don't know who.

[bluenose1940]

I've just read the first post on this thread and the letter from Lexus, what an absolute load of old codswallop to say that the reversing lights aren't there to aid driving.  I have mentioned elsewhere on this subject that I have. on numerous occasions, found myself in very narrow lanes in total darkness, no lighting whatsoever, and, having to reverse.  It's a total nightmare.

Whoever thought up the idea of having only one reversing light needs their head examining.  It's fine in a lot of situations, but certainly not in many others.

[Steve MaC]

Hi guys,

I have recently purchased a 2006 Lexus 400H, I love the car, however, the illumination at the rear of the vehicle is dismal outside of urban areas, I have difficulty reversing in areas where there is no street lighting, at first I thought maybe the reverse lamps in the cluster were pointed upward somehow by accident by a previous owner, not so, in fact it’s just a crap design, I was thinking if maybe an upgraded camera with infra red lighting was available or indeed if there is a conversion available for this issue, any ideas from you guys would be appreciated 

Steve M

[Herbie]

I've never seen anything about an upgraded camera or infrared lights but you don't really need to go to that expense, even if such things are available. Just take the shades off the light units and replace the halogen bulbs with the LEDs mentioned earlier in this topic and you'll be amazed at just how much of a difference it makes.

[Gliderpilot]

On 12/7/2017 at 2:14 PM, bluenose1940 said:

I've just read the first post on this thread and the letter from Lexus, what an absolute load of old codswallop to say that the reversing lights aren't there to aid driving.  I have mentioned elsewhere on this subject that I have. on numerous occasions, found myself in very narrow lanes in total darkness, no lighting whatsoever, and, having to reverse.  It's a total nightmare.

Whoever thought up the idea of having only one reversing light needs their head examining.  It's fine in a lot of situations, but certainly not in many others.

Our Yaris has only one reversing light but it's a LED and it's as bright as the sun on a good day so lights the rear beautifully. One light is good enough if it's up to the task.

[sandbank]

When I first had my RX400H I found rear visibility from the RX400h is also not helped by the headrests on the centre rear seat which is right in your line of vision if you are reversing in the traditional matter - i.e. looking through the rear window

Looking at the rear view mirror is also pretty much a waste of time. I had rear (non Lexus)  sensors fitted to bleep if I was getting too close to something  - and they have been a godsend.

However I'm now fully adjusted to reversing on camera alone ( you can increase the contrast on the screen) . I also find there's plenty of light at the rear if you have your brakes (and rear brakelights) on when reversing.

 

[Farnham Dave]

On 10/26/2013 at 5:13 PM, ISJason said:

This certainly is a mad topic.. I have never given a thought to the state of illumination for the reversing lights. They are to warn other drivers.. they are not headlights you know.

My thoughts exactly... And we're the lucky ones... There are people out there driving cars with only one reversing light by design. Problem for people approaching from the wrong side in a supermarket carpark, for example. Also no backup if your one r-light fails.

[bluenose1940]

Reversing lights are without doubt  a warning to others that you are indeed reversing but, equally without doubt, they are a driving aid.  If you live in a town/city then perhaps not such a problem but, driving in the very narrow lanes of Dartmoor on a stormy moonless night, things can and do get very difficult when you have to reverse for an oncoming vehicle.

I still maintain that the decision to fit only one reversing light was idiotic.

[Herbie]

22 minutes ago, bluenose1940 said:

I still maintain that the decision to fit only one reversing light was idiotic

Completely agree Geoff, utterly stupid.

[Steve MaC]

I hope to have sorted the problem by ordering an after market reverse camera made for the Lexus 400h which incorporates 4 x IR LED lights, I’ll post in here if this helps 

Steve M

[Herbie]

12 minutes ago, Steve MaC said:

I’ll post in here if this helps

Absolutely would help Steve, along with make, model, how much and where from please.

[Farnham Dave]

On 11/7/2013 at 10:29 AM, Topdown said:

I agree with NELMO, and I too am adding fuel to the fire ....... Having tried to bring a little humour to the party in an earlier post, it seems that reversing lights are a bone that needs shaking a bit more .

So, I looked at the "The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations" on the UK GOV web site and it says in respect or reversing lights ......

 

(Regulation 20)

SCHEDULE 14requirements relating to optional reversing lamps

1. Number:

Not more than two

2. Position:

No requirement

3. Angles of visibility:

No requirement

4. Alignment:

To the rear

5. Markings–

(a) A motor vehicle first used on or after 1st April 1986 and a trailer manufactured on or after 1st October 1985:

An approval mark

(b) A motor vehicle first used before 1st April 1986 and a trailer manufactured before 1st October 1985:

No requirement

6. Size of illuminated area:

No requirement

7. Colour:

White

8. Wattage–

(a) A reversing lamp bearing an approval mark:

No requirement

(b) A reversing lamp not bearing an approval mark:

The total wattage of any one reversing lamp shall not exceed 24 watts

9. Intensity:

No requirement

10. Electrical connections:

No requirement

11. Tell-tale–

(a) A motor vehicle first used on or after 1st July 1954, provided that the electrical connections are such that the reversing lamp or lamps cannot be illuminated other than automatically by the selection of the reverse gear of the vehicle:

No requirement

(b) Any other motor vehicle first used on or after 1st July 1954:

A circuit-closed tell-tale shall be fitted

© A motor vehicle first used before 1st July 1954:

No requirement

(d) Any vehicle which is not a motor vehicle:

No requirement

So it is apparent from this and other regs, you can have one or two lights, or even none. It or they do not have to illuminate anything except your desire to have really bright lights on your car. .... Whilst there may be a desire to have great lights on the back of a Lexus, there is no legal requirement For Lexus to fit bright lights.

Cheers chaps ...... Happy motoring, although I may have to stop going out at night as it is too stressful ..........

The requirement for there to be no more than two seems a little odd. I fitted an aftermarket reversing camera to my last car that had its own light, hence three reversing lights in total, and had no problem with the MOT test.

[Herbie]

5 hours ago, Farnham Dave said:

The requirement for there to be no more than two seems a little odd. I fitted an aftermarket reversing camera to my last car that had its own light, hence three reversing lights in total, and had no problem with the MOT test.

That's because the MOT doesn't count the number of reversing lamps. The requirement to pass the MOT is that there must be at least one fitted but the quantity isn't mentioned after that.

Taken from https://www.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/documents/manuals/class3457/Section-4-Lamps-reflectors-and-electrical-equipment.html#section_4.6

[Farnham Dave]

15 hours ago, Herbie said:

That's because the MOT doesn't count the number of reversing lamps. The requirement to pass the MOT is that there must be at least one fitted but the quantity isn't mentioned after that.

Taken from https://www.mot-testing.service.gov.uk/documents/manuals/class3457/Section-4-Lamps-reflectors-and-electrical-equipment.html#section_4.6

Ah. Thanks for the info.

[Farnham Dave]

On 2/26/2019 at 1:53 AM, Farnham Dave said:

My thoughts exactly... And we're the lucky ones... There are people out there driving cars with only one reversing light by design. Problem for people approaching from the wrong side in a supermarket carpark, for example. Also no backup if your one r-light fails.

My sincerest apologies. Having had to park in a dark location recently, I hadn't realised how much difference the reversing lights were making in other cars I've driven. More rear illumination is required in the RX400h IMHO. Will be fitting some decent brighter bulbs in due course.

[Lager shandy]

i think your find if you change the bulbs in your rear lights from normal bulbs to LED bulbs your modifying your car and so invalidating your insurance .i read this in the sun ,not sure if the story made it into the guardian so thought I would just say lol.

[Barry14UK]

3 hours ago, Lager shandy said:

i think your find if you change the bulbs in your rear lights from normal bulbs to led bulbs your modifying your car and so invalidating your insurance .i read this in the sun ,not sure if the story made it into the guardian so thought I would just say lol.

I have read many (but not all of the numerous posts on this thread) and had a similar thought to Alan.  Furthermore, let's consider the possibility of an accident whereby a motorist was driving along correctly in her/his lane and was involved in an accident in which s/he claimed s/he was blinded by rear reversing lights of a vehicle backing up directly in front.  The stated reason for the accident was investigated and it was found that the car that reversed had had it's lights modified.  I think it highly likely that the person who reversed might be landed with quite a bill.  As someone said earlier in the thread, at one time only a single light was fitted, the purpose of which was to warn oncoming drivers that a car was being reversed.  It was not intended as a major light, otherwise two would be have been been fitted  always and the wattage allowed not limited so low.  (The regs doubtless preceded the introduction of LED's). Fitting an auxiliary back up light could potentially leave you open to more criticism/risk.

Having said that I sympathize with those backing out in dark lanes, made more difficult with the introduction of dark tinted rear screens.

Incidentally, I find it annoying when vehicles park on your side of the road facing you with their headlights left on, which would be like having bright reversing lights on a car directly in front of you.

[Farnham Dave]

15 minutes ago, Barry14UK said:

I have read many (but not all of the numerous posts on this thread) and had a similar thought to Alan.  Furthermore, let's consider the possibility of an accident whereby a motorist was driving along correctly in her/his lane and was involved in an accident in which s/he claimed s/he was blinded by rear reversing lights of a vehicle backing up directly in front.  The stated reason for the accident was investigated and it was found that the car that reversed had had it's lights modified.  I think it highly likely that the person who reversed might be landed with quite a bill.  As someone said earlier in the thread, at one time only a single light was fitted, the purpose of which was to warn oncoming drivers that a car was being reversed.  It was not intended as a major light, otherwise two would be have been been fitted  always and the wattage allowed not limited so low.  (The regs doubtless preceded the introduction of LED's). Fitting an auxiliary back up light could potentially leave you open to more criticism/risk.

Having said that I sympathize with those backing out in dark lanes, made more difficult with the introduction of dark tinted rear screens.

Incidentally, I find it annoying when vehicles park on your side of the road facing you with their headlights left on, which would be like having bright reversing lights on a car directly in front of you.

Mmmmm... Not convinced they'd dazzle, I'll check for that anyway... Regardless of liability, I wouldn't like to be causing that sort of problem.

I'm also going to double check the insurance situation. I'm not convinced a new bulb counts as a mod, but I'll play it safe.

Legally, I checked up on things with a previous car when fitting a reversing camera with lights. It seems that the law doesn't give a hoot about reserving light layout as long as you've got something, and it passed the mot, so I can only assume that that was good advice. Whether the law and the insurance industry agree, of course, is a different matter!

[Barry14UK]

5 hours ago, Lager shandy said:

• 1 hour ago, Farnham Dave said:

  Mmmmm... Not convinced they'd dazzle, I'll check for that anyway... Regardless of liability, I wouldn't like to be causing that sort of problem.

  I'm also going to double check the insurance situation. I'm not convinced a new bulb counts as a mod, but I'll play it safe.

  Legally, I checked up on things with a previous car when fitting a reversing camera with lights. It seems that the law doesn't give a hoot about reserving light layout as long as you've got something, and it passed the mot, so I can only assume that that was good advice. Whether the law and the insurance industry agree, of course, is a different matter!

   

One further thought.  Many of the posts in this thread consider only MOT requirements and implications.  MOT requirements are becoming increasingly more strict but by no means cover all that is required for a model to obtain Type Approval which is something quite different.  If it comes to paying up in the event of an accident do you think that insurance companies will automatically do so because you have passed an MOT but gone outside Type Approval. particularly if you have not run these alterations past them?