When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
My '68 has no reverse lights, I assume somewhere along the line an owner removed them and filled the space in. I was looking through a book that I have and noticed that the '68's in it were also missing the reverse lights. Was removing the reverse lights a popular thing to do on these cars?
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
I believe the '68 reverse lights would have been in the lower panel on each side of the license plate, and weren't placed in the inner tail light fixtures until '69. If I run across a pic in the next day or two, I'll post one.
2025 c3 ('74-'82) of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2023 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2022 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
2020 C3 of the Year Finalist - Unmodified
Originally Posted by TheSkunkWorks
I believe the '68 reverse lights would have been in the lower panel on each side of the license plate, and weren't placed in the inner tail light fixtures until '69. If I run across a pic in the next day or two, I'll post one.
In '69 they went with back-up lights in the lens.......
Oh, I know well where they should be, but my rear was either filled in or replaced with a '69+ panel, I was just wondering if it was common to remove them, it does look cleaner without, but I would hate to get hit while backing out of a space, also, it would never pass VA safety inspections without. I looked and the wiring for the lights is there.
You could register your car here in VA as an antique and it would never have to go through inspection again. My 79 is registered that way. I have non functional reverse lights on mine. Someone removed the switch and all the wiring to the switch. Look on DMV's website for the specfic restrictions for registering a car with antique plates or year of manufacture plates.
I seriously doubt that anyone ever willingly removed their 68 backup lights just to change the look. I would guess that damaged panels were frequently replaced with 69 panels that did not have the backup lights.
From: Graceland in a Not Correctly Restored Stingray
If you drive your shark a lot, the antique tag could hinder your enjoyment should your local constabulary be sticklers.
...but, then everyone's not like that. The last time my not-even-close-to-original '78 went thru an inspection, the guys just gave a grin and passed me right thru every station. One of them even suggested I put the car in third or forth before doing the e-brake test. And, I don't even have back up lights either.
If you drive your shark a lot, the antique tag could hinder your enjoyment should your local constabulary be sticklers.
...but, then everyone's not like that. The last time my not-even-close-to-original '78 went thru an inspection, the guys just gave a grin and passed me right thru every station. One of them even suggested I put the car in third or forth before doing the e-brake test. And, I don't even have back up lights either.
I wish, here in VA, I had a guy fail my '97 because there was visible brake fluid around the master cylinder lid. VA sucks!!
My '68 has no reverse lights, I assume somewhere along the line an owner removed them and filled the space in. I was looking through a book that I have and noticed that the '68's in it were also missing the reverse lights. Was removing the reverse lights a popular thing to do on these cars?
The reverse lights on my '68 are also missing. I was baffled about it. The only explanation I can think of is that someone replaced the lower rear panels with '69 panels? Any other info on this would be great
The reverse lights on my '68 are also missing. I was baffled about it. The only explanation I can think of is that someone replaced the lower rear panels with '69 panels? Any other info on this would be great
When I got my 68 convert three years ago, the PO had fiberglassed over the reverse lights and painted the panel. The light sockets were still there on the back, so I carefully cut out the fiberglass and returned the reverse lights to their original operating condition. Not sure why the PO did this, since he did not change the inner brake/tail light to the 1969 style with back up lights. Work in progress and finished job shown here.
When I got my 68 convert three years ago, the PO had fiberglassed over the reverse lights and painted the panel. The light sockets were still there on the back, so I carefully cut out the fiberglass and returned the reverse lights to their original operating condition. Not sure why the PO did this, since he did not change the inner brake/tail light to the 1969 style with back up lights. Work in progress and finished job shown here.
When I got my 68 convert three years ago, the PO had fiberglassed over the reverse lights and painted the panel. The light sockets were still there on the back, so I carefully cut out the fiberglass and returned the reverse lights to their original operating condition. Not sure why the PO did this, since he did not change the inner brake/tail light to the 1969 style with back up lights. Work in progress and finished job shown here.
'68 only location...
I think I might do this on my SA some day, since I have 4 red bubbles... Na!
That's on my mods list too. It's part of my two brake lights per side as the '68's have. I like that a lot better and always wondered why GM went to those ugly (IMO) backup lights in the inner lens.
The only problem with using '68 parts as this is one of those '68 only things and the parts are pricey. There are nice, small rectangle aftermarket housing assemblies out there that will replicate that look.
Missing reverse lights on a '68?
In '69 they went with back-up lights in the lens.......
