In Europe: The great CFL rip-off.

Loading thread data ...

formatting link

**The only accurate point in that beat-up was the one about dimmers. Sheesh! What a load of complete bollocks. My oldest CFLs are in my bathrooms. Not only do they STILL deliver more light than the incandescents they replaced (measured with a light meter and a spare incandescent), they use less than 30% of the energy, haven't had to be replaced (previous lamps lasted around 6 months) and have similar colour balance. My only complaint is the slow (about 45 second) warm up time in the middle of Winter.

Talk about a storm in a teacup. My only CFL failure was when a possum sat on a naked lamp in the garage. I now have them in every fitting that will take them.

Having said all that, I agree that CFLs are far from perfect. LEDs, when they sort out the high power problems, should adress those issues nicely.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

formatting link

A lot won't fit in oyster fittings, if they do they overheat in non vented oyster fittings

Reply to
F Murtz

formatting link

**Then you have several choices:

  • Stockpile a handful of incandescents.

  • Choose another fitting.
  • Buy one of the newer halogens, which the gummint seems to think are OK.

One of my light fittings won't take a CFL either. I don't use it.

I also have a bunch of incredibly stupid, wasteful 50 Watt halogen downlights. I rarely use them too. Dumbest light fitting ever designed. Well, it's OK for lighting a specific workspace (like the kitchen sink), but that's about it. How on Earth designers thought they'd be a good idea for space lighting is beyond belief.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

"Trevor Wilson

** Barley any of them are now left on sale - particularly scare are the BC fiting kind.
** Will be banned from sale within 2 years.
** Shame when the whole damn place is full of such fittings.
** Folk are still installing them now

- despite the fact they are ear marked to be banned within a very few years.

Everything about the way CFLs are being made compulsory is a scam and a scandal.

May all the lunatic greenies burn in hell for it.

.... Phil

Reply to
Phil Allison

formatting link

Exactly.

Same here.

Yep. Until then I like my CFL's. Not perfect, but more than good enough for me to replace every light in my house with them.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
David L. Jones

formatting link

Not always true, but yeah, it's an issue. I've got plenty of poorly ventilated oysters that don't give me any trouble. And the ridiculous variety of tiny CFL's available these days means there is one to fit almost any fitting. The ones that did give me poor life and/or light output I replaced with T5 circular fluoro fittings and the light output is much better and more even, and they run cooler in the non ventilated fittings. Can't comment on life, as I haven't had to replace any yet.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
David L. Jones

formatting link

They are/were a good idea on the basis of looks, that's why they got to be so trendy and every new McMansion was filled with hundreds (no exaggeration) of them. It was all part of the "lifestyle" housing boom. You can now get recessed CFL fittings of all sorts, designed for that same look.

My house had a dozens of them when I moved in, they were the first things to be ripped out.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
David L. Jones

formatting link

The issue is one of claimed equivalence. Clearly there's no difficulty in getting a CFL that's as bright as a given incandescent. But the equivalence claims on the boxes leave a lot to be desired, and do rather overstate the light output.

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

formatting link

**Some MAY do. I've measured the light output of the ones I have (I only buy premium Philips branded ones now) are the equal or better than the incadescents they replaced (of the claimed Wattage on the box). In one of my applications, the CFLs actually deliver more light into the corners of the room than the incadescents (I try to measure the light output in several parts of the room). I did pick up some of those El CheapoT types once. They are (or were) crap. They certainly have a colour balance that I find particularly unnattractive. The Philips ones are much nicer they deliver the goods.

I suggest you buy some premium types next time. Forget the cheapies. They are crap. Actually, I just recall that I do have a couple of cheapies (Nelson branded) PAR38 floods. They take forever to warm up and the light output is very hard. Since they're in the backyard and rarely used, it doesn't matter so much. Still, when they're on, they do the job, consume 24 Watts (compared to 150 Watts with the incandescents they replaced) and they have lasted quite well so far.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

a scam and a scandal.

Amen to that!

Reply to
GeoffC

formatting link

As long as you don't want any light out of them.

Reply to
F Murtz

formatting link

Our main lighting is 3 50 watt halogens in the living room. Ordinary globes and CFLs won't work because of a very high ceiling (3.5 metres on one side), the light from the halogens focussed into the area where we sit in the evening. The lights are on from about 6pm in the winter 8pm in the summer to about 11pm, ie at worst 750watt hours per day. Using CFLs would save at most 500watt hours per day, probably less. If LEDs ever become available at reasonable cost, I'll consider them, but CFLs just don't cut it and the savings are quite minor.

Now, when the hot water system blew up 6 months back, I replaced it with a heat pump system. After the government rebates it cost less than a conventional electric system. The 2 electric bills that I have had since it was installed showed a savings of 7.5 and 5.0 Kw hours per day. Now that is real savings both in my pocket and for the environment.

Reply to
keithr

formatting link

If you like them, fine, but for many lights, eg closets, bathrooms etc, they just aren't used enough to make any real savings.

Reply to
keithr

formatting link

**I've done some back-of-the-napkin calcs on the hot water system thing and if I swap my off-peak system out, I'll lose big time. I don't have my bill close to hand, but I usually pay around $20.00/quarter for hot water.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

formatting link

You must be a pom and shower once a quarter :)

Reply to
keithr

Whether he needs to or not !

geoff

Reply to
geoff

formatting link

I like the bit that suggets that the CFLs will last 2, 3, 4,5 years. Haven't had one last more than 8 months yet. BAse gets hot, smells very plasticy, and die.

Any how many supermarket receipts for bulbs does one keep ?

Sylvania

(Geoff , actually).

Reply to
geoff

Some Philips CLFs I have quote a 6000 hour life, and claim that's equivalent to 6 incandescents. However, some, albeit "long life" incandescents I have quote a 2500 hour life. Philips are presumably comparing with a very cheap incandescent.

6000 hour is about 4 years at 4 hours per day.

If your CFLs are only lasting 8 months at a similar level of usage, then it's time to start keeping note, and getting refunds.

Time to start?

Sylvia.

Reply to
Sylvia Else

formatting link

**Stop buying crap CFLs. My only failure has been when a possum sat/fell on one. I only buy decent quality (Philips branded) ones though.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Reply to
Trevor Wilson

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.