Flourescent lamp switch

There is no reason on this planet to maintain a starter-based fluorescent fixture as such. a) It is an energy pig. b) The lamps required contain a relatively large amount of mercury. c) They are relatively short-lived. d) There is an LED equivalent available for very nearly every vintage fluorescent lamp ever made in any quantity.

So, whether one type of Luddite-approved technology is better than another does not change the fact that it remains Luddite-Approved technology.

Now, in answer to Tom's question on what to do with his "new" lamp:

Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

Hello, and aren't you the same Peter from over at rec.antiques.radio+phono that I would assume appreciates having access to that luddite tech such as vacuum tubes? I have a few antique soft drink and beer advertising signs that use fluorescent tubes, coil ballasts and starters. It's nice to know I can still inexpensively and easily maintain them in original condition without having to rely on used or NOS (at least for now) components. (I don't turn the signs on every day so the lamps and starters tend to last a very long time.) Antique and nostalgia issues aside, there are cogent arguments, as you point out, for replacing the innards of an assembly with newer tech, if feasible (cost of components, fits the footprint of the enclosure, etc.) Otherwise dispose/recycle it and purchase a modern equivalent. Sincerely,

I think I distinguished between museum-pieces (used loosely) and tools. On more than one occasion, I have entrusted my life, health and dexterity to v arious tools, such that I would not wish to do so with Luddite-Approved tec hnology. For the same reason that I use modern capacitors, modern resistors and similar when making repairs to vintage vacuum-tube equipment. But, I t end to use real tubes vs. modern solid-state devices - which exist in surpr ising numbers. At the same time there are occasions where I do use a modern solid-state device such as a VR-based plug-in ILO a 50A1 in a T/O, or a We ber "copper-top" rectifier ILO a 5AR4 so as to preserve scarce and costly o riginal parts. But there is no modification to the original to do so.

Your signs are 'museum pieces'. A lamp is a tool. When I am working on my ' museum pieces', I want the best and most reliable tools I can afford. And I want my finished products to be safe, reliable and fit for present society . I do not subscribe to the belief that the Louis XIV Chair with rotting-bu t-original fabric has any value as a chair, as it is useless as such. THAT is a true museum piece.

Horses for Courses.

Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

you must have quite missed my explanation then.

you guessed at the cause. It was a reasonable guess, but only a guess, and found to not be what's actually happening.

NT

Hello, and one person's junk (including "luddite-tech" radios) are another's treasures. The OP's lamp may not be a candidate for an auction but it may have sentimental value and perhaps the OP desires to keep it in original condition as much as feasible. That original fabric chair may well be worth more at auction than one with replacement fabric. Old radios with original components? Don't know if the same thing can be said. Sincerely,

Some of today's junk will be tomorrow's antiques.

Some value the technology of the thing, some only care about the case.

NT

"Tom Del Rosso" schreef in bericht news:pcg95k$j0i$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me...

The switch mechanism cracked in my magnifying lamp. No ballast. Just a momentary and a latching switch combined, that feed the 4 terminals on the tube. The equivalents I find are around $20. Must be a cheaper source. Physical shape doesn't matter much, since the hole can be enlarged.

Thanks.

Had a similar lamp. The switch was relatively fragile and worned out fast. At first a mounted a ordinanry universal starter that wordked for some time. Then I replaced the old fashioned ballast by the eletronics of e fluoriscent lamp. Worked for years as a charm. Starts fast and the tube lasts much longer.

petrus bitbyter