Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 76908	2007-02-20 05:51:00	why don't they have the lower wattage energy saver bulbs	Morgenmuffel (187)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
526188	2007-02-20 23:36:00	Use the spiral ones. Hate the spiral ones. The smallest twopronged sort of ones are the least offensive but even they are ugly. Why can't they just make a nicer designer.	pctek (84)
526189	2007-02-21 02:06:00	My problem is the opposite. I want stronger/brighter energy-saver bulbs - more particularly one to replace a 200 watt incandescent. So far, I've found nothing above 100 watt equivalents, though admittedly not looked for a while. Is that a manufacturing difficulty or a lack of demand?	Laura (43)
526190	2007-02-21 03:00:00	My problem is the opposite. I want stronger/brighter energy-saver bulbs - more particularly one to replace a 200 watt incandescent. So far, I've found nothing above 100 watt equivalents, though admittedly not looked for a while. Is that a manufacturing difficulty or a lack of demand? You can get them. I'm using a 125w equivalent at the moment, and have also seen 150w equivalents sold at Mitre10.	somebody (208)
526191	2007-02-21 03:48:00	You can get them. I'm using a 125w equivalent at the moment, and have also seen 150w equivalents sold at Mitre10. Thanks. That's handy to know. Maybe they're slowly "working upwards," as when they first appeared a few years back, I couldn't even find anything bright enough to be 100 watt equivalents, so had to wait for those.	Laura (43)
526192	2007-02-21 04:21:00	The Philips "Tornado" series have a 23 Watt version that is quite good. It would have an output somewhere between 100-150 Watts equivalent. Remember that these lamps take 30 seconds or so to reach full brilliance.	godfather (25)
526193	2007-02-21 04:58:00	Of course like any miracle product, they aren't perfect. The light distribution is not the same as that from an incandescent. The incandescent is approximately a point source, and radiates (admittedly mostly infrared) fairly uniformly in all directions. Any fluorescent is more like a cylinder source, with no (for traditional tubes) or little (for the bent or coiled CFLs) radiation from the end. So (with a bulb in a standard hanging socket) underneath the CFL you won't get the brightness an incandescent will give. (I have dismantled a few failed CFLs and apart from any failed components in the switching module, I've consistently found at least one dry soldered joint. The modern lead-free solder doesn't make reliable joints).	Graham L (2)
526194	2007-02-21 11:30:00	Ah, Graham's info has explained why an energy-saving eager-beaver relative & I had a difference of opinion a while back. I was reading quite comfortably underneath a 100 watt bulb hanging from an extremely high ceiing. It failed & he replaced it - unasked - with a tube version. Suddenly I was straining to see the print. He swore the new bulb was equivalent to 100 watts. I said it couldn't be, as its light was feeble. Because the borrowed ladder had been returned, the bulb stayed there - unused - while I moved a table lamp alongside instead. Now it seems we were both right... Somebody - forget who - said on RNZ National this afternoon that you get what you pay for with these bulbs, and supermarket cheapies don't last nearly as long as more expensive brands. Fits with badly-soldered joints, Graham? Or is that across all brands?	Laura (43)
526195	2007-02-21 13:39:00	I had a rise-and-fall light fitting put in my (large) kitchen replacing the ceiling mounted 150 watt. The largest energy saving lamp I could find was 24W. Initially I used an unspecified colour temperature type lamp and it seemed definitely dimmer but I then went to the Lamp Man here in Wgtn. and he sold me a Cool White which is brighter. Btw, the bulb is round, 10cms. in diameter and it looks OK in a big coolie-hat type shade. Apologies for the name.....lol Martynz	martynz (5445)
526196	2007-02-21 15:57:00	The markets here have been flooded with all sorts of energy-saving bulbs . . . I got a few of them in 4 watt sizes . . . equiv to 40 they say . . . well . . MAYBE they are . . . but they take a while to warm up and get bright . They look conventional enough . . round as they should be . . made in China, of course! The local energy companies (SoCal Edison) give them away for free . . . . otherwise I wouldn't try them . . but they are OK I guess . I use them mostly for night lights and at dark they are pretty good . . but during the day they just don't "flood" enough light to make much difference in removing shadows etc . Maybe it's just a trick by the opticians to get us to buy stronger reading glasses . . . must be a big conspiracy with the government like the fluoride in the water thing .	SurferJoe46 (51)
526197	2007-02-21 21:36:00	Interesting comment on the Stuff web-site this morning about the 2 -20 mg of mercury in these bulbs and the problems of disposal. www.stuff.co.nz	decibel (11645)
1 2 3 4