LED bulbs, BC GLS or golf ball

I've just had one of the 10W Müller-Licht lamps fail, not taken it back yet though unusually I do have the receipt for it, only bought in October (Aldi not Lidl) I don't think they're in stock except when they're a "special buy" so I'm expecting a refund rather than replacement.

The dead one is the one (of three) that has been used for most hours, but not sensible to extrapolate from such a small sample size.

Reply to
Andy Burns
Loading thread data ...

Aldi gave a refund without fuss (after I'd pointed out that multiple tens of thousands of hours life should equate to years rather than months of life).

Just bought an Osram LED superstar 10W/810lm from Tesco for a tenner, claimed 20 year life with 4 year guarantee, too many ES and not enough BC on the shelf, dimmable, warm white, *very* heavy feel to it as though the whole thing apart from the lens is epoxy potted.

Reply to
Andy Burns

Annoying, isn't it? Given a single central light etc in the UK will usually be BC.

I suppose there's a reason you can't buy a BC to ES adaptor?

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

tenner,

Should have bought the other week when they were on offer at £6.50. B-)

I think that's the reason why there are never any BC's left. They stock with equal amounts and the BC's fly off theshelf as that is all anyone wants.

You can: CPC PL0020905 £2.32 + VAT in a recent flyer. Drop the 05 for non-offer part no.

ES is 26 mm dia BC is 22 mm dia (ex pins), Anne Adapter would have to stick out of the BC holder, the above is 52 mm long...

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

Like this one?

formatting link
formatting link

Owain

Reply to
spuorgelgoog

Not much in the way of stock control if they're left with stuff which is slow selling, while the fast seller is sold out? And it's hardly a new problem - the same was the case with CFLs.

Right. Should have said I was surprised the likes of a large ASDA etc doesn't sell them, given their pretty big displays of lamps. And basic wiring accessories like switches and sockets.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Plenty on Ebay and Amazon - TLC's might be better quality.

Ms. Adapter has to be > the length of both bases; I suppose BC-->SES could be a bit shorter. BTW, very annoyingly the OD of an SES (E14) lamp holder is a bit more than that of a BC, so shades won't fit. Increasing the size of hole in a glass shade could be interesting.

Reply to
PeterC

Ah but it pulls you back into the store later in case they have restocked...

Probably not considered "safe" for the Great Unwashed.

Can't say I've seen wiring accessories in any of the large "Big 5". Prewired extensions, plugin things but nothing that would require messing with the fixed wiring.

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

My local ASDA has. Has batten and pendant bulb holders too - but only BC. In the same aisle as all the ES bulbs. ;-)

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Where do you get this information, please? I'm keeping an eye on LEDs, including the only (slightly) useful source that I've found so far: Lux Review

formatting link

I'm contrarian, as I've replaced single CFLs with 3-lamp LED luminaires in places where I want a good light for a short time - a minute or less - and a spread of light.

Although ES pendant sockets are cheap and easy to obtain (Ikea), ES batten holders with the full terminal strip seem to be unobtainable.

Reply to
PeterC

There are times when the wrong word is more interesting than the right one. ;-)

I can think of a few luminaries that would be out-performed by quite a dim lamp.

Chris

Reply to
Chris J Dixon

Ah well, the serendipity of laxness! :-)

I had a strong suspicion that I'd probably used the wrong spelling for "luminaire" BICBA to check until you pointed out my mistake.

It's one of those words where the 'correct' spelling of a similar one with a different meaning doesn't throw up the usual google question which so often hints at what you're really after. I had to dig a little bit more before finding Light fixture wiki article showing the wanted word.

I think the next time I'm tempted to use "luminaire", I'll just use "light fitting" instead. :-)

Reply to
Johny B Good

I once used "lumiere", but that's too close to the meaning to be interesting.

Reply to
PeterC

What came immediately to my mind was "Brothers", amazingly, a correctingly correct spot on association. Furthermore, a very job/profession appropriate surname to boot!

Anyhow, I've now figured out why I confused luminary with luminaire. Back in the middle of 1980, one would rarely hear the word "luminaire" used in common speech and my only knowledge of that word came from a text book on lighting where I presumed the fancy french spelling of the technically preferred alternative to "Light Fitting" was pronounced as "luminary".

Back then, there was no such thing as internet access, never mind google and on-line dictionaries with lists of rhyming words to offer the surprising fact that the word "luminaire" was spoken just as its spelling would suggest under the rules of English pronunciation.

Somehow or other, the correct pronunciation of the technically preferred term for 'light fitting' just seemed so cumbersome (in the same way that RP used for 'controversy' is so damned cumbersome after some joker in the Beeb's RP department decided to test his power for evil some two or three decades ago by way of a joke on the broadcasting industry's news readers).

Thanks to C J Dixon's contribution, I finally, some 35 years on, now know the correct pronunciation for 'luminaire'. :-)

Reply to
Johny B Good

Can't be bothered with Philips (or any of the single or triple high-power emitters). The electronics runs hot and are complicated. I see very poor service life from them.

Instead I buy cheap Chinese ones, usually from eBay, with lots of small surface mounts and clear covers rather than diffusers.

IMHE, no translucent diffuser turns the light through a right angle. So if you want side-emitting candles, get the ones with the LEDs pointing sideways.

Has anyone tried "filament LEDs" yet? Screwfix are starting to do them - lines of tiny LED emitters, set up to look like glowing filaments and those hipster-bulbs beloved of the TV decorator shows.

Reply to
Andy Dingley

I use "luminaire" if talking 'technically' as it's precise; "light fitting" is for general use. The term that annoys me is "bulb" - even for a tube. A bulb was so called because it's bulbous. I also hate "energy-saving bulb" - it's not a bulb and it doesn't save energy. If it did, it could be used to store output from panels and windmills, then emit a green light.

Reply to
PeterC

I've been using the COB-ceramic type - a sort of half-way form of the 'filament'.

formatting link
the 4100k is a nice light and it's rated at 320lm for 3W.

I'm about to order some filament-like lamps, one type of these:

formatting link
the globes
formatting link

It'll be a week or more, so I'll post my opinion of them.

I'd really like

formatting link
but at £7 each they're getting a bit expensive. Mind, 450lm from 4W...

Reply to
PeterC

They may look nice (if you like squirrel-cage lamps) but not much in the way of a heatsink for the LEDs ...

Reply to
Andy Burns

The form of the support for the LEDs doesn't hold the heat 'in'. The 3W,

320lm Ledlam lamps get luke warm at most and they're in lampshades that are closed at one end and horizontal. Some of Megaman's lamps have the ceramic substrates arching out from top to base, thus allowing good separation and double-sided escape for the heat. Ikea's lamp that I saw a few weeks ago was, IIRC, the encapsulated type, about 10W and 600lm and too hot to touch.
Reply to
PeterC

Well, it's really a matter of 'marketing speak', driven by a need to either use names already familiar to and in general use by the public or else a descriptive term that highlights the one aspect that will make the public 'sit up and take notice of', in this case, the saving of energy (consumption) which ultimately means a saving on their electricity bill.

The more appropriate "energy efficient" phrase just doesn't have the same impact in the public mind when it comes to maximising sales of the newer improved product that the marketing division have been charged with peddling to the great unwashed consumer.

In this case, as genuine as such an improvement is, this new innovation in lamp technology still has to suffer the effects of marketese just like every other "New & Improved" product vying for consumer attention.

The big thing with the marketing of the current crop of new wonder LED lamps available on today's shop shelves is that the current marketing strategy is concentrating on shifting lamps with only a mere

80L per watt efficiency[1] in the full knowledge that their bosses have already produced laboratory specimens producing 200 to 303 Lumens per watt in the confident expectation that these will be realised as saleable commodities just 18 to 24 months further down the line.

When you consider that Cree's record breaking 303L/W lamp was announced over 11 months ago, it's a sobering thought that in perhaps as little as just over a year's time, the marketing departments will be able to boast yet greater improved product efficiency, not of a mere fifty percent but a whopping two hundred percent!

Of course, it's only natural that the lamp manufacturers don't want this promise of even better product being indiscriminently disseminated amongst the general public whilst there's still a shedload of the current crop to be disposed of at a price that still offers a profitable return.

Marketing's job, after all, is to make sure that the current product achieves its target market penetration unpenalised by the promise of even better product tomorrow. It's not as if they're denying the promises made so publicly in the trade press as much as 'keeping quiet about it' and concentrating on the undoubted virtues over the older generation of energy efficient CFL and linear fluorescent tube luminaires[1].

Most consumers rarely take the time to investigate beyond the claims made for the current product to look at what will be on offer in just a year or so's time. Even those who have taken the trouble will be quite happy to invest in a few carefully chosen lamp upgrades to avail themselves of a higher efficiency lighting solution not served by CFLs (typically outside luminaires where the very much cooler environment makes such CFLs impractical) or where the instant on feature with a modestly improved efficiency is deemed a worthwhile investment.

[1] A 10W 810L LED offers 81L/W versus a best CFL's performance of 67L/W with electronically ballasted fluorescent tubed luminaires just reaching 90L/W. The improvement of 20% better efficiency for a 10W 810 Lumen lamp is quite modest compared to its typical price premium but does offer the benefit of instant on along with the promise of 35,000 to 50,000 hours life rating compared to the typical 8,000 to 15,000 hours rating for CFL.

The undoubted efficiency gain, though modest, along with its instant on feature is certainly a legitimate enough reason to take the hit on being an early adopter but, with the much better efficiencies being offered in the not too distant future, the saying, "All Good Things Come To Those Who Wait." is the key to getting the best value for money when considering a whole house lighting upgrade.

One other important point to remember when considering the higher efficiency lamps is that for a given lumen requirement from a standard luminaire, there'll be a lot less waste heat being produced which will permit the use of 810 and 1020 Lumen lamps to be used in existing luminaires not suited to the current crop of LEDs.

Waiting for the higher efficiency lamps to become available will probably save the need to upgrade existing luminaires to better ventillated versions otherwise required by the current LED lamps.

Reply to
Johny B Good

HomeOwnersHub 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.