As I said, that 45 seconds was at 10F, not room temp. I have CFLs just
about everywhere in my house and none of them has any noticeable turn on
delay, and I mean *no* delay as in the light is on at 90%+ brightness at
the same time you hear the wall switch click.
I don't use exotic CFLs, just generic stuff from Deopt, Lowe's, Sam's or
Costco, so I don't know where these mysterious CFLs that people claim
have huge turn on delays are coming from. I think the folks claiming all
these supposed CFL issues really have mental issues, or else haven't
actually tried a CFL since the very first ones that came out like a
A friend of mine recently converted to pretty much all CFLs in his house
and has not only had no complaints, rather he's thrilled with them and
the $20/mo he says it has cut from his electric bill.
Wow! I don't know where to start.
First, the attitude that "if it doesn't happen to me, it doesn't exist" is
pretty much Middle Ages thinking.
Second, to attribute those reports (including mine) to mental defect is just
plain insulting to your fellow posters. It's almost nonsensical.
Third, you've already admitted you've only tried bulbs from several vendors.
It's an AWFULLY big world out there. Mine are just a few years old.
Fourth, if I gave a damn about someone who's never met me impugning my
mental state or that of friends here in AHR I know to be accurate reporters
of the truth, I would cheerfully make a video of how long it takes my
floodlight mounted N:vision Home Depot bulbs to ramp up to full brightness.
But I don't care. Your denial says much more about you than it does about
me or the others who have actually seen slow warm-up.
I simply know that it takes TOO long to see someone breaking into my car via
my CCTV system with the Home Depot N:vision CFL floodlights so I installed a
second floodlight fixture that uses plain old, comes-on-instantly
incandescent floods so when I hear something and the lights are out, I can
at least get instant light on the subject. That was a lot of work, and it
made my wife unhappy to have yet another two-eyed floodlight stalk hanging
off the house. But we agreed it had to be done to counter a very specific
problem: slow startup of CFL floods, especially in cold weather. The one
flood bulb we used inside for the plant box exhibited the same problems.
It *could* be that the bulbs are designed that way to avoid cracking the
outer glass shell from too much heat applied too quickly in an environment
where there may be snow, rain or ice on the outer shell, but warm up slowly
is what they do. I'd bet you $5000 that these slow-warm-up bulbs exist
because I own three. I watch two of them ramp up slowly every night I turn
them on. If you're so sure, put your money where your mouth is and give me
a chance to double mine. It's easy money for me.
The whole palette of complaints - long warm up, bad dimming, incompatibility
with home automation systems that require filament current leakage to
operate, large size for high wattage, early burnout in bathrooms where they
are switched on 20 times a day and very spectacular burn-outs emitting a
cloud of acrid burned plastic smoke are quite real.
I would say you're the one in some sort of denial just because your
extrapolating other people's experience based on the (apparent) experience
of yourself and one other user. That doesn't constitute a large sample
compared to the population of the US or even the readership of this group.
An honorable man might offer up an apology for saying every person reporting
these issues might have mental problems. Now you get to show us what you're
really made of. Man or mouse?
In the meantime, educate yourself:
Also consider why GE sells a halogen/CFL bulb to counter situations where
it's dangerous to wait for a CFL to warm up (stairwells, for instance).
Slow warm-up is real. Consider yourself lucky if you've avoided or not
perceived it so far.
I've used many brands of CFLs over the past decade, and as I noted, not
one of them has had a long warm-up time. I've known a number of other
people who have switched to CFLs and none of them have reported any
warm-up time issues either. No, it's not a giant sample size, but it's
not tiny either and there isn't a single example of the claimed slow
CFLs in the lot. Not one problem CFL out of the hundreds in the sample.
I'm pretty confident that those who are continually protesting the
"slow" CFL tried one very early CFL, and have since talked themselves
into a corner where they can not admit that current CFLs simply do not
have the problem that they have fixated on. People certainly fixate on
stupider things such as religion.
Several vendors? Where do you come up with that? I listed four stores,
which is more than several right there. In my spare CFL stockpile at the
moment I have CFLs branded GE, Sylvania, Commercial Electric and Lights
of America. I'm sure there are a few others in some of my fixtures. Mine
range from about a year old to about 8 years old.
Floodlight mounted? Do you mean encapsulated CFLs? As Don K. notes,
those are the only type of CFLs that he's found have any warm-up time.
None of the CFLs I use are encapsulated.
So again, for such applications, why are you so fixated on
incandescents? Halogens work better for those uses and are more
efficient than regular incandescents. Those halogen lamps are also not
Again, you are referring to a special case of lamps for outdoor use,
where there is no push for CFLs anyway. Also the CFL based outdoor
fixtures such as the floodlights that use 65W flat CFL units don't have
the problem either.
I have CFLs in my bathroom and most everywhere else in my house, a
number are in enclosed fixtures such as in the shower stall. I put these
CFLs in when I moved here in July 2004, today it is July 2011 and to
date I have replaced two CFLs that dies of natural causes and one that
was inadvertently killed by a half wave dimmer. None have had any melt
down burn outs either, not even those in enclosed fixtures.
A lot more than one other user, I only noted the one friend who
converted to CFLs about three months ago, not the other friends who did
It constitutes hundreds of lamps of various brands bought in various
states and used in various environments. It's not an exhaustive sample,
but it's quite sufficient to note the lack of the issues people here
like to cry about.
Whoop-dee-doo, another special purpose lamp for cold environments. There
are similar HID/Halogen lamp assemblies designed to provide immediate
light after a power hit since HIDs require a cool down before re-strike
unless they have expensive ballasts. Been around for years and does not
in any way negate the value of HID lighting.
I've avoided CFLs with slow warm ups and so have all my friends using
CFLs for the past decade. Neither I nor my friends have had any short
CFL life issues either, our CFLs last 5 years or more in daily use, yet
there are those who claim their CFLs last a month or two. There people
with CFL issues are very much the exception, not the norm, and there are
almost certainly explanations for their issue that are not the fault of
the CFL lamps.
Hundreds? Your sample size grows and grows like Pinocchio's nose. How many
CFL bulbs do you think are in service, Pete? Billions. China is producing
almost half a billion bulbs annually. Don't take my word for it, read the
Wall Street Journal and extrapolate. You claim to be good at it.
If you read that article, you'll learn that all those different
manufacturers you tout as being part of some sample of alleged statistical
significance are very likely made by the same manufacturer:
<< TCP already is the largest manufacturer of CFL bulbs sold in the U.S.,
according to industry players.It produces 300 to 400 million CFL bulbs per
year in China, selling many under brands such as GE Lighting, Osram Sylvania
and Philips Lighting.>>
So much for your broad sample of many manufacturers. Let the debunking
My, my. What a scientist you are. You base your conclusions on the tiny
percent of all bulbs sold on the experience of you and a few buddies. You
posit a scenario with no proof whatsoever it's true and expect people to
believe you. Can't you see how silly that makes you look? Have you ever
taken a course in statistics? Then you might know a little more about
confidence and how to calculate it. You draw conclusions "ex nihilo"* and
expect rational people to believe them. That's laughable. And sad.
Oh my, you need an education in English too. Remember, you asked for this,
Pete by slandering rational observers of a well-known weakness in CFL's:
a : more than one <several pleas> b : more than two but fewer than many
So you're wrong again. The errors just keep on a' comin'. Why don't you
just apologize and get it over with? Soon, you'll earn the sobriquet "Easy
Meat Pete" because your conclusions are so laughably easy to disprove.
Good for you. How does that in any way mean that others haven't experienced
slow starts? It doesn't. You're just trying to climb out of the hole you
dug for yourself by extrapolating your tiny sample to the real world of
perhaps a billion CFL bulbs. Do I have to look up the word "pathetic" for
Good for you again. You've now disproved your own bogus theory by quoting
someone else who has seen slow warm-up in CFLs. Does Mr. Klipstein have the
mental defect you attribute to anyone that's had a negative warm-up
experience? You're weaseling, now, Pete, because you know you "misspoke"
in your earlier post. Somehow encapsulating a CFL makes it not a CFL in
your very strange world. What is it then, if not a CFL?
Oh, Pete, you're going make your momma cry. Do you know what the word
incandescent means? This is worse than shooting fish in a barrel. You
should have apologized for your dumb "mental" remark and ended it. Now
people will have to step outside to see for themselves if you tell them the
sky is blue:
A halogen lamp, also known as a tungsten halogen lamp, is an incandescent
lamp with a tungsten filament contained within an inert gas and a small
amount of a halogen such as iodine or bromine.
Drifting away from the topic and hoping no one will notice? Nice try but no
ceegar. Even if this was remotely relevant to your nonsensical claims of
mental deficiency, halogens are going to be banned by the EU and may soon be
banned in the US. The EU countries were the leaders in banning the common
tungsten filament light bulbs. We merely rode their coattails and probably
will again. I wouldn't be so sanguine about those halogen bulbs being
around for long.
" Energy saving experts are currently drawing up recommendations for the new
rules on so-called "directional" light bulbs, which focus and reflect light
in a single direction, but the ban is expected to include incandescent
spotlights and mains voltage halogen reflector bulbs."
What do you mean there's no "push?" Do you make this stuff up as you go
along? The skyrocketing cost of electricity is the push. The CO2 emissions
caused by incandescent is the push. When I want to run the floods for hours
at a time, the long warm up of CFL's is acceptable. It is NOT acceptable
when I hear a noise near the cars in the driveway. Hence the incandescent
floodlights which still cost considerably more than CFL floods to operate.
flat CFL units don't have
I'm sure homeowners will be rushing to replacing their existing floodlight
fixtures to remedy a problem that you don't believe exists because in your
sample of .0000001 (generous!) you haven't personally seen it. So many are
already SO thrilled at being forced to replace their tungsten bulbs they'll
just jump for joy at the need to replace all their outside floodlights.
Sounds like you're finally admitting that there ARE CFL bulbs that have a
very long warm up time, doesn't it? Sounds like your claim that people
reporting such observations are mentally defective is a lie based on your
own very obvious prejudice and lack of experience. To claim that people
who've seen CFLs take a long time to warm up are mentally ill is fuc&ing
offensive, Pete, even though you either don't know it or can't admit to it.
You should have simply apologized for it. Instead, you're squirming around,
being evasive and looking sillier and sillier.
Here we are, back again at Pete's Law: "If it didn't happen to me, it
doesn't exist" world. Good for you. Your minute sample is in NO WAY
representative of the rest of the world. It's an unscientific, personally
biased sample of one in millions and maybe tens of millions if we give you
credit for the number of friends that grows with each new posting.
Yes, I know. The gargantuan sample size of several, a word whose meaning is
apparently not known to you. If you don't know what words mean, what else
can we extrapolate that you don't know? That would be a much more logical
projection than your assumption of mental defects.
Ah, the last refuge of a cornered Usenetter: call in the imaginary army of
friends to bolster your still ludicrous position that if it didn't happen to
me or my closest friends, it doesn't happen. That's STILL what you're
saying whether you know it or not. It's just as scientifically and
statistically invalid as when you first tried to hide behind it.
It's totally insufficient because you apparently don't know that there's a
very high likelihood that all your "various" brands were likely made by one
Chinese company. Once again:
You CAN'T know statistics. Hundreds of samples out of BILLIONS of bulbs
sold in the last ten years is meaningless. Utterly. Even you, who appear to
be numerically challenged should know that.
I suppose I always knew the answer to that question, mus musculus. Too bad
you couldn't just man up and admit you made a very bad choice of words,
Pete. It's costing you your credibility.
No, another refutation of your ludicrous claim that people who report slow
CFL warm ups are mentally ill. I learned about the hybrid from a gentleman
here in AHR that needed a bulb that countered the CFL slow warmup on his
stairway. I don't recall a cold environment entering into it.
Read up on all the reports of slow warm-up:
Mus musculus, indeed. You made statements you can't back up based on
personal bias based on a sample size so small that if you ever had a stat
course, your professor might die of shame. Now you're trying to take the
focus off your incredibly offensive "mental" statement off into the ozone
somewhere. Who was talking about HIDs? We were talking about your
remarkable "mental defect" statement, which you apparently have no intention
of retracting despite mountains of evidence, including your own, to the
We're back to the "all my friends" scientific method. What do you do in
real life? It can't be based on science, math, statistics or common sense.
You posit "other explanations" but offer none. Proof of intellectual
The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy !Robert Burns
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_nihilo (if you don't know what "several"
means, I assume "ex nihilo" is way, WAY beyond you.)
<yada dada dada *snip*>
Have fun with your anti-CFL campaign, I'm going to continue happily
using my instant start CFAs and enjoying the energy savings and greatly
reduced replacements that they provide.
At this point, this sounds to me like an application for incandescents
that will survive the 2012-2014 USA "ban" on incandescents.
Namely, reflectorized floodlights/spotlights.
- Don Klipstein ( email@example.com)
That wasn't my point. Sorry I was unclear. I meant that the Feds could
step in using the Commerce Clause to claim jurisdiction if Texas had to
import any part of the bulb from outside the state to make it. My mind's
drawing its usual blank, but I do recall cases where the Feds had to back
off on trying to regulate a wholly intra-state activity. At least I think I
recall them. The great cruelty/irony of memory loss is that you know you
knew something but you don't remember what you knew, only that you can't
Well, that certainly wouldn't be the worst "interpretation" of the commerce
clause. Some are really pushing the edge even for an Omamunist. Given enough
twisting anything can be (and has been) "justified" under the commerce clause.
That wasn't its intent, however.
My mind is drawing a blank too, but there was one where some ag product was
determined to be "interstate commerce" even though the people growing it were
consuming the stuff themselves; not "commerce" at all. The ruling was that if
they didn't grow it, it *would* have required going to the market, therefore
their actions altered the interstate commerce in the commodity; and argument
Obama would love.
On 7/3/11 11:19 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Maybe I should help you two rickety old guys out. I'm close to it
myself. This particular court case was about wheat:
By the way, has anyone seen my motorcycle keys?
Thanks. Now I remember. I think it was a bum decision, ceding too much
power to Congress and trampling the rights of individuals. What I was
actually trying to remember was:
<<In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of
Appeals. It held that while Congress had broad lawmaking authority under the
Commerce Clause, the power was limited, and did not extend so far from
"commerce" as to authorize the regulation of the carrying of handguns,
especially when there was no evidence that carrying them affected the
economy on a massive scale.>>
Realistically that same logic applied to poor Filbrun/burn. Different
Justices, different outcomes. I think of any 5/4 ruling as "subject to
change without a lot of notice" when the court makeup shifts ideologically
speaking. I read an interesting article that said although the justices
claim they evaluate each case free of political bias their block voting
record disproves that contention. Their votes along ideological lines makes
that claim something like 1 in 44 quintillion to be true. The Supremes are
just as biased as anyone else, only they like to lie and pretend they're
Yes, that one did come to mind but I thought that the BATF said "we're going
to enforce Federals laws no matter what you pass" as the DEA did with
California pot laws. Has it gotten any traction?
I think that the Feds might leave Texas alone if it decides to manufacture
its own lightbulbs, but they may act just to avoid a landslide of other
states following suit. Hard to say. The CFL laws are incredible unpopular
both here and in Europe, with people seeing it as a case of needle-dicked
Kagan, possibly, because of her previous job, which leads me to believe
Obama made a bad choice picking someone who would have to recuse herself as
often as she has done. Why Thomas?
There's an easy response Thomas could use.
Years ago in Texas, an incumbent US Senator was criticized by his opponent
for not releasing his wife's tax records. The wife was a very successful
D.C. real estate broker. The response? (paraphrasing):
"There's a good reason why my opponent never married - he has a jaundiced
view of the American woman. Long gone are the days in which the "man of the
house" demanded anything of the "little woman." I don't tell my wife what to
do and I would never think of ordering her to do anything. My opponent
obviously thinks a wife should act differently."
Maybe they just went to different law schools?
I had the following conversation with my advisor: "The main purpose of law
school is not to teach law - because the law changes every day. The purpose
of law school is to teach you to think like a lawyer. What's your academic
Me: "Uh, I have a master's in math."
Him: "Oh you won't have any trouble with law school. You already know how to
think deductively. In general, we find that those who come to us from the
hard sciences, math, or engineering, make the best law students. Those from
the soft sciences, like psychology, or from business administration are your
average students. Those who come from the liberal arts - history, drama,
cello - have the most difficulty."
That explains it, you remind me of my PhD math professor friend from
Texas who taught at the university. He and I were part of a group of
friends from disparate backgrounds who hung out together. It always
made for interesting conversations.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.