View Single Post
  #22   Report Post  
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
Tom Del Rosso[_4_] Tom Del Rosso[_4_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 263
Default Loony Question for Today


Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the
halogen is more efficient at converting power to light (and hence
not to heat). I said 'technically' because you are unlikely to
notice the difference in heat.


My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.


But everybody has heard about low-power halogn floor lamps falling over and
starting fires, and their power is in the same common range of 40-100W.
Those things do get hotter than incandescents, and not just because the heat
is concentrated in a smaller bulb since the whole lamp head gets hot. This
is just based on my sense of touch of course but they seem to run hotter.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.