I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:48:42 -0500, allan wrote:

I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

I have. I'd get a larger CFL. It still uses less electricity.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Unlike biological evolution. 'intelligent design' is
not a genuine scientific theory and, therefore, has
no place in the curriculum of our nation's public
school classes." -- Ted Kennedy

Yep. When replacing a 60w bulb, use a CFL rated to replace a 75w.
Works great for me.

I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else noted
this?

My cfls take about 15 minutes to be fully bright. Give them some time.

allan wrote:
I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

It seems to vary greatly depending on the specific CF, the temperature,
the length of time it has been on and the actual voltage.

Frankly all the CF I have bought recently seem brighter than claim to me,
at least once the warm up. I kind of like that slightly less bright light
and a gradual brightening.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit

The really cheap ones don't seem as bright as they claim.

The nicer ones I bought at Home Depot (instead of the dollar-type
discount store) seem to match the brightness they claim.

But yeah, you'll still save tons of money if you go one category
brighter in a CFL vs. regular bulb.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:48:42 -0500, allan wrote:

I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?


Some 60's put out more light than others. So best to compare lumins,
also the manufactures compareison, might be an average.

Just a guess....

tom @ www.FreelancingProjects.com

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:48:42 -0500, allan wrote:

I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

The 100s equal about a 75.
The 75 equal about a 60.

Pay more and get more light.

Try to work in t8 whereever more light is needed.

In article , allan wrote:
I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

I have found 13 watt CFL to match 60 watt "standard incandescent" at a
favorable temperature and when the CFL is in newer condition and on a good
day.

It appears to me that a 15 watt CFL can usually at favorable temperature
match the light output of a 60 watt "standard incandescent".

Given phosphor aging and scotopic vision and fixture optical design
issues, I consider it not too unlikely that you may need a compact
fluorescent in the 18-20 watt range to produce as much illumination as a
60 watt "standard incandescent".

- Don Klipstein )

In article , Buck Turgidson wrote:
I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else noted
this?

My cfls take about 15 minutes to be fully bright. Give them some time.

That sounds unusually long to me. In my experience, CFLs usually take
half a minute to a minute to get close enough to full brightness.

Outdoor types in colder temperatures can take 5-10 minutes to get
warmed up.

- Don Klipstein )

In .com, Shaun Eli wrote:
The really cheap ones don't seem as bright as they claim.

The nicer ones I bought at Home Depot (instead of the dollar-type
discount store) seem to match the brightness they claim.

I would avoid the dollar store ones as if they were fleas and
mosquitoes!

I have tested 57 "models" of I forget how many "brands" (maybe 18-19 or
so), and found 100% of the ones making claims of light output to fall
significantly short - in a few cases by a factor of at least 3!

Additional issues with the "dollar store" CFLs according to my
experience:

1) The color is usually an icy cold bluish white "daylight". Some models
in packages claiming "soft warm white light" have the icy cold bluish
white color.

2) Of the minority that actually has a "warm white" color, most have low
color rendering index.

3) Defect rate is higher than that of other CFLs, and failures are more
likely to be spectacular.

========================

Next down the line, my experience with Lights of America has a high rate
of early failures and a high rate of light output falling short of claims
to an extent that I consider significant, although nothing like the dollar
store junkers.

After that, I have found the "Maxlite" brand to have a significant
rate of falling short of claimed light output, although mostly slightly
although I had one model do so more badly.

After that, the GE FLB15 (early 1990's) fell significantly short of
claimed light output in my experience.

Another note - Many PL/twintube types had light output exaggerated by
8-9%, and the major name brands backed down their light output claims of
many models of these by about 8% several years ago. Consider 820-825
lumens from a PL-13 realistic and 900 lumens from such to be what the
major manufacturers had to back down from.

- Don Klipstein )

On 26 Feb 2007 18:45:29 -0800, "Shaun Eli"
wrote:

The really cheap ones don't seem as bright as they claim.

The nicer ones I bought at Home Depot (instead of the dollar-type
discount store) seem to match the brightness they claim.

On two occasions I bought one at a dollar store, and I finally solved
my problem by using one of those 2 sockets in one, and running them at
the same time, in the basement. They're bright enough that way.

But yeah, you'll still save tons of money if you go one category
brighter in a CFL vs. regular bulb.

On Feb 27, 1:02 am, Fay wrote:
allan wrote :

I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

I bought some that were labeled soft white. They were not very bright. I
went back and bought some labeled bright white and they are very close to
the 60s I replaced.

You have to be careful with this, as light may be of different
spectrum that you may not like. I had to put a pair of these on the
porch because wife objected to light.

Also buy by lumens or light output and not advertised wattage
equivalent.
As others suggest, I buy the slightly higher wattage cfl's which put
out more light and still save a lot of money.

Frank

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:00:31 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:48:42 -0500, allan wrote:

I have been replacing my 60s with cfl 13 which say they are
equivalent, they are not the 60 is much brighter. Has anyone else
noted this?

I have. I'd get a larger CFL. It still uses less electricity.

Brightness is in the eye of the beholder!

To make the claim your CFL's make they probably do put out the same
number of lumens.

But the spectra may not match what you expect or how your home
furnishings are colored.

Another person might have different colored furnishings and walls... and
have different color perception in their eye.

Try a different CFL with a different color temperature or higher CRI
(color rendition). It might seem "brighter" to you in your environment.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots