Perhaps it's just the brand(s) of CFL bulbs that I've been buying -
but has anyone else noticed a lack of "brightness" with these things.
Case in point: I've switched bulbs out in light fixtures that I
normally would use 75 watt incandescents in - replacing them with
CFL's. The light output always seems dimmer in nature. I've even
gone as far as replacing my "normal" 75-watters -- upping them to 100-
watt CFL's...but I get the same results.

I also don't believe the long-life promises. Most of mine burn out in
less than a year or two -- the same term that standard bulbs with.

I'm disheartened that incandescents will no longer be sold after 2012;
I visualize us all in a "dimmer world".....

On 4/28/2008 11:45 AM Stanko spake thus:

Perhaps it's just the brand(s) of CFL bulbs that I've been buying -
but has anyone else noticed a lack of "brightness" with these things.
Case in point: I've switched bulbs out in light fixtures that I
normally would use 75 watt incandescents in - replacing them with
CFL's. The light output always seems dimmer in nature. I've even
gone as far as replacing my "normal" 75-watters -- upping them to 100-
watt CFL's...but I get the same results.

I also don't believe the long-life promises. Most of mine burn out in
less than a year or two -- the same term that standard bulbs with.

I'm disheartened that incandescents will no longer be sold after 2012;
I visualize us all in a "dimmer world".....

You've raised two separate points (maybe more) he

1. Brightness of incandescents vs. CFLs:

Keep in mind that the "equivalent" rating of a CFL ("equal to a XX-watt
bulb") is an advertising claim not subject to any objective standard. It
turns out that this does correspond pretty roughly to the *actual* power
consumption of the bulb, meaning that a 23-watt CFL will be brighter
than an 18-watt one. Which means that this claim will vary from
manufacturer to manufacturer. I've had very good results in terms of
brightness with the 23-watt bulbs I've been buying recently (cheap ones
subsidized by local power company, Pacific Gas & Electric), and find
that they are equal to, or possibly a little brighter than 100-watt
incandescents.

2. Longevity of CFLs:

Again, this varies from mfr. to mfr. I've seen CFLs with ****-poor
infant mortality rates (i.e., burn out in weeks to months); on the other
hand, the 20-watt CFLs I bought at Ikea about 6 years ago are still
burning bright.

I wonder if /Consumer Reports/ has good information on which brands of
CFLs are better? Such reports are clearly needed, now that this market
is booming.


--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute
conversation with the average voter.

- Attributed to Winston Churchill

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:45:26 -0700 (PDT), Stanko
wrote:

I visualize us all in a "dimmer world".....

Antidepressants already do that anyway.

Stanko wrote:
Perhaps it's just the brand(s) of CFL bulbs that I've been buying -
but has anyone else noticed a lack of "brightness" with these things.
Case in point: I've switched bulbs out in light fixtures that I
normally would use 75 watt incandescents in - replacing them with
CFL's. The light output always seems dimmer in nature. I've even
gone as far as replacing my "normal" 75-watters -- upping them to 100-
watt CFL's...but I get the same results.

I also don't believe the long-life promises. Most of mine burn out in
less than a year or two -- the same term that standard bulbs with.

I'm disheartened that incandescents will no longer be sold after 2012;
I visualize us all in a "dimmer world".....

I compare based on lumens. I've also been using the 75 watt equivalents
where I used to use 60 watt incandescents, particularly to accommodate
wife as the cfl's take a few minutes to come up to full brightness. I
still save electricity, which I don't care about, and bill is less,
which I do care about. In bath and powder rooms, I use incandescents as
use is only a few minutes and too short to get full light. In one
powder room and my stall shower, I still have original, 35 year old,
super bulbs.

I had one pair of cfl's I had to relegate to the front porch as they
were too white and glared in the house.

In ,
Stanko wrote:

Perhaps it's just the brand(s) of CFL bulbs that I've been buying -
but has anyone else noticed a lack of "brightness" with these things.
Case in point: I've switched bulbs out in light fixtures that I
normally would use 75 watt incandescents in - replacing them with
CFL's. The light output always seems dimmer in nature. I've even
gone as far as replacing my "normal" 75-watters -- upping them to 100-
watt CFL's...but I get the same results.

I also don't believe the long-life promises. Most of mine burn out in
less than a year or two -- the same term that standard bulbs with.

What kind of fixtures are you putting them in? If they are recessed
ceiling fixtures, they could be overheating. CFLs have reduced light
output when temperature is non-optimum. Overheating can also shorten
their life a lot.

By-and-large, CFLs with "Energy Star" logo or of a "Big 3" brand (GE,
Philips, Sylvania) are better than others.

In my experience, the following have a high rate of producing less than
claimed light output:

Lights of America (I only bought 1 since 2001)
Maxlite
dollar store ones

At lower illumination levels, sometimes lowish typical home lighting
levels, a characteristic known as "scotopic photopic ratio" makes a
difference. 2700K CFLs have this figure being lower than incandescents
have. That can largely be fixed by using higher color temperature CFLs.
3500K ones usually work well for homes in my experience. Lowes and Home
Depot carry 3500K spiral CFLs in a range of wattages.
I would advise against color temp. higher than 3500K for most home use -
that can appear stark or "dreary gray".

I'm disheartened that incandescents will no longer be sold after 2012;
I visualize us all in a "dimmer world".....

Home Depot is already selling incandescents that have energy efficiency
high enough to be allowed until 2020. These are Philips Halogena "Energy
Saver". They are more efficient than conventional incandescents, and a
little more efficient than more ordinary halogens of similar wattage
and same voltage, but only about 35-40% as efficient as CFLs.

- Don Klipstein )

In m, David Nebenzahl
wrote in part:

1. Brightness of incandescents vs. CFLs:

Keep in mind that the "equivalent" rating of a CFL ("equal to a XX-watt
bulb") is an advertising claim not subject to any objective standard. It
turns out that this does correspond pretty roughly to the *actual* power
consumption of the bulb, meaning that a 23-watt CFL will be brighter
than an 18-watt one. Which means that this claim will vary from
manufacturer to manufacturer. I've had very good results in terms of
brightness with the 23-watt bulbs I've been buying recently (cheap ones
subsidized by local power company, Pacific Gas & Electric), and find
that they are equal to, or possibly a little brighter than 100-watt
incandescents.

Light bulbs intended for "general purpose", including single-wattage
screw-base spiral CFLs, have their light output in lumens printed on the
packages. I believe this is an FTC regulation - though most dollar store
CFLs don't follow this.

Specialty lightbulbs, such as decorative, appliance and colored ones,
mostly do not mention light output in lumens.

- Don Klipstein )

On 4/28/2008 3:48 PM Don Klipstein spake thus:

In m, David Nebenzahl
wrote in part:

1. Brightness of incandescents vs. CFLs:

Keep in mind that the "equivalent" rating of a CFL ("equal to a XX-watt
bulb") is an advertising claim not subject to any objective standard. It
turns out that this does correspond pretty roughly to the *actual* power
consumption of the bulb, meaning that a 23-watt CFL will be brighter
than an 18-watt one. Which means that this claim will vary from
manufacturer to manufacturer. I've had very good results in terms of
brightness with the 23-watt bulbs I've been buying recently (cheap ones
subsidized by local power company, Pacific Gas & Electric), and find
that they are equal to, or possibly a little brighter than 100-watt
incandescents.

Light bulbs intended for "general purpose", including single-wattage
screw-base spiral CFLs, have their light output in lumens printed on the
packages. I believe this is an FTC regulation - though most dollar store
CFLs don't follow this.

Specialty lightbulbs, such as decorative, appliance and colored ones,
mostly do not mention light output in lumens.

After I posted this, I thought to suggest that the O.P. compare bulb
brightnesses by lumens. Thanks.

And keep in mind that another annoying "feature" of CFLs is that they
don't achieve full brightness at turn-on, unlike incandescents. (One can
easily get used to this behavior, though, so it's not necessarily a
show-stopper.)


--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute
conversation with the average voter.

- Attributed to Winston Churchill

On Apr 28, 1:45*pm, Stanko wrote:
Perhaps it's just the brand(s) of CFL bulbs that I've been buying -
but has anyone else noticed a lack of "brightness" with these things.
Case in point: *I've switched bulbs out in light fixtures that I
normally would use 75 watt incandescents in - replacing them with
CFL's. *The light output always seems dimmer in nature. *I've even
gone as far as replacing my "normal" 75-watters -- upping them to 100-
watt CFL's...but I get the same results.

I also don't believe the long-life promises. *Most of mine burn out in
less than a year or two -- the same term that standard bulbs with.

I'm disheartened that incandescents will no longer be sold after 2012;
I visualize us all in a "dimmer world".....

You say you replaced 75 watt incandesant with 100w Cfls!!!! You dont
know what you are talking about, 100w cfls are GIANT and put out 400w
equivilant of incandesants and cost a crap load, maybe you mean an
equivilant amount which is a 22w Cfl , www.PopularMechanics.com
magazine has a review of cfls to incandesant in the HOME section, its
old, Home Depots cfls have a 9 Year Warranty, [ so keep the reciept]
and are better rated than all , even to incandesant [ by a reviewer]
than incandesant in skin color. A 9 w cfl should equal 40 w
incandesant. a 22w cfl will equal 100 w incandesant, or more. when you
realise an incandesant bulb is just an electric heater, and that 100w
bulbs only actualy puts out 6-8 watts of light will you understand how
antiquated Edisons Heaters [ bulbs] realy are. For every 11 of 100
watt bulbs, you generate about 1000 watts of extra heat, !!! and you
will pay extra for you AC to remove it this summer. Electric
companaies love this, your built in suckerism, stupidity, on
incandesant bulbs. That why mine gives them away for FREE.!! You
pay to cool, and you heat with incandesants , so you pay more to cool.
Evil BS them Fkn Elec cos are. But companies are in business for
profitt.

In ,
ransley wrote in part:

You say you replaced 75 watt incandesant with 100w Cfls!!!! You dont
know what you are talking about, 100w cfls are GIANT and put out 400w
equivilant of incandesants and cost a crap load, maybe you mean an
equivilant amount which is a 22w Cfl

I have yet to see a CFL under 25 watts fully match a "standard" 120V 750
hour 100 watt "A19" incandescent. Most under 25 watts claim less than
1700-1750 lumens. The lowest wattage spiral I have seen so far achieving
this much is 26 watts. I have seen only one 25 watt screw base model
achieve this - a Philips SLS "triple arch".

I just want people to not feel let down when they get a 23 watt CFL that
claims to achieve "100 watt equivalence" but falls a little short. 23
watt ones produce 1600 lumens at best so far in my experience. There are
some 100 watt incandescents that produce less than that (superlonglife
ones, vibration duty ones, and GE "Enrich" ones, but 750 hour "standard
frost" 120V 100W A19 with coiled-coil filament normally produces 1710-1750
lumens.

CFLs also fade slightly as they age and have reduced light output when
their temperature is not optimum. They may work less well in some
fixtures than incandescents due to different light output pattern or
different shape/size of the light-emitting area. They may appear a
little dimmer in some areas because 2700K CFL has a lower
scotopic/photopic ratio than most incandescents 60 watts or more and
rated 1500 hours or less (or halogen). So one can easily need "claimed
incandescent equivalence" one step higher than claimed.

7 watt CFLs usually match or outperform 25 watt incandescents.

9-10 watt ones on a good day match or outperform most 40 watt
incandescents. With all of the above real-world factors, 9-10 watt CFLs
often fall a little short of better 40 watt incandescents.

11 watt spirals do well at matching/outperforming 40 watt incandescents.

13-15 watt spirals match better 60 watt incandescents when everything is
going right. Otherwise, they only have a high rate of
matching/outperforming 60 watt incandescents if the incandescents are
"commercial service" or 130 volt ones or the like.

18-20 watt spirals, when everything is going right, match 75 watt 750
hour "standard" incandescents. Otherwise, only count on them at least
matching 130V or "commercial service" or similar 75 watt incandescents.
These should have little problem at least matching the best 60 watt
incandescents.

23 watt spirals even at best are slightly dimmer than 100 watt
"standard" incandescents, but usually match or exceed the light output of
"commercial service", 130V and "vibration duty" 100 watt incandescents and
the brightest 75 watt incandescents.

26-27 watt spirals, when at their best, match or very slightly exceed
the output of "standard" 100 watt incandescents. In the real world, in
average conditions and after a couple thousand hours of use, these have a
high rate of falling slightly short of 100 watt "standard" incandescents.

30 watt spirals do well at having at least as much light output as a 100
watt "standard" incandescent.

This is after the CFL warms up. Spirals with bare tubing generally warm
up to close to full brightness in half a minute to a minute.

Keep in mind that screw-base CFLs over 23 watts easily overheat in
recessed ceiling fixtures, other downlights, and small enclosed fixtures.

Take all of this into consideration, and you will be much less likely to
be disappointed.

- Don Klipstein )

Joseph Meehan wrote:
I can only point out two things. First the "equivalent "
brightness is not "official" I would say that many are overstated. Also
note that CF's will start off dimmer and slowly brighten up. In my bath I
have four CF's and four incandescent lamps that
according to the packages should be equal. When I turn them on the
incandescent are certainly brighter, but after a few minutes the CF's
are brighter. The mix of colors makes for a very good light since it
is somewhere between sun light and tungsten. I also like the slow
ramp up of brightness, especially in the morning when I am not really
ready for bright lights.

The ladies appreciate varied bulbs - different wattages, colors, etc. That
way they can judge their makeup under all conditions likely to be
encountered.

My dentist has two four-bulb florescents above the chair. Each one has a
different type bulb. He says it's easier to spot areas needing attention
with the different colors and wavelengths.

On 12/30/2010 01:43 AM, mm wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:53:00 +0000,
(Bill G) wrote:



And keep in mind that another annoying "feature" of CFLs is
that they
don\'t achieve full brightness at turn-on, unlike incandescents.

I think that time is getting shorter.

Depends. The decorative globe ones that you would use in a bathroom are
still pretty bad. Also if you use CFLs outside, they're REAL dim when
it's below freezing until they come up to temp, although that is outside
their design parameters.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

In ,
Nate Nagel typed:
On 12/30/2010 01:43 AM, mm wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:53:00 +0000,
(Bill G) wrote:
....

Depends. The decorative globe ones that you would use in a
bathroom are still pretty bad. Also if you use CFLs
outside, they're REAL dim when it's below freezing until
they come up to temp, although that is outside their design
parameters.
nate

That light slowness happens inside my garage until the bulbs warm up but
those are 8' fl bulbs. On the porch, exposed to the temperatures down to 18
below F so far, surprisingly, the CFLs come on just fine. I expected them to
take some time to get to full brightness like insde the garage too but they
are up to brightness in less than ten seconds or so.
Sounds like I should check the brand and stick with it! I do know they're
the daylight types, so maybe that's the difference.

What are others' experiences that way?

HTH,

Twayne`

On Dec 30, 10:00*am, "Twayne" wrote:
,
Nate Nagel typed:

On 12/30/2010 01:43 AM, mm wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:53:00 +0000,
(Bill G) wrote:
...

Depends. *The decorative globe ones that you would use in a
bathroom are still pretty bad. *Also if you use CFLs
outside, they're REAL dim when it's below freezing until
they come up to temp, although that is outside their design
parameters.
nate

That light slowness happens inside my garage until the bulbs warm up but
those are 8' fl bulbs. On the porch, exposed to the temperatures down to 18
below F so far, surprisingly, the CFLs come on just fine. I expected them to
take some time to get to full brightness like insde the garage too but they
are up to brightness in less than ten seconds or so.
* *Sounds like I should check the brand and stick with it! I do know they're
the daylight types, so maybe that's the difference.

What are others' experiences that way?

In my case I'm pretty sure that the outside CFLs are all Sylvania
brand. All mounted vertically in lantern-type wall fixtures.

However at my last place I remember replacing the light on the front
porch - typical ceiling mounted enclosed fixture - with a CFL which
I'm also pretty sure was a Sylvania, and didn't notice near the
dimness on initial turn on as I do now.

Maybe it's an artifact of the light reflecting off the light covered
porch ceiling as opposed to not having any? and the porch one really
did take a long time to warm up but I didn't notice it because it
still provided acceptable light even when dim?

nate

On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:00:07 -0500, "Twayne"
wrote:

In ,
Nate Nagel typed:
On 12/30/2010 01:43 AM, mm wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:53:00 +0000,
(Bill G) wrote:
...

Depends. The decorative globe ones that you would use in a
bathroom are still pretty bad. Also if you use CFLs
outside, they're REAL dim when it's below freezing until
they come up to temp, although that is outside their design
parameters.
nate

I havent' used any outside.

That light slowness happens inside my garage until the bulbs warm up but
those are 8' fl bulbs. On the porch, exposed to the temperatures down to 18
below F so far, surprisingly, the CFLs come on just fine. I expected them to
take some time to get to full brightness like insde the garage too but they
are up to brightness in less than ten seconds or so.
Sounds like I should check the brand and stick with it! I do know they're
the daylight types, so maybe that's the difference.

That doesn't make sense. Daylight takes an hour to brighten up.
Really it's not fully bright until 10 or 11AM.


What are others' experiences that way?

HTH,

Twayne`

On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:43:05 -0500, mm
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:53:00 +0000,
(Bill G) wrote:



And keep in mind that another annoying "feature" of CFLs is
that they
don\'t achieve full brightness at turn-on, unlike incandescents.

I think that time is getting shorter.

Everything is on Youtube these days. Here's someone's test of warmup
time for a few brands of CFL's:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nkcx28X3DlY

There's also a Leviton dimmer that supposedly optimizes performance of
CFLs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NabiE...eature=related

I'd be wary of some of the claims made there ("it knows brands of
CFLs"??), but it may be worth a look. Note that at the end, they do
say that it helps to correct for warmup delay. That would be nice, but
I'm not sure how they'd possibly do that.

On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 18:37:09 -0500, Eric
wrote:



I'd be wary of some of the claims made there ("it knows brands of
CFLs"??), but it may be worth a look. Note that at the end, they do
say that it helps to correct for warmup delay. That would be nice, but
I'm not sure how they'd possibly do that.

For the bathroom light, you could get to the bathroom before you
actually got to the bathroom, turn the light one, and then when you
actually get to the bathroom, it will have warmed up.

For the bedroom light, you can get up early, turn the light on, then
go back to sleep until it's time to get up.