I've read all the threads on LED light bulbs. Not a lotta good things
to say. Directional, wrong spectrum, etc. Me? I like 'em, so far.

I have a regular shaded lamp with a CFL in it. Takes at least 30-60
secs to come up to full brightness. For reading, I have one of those
flex-neck lamps with a directional hood (like pole lamps). I put a
60W LED bulb in it. I bought the cheapest bulb I could find at
WallyWorld fer $2.58. In a directional hooded lamp, it works great.
Full brightness, instantly. Plenty bright enough fer reading when
bounced off a white wall.

Not that I endorse them, without reservation. I'll be damned if I'll
spend $1K+ fer an LED grow light. Not until they settle on what
spectrums are best fer veg/flowering, first. But, fer a couple bucks,
good enough fer reading.

nb

On 11/27/2015 4:31 PM, notbob wrote:
I've read all the threads on LED light bulbs. Not a lotta good things
to say. Directional, wrong spectrum, etc. Me? I like 'em, so far.

I have a regular shaded lamp with a CFL in it. Takes at least 30-60
secs to come up to full brightness. For reading, I have one of those
flex-neck lamps with a directional hood (like pole lamps). I put a
60W LED bulb in it. I bought the cheapest bulb I could find at
WallyWorld fer $2.58. In a directional hooded lamp, it works great.
Full brightness, instantly. Plenty bright enough fer reading when
bounced off a white wall.

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

Not that I endorse them, without reservation. I'll be damned if I'll
spend $1K+ fer an LED grow light. Not until they settle on what
spectrums are best fer veg/flowering, first. But, fer a couple bucks,
good enough fer reading.

Depends on how you expect to use them.

Here, most "area lighting" is from recessed cans. So, very easy to find
an effective LED lamp that pushed all its light out *one* "end".
CFL's, by comparison, try to throw most of their light out the *sides*
so not-quite-so-good.

Temperature performance of CFL's also makes them less than ideal.
No so with LED's.

When dimmable BR30's and R20's become more affordable, we'll switch
to them and just keep a couple of CFL's for (bedside) "reading lamps"
(where the light needs to radiate in all directions) and (big) CFL
"floods" for the up-lights in the office.

Still looking for high intensity floods (LED, probably) for the recessed
cans in the garage (high ceiling means they have to throw a lot of light)

Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 4:31 PM, notbob wrote:
I've read all the threads on LED light bulbs. Not a lotta good things
to say. Directional, wrong spectrum, etc. Me? I like 'em, so far.

I have a regular shaded lamp with a CFL in it. Takes at least 30-60
secs to come up to full brightness. For reading, I have one of those
flex-neck lamps with a directional hood (like pole lamps). I put a
60W LED bulb in it. I bought the cheapest bulb I could find at
WallyWorld fer $2.58. In a directional hooded lamp, it works great.
Full brightness, instantly. Plenty bright enough fer reading when
bounced off a white wall.

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

Not that I endorse them, without reservation. I'll be damned if I'll
spend $1K+ fer an LED grow light. Not until they settle on what
spectrums are best fer veg/flowering, first. But, fer a couple bucks,
good enough fer reading.

Depends on how you expect to use them.

Here, most "area lighting" is from recessed cans. So, very easy to find
an effective LED lamp that pushed all its light out *one* "end".
CFL's, by comparison, try to throw most of their light out the *sides*
so not-quite-so-good.

Temperature performance of CFL's also makes them less than ideal.
No so with LED's.

When dimmable BR30's and R20's become more affordable, we'll switch
to them and just keep a couple of CFL's for (bedside) "reading lamps"
(where the light needs to radiate in all directions) and (big) CFL
"floods" for the up-lights in the office.

Still looking for high intensity floods (LED, probably) for the recessed
cans in the garage (high ceiling means they have to throw a lot of light)

LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail
lights on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:43:30 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

At Lowe's...not sure how long that sale lasts.

On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put *optics* in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been *behind* it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think *we* have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail
lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put *optics* in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been *behind* it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think *we* have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

If you try to see LED tail lights from about 45 deg. angle it is very
hard to see if it's on or off. When I remote start my car from a
distance, it is little difficult to confirm car is started and running.
When driving in blowing snow LED lights seem to glare more. And under
the sheet of thin ice in winter.(maybe because it does not produce some
heat like old lights) Also replacement LED light assembly will cost
more. (can't replace individual element in an array)

On 11/27/2015 6:19 PM, bob_villain wrote:
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:43:30 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

At Lowe's...not sure how long that sale lasts.

I was checking out the Utilitech 99-cent LED lamps at Lowe's today.
Lamp life rated at 2000 hours.
What's up with that?
I didn't buy any.

On 11/27/2015 5:31 PM, notbob wrote:
I've read all the threads on LED light bulbs. Not a lotta good things
to say. Directional, wrong spectrum, etc. Me? I like 'em, so far.

I have a regular shaded lamp with a CFL in it. Takes at least 30-60
secs to come up to full brightness. For reading, I have one of those
flex-neck lamps with a directional hood (like pole lamps). I put a
60W LED bulb in it. I bought the cheapest bulb I could find at
WallyWorld fer $2.58. In a directional hooded lamp, it works great.
Full brightness, instantly. Plenty bright enough fer reading when
bounced off a white wall.

Not that I endorse them, without reservation. I'll be damned if I'll
spend $1K+ fer an LED grow light. Not until they settle on what
spectrums are best fer veg/flowering, first. But, fer a couple bucks,
good enough fer reading.

nb


I've got all LED bulbs in my bathroom, now, where I've added shelves to
put plants on. I turn them on and it's like being outside on a sunny day
with no clouds in the sky. I read that LED are just as good for growing
plants, plus, LED blue and red bulbs are also good for plants, so, I'll
see for myself how it does this winter.

I bought some carnivorous plants to keep amongst the other plants and
they've already caught some tiny gnats. (venus flytrap, and octopus
plant [sundew]). LOVE them both. One of the octopus plants is blooming
pretty pink flowers.

--
Maggie

On 11/27/2015 8:19 PM, bob_villain wrote:
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:43:30 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

At Lowe's...not sure how long that sale lasts.


So far, I'm liking the LED. Nice bright lighting.

--
Maggie

On 11/27/2015 7:57 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail
lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put *optics* in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been *behind* it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think *we* have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

If you try to see LED tail lights from about 45 deg. angle it is very hard to
see if it's on or off. When I remote start my car from a distance, it is little
difficult to confirm car is started and running.

As I said, I've never seen the back of the car...

When driving in blowing snow LED lights seem to glare more. And under the sheet
of thin ice in winter.(maybe because it does not produce some heat like old

We don't have snow -- or ice.

lights) Also replacement LED light assembly will cost more. (can't replace
individual element in an array)

Yes, headlights have been expensive for more than a decade. Last vehicle
they were $400/each.

Of course, you typically only pay that when you've collided with something.
I can't recall the last time I *replace* a headlight (from wear).

I am much more concerned with all the electronic kit that I'm at
the mercy of a dealer to replace/repair. (I can still drive a car
during daylight hours with a bad headlight; I can't drive it
if any of the ECU's fail!)

On 11/27/2015 9:29 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail
lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put *optics* in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been *behind* it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think *we* have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 11/27/2015 9:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 4:31 PM, notbob wrote:
I've read all the threads on LED light bulbs. Not a lotta good things
to say. Directional, wrong spectrum, etc. Me? I like 'em, so far.

I have a regular shaded lamp with a CFL in it. Takes at least 30-60
secs to come up to full brightness. For reading, I have one of those
flex-neck lamps with a directional hood (like pole lamps). I put a
60W LED bulb in it. I bought the cheapest bulb I could find at
WallyWorld fer $2.58. In a directional hooded lamp, it works great.
Full brightness, instantly. Plenty bright enough fer reading when
bounced off a white wall.

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

Not that I endorse them, without reservation. I'll be damned if I'll
spend $1K+ fer an LED grow light. Not until they settle on what
spectrums are best fer veg/flowering, first. But, fer a couple bucks,
good enough fer reading.

Depends on how you expect to use them.

Here, most "area lighting" is from recessed cans. So, very easy to find
an effective LED lamp that pushed all its light out *one* "end".
CFL's, by comparison, try to throw most of their light out the *sides*
so not-quite-so-good.

Temperature performance of CFL's also makes them less than ideal.
No so with LED's.

When dimmable BR30's and R20's become more affordable, we'll switch
to them and just keep a couple of CFL's for (bedside) "reading lamps"
(where the light needs to radiate in all directions) and (big) CFL
"floods" for the up-lights in the office.

Still looking for high intensity floods (LED, probably) for the recessed
cans in the garage (high ceiling means they have to throw a lot of light)

LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail
lights on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

One annoyance of getting a new car.

The string of LED's around tail lights looks chincy, particularly on
expensive cars.

Those that want to grow their pot with them should look at spectra of
light output. There is more UV but not sure how else they might affect
growth.

On 11/28/2015 07:42 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

To be clear, I'm not a proponent of road-rage but at some point, road rage may dim his lights off for him.

Tick-tock!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/22...exico-freeway/

On Saturday, November 28, 2015 at 12:00:39 AM UTC-6, Muggles wrote:
On 11/27/2015 8:19 PM, bob_villain wrote:
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:43:30 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

At Lowe's...not sure how long that sale lasts.

So far, I'm liking the LED. Nice bright lighting.
--
Maggie

I put LED bulbs in my desk lamps at home. When I needed to examine something up close, I could bring the lamp down very near to something I was examining without getting sunburned like I would with an incandescent lamp. ლ(o—¡oლ)

[8~{} Uncle Lamp Monster

On 2015-11-28, Tony Hwang wrote:

Also replacement LED light assembly will cost more. (can't replace
individual element in an array)

I think this issue was resolved several yrs ago, but I could be
wrong.

I recall fans of Suzuki motorcycles were outraged when they
discovered they hadda replace an entire 4-LED light array, at huge
cost, instead of a single small LED bulb. Suzy changed it to
easily replaceable individual LEDs.

I've seen the same issue with the newer LED stoplight assys. Usta
see a few individual LED bulbs burned out. No more. Seems it's the
total array or nothing. This is weird, as the Japanese usta
live/die for selling entire assemblies. Are the arrays now cheaper
or is it jes companies maximizing profits?

nb

On 11/28/2015 5:42 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 11/27/2015 9:29 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head lights/tail
lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put *optics* in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been *behind* it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think *we* have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

Tell the factory that! Car rides up higher than a
regular car -- should all truck drivers deliberately
point their lights at the ground (instead of "aiming"
them as required?)

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

On 2015-11-28, Don Y wrote:

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

Halogen headlights usta be illegal in CA. Lotta bikers got busted cuz
the CHP knew chopper riders invariably customized their bikes to
include illegal halogen headlights for better see-ability.

So, I was shocked when I got a new job in Silly-Con Valley (long time
ago) that required me to commute at O-dark-thirty. Seems half the
cars on the road had these newer, brighter, headlights. So bright,
they gave me a headache. I usta let my hatchback rear window remain
dirty jes to diminish the brightness of following vehicles.

So, upside, can see better. Downside, $300 sunglasses!

nb

On 11/28/2015 9:12 AM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Saturday, November 28, 2015 at 12:00:39 AM UTC-6, Muggles wrote:
On 11/27/2015 8:19 PM, bob_villain wrote:
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:43:30 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

At Lowe's...not sure how long that sale lasts.

So far, I'm liking the LED. Nice bright lighting.
--
Maggie

I put LED bulbs in my desk lamps at home. When I needed to examine
something up close, I could bring the lamp down very near to something
I was examining without getting sunburned like I would with an
incandescent lamp. ლ(o—¡oლ)

[8~{} Uncle Lamp Monster


I've got a couple of desk lamps with LED bulbs in them, too. They don't
get hot at all, which is another reason that I like them. They don't
compete with the AC in the summer time.

--
Maggie

Don Y wrote:

Tell the factory that! Car rides up higher than a
regular car -- should all truck drivers deliberately
point their lights at the ground (instead of "aiming"
them as required?)

The height of the lamp isn't the issue. As you noted, it's the aim point and the
coverage area. Misaimed headlights are frequently too high and stray into the
oncoming lane.

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

They aren't. The DOT regulates how bright a standard headight can be.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...e49.6.571_1108

Table XVIII and XIX - note the Maximum Photometric Intensity column. People
think High Beams means brighter - it doesn't. It means the aim point is higher.
People also think some lamps are brighter because the color temp is different -
more blue than incandescent or halogens. That's also regulated, but not as
tightly.

On 11/28/2015 12:21 AM, mike wrote:
On 11/27/2015 6:19 PM, bob_villain wrote:
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:43:30 PM UTC-6, Don Y wrote:

I saw some 60 equivalent watt units listed for $0.99 recently...

At Lowe's...not sure how long that sale lasts.

I was checking out the Utilitech 99-cent LED lamps at Lowe's today.
Lamp life rated at 2000 hours.
What's up with that?
I didn't buy any.

I guess you get what you pay for. I looked at other cheap Utilitech
bulbs and the 60W equivalent is only 5000 hours. Same size from
Sylvania is 25,000 hours and is only a buck or so more.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I guess you get what you pay for. I looked at other cheap Utilitech
bulbs and the 60W equivalent is only 5000 hours. Same size from
Sylvania is 25,000 hours and is only a buck or so more.

The other thing to keep in mind is "dimable" vs. "non-dimable."

The dimable bulbs (i.e. Feits from Costco) tend to be large and heavy. The bulb
base has extra electronics to managing the dimming. The "non-dimable" Philips
bulbs (traditional style - not the flat ones) are much smaller and lighter
weight. Depending on the type of dimmer you have, the non-dimable builbs may
still work.

On 11/28/2015 10:24 AM, Don Y wrote:


Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

Tell the factory that! Car rides up higher than a
regular car -- should all truck drivers deliberately
point their lights at the ground (instead of "aiming"
them as required?)

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

Properly aimed, they should not be blinding others no matter how bright.

One possibility is some drivers just see they are brighter and assume
you have the high beams on even if they are not blinded.

Possible aim is bad from the factory. Unlikely, but stuff happens.

The factory specs are less than the best. I sometimes do notice the
Jeep SUV type is a bad aim for oncoming cars. I see a couple of them
and they are brighter in my eyes than any other car.

Another possibility is you have 6 bags of concrete in the trunk and the
lights are looking up. Many cars have self leveling lights though.

On 11/28/2015 8:19 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2015-11-28, Tony Hwang wrote:

Also replacement LED light assembly will cost more. (can't replace
individual element in an array)

I think this issue was resolved several yrs ago, but I could be
wrong.

AFAICT, this varies with the make/model of the vehicle.

I recall fans of Suzuki motorcycles were outraged when they
discovered they hadda replace an entire 4-LED light array, at huge
cost, instead of a single small LED bulb. Suzy changed it to
easily replaceable individual LEDs.

I've seen the same issue with the newer LED stoplight assys. Usta
see a few individual LED bulbs burned out. No more. Seems it's the
total array or nothing. This is weird, as the Japanese usta
live/die for selling entire assemblies. Are the arrays now cheaper
or is it jes companies maximizing profits?

I think they are minimizing *production* costs. In our case, each
"headlamp assembly" consists of 5 LED emitters -- 3 for "low" and
2 more for "high" -- mated to optics that focus the light in the
desired dispersal pattern.

Making this an assembly means you reduce the labor involved in
aiming 5 individual elements along with their optics. You have
two connectors instead of 5 (for each lamp), two wiring
harnesses instead of 5, etc.

As with many "production economies", this comes at the expense of
*repair* costs (different from "maintenance" costs as the headlamps
have high life expectancy -- higher than incandescent *or* HID;
at least, "on paper" : ).

Playing krinkle-bumper is where this turns up, in most cases.
Who cares if the bulb is $20 if the PLASTIC assembly into which
it fits is $400? Now it's a $420 bulb! (DIYer can't "fix" the
molded plastic assembly *and* optics)

Likewise, crumple zones mean little accidents (that previously
would have transferred the impact energy to your neck, spine,
etc.) now transfer it to the body shop!

As I said, I am more concerned with all the electronics kit
littered around the vehicle (true of virtually all vehicles
nowadays). None of it likes heat -- yet most of it is
exposed to heat in the normal course of events (esp in the
engine compartment).

We test drove a vehicle with forward facing "technology"
(camera, "RADAR", etc.) mounted just inside the front
windshield (forward of the rear view mirror).

Sitting in the running vehicle while waiting for the sales droid,
I watched error messages pop up on the driver's information
display in rapid succession:
- forward-facing-technology-feature #3 failure
- forward-facing-technology-feature #1 failure
- forward-facing-technology-feature #2 failure
- forward-facing-technology-feature #4 failure
(I forget the names of these individual features).

Of course, it was easy to suss out that each of these features
was related to the bit of technology packaged "inside the windshield"!

When I asked the sales droid, his reply: "Oh, it does that when
sitting out in the sun" (WTF? Are we only supposed to drive AT NIGHT??)

Turns out the problem is related to heat build-up in a *stationary*
vehicle -- air flowing over the windshield normally acts to cool
this stuff (doesn't happen when you're parked *in* the sunshine).

Likewise, it's relatively easy to find "bugs" in the systems in
most vehicles -- without looking too hard! : I was able to
crash the "infotainment system" in a Nissan (Murano, IIRC) purely
by chance -- in the few minutes I was playing with it.

I've already started a list of "anomalous behaviors" that I've
observed in the various bits of technology. Some are just
consequences of the implementation (e.g., if passenger and
driver each have key fobs on their persons, vehicle tends to
think first occupant is driver -- regardless of where seated!),
some are poor design choices and others are "implementation
screwups".

Thankfully, most of the design choices *seem* to have been well
thought out. In looking back at other vehicles, some of the
same features were present but implemented differently -- in
less "friendly" manners.

E.g., when vehicle is in reverse, many vehicles automatically
tilt the side mirrors downward so you can see what you are
"backing into/onto". Some cars tilt both mirrors. Some cars
tilt one or the other (configured by a user "setting" in a
"configuration mode").

This vehicle puts that choice in the driver's hands at "run time"
in a reasonably intuitive manner:
- if the "side mirror select" switch (with which the driver normally
chooses left, right or neither mirror to adjust with the "joystick"
on the arm rest) is in the "none"/center position, both side
mirrors remain "as is" when the vehicle is in reverse.
- if the side mirror select switch is set to "driver's side mirror"
(i.e., as if the driver would have wanted to adjust the driver's
side mirror with the joystick), then the left mirror tilts downward
when the car reverses
- ditto for passenger's side mirror
So, leave the switch in the center if you want to disable the "feature"
(this also prevents you from accidentally disturbing the normal setting
of the mirror by locking out the joystick). If you decide you need some
help on one side or the other while backing up, just flip the switch
to that side and the selected mirror moves downward.

[I've not checked to see what happens if you try to use the joystick
at this time]

Other vehicles had cameras mounted around the vehicle to expose various
views in the dash mounted display. IIRC, the Nissan had a downward
facing camera in the passenger's side mirror that would let you watch
the *curb* line while parking!

These sorts of features are an excellent example of why -- contrary to
most *naive* engineer's opinions -- providing too much flexibility
in configuration is A Bad Thing; most users would be intimidated and
not exploit *any* of that ability -- let alone exploit it *wisely*!

One notable deficiency is a lack of *useful* information in an
already BLOATED "owner's manual". There are many things that are
not well documented. And, many others that could benefit from
some detailed examples. I guess they expect you to get this
information from an on-line forum, dealer, etc. And, of course,
there are obvious documentation "errors" (cases where the software
has evolved but the documentation hasn't kept pace).

Then, there are amusing omissions! E.g., the navigation system
can litter the map display with icons for hospitals, libraries,
food stores, ATM's, dealerships (of course!), etc. But, no way to
see where police stations are located! (I've not checked fire
stations or post offices, yet). Amusing when you consider those
things are probably more permanent (less likely to change than
Joe's Generic Restaurant) than most of the "data" that WILL change
almost monthly!

Currently, the biggest "*simple* fix" screwup is a failure to add
tactile indicators (i.e., "bumps") to the overhead garage door opener
buttons so you can *feel* for the desired button in a darkened
vehicle (instead of accidentally pushing one of the *other* buttons
located nearby).

It would be fun to design the "user interface" in a car!

On 11/28/2015 8:04 AM, Frank wrote:


One annoyance of getting a new car.

The string of LED's around tail lights looks chincy, particularly on
expensive cars.

Those that want to grow their pot with them should look at spectra of
light output. There is more UV but not sure how else they might affect
growth.


Depends on the car. My Genesis has LED taillights but they have a full
red lens so they don't appear to be a string of dots.

Front DRL on a few cars look terrible, IMO. Cadillac is one of the
worst, IMO, Audi not far behind. They they go out when the turn signal
is on and it really looks bad.

Some look like the designers got a new toy and they don't know how to
play with them yet, but they must use them because the competition has
them.

The dimable bulbs (i.e. Feits from Costco) tend to be large and heavy.
The bulb base has extra electronics to managing the dimming. The
"non-dimable" Philips bulbs (traditional style - not the flat ones)
are much smaller and lighter weight. Depending on the type of dimmer
you have, the non-dimable builbs may still work.

Philips "warm glow" bulbs are the best dimmable LED's I've seen and weigh
less than CREE's non-dimmable bulbs. They're still heavier than a 60W
incandescent bulb, but not by much. I just bought Philips 60W replaceable
"warm glow" bulbs from Home Depot for $8 each.

Sylvania's sunset effect bulbs are fairly light weight too, but I like the
Philips bulbs better.

Anthony Watson
www.mountainsoftware.com
www.watsondiy.com

Muggles wrote:
....
I bought some carnivorous plants to keep amongst the other plants and
they've already caught some tiny gnats. (venus flytrap, and octopus
plant [sundew]). LOVE them both. One of the octopus plants is blooming
pretty pink flowers.

ages ago i kept venus flytraps in a 10 gallon
terrarium and they bloomed. did you ever think of
how venus flytraps would be pollinated? they
have yellow flowers on top of a stalk 8+" high.

if you do get flower stalks they can be hand
pollinated with a little brush and then the seeds
will eventually come along. they look like tiny
little eggplants. to get them to grow from seed
can be a challenge. i had a bunch of them coming
along and went on vacation and left my sister in
charge of making sure they didn't dry out. heh.
came home to shrivelled little nothings... poor
tykes.


songbird

On 11/28/2015 9:24 AM, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
Don Y wrote:

Tell the factory that! Car rides up higher than a
regular car -- should all truck drivers deliberately
point their lights at the ground (instead of "aiming"
them as required?)

The height of the lamp isn't the issue. As you noted, it's the aim point and the
coverage area. Misaimed headlights are frequently too high and stray into the
oncoming lane.

There are two different issues at play. One is left to right aiming:
the driver's side (inner) headlamp is supposed to point "right" instead
of straight ahead. This keeps your lights out of the "other lane".

But, height/elevation also plays a role. If you're lights are higher up
off the roadway, they will cross a given point of elevation that lower
mounted lights won't. E.g., an 18-wheeler's lights are more likely to
be up *above* my eyes, pointed downward, than a MiniCooper's.

In each case where "oncoming" drivers "flashed us", they were parked
(at a light) directly across the intersection from us. I.e., close
enough that our light cone hadn't fallen to a point BELOW the driver's
eye level.

Living in a world of pickup trucks, we had noticed this early on:
"Why are everyone's headlights so bright?" But, you'd only notice
when the offending vehicle was very close -- not "down the road a
bit and headed in your direction". The "solution" is to get your
vehicle *up* and out of the downward aimed lights sooner.

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

They aren't. The DOT regulates how bright a standard headight can be.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...e49.6.571_1108

Table XVIII and XIX - note the Maximum Photometric Intensity column. People
think High Beams means brighter - it doesn't. It means the aim point is higher.

Exactly. "High" and "low" aren't synonyms for "bright" and "dim".

People also think some lamps are brighter because the color temp is different -
more blue than incandescent or halogens. That's also regulated, but not as
tightly.

On 11/28/2015 8:46 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2015-11-28, Don Y wrote:

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

Halogen headlights usta be illegal in CA. Lotta bikers got busted cuz
the CHP knew chopper riders invariably customized their bikes to
include illegal halogen headlights for better see-ability.

So, I was shocked when I got a new job in Silly-Con Valley (long time
ago) that required me to commute at O-dark-thirty. Seems half the
cars on the road had these newer, brighter, headlights. So bright,
they gave me a headache. I usta let my hatchback rear window remain
dirty jes to diminish the brightness of following vehicles.

So, upside, can see better. Downside, $300 sunglasses!

We found the problem was the actual "height" of the lights.
E.g., when a truck's headlamps are at the level of your head,
while seated, it doesn't matter how bright they are; they're
"in your eyes".

People behind you tend to *stay* behind you. So, wherever
their headlights are (focused) now, they will remain there
for the foreseeable future.

OTOH, an oncoming vehicle's headlamps will pass *through*
the point of focus "in your eyes" before the vehicle
gets to your location; it won't *stay* in that "unsweet spot"
indefinitely (unless you are both sitting at a traffic
interchange waiting for the signal to change!)

On 11/28/2015 9:41 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/28/2015 10:24 AM, Don Y wrote:


Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

Tell the factory that! Car rides up higher than a
regular car -- should all truck drivers deliberately
point their lights at the ground (instead of "aiming"
them as required?)

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

Properly aimed, they should not be blinding others no matter how bright.

One possibility is some drivers just see they are brighter and assume you have
the high beams on even if they are not blinded.

See my other posts, here. The issue is elevation of the headlamp.
The first time it happened, we (new to the car) went to "lower"
the beam -- and ended up flashing the highs, instead. So, the
other vehicle now *knows* we didn't have the highs on.

Had he been in a pickup truck or other "high riding" vehicle, he
would probably not have noticed. Or, had his vehicle been
in relative motion to ours so he wasn't in the "bad spot"
for the duration of the traffic light.

It's also possible that seeing the "wider" light source (3 lamps
each side instead of just one filament) led him to think it was
two bulbs, side by side.

And, they're "whiter" than normal incandescents.

Possible aim is bad from the factory. Unlikely, but stuff happens.

The factory specs are less than the best. I sometimes do notice the Jeep SUV
type is a bad aim for oncoming cars. I see a couple of them and they are
brighter in my eyes than any other car.

Another possibility is you have 6 bags of concrete in the trunk and the lights
are looking up. Many cars have self leveling lights though.

There's a real spare in the trunk (instead of a bottle of sealant and a
pump) but I doubt that makes much of a load difference (~100#?)

HerHusband wrote:

I just bought Philips 60W replaceable
"warm glow" bulbs from Home Depot for $8 each.

LED bulb costs are starting to come down. Costco sells a 3 pack of Feit 60W for
under $9, but that inlcudes a local electric utility subsidy. Without the
subsidy they are around 3/$15.

On 11/28/2015 9:39 AM, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I guess you get what you pay for. I looked at other cheap Utilitech
bulbs and the 60W equivalent is only 5000 hours. Same size from
Sylvania is 25,000 hours and is only a buck or so more.

The other thing to keep in mind is "dimable" vs. "non-dimable."

The dimable bulbs (i.e. Feits from Costco) tend to be large and heavy. The bulb
base has extra electronics to managing the dimming. The "non-dimable" Philips
bulbs (traditional style - not the flat ones) are much smaller and lighter
weight. Depending on the type of dimmer you have, the non-dimable builbs may
still work.

Non-dimmable bulbs in a dimmer circuit often consume *more* power (as well as
almost ALWAYS forcing less efficient operation!) when used with dimmers that
are "inappropriate"!

Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
HerHusband wrote:

I just bought Philips 60W replaceable
"warm glow" bulbs from Home Depot for $8 each.

LED bulb costs are starting to come down. Costco sells a 3 pack of Feit 60W for
under $9, but that inlcudes a local electric utility subsidy. Without the
subsidy they are around 3/$15.

I tried GE, Feit, Cree, Philips, I liked Philips, Cree daylight ones.
Also found out dimmable ones work as well with motion sensors.

Don Y wrote:
On 11/28/2015 9:39 AM, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I guess you get what you pay for. I looked at other cheap Utilitech
bulbs and the 60W equivalent is only 5000 hours. Same size from
Sylvania is 25,000 hours and is only a buck or so more.

The other thing to keep in mind is "dimable" vs. "non-dimable."

The dimable bulbs (i.e. Feits from Costco) tend to be large and heavy.
The bulb
base has extra electronics to managing the dimming. The "non-dimable"
Philips
bulbs (traditional style - not the flat ones) are much smaller and
lighter
weight. Depending on the type of dimmer you have, the non-dimable
builbs may
still work.

Non-dimmable bulbs in a dimmer circuit often consume *more* power (as
well as
almost ALWAYS forcing less efficient operation!) when used with dimmers
that
are "inappropriate"!

By wasted non-energy producing ghost Wattage!

On 11/28/2015 9:50 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/28/2015 8:04 AM, Frank wrote:

One annoyance of getting a new car.

The string of LED's around tail lights looks chincy, particularly on
expensive cars.

I'm waiting for the Tbird emulation frenzy to take place! :

Those that want to grow their pot with them should look at spectra of
light output. There is more UV but not sure how else they might affect
growth.

Depends on the car. My Genesis has LED taillights but they have a full red
lens so they don't appear to be a string of dots.

Front DRL on a few cars look terrible, IMO. Cadillac is one of the worst, IMO,
Audi not far behind. They they go out when the turn signal is on and it really
looks bad.

Some look like the designers got a new toy and they don't know how to play with
them yet, but they must use them because the competition has them.

A lot of what goes into cars (appearance-wise) is to make the vehicle
more noticeable to other drivers (safety). E.g., brake lights had
been "low, on either side" of the car for ages -- why the sudden
need to put a third one "up high"?

Ans: because it isn't *expected* there (yet) so drivers notice it
more readily.

Ditto motorcycles running with headlight(s) on -- in daylight.

Drivers -- when not deliberately distracted by their own amusements -- tend
to "zone out" and fail to see lots of what's in front of them.

On 2015-11-28, Don Y wrote:

People behind you tend to *stay* behind you. So, wherever
their headlights are (focused) now, they will remain there
for the foreseeable future.

....unless they are following you at half a car-length and/or driving
one of those 4WD "land yacht" trucks/suvs and their "illuminate
Cincinnati" headlights are "in yer face".

Sheesh! You relate all the proper technical answers, but seem to have
never done any real life commuting or even any real driving. I think
you need to get a "real life" clue.

nb

On 2015-11-28, Tony Hwang wrote:
Don Y wrote:

Non-dimmable bulbs in a dimmer circuit often consume *more* power
(as well as almost ALWAYS forcing less efficient operation!) when
used with dimmers that are "inappropriate"!

By wasted non-energy producing ghost Wattage!

Yes. It's called a shunt.

You jes lost any creds you may have ever had.

nb

On 11/28/2015 11:04 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2015-11-28, Don Y wrote:

People behind you tend to *stay* behind you. So, wherever
their headlights are (focused) now, they will remain there
for the foreseeable future.

....unless they are following you at half a car-length and/or driving
one of those 4WD "land yacht" trucks/suvs and their "illuminate
Cincinnati" headlights are "in yer face".

Sheesh! You relate all the proper technical answers, but seem to have
never done any real life commuting or even any real driving. I think
you need to get a "real life" clue.

Did you *read* what I wrote?

"People behind you tend to stay behind you."

I.e., if they are "half a car-length" behind you they will STAY
half a car length behind you -- unlike oncoming cars where the
distance changes with each passing instant!

"So, wherever their headlights are (focused) now, they will remain
there for the foreseeable future"

I.e., "in yer face" -- and they will *stay* "in yer face"!

You should, perhaps, think more carefully about what I've written
before complaining about my lack of "real life" experience.

(Or, should I be writing at a THIRD grade level, instead??)

Stormin Mormon wrote in alt.home.repair:

On 11/27/2015 9:29 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head
lights/tail lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put optics in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been behind it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think we have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

Agreed. In Virgnia, it's part of the annual inspection to ensure the
tilt it maintained so you do not blind (and thereby endanger) other
drivers.

If folks flash their lights at you, you have something wrong and need
to fix it.



--

Don Y wrote in alt.home.repair:

On 11/28/2015 5:42 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 11/27/2015 9:29 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 11/27/2015 7:00 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
LEDs are not matured yet. I have a reservation on LED head
lights/tail lights
on new cars. They're like LCD display, narrow view of angle.

That's why you put optics in front of them!

We've been very pleased with the LED headlights on our vehicle
(haven't ever been behind it to comment on tail lights).
Oncoming vehicles frequently flash their "brights" suggesting
they think we have ours on (but we don't).

Turn signals illuminate the overhead signs ("next exit 2 miles").

Time will tell how they fare with our heat...

Sounds like you should tilt those headlights
down a bit, so you don't keep (knowingly)
blinding other drivers. That's quite
inconsiderate to keep blinding other drivers
after being asked many times, and knowing that
you've been asked many times, to dim the brights.

Tell the factory that! Car rides up higher than a
regular car -- should all truck drivers deliberately
point their lights at the ground (instead of "aiming"
them as required?)

Should folks not be allowed to use halogen and HID lights
because they're brighter??

There is an angle higher cars ned to use to not blind others. It is
the law. Higher car does not matter.

--

On 11/28/2015 11:11 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2015-11-28, Tony Hwang wrote:
Don Y wrote:

Non-dimmable bulbs in a dimmer circuit often consume *more* power
(as well as almost ALWAYS forcing less efficient operation!) when
used with dimmers that are "inappropriate"!

By wasted non-energy producing ghost Wattage!

Yes. It's called a shunt.

No, dimmers don't work with "shunts". The problem with CFL/LED "ballasts"
is that they don't represent nice resistive loads -- like the incandescents
for which legacy dimmers were created (and still in use).

See the 'scope traces at:
http://sound.westhost.com/articles/incandescent.htm#wfm
(N.B. the vertical scale has been changed by a factor of *5*
from the "non-dimmer" example to the "dimmer" example that
appears below it.

[The rest of the page is probably worth reading -- if you're technically
inclined. E.g., the table that appears a bit above the cited photos
if you like to see numbers instead of graphs]

You jes lost any creds you may have ever had.

Hmmm... something about "real life" comes to mind...