EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...LWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?

Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a boom
in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!

Richard J Kinch wrote:

EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...LWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?


Sure, while they are at it they probably will want to inspect my gun
collection. Might have a dangerous lightbulb in the gun safes.

Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a boom
in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!

That link is a session link.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...6enr.txt .pdf

This should work better.

As far as your original question, I'm trying to read this but it is giving
me a headache. Btw, you need ANSI and other standards to understand the
bill. So how am a I a common citizen for who ignorance of law is considered
no defense supposed to comply with this?

Like most enrolled bills you have to have copies of all the other referenced
bills passed into law where one word in a paragraph modified by this bill
can drastically change the effect of already enacted laws.

Not only do we need term limits, we need limits on the size of each congress
critters staff. This wasn't written my our legislators, they are too busy
raising money for their next election.

Wes

In article ,
Richard J Kinch wrote:

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!

It's no problem getting 35mpg, the problem is affording it

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.
JR
Dweller in the cellar

Richard J Kinch wrote:
EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...LWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?

Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a boom
in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!


--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes
Doubt yourself, and the real world will eat you alive
The world doesn't revolve around you, it revolves around me
No skeletons in the closet; just decomposing corpses
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dependence is Vulnerability:
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Open the Pod Bay Doors please, Hal"
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.."

On Dec 22, 1:34 am, Richard J Kinch wrote:


Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!

Really? I have a 9 year old car that is the best performing car I've
ever owned, but it gets 39 mpg on highway and 32-33 mpg in town. I
can't buy one with comparable milage today from the same company.
They say it is impossible. Have those laws of phyics changed since
they built my car?

"Don Stauffer in Minnesota" wrote in message
...
Have those laws of phyics changed since
they built my car?

And mine too? My 1980 Plymouth Champ easily met the future EPA rules without
computers and without fuel injection. Imagine what that car could do today if
it had a transplant of ordinary 2000-era technology.

Vaughn

On Dec 21, 11:34 pm, Richard J Kinch wrote:
EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...LWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?

Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a boom
in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!

Here is my take on all the expert opinion that the government looks to
for justification of these environmental laws. When they talk about
efficiency, they make up the parameters to fit their needs. The
incandescent light is a heat generating device. It converts
electricity to heat and is 100% efficient at doing it. A part of that
heat is detectable by the inefficient receptors on the front of our
heads. The inefficient part of the equation is not the source, but the
receiver.

Our home is heated by a heat pump backed up by an electric furnace.
When the weather is really cold, the electric heat unit is on quite a
bit. The light bulbs in our home are also on and contribute to the
heat just as much as the furnace does. Nothing is saved by turning off
the light, but leaving the electric furnace running.

We use a 60 watt incandescent bulb in a well insulated outbuilding to
keep the well water works from freezing. Works just fine. When
extremely cold weather is expected, we change to a 100 watt bulb. Many
of our neighbors do the same. You can't use a compact florescent bulb
for that. I guess the light bulb police will let us use 1,000 watt
heaters instead.

Out side lights are a different story. There, any heat is immediately
lost, so with some exceptions, those bulbs are florescent. The
exception being the motion controlled flood lights.

On a different note, the florescent lamps all generate radio noise.
Many hams in the area have noted when they turn their vhf beams toward
a town or city notice an increase in the noise level. The replacement
of incandescent lamps will mean that level will continue to rise.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Paul, KD7HB in Central Oregon

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:34:57 -0600, Richard J Kinch wrote:

EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/
~c110KLWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?

Sure. They'll make business do it, and not pay for it. Both parties
like to spout pro-business rhetoric, the left likes to spout "pay as you
go" while the right likes to spout "small government" -- but in the end,
they always try to force businesses into being the cop first (see the
immigration law in Arizona for an example).

So the _traceable_ government stays small, while the government's
responsibilities get forked onto business, and you pay for it whether you
like it or not.

Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a
boom in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change
in the laws of physics!

35 mpg cars are easy -- just make them small and light. They won't
survive a collision with a Hummer or a semi as well as a Ford Expedition,
true. But there'll be fewer Hummers on the road, and because you always
survive the collision you successfully avoid the population will get
smarter over time.

--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott
Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:34:57 -0600, Richard J Kinch wrote:

EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/
~c110KLWOHv:e261985:

-- snip --

I've never had a compact florescent light last me more than two years,
and they often fail within six months. Given the amount of stuff in one
of those, which implies a lot of energy expenditure to manufacture, I
question the notion that you'll really save anything over the life cycle
of the bulb by using incandescents.

(and, compact florescent lights use mercury, and become a hazardous waste
issue the instant they enter your door -- assuming free manufacture, I'll
trade off the inefficiency of an incandescent light for it's safety any
day).

--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott
Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

I'm not in favour of banning incandescent lamps. One of their greatest
advantages is that whatever kind of lamp you have, you can buy a
replacement and fit it easily. This isn't the case with many other light
sources such as LEDs, which are promoted as being replacements for
incandescent lamps. The manufacturers will tell you that the lamps
aren't replaceable because they don't need to be replaced in a very long
time, but this simply isn't true.

Best wishes,

Chris

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:

Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

Got sucked into the whole compact flourescent whirlpool a
few years ago. Local
power company (Portland General Electric) was handing out
coupons for free/deep
discount/rebate on compact flourescents, and we were
lighting up a new home.
I think there are maybe 4 left in the whole house. Short
life, unacceptable warm up time,
just general crappy performance. Unless there has been a
huge improvement in
the CF technology, I'll keep my incandescents!

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:57:33 -0500, Wes wrote:

Richard J Kinch wrote:

EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...LWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?


Sure, while they are at it they probably will want to inspect my gun
collection. Might have a dangerous lightbulb in the gun safes.

I changed mine out to 4' single tube florescents.

On Dec 22, 1:05 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:

Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

i get 50 around town
60+ in the highway in a semi new VubDub

Its no worse than a honda with a fartcan exhaust

it IS as loud as a V8 gas like the ford 4 liter but still its not the
end of the world to make a reasonably sized efficient vehicle that
still feels and drives like a car.

Maintenance isnt terrible either, Cost is a bit higher granted but
between stuff done at home and the engne block being rock solid its
not a biggie

On Dec 22, 1:22 pm, "BillM" wrote:
Got sucked into the whole compact flourescent whirlpool a
few years ago. Local
power company (Portland General Electric) was handing out
coupons for free/deep
discount/rebate on compact flourescents, and we were
lighting up a new home.
I think there are maybe 4 left in the whole house. Short
life, unacceptable warm up time,
just general crappy performance. Unless there has been a
huge improvement in
the CF technology, I'll keep my incandescents!

My biggest issue with CF's is the colour temperature can vary wildly
from painful blue to a fine warm yellowish red.

I'm positive that there will be exceptions for industrial use like
stage lighting or as heating. even quartz halogen could be called
incandescent.

there IS logic behind getting rid of some cases of them. It is stupid
to use a heater as a light source. It makes sense to use a heater that
gives of excess light as a heat and light source however.

As many have said a blanket ban is stupid but there are good reasons
to replace them in many cases

A little sense in cutting use will help greatly

Brent
Ottawa Canada

Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:34:57 -0600, Richard J Kinch wrote:


EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/

~c110KLWOHv:e261985:

-- snip --

I've never had a compact florescent light last me more than two years,
and they often fail within six months. Given the amount of stuff in one
of those, which implies a lot of energy expenditure to manufacture, I
question the notion that you'll really save anything over the life cycle
of the bulb by using incandescents.

(and, compact florescent lights use mercury, and become a hazardous waste
issue the instant they enter your door -- assuming free manufacture, I'll
trade off the inefficiency of an incandescent light for it's safety any
day).


Maybe try a different brand?. The oldest I have was about 5 years old
and working fine until I dropped it, it was a slow warm-up one so got
relegated to the blasting booth a couple of years ago, all the newer
ones are virtually instant on. The others in the house are mostly 3 to 4
years old and seem to be going strong, not had one fail yet. When time
for disposal i'll take them to the local council site that handles
fluorescents for recycling. I'm not sure of the efficiency of the
compact fluorescents at start-up, like normal flourescents can take a
large starting current, so have only changed out those lights that will
be on for longer periods, all those that are on for a short period are
still incandescent.

nick hull wrote in
:

In article ,
Richard J Kinch wrote:

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a
change in the laws of physics!

It's no problem getting 35mpg, the problem is affording it

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/


I had a 1962 MG Midget - fancy version of the Mk. II A-H Sprite - that gave
me 33 MPG City, 55 MPG Highway.

If this could be done 45 years ago then why can't it be done today?

BTW, for one car that's slated to hit the market about a year from now
that'll (supposedly) get over 180 MPG, go to http://www/loremo.com.

Too bad the SafetyNazis will prevent US sales.

Brent wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:05 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:


Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS


i get 50 around town
60+ in the highway in a semi new VubDub

Its no worse than a honda with a fartcan exhaust

it IS as loud as a V8 gas like the ford 4 liter but still its not the
end of the world to make a reasonably sized efficient vehicle that
still feels and drives like a car.

Maintenance isnt terrible either, Cost is a bit higher granted but
between stuff done at home and the engne block being rock solid its
not a biggie

From one of the VW forums, the skinny on the VW diesel engine is that
it was designed as an industrial powersource, with an expected lifespan
of 50 000 hours running until it would require a rebuild.

Solid stuff!

I have a '90 Jetta with a 1.6 Turbo D in it. Just rolled 400 thousand
KMs on it, and had to rebuild a head off a 600 thousand KM's parts car
for it, because I cracked the original, changing out the glow plugs.

It's not running great and need some new nozzles, so I am getting
around 40 MPG highway. It will do better with new nozzles.

Cheers
Trevor Jones

Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:34:57 -0600, Richard J Kinch wrote:

EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/
~c110KLWOHv:e261985:
-- snip --

I've never had a compact florescent light last me more than two years,
and they often fail within six months. Given the amount of stuff in one
of those, which implies a lot of energy expenditure to manufacture, I
question the notion that you'll really save anything over the life cycle
of the bulb by using incandescents.

(and, compact florescent lights use mercury, and become a hazardous waste
issue the instant they enter your door -- assuming free manufacture, I'll
trade off the inefficiency of an incandescent light for it's safety any
day).

Didn't you get the memo? That's a secret! G We are not supposed to
notice that until it's too late to go back. Then we will need a new
government program to deal with the waste (Hg), and another to deal with
the waste ($$) from that agency, and another to deal with the eventual
discovery that the first one didn't do its job, etc.

I don't want to breathe CO or eat Hg any more than the next guy, but
would somebody please read the tenth amendment to those clowns on the hill?

End of rant.

Bill

On Dec 22, 2:36 pm, Trevor Jones wrote:
Brent wrote:
On Dec 22, 1:05 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:

Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

i get 50 around town
60+ in the highway in a semi new VubDub

Its no worse than a honda with a fartcan exhaust

it IS as loud as a V8 gas like the ford 4 liter but still its not the
end of the world to make a reasonably sized efficient vehicle that
still feels and drives like a car.

Maintenance isnt terrible either, Cost is a bit higher granted but
between stuff done at home and the engne block being rock solid its
not a biggie

From one of the VW forums, the skinny on the VW diesel engine is that
it was designed as an industrial powersource, with an expected lifespan
of 50 000 hours running until it would require a rebuild.

Solid stuff!

I have a '90 Jetta with a 1.6 Turbo D in it. Just rolled 400 thousand
KMs on it, and had to rebuild a head off a 600 thousand KM's parts car
for it, because I cracked the original, changing out the glow plugs.

It's not running great and need some new nozzles, so I am getting
around 40 MPG highway. It will do better with new nozzles.

Cheers
Trevor Jones

My timing belt is supposed to be changed every 100 000 and it might
have been missed the first time because it looks like it stretched
ever so slightly as to give a fuel mileage hit that cleaned out after
i replaced it.

My only issue with VW is there are a lot of oil lines in my 1.9 TDI
that drip occasionally and I need a shoehorn to fit my oil filter in
the the enclosure where tis supposed to be. but for the time it would
take me to deal with them all and the downtime i need to sort them all
out i've just been keeping a spare litre in the car and adding it at
some point between oil changes

I have far and away the highest mileage vehicle out of my entire
family at 278 000 km now and i've never had anything i could call an
"engine" issue

I've needed to do work on the suspension a few times now and there is
something unhappy int he glow plug system that a block heater has been
compensating for.

Basically the only reason i have any problems with the VW is because i
cant take it off the road for a week to deal with all the itty bitty
issues or with the issues that are coming due (Rear struts and 4
wheels worth of brakes will be due in the spring)

At least here in canada we are a lot more Diesel friendly despite the
winters.

Brent
Ottawa Canada

RAM³ wrote:
nick hull wrote in
:


In article ,
Richard J Kinch wrote:


Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a
change in the laws of physics!

It's no problem getting 35mpg, the problem is affording it

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/



I had a 1962 MG Midget - fancy version of the Mk. II A-H Sprite - that gave
me 33 MPG City, 55 MPG Highway.

If this could be done 45 years ago then why can't it be done today?

BTW, for one car that's slated to hit the market about a year from now
that'll (supposedly) get over 180 MPG, go to http://www/loremo.com.

Too bad the SafetyNazis will prevent US sales.


Good man, i've still got my Mk1 sprite which I have had since 1984 and
it did return really good mileage when driven sensibly, still good when
driven like a lunatic. From the detail though that's a 948cc engine and
unladen weight of 660kg (1452 lbs), given that spec any modern vehicle
should be able to beat the mpg easily by a vast margin. It seems to me
that while modern vehicles are getting safer and the structure lighter
the vehicles are getting heavier. Too many power electric accessories?.
Renault introduced a 6k euro car idea for emerging markets a few years
ago and IIRC later reduced it to 5k euro. Basic car, no thrills, simple
to maintain, one body style, really took off from what I read and many
were imported into europe by people wanting simple transport without the
bloat.

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:33:59 -0800 (PST), Don Stauffer in Minnesota
wrote:

On Dec 22, 1:34 am, Richard J Kinch wrote:


Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!

Really? I have a 9 year old car that is the best performing car I've
ever owned, but it gets 39 mpg on highway and 32-33 mpg in town. I
can't buy one with comparable milage today from the same company.
They say it is impossible. Have those laws of phyics changed since
they built my car?

No, the legislaters have just mandated about 800 lbs more "nanny"
features on the car. Hauling all that dead weight takes fuel.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:22:52 GMT, "BillM"
wrote:

Got sucked into the whole compact flourescent whirlpool a
few years ago. Local
power company (Portland General Electric) was handing out
coupons for free/deep
discount/rebate on compact flourescents, and we were
lighting up a new home.
I think there are maybe 4 left in the whole house. Short
life, unacceptable warm up time,
just general crappy performance. Unless there has been a
huge improvement in
the CF technology, I'll keep my incandescents!

Likewise. All you can buy is cheap but overpriced Chinese CRAP that
burns out or otherwise fails in less than 2 years - generally within 6
months.
I still have a few incandescent bulbs in the house that were here when
I bought it 27 years ago.

Todays long tube flourescents are also nothing but crap. Untill I
changed out to halogens in my office/rec room I was replacing tubes
every couple of months, and ballasts every year or so.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

RAM³ wrote:

I had a 1962 MG Midget - fancy version of the Mk. II A-H Sprite - that gave
me 33 MPG City, 55 MPG Highway.

If this could be done 45 years ago then why can't it be done today?

BTW, for one car that's slated to hit the market about a year from now
that'll (supposedly) get over 180 MPG, go to http://www/loremo.com.
My 1976 Vega with stick shift got 40+ MPG on the highway, with
the A/C running. I always wondered if they made a mistake and
put in an auto trans axle ratio. I used to joke it had "4
speeds, that's 3rd, 4th, half-grumble and full-grumble". It was
a little difficult to drive, a very touchy clutch that wore out
at 18,000 miles. I put a 12" clutch in it, and then it was
nearly impossible to drive. I had to invent a whole new clutch
technique that I called the "inertial dump mode". You revved
the engine and then engaged the clutch until you got rolling,
then removed your foot from the gas and let is stall -
completely. While this happened, the clutch could be locked up
and the car's momentum jump-started it. If you tried to feather
the clutch in, it would start massive clutch chatter until the
front bumper struck the pavement! I'm not kidding, but my wife
proved that a Vega can actually do a "wheelie"!

My 1989 Toyota Corolla wagon with 5-speed will do over 40 on the
highway under the best conditions, and does 32+ MPG in mixed
driving.

Niether of these are extremely light vehicles, or highly
aerodynamic. And, they both are straight Otto-cycle engines,
with all the pumping losses that entails.

The problem with the Prius and other hybrids is the engine is
WAY too big, and the batteries and motor/drives are way too
small. The highly aerodynamic Prius ought to be able to cruise
on the highway with under 10 Hp applied, mostly for wind
resistance. Why the HELL they need an 80+ Hp engine in that
thing must be beacuse Toyota has a big plant that makes 80+ Hp
4-cyl engines! Otherwise, that sized engine is totally
ludicrous. Properly sizing the engine, and maybe going to a
stratified-charge or Diesel cycle, should allow a nearly stock
Prius to get 80 + MPG.

Jon

Tim Wescott wrote:
I've never had a compact florescent light last me more than two years,
and they often fail within six months. Given the amount of stuff in
one of those, which implies a lot of energy expenditure to
manufacture, I question the notion that you'll really save anything
over the life cycle of the bulb by using incandescents.
I have found out a few things. One, don't use electronic
ballasts in the bathroom, the steam kills the 400 V electronics.
Newer ones seem to be tougher in this regard. My entire shop is
lit with either tube or compact fluorescents, some have lasted
5+ years. Again, the magnetic ballast ones seem to last to
complete lamp burnout, the ring ones can usually be relamped
cheaply and continue in use. The electronic ballasts seem to
pop before lamp burnout in most cases, I'm still watching this
issue. I think maybe the electronic ballasts went through a bad
time about 2002-2005 or so, when they had very short life. As I
marked the date on them, I could bring them back to the local
hardware store for a free exchange if less than 6 months old or so.

I always write the date of installation on the base of a CF so I
know how much life I'm getting out of them. Incandescents have
a really short life, in many cases a month or two. If you have
to replace an incandescent bulb 12 times over 2 years, the cheap
CF's start looking good even forgetting the energy saving.

Jon

BillM wrote:
Got sucked into the whole compact flourescent whirlpool a
few years ago. Local
power company (Portland General Electric) was handing out
coupons for free/deep
discount/rebate on compact flourescents, and we were
lighting up a new home.
I think there are maybe 4 left in the whole house. Short
life, unacceptable warm up time,
just general crappy performance. Unless there has been a
huge improvement in
the CF technology, I'll keep my incandescents!


They ARE getting better. Get a couple electronic and a couple
magnetic (usually in the ones with ring tubes) and mark the date
of installation. These things are going under $5.00 now. I
usually use the largest sizes, 26 - 32 W, and I know the
eqivalent lumens compared to XX W incandescent is a fabrication
on the order of the old air compressor and shop vac ratings
wars. The electronic ballast ones switch on in milliseconds,
and I put the magnetic ones in places where I have instant light
from electronic CF's or rapid-start tubes, and the slow start of
the magnetic ballast CF is not a problem as they add aditional
light.

Jon

Brent wrote:
On Dec 22, 2:36 pm, Trevor Jones wrote:

Brent wrote:

On Dec 22, 1:05 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:

Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

i get 50 around town
60+ in the highway in a semi new VubDub

Its no worse than a honda with a fartcan exhaust

it IS as loud as a V8 gas like the ford 4 liter but still its not the
end of the world to make a reasonably sized efficient vehicle that
still feels and drives like a car.

Maintenance isnt terrible either, Cost is a bit higher granted but
between stuff done at home and the engne block being rock solid its
not a biggie

From one of the VW forums, the skinny on the VW diesel engine is that
it was designed as an industrial powersource, with an expected lifespan
of 50 000 hours running until it would require a rebuild.

Solid stuff!

I have a '90 Jetta with a 1.6 Turbo D in it. Just rolled 400 thousand
KMs on it, and had to rebuild a head off a 600 thousand KM's parts car
for it, because I cracked the original, changing out the glow plugs.

It's not running great and need some new nozzles, so I am getting
around 40 MPG highway. It will do better with new nozzles.

Cheers
Trevor Jones


My timing belt is supposed to be changed every 100 000 and it might
have been missed the first time because it looks like it stretched
ever so slightly as to give a fuel mileage hit that cleaned out after
i replaced it.

My only issue with VW is there are a lot of oil lines in my 1.9 TDI
that drip occasionally and I need a shoehorn to fit my oil filter in
the the enclosure where tis supposed to be. but for the time it would
take me to deal with them all and the downtime i need to sort them all
out i've just been keeping a spare litre in the car and adding it at
some point between oil changes

I have far and away the highest mileage vehicle out of my entire
family at 278 000 km now and i've never had anything i could call an
"engine" issue

I've needed to do work on the suspension a few times now and there is
something unhappy int he glow plug system that a block heater has been
compensating for.

Basically the only reason i have any problems with the VW is because i
cant take it off the road for a week to deal with all the itty bitty
issues or with the issues that are coming due (Rear struts and 4
wheels worth of brakes will be due in the spring)

At least here in canada we are a lot more Diesel friendly despite the
winters.

Brent
Ottawa Canada

Yeah. The VW's get pretty poor results in the car ratings, as you
would have to pay a dealer a PILE of money over time to fix a bunch of
little issues.

If you can live without the car being "new" for the entire life of it,
you can do an awful lot of stuff yourself.

Depends on your situation, very much.

I have the Jetta, a spare parts Jetta, and a GM 4x4 with a 6.5 in it.

Gettin' WAY to familiar with the diesel engine and it's needs. :-)

Cheers
Trevor Jones
Merry Christmas, all!

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:59:46 -0800 (PST), with neither quill nor
qualm, Brent quickly quoth:

On Dec 22, 1:22 pm, "BillM" wrote:
Got sucked into the whole compact flourescent whirlpool a
few years ago. Local
power company (Portland General Electric) was handing out
coupons for free/deep
discount/rebate on compact flourescents, and we were
lighting up a new home.
I think there are maybe 4 left in the whole house. Short
life, unacceptable warm up time,
just general crappy performance. Unless there has been a
huge improvement in
the CF technology, I'll keep my incandescents!

My biggest issue with CF's is the colour temperature can vary wildly
from painful blue to a fine warm yellowish red.

I dislike incans due to their yellow look, so the blue is beauty to my
eyes. I have CFs in all the longer-used sections of my house and love
them. While some tubes last eons, many have gone dead far too soon,
quicker than incans. Feit Electric stands behind them and they've sent
4 replacements so far, on their nickel. Warmup time isn't critical in
most places, but one lights faster than the other in the bath, so
there is nearly instantaneous light in there, then it gets REALLY
bright on 200 watts worth. That's 46w total. I love 'em.


I'm positive that there will be exceptions for industrial use like
stage lighting or as heating. even quartz halogen could be called
incandescent.

there IS logic behind getting rid of some cases of them. It is stupid
to use a heater as a light source. It makes sense to use a heater that
gives of excess light as a heat and light source however.

Amen.


As many have said a blanket ban is stupid but there are good reasons
to replace them in many cases

Agreed.


A little sense in cutting use will help greatly

Since they're guaranteed so well and have been on sale for $0.99 for
eons now, what's to lose by swapping out? CF and LED should replace
the ugly old yellow bulbs just as soon as the prices get reasonable.
In CFs, that time is already here.

--
Once we believe in ourselves, we can risk curiosity, wonder, spontaneous
delight, or any experience that reveals the human spirit.
--e e cummings

This is the German Rabbit with the 1500 engine. Much smoother and
quieter than the 1600 in the US cars.
JR
Dweller in the cellar

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:


Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.


How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS


--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes
Doubt yourself, and the real world will eat you alive
The world doesn't revolve around you, it revolves around me
No skeletons in the closet; just decomposing corpses
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dependence is Vulnerability:
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Open the Pod Bay Doors please, Hal"
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.."

"Trevor Jones" wrote in message
news:rHdbj.30966$UZ4.5900@edtnps89...

From one of the VW forums, the skinny on the VW diesel engine is that it
was designed as an industrial powersource, with an expected lifespan of 50
000 hours running until it would require a rebuild.

Solid stuff!

Are you sure? 50000 hrs is a longggg time.
Are you refering to the TDI or the older Rabbit diesel (which was a
converted gas engine. Really)?

-Carl

Carl Byrns wrote:
"Trevor Jones" wrote in message
news:rHdbj.30966$UZ4.5900@edtnps89...


From one of the VW forums, the skinny on the VW diesel engine is that it
was designed as an industrial powersource, with an expected lifespan of 50
000 hours running until it would require a rebuild.

Solid stuff!


Are you sure? 50000 hrs is a longggg time.
Are you refering to the TDI or the older Rabbit diesel (which was a
converted gas engine. Really)?

-Carl


The 1.6, and by default, the 1.9 IDI engines. Not sure how the 1.5's
fit in the family tree.

Fifty thousand hours/ half million KMs at highway speeds.

That does not account for the wear items, like timing belts, IP's,
nozzles and the like.
Pretty solid little engines!

They don't fare well on paper, as the horsepower numbers don't draw
the ooohs and aaahs like some of the gas engines, but they sure pull. I
think my Turbo Deisel is rated 65 HP on it's books.

Really don't know why the diesels have not made as much of a
penetration into the US markets as they have in the rest of the world.

Cheers
Trevor Jones

let me point out, for the benefit of truth, at least, that 35 mpg is no big
deal - your VW bug did better than that, my 56 porsche averaged 45 mpg
(city), so it is absolutely not the case that you need to change any laws of
physics to meet this requirement.

Now, as a matter of policy, I think it's better to raise the price of gas by
a stiff tax and let folks decide for themselves how efficient they want
their cars to be, but policy is different from physics.


"Richard J Kinch" wrote in message
. ..
EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

------------snip --------------


Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change
in
the laws of physics!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

I have a '79 also. I think the older diesel Rabbits got the reputation for
noise because the RH motor mount doesn't last long, and when it fails lots
of vibration is transmitted to the body. Mine needs changing again, and it
isn't easy.

I also have an Isuzu turbodiesel pickup. 35mpg in town, on the road, full,
empty, pulling a trailer, whatever. I picked it up a few years ago for less
than $1,000. Folks wanted big pickups and SUVs, not small trucks then.
Even our Mercedes diesel sedan gets 35mpg on the road. There is no reason
the vast majority of vehicles on the road couldn't meet or beat 35MPG.
Biodiesel is easier and cheaper to make than ethanol, too.

For those of you who drive the thirsty gassers, and think it should be your
birthright, remember how much of your money goes each month to support
madrassas around the world. You are making a conscious choice to support
radical Islam. You do have a choice.


"JR North" wrote in message
.. .
This is the German Rabbit with the 1500 engine. Much smoother and quieter
than the 1600 in the US cars.
JR
Dweller in the cellar

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:


Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.


How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS


--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes
Doubt yourself, and the real world will eat you alive
The world doesn't revolve around you, it revolves around me
No skeletons in the closet; just decomposing corpses
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dependence is Vulnerability:
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Open the Pod Bay Doors please, Hal"
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.."

Trevor Jones wrote:

Really don't know why the diesels have not made as much of a
penetration into the US markets as they have in the rest of the world.

Particulants.

In article Kxgbj.10668$wy2.9590@edtnps90, Trevor Jones wrote:
Carl Byrns wrote:
Are you sure? 50000 hrs is a longggg time.
Fifty thousand hours/ half million KMs at highway speeds.

10kph isn't exactly highway speed.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Dec 22, 4:52 pm, Trevor Jones wrote:
Brent wrote:
On Dec 22, 2:36 pm, Trevor Jones wrote:

Brent wrote:

On Dec 22, 1:05 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:27:08 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm, JR
North quickly quoth:

Phooey. My '79 diesel Rabbit gets 50 mpg+ just bopping around town.

How do you feel about the engine, besides it being a VubDub and the
noisiest futher mucker in the known world? Cost to maintain? Ease of
maintenance?

--
Seen on a bumper sticker: ARM THE HOMELESS

i get 50 around town
60+ in the highway in a semi new VubDub

Its no worse than a honda with a fartcan exhaust

it IS as loud as a V8 gas like the ford 4 liter but still its not the
end of the world to make a reasonably sized efficient vehicle that
still feels and drives like a car.

Maintenance isnt terrible either, Cost is a bit higher granted but
between stuff done at home and the engne block being rock solid its
not a biggie

From one of the VW forums, the skinny on the VW diesel engine is that
it was designed as an industrial powersource, with an expected lifespan
of 50 000 hours running until it would require a rebuild.

Solid stuff!

I have a '90 Jetta with a 1.6 Turbo D in it. Just rolled 400 thousand
KMs on it, and had to rebuild a head off a 600 thousand KM's parts car
for it, because I cracked the original, changing out the glow plugs.

It's not running great and need some new nozzles, so I am getting
around 40 MPG highway. It will do better with new nozzles.

Cheers
Trevor Jones

My timing belt is supposed to be changed every 100 000 and it might
have been missed the first time because it looks like it stretched
ever so slightly as to give a fuel mileage hit that cleaned out after
i replaced it.

My only issue with VW is there are a lot of oil lines in my 1.9 TDI
that drip occasionally and I need a shoehorn to fit my oil filter in
the the enclosure where tis supposed to be. but for the time it would
take me to deal with them all and the downtime i need to sort them all
out i've just been keeping a spare litre in the car and adding it at
some point between oil changes

I have far and away the highest mileage vehicle out of my entire
family at 278 000 km now and i've never had anything i could call an
"engine" issue

I've needed to do work on the suspension a few times now and there is
something unhappy int he glow plug system that a block heater has been
compensating for.

Basically the only reason i have any problems with the VW is because i
cant take it off the road for a week to deal with all the itty bitty
issues or with the issues that are coming due (Rear struts and 4
wheels worth of brakes will be due in the spring)

At least here in canada we are a lot more Diesel friendly despite the
winters.

Brent
Ottawa Canada

Yeah. The VW's get pretty poor results in the car ratings, as you
would have to pay a dealer a PILE of money over time to fix a bunch of
little issues.

If you can live without the car being "new" for the entire life of it,
you can do an awful lot of stuff yourself.

Depends on your situation, very much.

I have the Jetta, a spare parts Jetta, and a GM 4x4 with a 6.5 in it.

Gettin' WAY to familiar with the diesel engine and it's needs. :-)

Cheers
Trevor Jones
Merry Christmas, all!

The Heart of my car i have no complaints with. Reliable engine Cozy on
the Keester but i do have to learn some german curses for when i do
stuff like change the oil filter (Poorly engineered placement) and
when its a fit or finish issue i have to curse in spanish (Mexican
made)

I'm just waiting for someone to help nudge some kind of bacteria to
eat food waste and compost and poop out combustible plant oil, that
will sink a HUGE chunk of the Gas market when diesel fuel suddenly
becomes easily renewable from waste

But the best investment i made was the bentley book for my car.

I look at soem jobs and i usually say, OK or i say Ok i need a shop
tool

but occasionally i see a job that needs more specialist tools than you
can shake a stick at and i see that job and i say, nope forget it
thats a shop job. I took the car in to change the front wheel bearing
because i dont have presses or pullers and there was a PILE of special
VAG tools and fixtures involved in the job. It looked like it MIGHT
have been doable but i would need to have seen it done once first
before i tried tackling it alone.

For me the car is easily maintainable in most cases but the secret is
KNOWING WHEN TO NOT TRY IT MYSELF =)

there are limits to the driveway job

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 19:41:42 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, Wes
quickly quoth:

Trevor Jones wrote:

Really don't know why the diesels have not made as much of a
penetration into the US markets as they have in the rest of the world.

Particulants.

Are those ants which eat the particulates, Wes? gd&r

--
Once we believe in ourselves, we can risk curiosity, wonder, spontaneous
delight, or any experience that reveals the human spirit.
--e e cummings

clare wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:22:52 GMT, "BillM"
wrote:

Got sucked into the whole compact flourescent whirlpool a
few years ago. Local
power company (Portland General Electric) was handing out
coupons for free/deep
discount/rebate on compact flourescents, and we were
lighting up a new home.
I think there are maybe 4 left in the whole house. Short
life, unacceptable warm up time,
just general crappy performance. Unless there has been a
huge improvement in
the CF technology, I'll keep my incandescents!

Likewise. All you can buy is cheap but overpriced Chinese CRAP that
burns out or otherwise fails in less than 2 years - generally within 6
months.
I still have a few incandescent bulbs in the house that were here when
I bought it 27 years ago.

Todays long tube flourescents are also nothing but crap. Untill I
changed out to halogens in my office/rec room I was replacing tubes
every couple of months, and ballasts every year or so.

get commercial grade flourescent bulbs from an electrical or lighting
supply place. Anything at home depot is junk. You will pay more, but those
cheap crap bulbs don't work.

On Dec 22, 7:41 pm, Wes wrote:
Trevor Jones wrote:
Really don't know why the diesels have not made as much of a
penetration into the US markets as they have in the rest of the world.

Particulants.

SO do vacuums and Laser printers.

A little Soot wont kill you. I'd love to see the "Particulate" count
form a diesel exhaust compared to a cigarette for example.

I suppose they will pay 100% cost for new light fixtures and new designs
for fluorescents of all sizes and wattages.

I think this is a prime point of "loony tune" congress and the various paid
lobbyist that write these bills for the illiterates in congress.

They can't ban incandescent lamps - just the household lamps.
Oh they can do anything being controlled by the Demos and Libs and Commie.

But logical and physical constraints prevent it.

Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Richard J Kinch wrote:
EISA 2007 is said to ban incandescent lamps.

I defy anyone to understand this law. See the lightbulb text he

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...LWOHv:e261985:

What, are we gonna have lightbulb police?

Apparently the left-hand thread is an exemption. Are we gonna see a boom
in right-to-left-hand-thread lamp base adapters?

Don't get me started on 35 mpg cars. The US government decrees a change in
the laws of physics!