Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

£10 each, which isn't cheap though.

Andrew

On 26/03/2014 12:27, wrote:

Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

£10 each, which isn't cheap though.

Andrew

Those are not at all bad prices - thanks for the heads up. Similar ones
are on Amazon from more recognisable brands. The ones with Samsung and
Philips LEDs in do the best imitation of incandescent lighting.

Some of the cheap and nasty ones sing faintly when on.

First half decent LED lamp I ended up with was an end of line
remaindered model from Aldi/Lidl discounted to £10 for a brace.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Martin Brown wrote:

First half decent LED lamp I ended up with was an end of line
remaindered model from Aldi/Lidl discounted to £10 for a brace.

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy
wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

First half decent LED lamp I ended up with was an end of line
remaindered model from Aldi/Lidl discounted to £10 for a brace.

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

That's typical. What you're paying for (assuming enough lumens) is
the 50,000 hour life rating and 'instant on' feature.

The best lighting in terms of cost per lumen output still remains the
linear fluorescent tube in an electronically ballasted fitting.

The CFL can't compete simply on account that its much higher tube
temperature demands the use of the slightly less efficient mercury
amalgam fill (the reason why they suffer a 'run up to temperature'
delay in reaching their design lumens brightness).
--
Regards, J B Good

On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

First half decent LED lamp I ended up with was an end of line
remaindered model from Aldi/Lidl discounted to £10 for a brace.

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

Yes - and quote 20,000 hours when most others are 26 - 30kh.

Last time Aldi had LED lamps I went there the day fter and there were loads
of SBC, ES and SES but no BC. When will they admit that the UK still has
mainly BC?

A helpful IkeaDroid said she'd mention a suggestion of stocking adaptors (I
emphasised good quality, minimal extra lenght and clearance for 'shoulder'
and also said that there was talk of adaptors being possible anyway.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:01:00 PM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

That's typical. What you're paying for (assuming enough lumens) is
the 50,000 hour life rating and 'instant on' feature.
The best lighting in terms of cost per lumen output still remains the
linear fluorescent tube in an electronically ballasted fitting.
The CFL can't compete simply on account that its much higher tube
temperature demands the use of the slightly less efficient mercury
amalgam fill (the reason why they suffer a 'run up to temperature'
delay in reaching their design lumens brightness).

I thought short tube length was the main cause of lower efficacy.


NT

PeterC wrote:

Last time Aldi had LED lamps I went there the day fter and there were
loads of SBC, ES and SES but no BC. When will they admit that the UK still
has mainly BC?

Yes, this is odd.

Also I'd really like to see screw-type brass lamp sockets
of the kind popular for many decades in the UK,
hopefully ones that can simply replace the corresponding BC sockets.

I've never seen any similar brass fitting on the continent,
only ugly plastic things.

(I know there are screw adaptors, and have bought many cheaply online;
but these don't fill me with great confidence.)



--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net
School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:08:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:01:00 PM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

That's typical. What you're paying for (assuming enough lumens) is
the 50,000 hour life rating and 'instant on' feature.
The best lighting in terms of cost per lumen output still remains the
linear fluorescent tube in an electronically ballasted fitting.
The CFL can't compete simply on account that its much higher tube
temperature demands the use of the slightly less efficient mercury
amalgam fill (the reason why they suffer a 'run up to temperature'
delay in reaching their design lumens brightness).

I thought short tube length was the main cause of lower efficacy.


That's certainly a contributary factor (possibly the main factor) but
it's surprising just how long the coiled tube turns out to be in a
modern 11W CFL. I've just checked one and I reckon they've packed a
good 14 to 15 inches worth of tube, not counting the hidden ends, into
the double helix.

Without hunting down a 20W example to measure, I reckon the effective
tube length could be approaching the 20 to 24 inch mark, significantly
longer than the classic 6 and 8 inch linear tubes where the short
length is a major factor in reduced efficacy.

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.

Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.

At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.
--
Regards, J B Good

On 26/03/2014 17:53, PeterC wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

First half decent LED lamp I ended up with was an end of line
remaindered model from Aldi/Lidl discounted to £10 for a brace.

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

Yes - and quote 20,000 hours when most others are 26 - 30kh.

Last time Aldi had LED lamps I went there the day fter and there were loads
of SBC, ES and SES but no BC. When will they admit that the UK still has
mainly BC?

They are a continental company. I agree it is odd, but it works to my
benefit since I get to buy up the remaindered non-BC stuff.

A helpful IkeaDroid said she'd mention a suggestion of stocking adaptors (I
emphasised good quality, minimal extra lenght and clearance for 'shoulder'
and also said that there was talk of adaptors being possible anyway.

I don't much like adaptors in permanent light fittings.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54:18 AM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:08:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:01:00 PM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

That's typical. What you're paying for (assuming enough lumens) is
the 50,000 hour life rating and 'instant on' feature.
The best lighting in terms of cost per lumen output still remains the
linear fluorescent tube in an electronically ballasted fitting.
The CFL can't compete simply on account that its much higher tube
temperature demands the use of the slightly less efficient mercury
amalgam fill (the reason why they suffer a 'run up to temperature'
delay in reaching their design lumens brightness).

I thought short tube length was the main cause of lower efficacy.

That's certainly a contributary factor (possibly the main factor) but
it's surprising just how long the coiled tube turns out to be in a
modern 11W CFL. I've just checked one and I reckon they've packed a
good 14 to 15 inches worth of tube, not counting the hidden ends, into
the double helix.
Without hunting down a 20W example to measure, I reckon the effective
tube length could be approaching the 20 to 24 inch mark, significantly
longer than the classic 6 and 8 inch linear tubes where the short
length is a major factor in reduced efficacy.

14-15" makes for rather poorer efficacy than 5' & 8' tubes. There's just no way round that with fluorescents.

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.
Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.
At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

Folk have been saying that for decades, but it still hasnt happened. At some point it may, but not soon. CFL will continue to rule for years for GLS equivalents.


As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.

purchase price, premature failures, poor CCT & CRI, and inadequate power ratings. In short they're a bit of a niche product still.


NT

NT

I always thought that the circular fluorescent tubes had potential - but
the fittings were always horrible.
Perhaps a flat spiral tube would be a good way of getting additional
lengthe whilst aiming the light downwards.

On 27/03/2014 08:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54:18 AM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.

Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.
At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

Folk have been saying that for decades, but it still hasnt happened. At some point it may, but not soon. CFL will continue to rule for years for GLS equivalents.

No they haven't been saying it for decades. High power LEDs are a
comparatively recent innovation they were indicator lamps originally.
CFL is essentially about to be phased out as LEDs have now won.

The latest consumer LED lamps are around 80lm/W for 8-10W bulbs which is
about comparable with fluorescents and *better* than most CFLs. There
are already 10W LEDs in production which at 100lm/W Cree XM-L would
trounce any fluorescent lamp.

Research grade white LEDs can now reach 250lm/W or more but their price
is still astronomical see for example Cree's recent announcement.

http://www.cree.com/News-and-Events/...00-LPW-fixture

This really is impressive because only the low pressure sodium vapour
lamp and the microwave pumped sulphur lamp are in that league.

As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.

purchase price, premature failures, poor CCT & CRI, and inadequate power ratings. In short they're a bit of a niche product still.

The Philips and Samsung white LEDs do a pretty good imitation of
incandescent 3300K colour temperature. However, some of the cheap and
nasty LEDs have bad colour fringes and also cook their electronics.

The biggest problem for LED retrofit is getting the waste heat away from
the bulb since it all ends up as temperature rise with very little being
radiated away (and they die rather quickly at 100C or above).

The big problem for getting people to buy them is that people only see
the shelf price and forget about the true total cost of ownership
including the electricity used and replacement bulbs.

Same happens with loss leader sales of printers and mobile phones where
it is using of the "free/cheap" device that really costs the big money.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 9:57:28 AM UTC, Martin Brown wrote:
On 27/03/2014 08:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54:18 AM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.
Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.
At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

Folk have been saying that for decades, but it still hasnt happened. At some point it may, but not soon. CFL will continue to rule for years for GLS equivalents.

No they haven't been saying it for decades.

In the 70s once indicator LEDs appeared, it was fashiobnable to think the future of lighting lay with flat wall light panels lit by solid state LED lamps. People saw the future fairly well even then. Since lighting LEDs came along, there have always been people saying practical LED lighting is just around the corner.

High power LEDs are a
comparatively recent innovation they were indicator lamps originally.
CFL is essentially about to be phased out as LEDs have now won.

funny

The latest consumer LED lamps are around 80lm/W for 8-10W bulbs which is
about comparable with fluorescents and *better* than most CFLs. There
are already 10W LEDs in production which at 100lm/W Cree XM-L would
trounce any fluorescent lamp.
Research grade white LEDs can now reach 250lm/W or more but their price
is still astronomical see for example Cree's recent announcement.
http://www.cree.com/News-and-Events/...00-LPW-fixture
This really is impressive because only the low pressure sodium vapour
lamp and the microwave pumped sulphur lamp are in that league.

there have been interesting research LEDs for years.

As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.

purchase price, premature failures, poor CCT & CRI, and inadequate power ratings. In short they're a bit of a niche product still.

The Philips and Samsung white LEDs do a pretty good imitation of
incandescent 3300K colour temperature. However, some of the cheap and

incandescents arent 3300K

nasty LEDs have bad colour fringes and also cook their electronics.
The biggest problem for LED retrofit is getting the waste heat away from
the bulb since it all ends up as temperature rise with very little being
radiated away (and they die rather quickly at 100C or above).
The big problem for getting people to buy them is that people only see
the shelf price and forget about the true total cost of ownership
including the electricity used and replacement bulbs.

well, LEDs have bigger problems than that at this point

Same happens with loss leader sales of printers and mobile phones where
it is using of the "free/cheap" device that really costs the big money.

LEDs arent sold as loss leaders AFAIK.


NT

About the same as the Low energy ones were when they first appeared.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
wrote in message
...
Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye
was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of
dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will
try them out later and report back.

£10 each, which isn't cheap though.

Andrew

In article , Martin Brown |||newspam|||
@nezumi.demon.co.uk writes

This really is impressive because only the low pressure sodium vapour
lamp and the microwave pumped sulphur lamp are in that league.

I recently was in a shopping mall lit by (I think) metal halide lamps
(big white bulb, probably E40 cap).

Some of those fittings had been retrofitted with large spiral CFLs and I
was impressed with their brightness and colour rendition. They were so
bright it was difficult to look at them directly.

http://www.energynowinc.com/cms/?q=S...n_Replacements

This seems to me to be a suitable case for using CFL rather than LED as
a replacement.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On 27/03/2014 09:57, Martin Brown wrote:



The latest consumer LED lamps are around 80lm/W for 8-10W bulbs which is
about comparable with fluorescents and *better* than most CFLs. There
are already 10W LEDs in production which at 100lm/W Cree XM-L would
trounce any fluorescent lamp.

Yes the latest LED bulbs that I have bought are more efficient than
CFLs. The BC22 bulbs I have bought from Amazon were cheaper than the
Aldi ones mentioned by the O/P.


--
Michael Chare

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:13:13 +0000, Martin Brown wrote:

A helpful IkeaDroid said she'd mention a suggestion of stocking adaptors (I
emphasised good quality, minimal extra lenght and clearance for 'shoulder'
and also said that there was talk of adaptors being possible anyway.

I don't much like adaptors in permanent light fittings.

I feel the same but I still have a shedload of 10p CFLs and they'ree good
ones. Can't yet justify going to ES wired sockets, although easy to do,
especially as LEDs are still expensive and grossly inefficient.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 12:27:22 PM UTC, wrote:
Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

Ok, it's bright, the 1050lm one. Possibly a little too bright for the application I wanted it for: an uplighting standard lamp. Colour temp is very warm, 2700K.

The lamps are completely unbranded, just say "made in china" dot printed on the side. They're also jolly heavy compred to an old tfl or one of my 23W Megaman spiral clfs.

Stated life is 25k hours.

On 27/03/2014 16:15, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 12:27:22 PM UTC, wrote:
Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

Ok, it's bright, the 1050lm one. Possibly a little too bright for the application I wanted it for: an uplighting standard lamp. Colour temp is very warm, 2700K.

The lamps are completely unbranded, just say "made in china" dot printed on the side. They're also jolly heavy compred to an old tfl or one of my 23W Megaman spiral clfs.

That will be from the heat sink. They don't sound too bad at all.

Stated life is 25k hours.

How uniform is the illumination under it?

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 01:45:28 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54:18 AM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:08:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:01:00 PM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

That's typical. What you're paying for (assuming enough lumens) is
the 50,000 hour life rating and 'instant on' feature.
The best lighting in terms of cost per lumen output still remains the
linear fluorescent tube in an electronically ballasted fitting.
The CFL can't compete simply on account that its much higher tube
temperature demands the use of the slightly less efficient mercury
amalgam fill (the reason why they suffer a 'run up to temperature'
delay in reaching their design lumens brightness).

I thought short tube length was the main cause of lower efficacy.

That's certainly a contributary factor (possibly the main factor) but
it's surprising just how long the coiled tube turns out to be in a
modern 11W CFL. I've just checked one and I reckon they've packed a
good 14 to 15 inches worth of tube, not counting the hidden ends, into
the double helix.
Without hunting down a 20W example to measure, I reckon the effective
tube length could be approaching the 20 to 24 inch mark, significantly
longer than the classic 6 and 8 inch linear tubes where the short
length is a major factor in reduced efficacy.

14-15" makes for rather poorer efficacy than 5' & 8' tubes. There's just no way round that with fluorescents.

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.
Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.
At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

Folk have been saying that for decades, but it still hasnt happened. At some point it may, but not soon. CFL will continue to rule for years for GLS equivalents.


As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.

purchase price, premature failures, poor CCT & CRI, and inadequate power ratings. In short they're a bit of a niche product still.


That rather neatly sums it up. Mentioning the phrase "niche product"
reminds me that I found one for a 5 watt LED lamp I bought in Asda for
a fiver about a year ago. The niche in question being the foot of the
basement steps where the area being lit is quite small and the cool
temperature reduces thermal stress on the lamp (it's plugged into a
ceiling mounted batten socket).

The half second or so delay between switch on and instant brightness
is a welcome change from the 11W CFL previously residing in the
socket.

I'd bought it because it was cheaper than the 3.5 and 4 watt
alternatives next to it on the shelf and thought it was 'worth a
punt'. I first tried it out as a replacement to the 11W double helix
CFL in the bedroom wall light fixture over the bed head.

The glass tulip shade wasn't ventillated and I rather thought this
was detrimental to the lamp so I then transplanted it to a desk lamp
where it seemed to be adequate and in no danger of overheating. Even
here, I decided that another 11W CFL would be a better match before
finally discovering its ultimate niche.

I saw those 10W LEDs in Aldi last Sunday and wasn't impressed at the
1 penny shy of ten quid price tag and, for all the reasons you gave
which so neatly sums it all up, decided against making a purchase. I
might have been tempted if it had been more sensibly priced (imo, a
fiver would have been enough temptation).
--
Regards, J B Good

In article ,
Johny B Good wrote:

I saw those 10W LEDs in Aldi last Sunday and wasn't impressed at the
1 penny shy of ten quid price tag and, for all the reasons you gave
which so neatly sums it all up, decided against making a purchase. I
might have been tempted if it had been more sensibly priced (imo, a
fiver would have been enough temptation).


ledhut.co.uk have some good ones - I've been trying a few and have been
very impressed.

Quidco cashback available, and often a 25% code around (there is today for
example). Next day delivery with DPD (so it actually arrives) is only 2.99
as well which seems perfectly fair.

If you get the discounts and order at the right time, they are becoming
quite cost effective now. I've been impressed at the quality (both of the
lamp, and the light :-) ) so far... Can't comment on the life though yet

They do offer a 5 yr warranty although you have to post them back a form
for that IIRC.

No connection beyond being a happy customer

Darren

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:57:28 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 27/03/2014 08:45, wrote:
On Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54:18 AM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.

Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.
At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

Folk have been saying that for decades, but it still hasnt happened. At some point it may, but not soon. CFL will continue to rule for years for GLS equivalents.

No they haven't been saying it for decades. High power LEDs are a
comparatively recent innovation they were indicator lamps originally.
CFL is essentially about to be phased out as LEDs have now won.

The latest consumer LED lamps are around 80lm/W for 8-10W bulbs which is
about comparable with fluorescents and *better* than most CFLs. There
are already 10W LEDs in production which at 100lm/W Cree XM-L would
trounce any fluorescent lamp.

Research grade white LEDs can now reach 250lm/W or more but their price
is still astronomical see for example Cree's recent announcement.

http://www.cree.com/News-and-Events/...00-LPW-fixture

This really is impressive because only the low pressure sodium vapour
lamp and the microwave pumped sulphur lamp are in that league.

As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.

purchase price, premature failures, poor CCT & CRI, and inadequate power ratings. In short they're a bit of a niche product still.

The Philips and Samsung white LEDs do a pretty good imitation of
incandescent 3300K colour temperature. However, some of the cheap and
nasty LEDs have bad colour fringes and also cook their electronics.

The biggest problem for LED retrofit is getting the waste heat away from
the bulb since it all ends up as temperature rise with very little being
radiated away (and they die rather quickly at 100C or above).

The big problem for getting people to buy them is that people only see
the shelf price and forget about the true total cost of ownership
including the electricity used and replacement bulbs.

Same happens with loss leader sales of printers and mobile phones where
it is using of the "free/cheap" device that really costs the big money.

Here's the latest from Cree:

http://www.ecnmag.com/news/2014/03/cree-first-break-300-lumens-watt-barrier

a staggering 303Lm per watt efficacy. That's remarkably close to what
Philips referred to as a theoretical maximum of 390Lm/W for a lamp
with a CRI 80 with sufficient red content (the 683Lm/W maximum is in
relation to a single pure green light of 555nm wavelength).

Now all we have to do is sit tight until all the rubbish stock has
been cleared out of the distribution channel and the current lab
developments to be worked up into a marketable product. Cree are
suggesting a development to market timetable of 18 to 24 months.

Assuming a properly implemented lamp design, even a mere 200Lm/W lamp
would be worth considering (twice as good as a fluorescent tube) as
long as they cost no more than the 4 or 5 CFLs required to last the
50,000 hour life rating of the replacement LED lamp.

If the lamp manufacturers offer warranty periods to match the lamp
life claims (3 to 6 years), they'll expand the pool of 'early
adopters' prepared to accept a premium pricing of the product which
will speed up the process of ramping up to mass volume production
levels and an ensuing fall in pricing.

The CFL could well become a museum curiousity by the end of the
decade given the surprisingly rapid development in LED technology over
the past 8 years.
--
Regards, J B Good

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:12:35 +0000, Mike Tomlinson
wrote:

In article , Martin Brown |||newspam|||
writes

This really is impressive because only the low pressure sodium vapour
lamp and the microwave pumped sulphur lamp are in that league.

I recently was in a shopping mall lit by (I think) metal halide lamps
(big white bulb, probably E40 cap).

Some of those fittings had been retrofitted with large spiral CFLs and I
was impressed with their brightness and colour rendition. They were so
bright it was difficult to look at them directly.

http://www.energynowinc.com/cms/?q=S...n_Replacements

This seems to me to be a suitable case for using CFL rather than LED as
a replacement.

True enough at the moment but it looks very much as though that's
about to change sometime in the next two to three years.
--
Regards, J B Good

On 27/03/2014 11:12, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article , Martin Brown |||newspam|||
@nezumi.demon.co.uk writes

This really is impressive because only the low pressure sodium vapour
lamp and the microwave pumped sulphur lamp are in that league.

I recently was in a shopping mall lit by (I think) metal halide lamps
(big white bulb, probably E40 cap).

Some of those fittings had been retrofitted with large spiral CFLs and I
was impressed with their brightness and colour rendition. They were so
bright it was difficult to look at them directly.

http://www.energynowinc.com/cms/?q=S...n_Replacements

This seems to me to be a suitable case for using CFL rather than LED as
a replacement.

There are already LED units with better efficacy although worse CRI I
don't know what the price in bulk or availability is like. There are
some in use at the Wetherby service station seating area on the A1.

http://www.gogreenledinternational.c...-220w-hid.html

(not a recommendation - no experience of these units)

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:24:42 PM UTC, Martin Brown wrote:


How uniform is the illumination under it?

Very. I can't see any variation in the illumination cast on the ceiling.

On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 05:27:22 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

I got a couple of them last time around and another one a few weeks
ago. Pretty damn good, and the latest lot included dimmables.

On 27/03/14 17:58, Johny B Good wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 01:45:28 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:54:18 AM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:08:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:01:00 PM UTC, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:14:08 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:

I was a bit surprised to see when I visited IKEA recently
that the LED "candle bulbs" were slightly less efficient,
in lumens per watt, that the more standard energy-saving bulbs.

That's typical. What you're paying for (assuming enough lumens) is
the 50,000 hour life rating and 'instant on' feature.
The best lighting in terms of cost per lumen output still remains the
linear fluorescent tube in an electronically ballasted fitting.
The CFL can't compete simply on account that its much higher tube
temperature demands the use of the slightly less efficient mercury
amalgam fill (the reason why they suffer a 'run up to temperature'
delay in reaching their design lumens brightness).

I thought short tube length was the main cause of lower efficacy.

That's certainly a contributary factor (possibly the main factor) but
it's surprising just how long the coiled tube turns out to be in a
modern 11W CFL. I've just checked one and I reckon they've packed a
good 14 to 15 inches worth of tube, not counting the hidden ends, into
the double helix.
Without hunting down a 20W example to measure, I reckon the effective
tube length could be approaching the 20 to 24 inch mark, significantly
longer than the classic 6 and 8 inch linear tubes where the short
length is a major factor in reduced efficacy.

14-15" makes for rather poorer efficacy than 5' & 8' tubes. There's just no way round that with fluorescents.

One thing I do know for a fact is that the mercury amalgam lamp is
less efficient than the straight mercury vapour lamp when each is run
at their optimum temperature. I'd overlooked the short tube effect on
efficacy so there's even less reason to disbelieve that a modern
linear tube and electronic fitting is the most efficient of all the
GLS lighting technologies to date.
Given further development of the LED lamp, notably more efficient
mass production as demand starts to increase to scale up mass
production to more economic levels, the price of such lamps will fall
to a level comparable to the equivilent of the 5 or 6 CFL lamps it
replaces. The efficiency needn't have to match or exceed a modern CFL
to succeed as a replacement since there are other benefits than just
the bare watts to lumens ratio involved in the TCO equation.
At the moment, most LED lamps are around 4 to 4 1/2 times more
efficient than a tungsten filament GLS lamp compared to a CFL's
efficiency figure of 5 times. An LED lamp isn't so far behind the CFL
and may yet match or even just exceed the efficiency of the CFL in the
not too distant future.

Folk have been saying that for decades, but it still hasnt happened. At some point it may, but not soon. CFL will continue to rule for years for GLS equivalents.


As things stand, it's not the slightly lower efficacy compared to CFL
that's holding back the uptake of LED. It's the high price on GLS
lamps with barely adequate ratings that's the big turn off.

purchase price, premature failures, poor CCT & CRI, and inadequate power ratings. In short they're a bit of a niche product still.


That rather neatly sums it up. Mentioning the phrase "niche product"
reminds me that I found one for a 5 watt LED lamp I bought in Asda for
a fiver about a year ago. The niche in question being the foot of the
basement steps where the area being lit is quite small and the cool
temperature reduces thermal stress on the lamp (it's plugged into a
ceiling mounted batten socket).

The half second or so delay between switch on and instant brightness
is a welcome change from the 11W CFL previously residing in the
socket.

I'd bought it because it was cheaper than the 3.5 and 4 watt
alternatives next to it on the shelf and thought it was 'worth a
punt'. I first tried it out as a replacement to the 11W double helix
CFL in the bedroom wall light fixture over the bed head.

The glass tulip shade wasn't ventillated and I rather thought this
was detrimental to the lamp so I then transplanted it to a desk lamp
where it seemed to be adequate and in no danger of overheating. Even
here, I decided that another 11W CFL would be a better match before
finally discovering its ultimate niche.

I saw those 10W LEDs in Aldi last Sunday and wasn't impressed at the
1 penny shy of ten quid price tag and, for all the reasons you gave
which so neatly sums it all up, decided against making a purchase. I
might have been tempted if it had been more sensibly priced (imo, a
fiver would have been enough temptation).


For laughs I've replaced three 11W CFL bulbs in the same light fitting,
with 6W LED golf ball - purchased from ASDA, they are currently selling
three for £15. Light output is a more pleasing white rather than yellow
- also the round bulb suits the shades rather better than the CFL sticks.

6 Watt LED GLS BC Bulb - £8 each, deal 3 for £15.

http://direct.asda.com/george/george...efault,pd.html

Note these bulbs are 39W incandescent equivalents (420 lumens) they
won't light up a whole room by themselves. But three is ample.

Once upon a time for me that light fitting drew 120W of power daily from
18:00 to midnight. Now it's down to 18W.

--
Adrian C

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:13:13 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

Last time Aldi had LED lamps I went there the day fter and there were loads
of SBC, ES and SES but no BC. When will they admit that the UK still has
mainly BC?

They are a continental company. I agree it is odd, but it works to my
benefit since I get to buy up the remaindered non-BC stuff.

Ditto that.
The BC fitting go fast and there are always a few ES left by the time
I get there, often reduced to clear.

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 12:27:22 PM UTC, wrote:
Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

£10 each, which isn't cheap though.

Andrew

I now have to report that one of the lamps has failed entirely. So that's just 16 months of life, maybe 2 hours a day = 1000 hours. Boo.

It was fitted in an upright position in a standard lamp, socket downwards, which I understand is the best way to keep the lamp cool. There was plenty of clearance above too.

In article ,
wrote:
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 12:27:22 PM UTC, wrote:
Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What caught
my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also a BC
850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully bright
ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.

£10 each, which isn't cheap though.

Andrew

I now have to report that one of the lamps has failed entirely. So
that's just 16 months of life, maybe 2 hours a day = 1000 hours. Boo.

It was fitted in an upright position in a standard lamp, socket
downwards, which I understand is the best way to keep the lamp cool.
There was plenty of clearance above too.

Have you got the receipt? May have the usual 3 year money back warranty.

Doesn't surprise me, though. My limited experience of mains LEDs say they
don't have a good life.

--
*We never really grow*up, we only learn how to act in public.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

Doesn't surprise me, though. My limited experience of mains LEDs say they
don't have a good life.

Not surprising really, as they spend a lot of their time hanging
around in the dark.


michael adams

....

On Wed, 5 Aug 2015 06:29:08 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

I now have to report that one of the lamps has failed entirely. So
that's just 16 months of life, maybe 2 hours a day = 1000 hours. Boo.

Had a 350 lm 4.8W Aldi fail the other evening but this one is on 24/7
and the quoted life of 20,000 hrs is about 2 years 3 months. I'm not
sure when it went into service, for some reason I didn't write the in
service date on it.

This bulb was in an enclosed ceiling fitting and currently the
overnight voltage is around 255, better than the 258+ it got to the
first night after they started line work and rerouted the 33 kV feed
to the local substation. We did drop below 253 (the upper limit) for
a few night but it's gone back up again.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 05/08/2015 14:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Doesn't surprise me, though. My limited experience of mains LEDs say they
don't have a good life.


Maybe your dark is thicker than the normal so they can't suck in as much?

wrote:

On March 26, 2014 wrote:

Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What
caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also
a BC 850lm. Plenty of dimmer ones too. These are the first usefully
bright ones I've found. Will try them out later and report back.
£10 each, which isn't cheap though.

I now have to report that one of the lamps has failed entirely.

You may remember one of mine failed entirely, I got a refund, another
flickered a couple of times the other evening, it may have been mains
disturbance as it was dark/thundery weather nearby ... but I'm keeping
an eye on it ...

On 05/08/2015 14:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Doesn't surprise me, though. My limited experience of mains LEDs say they
don't have a good life.

Yes. I bought a few 1000 lumen (~75 W equiv) from Ryness about 6 months
ago - one failed last month after at most 150 hours. They replaced it,
but it doesn't inspire confidence.

--
Clive Page

On Wed, 5 Aug 2015 18:16:45 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Maybe your dark is thicker than the normal so they can't suck in as
much?

That's why we have two set of curtains on most windows, to keep the
truely dark dark out. Lights just can't hack the truely dark and just
glimmer against it.

When it's truely dark up here it's unnerving, "have I gone blind"?

--
Cheers
Dave.

dennis@home wrote in
web.com:

On 05/08/2015 14:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Doesn't surprise me, though. My limited experience of mains LEDs say
they don't have a good life.


Maybe your dark is thicker than the normal so they can't suck in as
much?


This is why lights run on AC. If they were on DC and you fitted the lamp
with the polarity reversed they would make the room very dark.

Dave Liquorice wrote:

Had a 350 lm 4.8W Aldi fail the other evening

Noticed today that Tesco have some 1521 lumen 13W (100W equivalent) LEDs
in ... not dimmable though.

Andy Burns wrote:

wrote:

On March 26, 2014 wrote:

Aldi have a range of led lamps in their current specials. What
caught my eye was a ES rated at 1050lm, staing 75W equivalent. Also

I now have to report that one of the lamps has failed entirely.

You may remember one of mine failed entirely, I got a refund, another
flickered a couple of times the other evening

The flickery one has now also failed completely, I don't have a receipt
for it, but have emailed aldi to see what their policy is, seems to me
the 13W ones are flaky.

wrote:

I now have to report that one of the lamps has failed entirely. So
that's just 16 months of life, maybe 2 hours a day = 1000 hours.

My second one managed more than that, lets say 18 months at 6 hours/day,
3000+ hours, nothing like the 25,000 headline figure on the packaging.

I contacted ALDI by email, their response was 12 month warranty, tough.

I didn't want to faff about convincing them to refund/replace, so I took
it apart, hoping I might find an obviously failed capacitor in an easily
accessible location, no such luck.

Fairly normal layout, all potted in soft silicone, input resistors to
mains rectifier to bead-type smoothing caps, then there was a wirewound
resistor feeding into the ICs/transistor chopper section, feeding small
transformer and output smoothing caps.

The wirewound resistor was burnt to a crisp (the lamp didn't fail
spectacularly just flickered then faded away) all the surrounding SMDs
looked like their solder was cooked and discoloured, one surface
resistor had melted away from the PCB, so looks like long term overheating.

Seems like the guts of the 13W are pushed too hard.

Boo.

Indeed, sod lidaldi for LEDs in future, the LEDhut ones of similar age
(fewer hours and lower wattage) are still going OK, but I'll try some
with a multi-year warranty, what were those recommended by Adam,
"Integral" ?