Flier from Toolstation today:-

LED GU 10 5w (equiv 55w) (1.80 each as part of a 5 pack)

GLS style 8w (equiv 60w) (2.50 each as part of a 6 pack)

A mains GU 10 halogen is probably as efficient as mains tungsten come.
GLS tungsten not so.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward *

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

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

A mains GU 10 halogen is probably as efficient as mains tungsten come.
GLS tungsten not so.

I thought there was a move to get people buying by lumens, rather than
ever changing actual or equivalent wattages?

But then allowing for the directional (e.g. GU10) or omni(ish) output
(e.g. GLS) I suppose getting everyone to understand lumens per steradian
would be rather hopeful ...

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

A mains GU 10 halogen is probably as efficient as mains tungsten come.
GLS tungsten not so.

I thought there was a move to get people buying by lumens, rather than
ever changing actual or equivalent wattages?

I'd have thought a comparison with the tungsten they were replacing quite
useful? But then I've never seen a 55w tungsten GU10.

But then allowing for the directional (e.g. GU10) or omni(ish) output
(e.g. GLS) I suppose getting everyone to understand lumens per steradian
would be rather hopeful ...

Normal ploy is confuse the hell out of the ordinary person so they can't
do an instant comparison. Like using odd weights for packets of crisps or
whatever. And that famous one - 'contents may settle'.

--
*Honk if you love peace and quiet.

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Andy Burns
wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

A mains GU 10 halogen is probably as efficient as mains tungsten
come. GLS tungsten not so.

I thought there was a move to get people buying by lumens, rather than
ever changing actual or equivalent wattages?

I'd have thought a comparison with the tungsten they were replacing quite
useful? But then I've never seen a 55w tungsten GU10.

But then allowing for the directional (e.g. GU10) or omni(ish) output
(e.g. GLS) I suppose getting everyone to understand lumens per
steradian would be rather hopeful ...

Normal ploy is confuse the hell out of the ordinary person so they can't
do an instant comparison. Like using odd weights for packets of crisps or
whatever. And that famous one - 'contents may settle'.


I prefer "average contents 1"

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 16/11/2016 16:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And that famous one - 'contents may settle'.

Who cares if you're buying by weight.

Well I would want big tits and not a fat belly.


--
Adam

Andy Burns wrote in news:e93bflFm7v6U1
@mid.individual.net:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

A mains GU 10 halogen is probably as efficient as mains tungsten come.
GLS tungsten not so.

I thought there was a move to get people buying by lumens, rather than
ever changing actual or equivalent wattages?

But then allowing for the directional (e.g. GU10) or omni(ish) output
(e.g. GLS) I suppose getting everyone to understand lumens per steradian
would be rather hopeful ...



All a bit like cameras with the 35mm equivalent when defining lenses. Most
camera users now will not have had a 35mm camera. Let alone a SLR that
makes a SLR noise.
View Angle would be better in my opinion. Easier to visualise.

and particularly the people who write adverts no doubt.


Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

A mains GU 10 halogen is probably as efficient as mains tungsten come.
GLS tungsten not so.

I thought there was a move to get people buying by lumens, rather than
ever changing actual or equivalent wattages?

But then allowing for the directional (e.g. GU10) or omni(ish) output
(e.g. GLS) I suppose getting everyone to understand lumens per steradian
would be rather hopeful ...

On Wednesday, 16 November 2016 19:15:24 UTC, ARW wrote:
On 16/11/2016 16:03, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

And that famous one - 'contents may settle'.

Who cares if you're buying by weight.

Well I would want big tits and not a fat belly.

Then you need to be a little more precise with your hormone treatment .