I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

On 05/01/17 21:42, Simon Mason wrote:
On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

A point to you, hope you relish it.

On 05/01/2017 21:39, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.


Well I suppose it depends on where you are shopping.


--
Adam

R D S Wrote in message:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.



I had some T4 under cabinet kitchen lights and they were just
constantly eating tubes.
Have installed LEDs to see if they are more reliable.

Phil
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
R D S writes:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

There are circumstancies where they are clear winners, but
those may not apply to you.

They are slightly more efficient, but also more expensive.
Theoretical life is longer, but some makes won't make it.
They normally direct the light to one side only, much more
efficiently than the reflector in a fluorescent luminare can
rediect light from the back of the tube to the front (which
makes them much more efficient for directed lighting).
If the light is being directed downwards, dust settling on
the top won't reduce light output.

I suspect prices will drop over the next couple of years,
making them more attractive to you, so no need to rush in
now if you aren't convinced yet.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

"R D S" wrote in message
news
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling to
see the point.

Yeah, I havent bothered.

Would be handy to have much better light in the kitchen tho,
but the price of the led panels is even less attractive and I dont
like the idea that they are only guaranteed for 5 years. I get a
hell of a lot longer than that out of the fluoro tubes, 20+ years.

And with led panels at the stupid price they are, I want fully
auto PIR sensor panels that do everything for themselves
and can be remotely controlled from the phone for some
situations like if I have a web cam setup so I can monitor
how the stiff in the glass convection oven is going etc.

And it would be handy to have full color temp control
from the phone too. I dont need lairy colors, but full
color temp control would be quite handy.

"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 05/01/2017 21:39, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.


Well I suppose it depends on where you are shopping.

I dont think it does myself. I cant find anything even remotely
competitive with long tube fluoros if you already have the
fluoros and are only replacing the tubes as they fail.

In article ,
TheChief wrote:
I had some T4 under cabinet kitchen lights and they were just
constantly eating tubes.

I've got some under cupboard fluorescents - standard size tubes - with
electronic ballasts, which are heavily used, and over 15 years old. I
suppose they may not give as much light as once - but it's not obvious.

--
*I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you

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

Rod Speed wrote:


"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 05/01/2017 21:39, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.


Well I suppose it depends on where you are shopping.

I dont think it does myself. I cant find anything even remotely
competitive with long tube fluoros if you already have the
fluoros and are only replacing the tubes as they fail.

I was lucky, aldi had some and no one was buying, got them muchly
reduced.Although people kept opening them and losing the replacement
starters (just short circuits)

"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed wrote:


"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 05/01/2017 21:39, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.


Well I suppose it depends on where you are shopping.

I dont think it does myself. I cant find anything even remotely
competitive with long tube fluoros if you already have the
fluoros and are only replacing the tubes as they fail.

I was lucky, aldi had some and no one was buying, got them muchly
reduced.Although people kept opening them and losing the replacement
starters (just short circuits)

Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

On 05/01/2017 21:48, R D S wrote:
On 05/01/17 21:42, Simon Mason wrote:
On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

A point to you, hope you relish it.

My DW is absolutely brilliant at spotting spelling errors. If we go to a
restaurant and there are no spelling errors in the menu, she is terribly
disappointed. She'd have a field day if she ever found usenet.

Rod Speed explained :
Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have noticed is
that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness. There is also no
start up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer,
so is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per
day - an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices
fall. I might even get around to making something up using more
conventional LED lamps.

On 06/01/17 11:10, GB wrote:
On 05/01/2017 21:48, R D S wrote:
On 05/01/17 21:42, Simon Mason wrote:
On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

A point to you, hope you relish it.

My DW is absolutely brilliant at spotting spelling errors. If we go to a
restaurant and there are no spelling errors in the menu, she is terribly
disappointed. She'd have a field day if she ever found usenet.


Its worse on the newspapers and the MSM sites.

I assume they are written by stewdents with meeja studdies degreas...

On 06/01/17 11:11, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Rod Speed explained :
Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have noticed is
that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness. There is also no start
up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer, so
is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per day
- an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices fall. I
might even get around to making something up using more conventional LED
lamps.

apart from early days of the tech*, its been rare to see LEDS fail,
though IIRC the dopant migrates and they lose brightness over time

I would say that they are now coming up to the sort of period - 20 years
plus - where there is no excuse for failure at all.


*who hasn't seen a 7 segment display missing one segment...

Harry Bloomfield wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have
noticed is that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness.

I prefer the soft start with the one in the bed head
light since I always get up in the dark now.

There is also no start up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

Sure, but that is a very minor consideration
when the long tube fluoros last 20+ years.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer,
so is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per
day - an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices
fall. I might even get around to making something up using more
conventional LED lamps.

On 05-Jan-17 9:39 PM, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.


There probably isn't any if you only use the light intermittently. If
they had been available when I still had factories where the lights were
on continuously 10-16 hours a day, they would have paid for themselves
within four months and I could at least have doubled the interval
between lamp changes.


--
--

Colin Bignell

In article ,
Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Rod Speed explained :
Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have noticed is
that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness. There is also no
start up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

Non of my proper fluorescent fittings take appreciable time to come up to
full output - unlike those awful CFLs which I've only ever used as feebies
in a cupboard, or outside.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer,
so is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per
day - an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices
fall. I might even get around to making something up using more
conventional LED lamps.

A decent florry with a decent electronic ballast isn't going to be worried
about being switched on and off several times a day.

--
*Starfishes have no brains *

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

In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
There probably isn't any if you only use the light intermittently. If
they had been available when I still had factories where the lights were
on continuously 10-16 hours a day, they would have paid for themselves
within four months and I could at least have doubled the interval
between lamp changes.

Does anyone actually know how much less electricity a decent LED uses
versus decent fluorescent? Real figures rather than advertising. ;-)

--
*Ah, I see the f**k-up fairy has visited us again

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

On 06/01/2017 11:58, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
There probably isn't any if you only use the light intermittently. If
they had been available when I still had factories where the lights were
on continuously 10-16 hours a day, they would have paid for themselves
within four months and I could at least have doubled the interval
between lamp changes.

Does anyone actually know how much less electricity a decent LED uses
versus decent fluorescent? Real figures rather than advertising. ;-)

Decent long tube fluorescents max out efficacy at around 55 lumen/watt
the consumer LEDs are now pushing 120 lumen/watt and improving in
addition to their intrinsically better colour rendering. They still have
a way to go to reach low pressure sodium's record 220 lumen/watt.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
Decent long tube fluorescents max out efficacy at around 55 lumen/watt
the consumer LEDs are now pushing 120 lumen/watt and improving in
addition to their intrinsically better colour rendering. They still have
a way to go to reach low pressure sodium's record 220 lumen/watt.

Ok. I've yet to find any LED which betters decent fluorescent (not plain
white) for colour rendering, though.

--
*A backward poet writes inverse.*

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

On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:39:54 +0000, R D S wrote:

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

Did that include the replacement or modification of the existing
fittings to allow LED tubes to work in them?

On 2017-01-05, Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

It's an easy mistake to make --- I know how to spell the word (out
loud, for example) but still sometimes type it wrong, I guess because
"ou" is more common in English & therefore in my finger memory than
"uo" is.

On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 2:50:20 PM UTC, Peter Parry wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:39:54 +0000, R D S wrote:

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

Did that include the replacement or modification of the existing
fittings to allow LED tubes to work in them?

I bought 10 PAR 28 LEds from LED HUT on offer a while back. They are quoted as 120W equivalent. Today I got the adapters, the kitchen has 8 of them. I can see what I am doing. They were something like £3 each, they are £15 today. I bought them in error thinking they were small edison screw. Kicking myself now that I did not buy more.

On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 15:53:17 +0000, Adam Funk wrote:

On 2017-01-05, Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

It's an easy mistake to make --- I know how to spell the word (out
loud, for example) but still sometimes type it wrong, I guess because
"ou" is more common in English & therefore in my finger memory than
"uo" is.

I had to keep checking "Floureon" batteries - had trouble spelling that,
having avoided it for so long for tubes.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 09:11:25 GMT, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Rod Speed explained :
Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have noticed is
that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness. There is also no
start up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer,
so is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per
day - an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices
fall. I might even get around to making something up using more
conventional LED lamps.

In one of the sheds is a 5' florry, starts OK although it's an old one.
There's 1 spare tube, but I'm very tempted to get 5 batten holders and
5-for-8-quid 800lm LEDs from SF. 4000lm and instant-on, spread along 5 - 6'
would be a pretty good light.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On 06/01/17 17:53, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2017-01-05, Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

It's an easy mistake to make --- I know how to spell the word (out
loud, for example) but still sometimes type it wrong, I guess because
"ou" is more common in English & therefore in my finger memory than
"uo" is.

Yuo can stuff that up your doudenum then.

On 06-Jan-17 2:50 PM, Peter Parry wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:39:54 +0000, R D S wrote:

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

Did that include the replacement or modification of the existing
fittings to allow LED tubes to work in them?


The modification on the ones I've seen is to wire the mains direct to
one of the end sockets. Removing the redundant bits is optional.

--
--

Colin Bignell

After serious thinking PeterC wrote :
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 09:11:25 GMT, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Rod Speed explained :
Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have noticed is
that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness. There is also no
start up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer,
so is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per
day - an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices
fall. I might even get around to making something up using more
conventional LED lamps.

In one of the sheds is a 5' florry, starts OK although it's an old one.
There's 1 spare tube, but I'm very tempted to get 5 batten holders and
5-for-8-quid 800lm LEDs from SF. 4000lm and instant-on, spread along 5 - 6'
would be a pretty good light.

That is what I had in mind, 5x batten holders on a strip of wood, but I
already have a stock of LED lamps. A single lamp would not work, there
is a series of washing lines in the way which would obscure a single
lamp.

On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:39:54 +0000, R D S wrote:

I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

Check for EMC compliance :-)

On 06/01/17 15:53, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2017-01-05, Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

It's an easy mistake to make --- I know how to spell the word (out
loud, for example) but still sometimes type it wrong, I guess because
"ou" is more common in English & therefore in my finger memory than
"uo" is.

I almost always spell guage wrong. Did I do it then? I didn't check.
I've overthought it now, it has stopped sounding and looking like a word.

On 06/01/17 14:50, Peter Parry wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:39:54 +0000, R D S wrote:

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

Did that include the replacement or modification of the existing
fittings to allow LED tubes to work in them?

It did.

On 06/01/2017 13:52, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
Decent long tube fluorescents max out efficacy at around 55 lumen/watt
the consumer LEDs are now pushing 120 lumen/watt and improving in
addition to their intrinsically better colour rendering. They still have
a way to go to reach low pressure sodium's record 220 lumen/watt.

Ok. I've yet to find any LED which betters decent fluorescent (not plain
white) for colour rendering, though.

You surely jest.

Photography under fluorescent lights is nigh on impossible because of
the strong green mercury line. Autowhite balance fiddles it on digital
cameras more or less but for classic film it was dire. The human eye is
incredibly tolerant of accepting odd shades of "white" light as white.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
Ok. I've yet to find any LED which betters decent fluorescent (not
plain white) for colour rendering, though.

You surely jest.

No.

Photography under fluorescent lights is nigh on impossible because of
the strong green mercury line. Autowhite balance fiddles it on digital
cameras more or less but for classic film it was dire. The human eye is
incredibly tolerant of accepting odd shades of "white" light as white.

There is a vast range of fluorescent tubes available - including ones
designed for colour matching and photography. But you'll not find them in
your local shop.

LEDs, on the other hand, don't have a continuous spectrum. Although are
slowly getting better.

The same applies to them as specialist fluorescent. The better the colour
spectrum the lower the efficiency.

--
*The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on my list.

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

On 07/01/17 00:25, Martin Brown wrote:
On 06/01/2017 13:52, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
Decent long tube fluorescents max out efficacy at around 55 lumen/watt
the consumer LEDs are now pushing 120 lumen/watt and improving in
addition to their intrinsically better colour rendering. They still have
a way to go to reach low pressure sodium's record 220 lumen/watt.

Ok. I've yet to find any LED which betters decent fluorescent (not plain
white) for colour rendering, though.

You surely jest.

Photography under fluorescent lights is nigh on impossible because of
the strong green mercury line. Autowhite balance fiddles it on digital
cameras more or less but for classic film it was dire.

You used a pink filter.


The human eye is
incredibly tolerant of accepting odd shades of "white" light as white.

On 06/01/2017 18:14, Nightjar wrote:
On 06-Jan-17 2:50 PM, Peter Parry wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2017 21:39:54 +0000, R D S wrote:

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

Did that include the replacement or modification of the existing
fittings to allow LED tubes to work in them?


The modification on the ones I've seen is to wire the mains direct to
one of the end sockets. Removing the redundant bits is optional.


You need to be careful if you do that.
Most LED tubes have a short at one end and if you put them in with the
feed at that end things will trip.

I feed the live at one end and the neutral at the other so that the tube
will work either way around.

This is what most conversions do, except they leave the ballast in.

"R D S" wrote in message news

On 06/01/17 15:53, Adam Funk wrote:
On 2017-01-05, Simon Mason wrote:

On Thursday, 5 January 2017 21:39:57 UTC, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.

FLUORESCENT, DEAR BOY.

It's an easy mistake to make --- I know how to spell the word (out
loud, for example) but still sometimes type it wrong, I guess because
"ou" is more common in English & therefore in my finger memory than
"uo" is.

I almost always spell guage wrong. Did I do it then? I didn't check.
I've overthought it now, it has stopped sounding and looking like a word.

You dropped the lan in front. You just need to remember that *gauge* is an
awkward word in the English *language*. Gauge, a five letter word with u in
the middle.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/01/17 11:11, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Rod Speed explained :
Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.

Where I have replaced CFL's with LED, a big advantage I have noticed is
that LED's are instant on and at 100% brightness. There is also no start
up consumption or wear and tear penalty for LED's.

I have one 5' fitting, which is on an occupation switch lighting the
utility room. The room provides access to a pantry and a big freezer, so
is constantly being visited, so the tube is fired multiple times per day
- an ideal situation for replacing it with LED, when the prices fall. I
might even get around to making something up using more conventional LED
lamps.

apart from early days of the tech*, its been rare to see LEDS fail,
though IIRC the dopant migrates and they lose brightness over time

Except for cheap corncobs, mine fail regurly.

I would say that they are now coming up to the sort of period - 20 years
plus - where there is no excuse for failure at all.


*who hasn't seen a 7 segment display missing one segment...

Rod Speed wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed wrote:


"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 05/01/2017 21:39, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm struggling
to see the point.


Well I suppose it depends on where you are shopping.

I dont think it does myself. I cant find anything even remotely
competitive with long tube fluoros if you already have the
fluoros and are only replacing the tubes as they fail.

I was lucky, aldi had some and no one was buying, got them muchly
reduced.Although people kept opening them and losing the replacement
starters (just short circuits)

Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.


I am not likely to be changing mine in a hurry, I have nine twin four
foot fluoros in my shed for general lighting and small led floods where
I need light.

"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Rod Speed wrote:


"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 05/01/2017 21:39, R D S wrote:
I was about to buy some strip lights for work,
2x 4 foot flourescent tubes, (36x2 watts).

I'll be buying 5. Looking at the projected yearly savings it will
take
about 4 years to break even given the extra costs of the LED units.

So unless they give off better light, or last for ages, i'm
struggling
to see the point.


Well I suppose it depends on where you are shopping.

I dont think it does myself. I cant find anything even remotely
competitive with long tube fluoros if you already have the
fluoros and are only replacing the tubes as they fail.

I was lucky, aldi had some and no one was buying, got them muchly
reduced.Although people kept opening them and losing the replacement
starters (just short circuits)

Trouble is, given that my long tube fluoros have generally lasted for
20+ years, it will take a while to be clear if those will last as long.


I am not likely to be changing mine in a hurry,

I might. One of the twin 4' tube liminares is very
hard to change the tubes in in the kitchen.

I have nine twin four foot fluoros in my shed for general lighting

I dont have anything like that myself.

and small led floods where I need light.

Yeah, I have quite a few PAR38s like that. Not led currently tho.