Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

designingwithleds.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 189 posts

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#121

Post by giardini »

com2kid wrote: post #106
giardini wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is, the CFLs don't last. They usually don't last even a single year. My story: I got the faith: I replaced every incandescent in our condominium association with CFL. After one year, most all the CFLs had failed, despite having 3- to 5-year warranties. Also noticed another peculiarity: CFLs are stolen more often! Apparently our condominium parking lot has become a CFL bank for individuals who want to lower th…

> Problem is, the CFLs don't last. They usually don't last even a single year. My story: CFLs are very picky about the quality of the electricity supplied to them, and the cheaper CFLs save money by using a cheap ballast which ends up frying the bulb pretty early in its lifespan. If you buy a name brand (such as Phillips) you will get a product that lasts 3+ years easily. Now in theory LEDs can a bit over a decade if…

We have used every brand available including Phillips. The CFLs don't last; the incandescents work reliably. As for the quality of electrical power - that's in the hands of the power company.

We returned bulbs on warranty but, seriously, if you're spending money/time driving to/from Home Depot to get replacement CFL bulbs on a warranty instead of buying cheap incandescent bulbs that work, you are suboptimizing.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#122

Post by SystemOut »

umsm wrote: post #101
RHSeeger wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We use CFT in our house for a number of places (kitchen lamp, etc). For other places, we use LED... specifically in places where, when I flip the switch, I want full light output immediately like my office. CFTs are horrible at taking too long to get to a useful state of light output.

If a bulb slowly becomes brighter, it's easier on the eyes.

If his are like mine it can be more like minutes. You get some immediate light and then over the next minute or two it gets to full brightness. This is probably due to cheap bulbs or what not but it can be annoying.

I even have a problem with CFLs in a different room where on occasion I turn the switch on and the light won't come on at all right away unless the other switch that controls a different set of lights is on already. It's pretty bizarre. It's not a big enough deal to spend the money on finding an electrician for something this small but it is strange.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#123

Post by justin66 »

ars wrote: post #107
ck2 wrote: post #20

We talked about this a month or two ago here. The amazing part of this bulb is not it's watts or it's cost. It's that a manufacturer finally put it's warranty where it's mouth is. With a 10 year warranty I will actually buy it compared to the Phillips. BTW I've yet to have a cheap chinese led 110v bulb last more than 3 years.

We talked about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5329732 And the biggest problem with this bulb is the CRI of 80. That's much worse than CFL's which are typically around 90.

Is that really the typical CFL number? I ask because I've got one of the new Cree bulbs and I find the quality of light really a lot better than that of the (admittedly cheap) CFLs I've bought at Costco.

So I guess I'm struggling with the significance of CRI.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#124

Post by lutorm »

com2kid wrote: post #76

I am unimpressed by 60 watt equivalent bulbs. A 60 watt equivalent is about enough to be a desk lamp, if I need to provide light for even a small room it is a useless amount unless I get a large number of bulbs together. Unfortunately 60 watt equivalent has become some sort of benchmark for new light bulb technology. If you really want to replace lighting in some meaningful way, start quoting 100 watt equivalent numb…

Even if I want more light, one single high-output bulb is a bad way to do it. Spreading the light out over more sources gives a much more even, ambient-like illumination.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#125

Post by justin66 »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #108
drakaal wrote: post #87

This is Spam. There are a few dozen of these with better economics on Amazon. And if you want to light a house on the cheap, the LED "ropes" are more efficient, and will last longer. Also a CFT would be 12W and cost $2 ($1.25 if you look around). Over 10 years in most markets that would be cheaper. PS: My Home is almost 100% LED's. I love them. But that doesn't mean they are always the cheapest, the most efficient, o…

I dislike the consistent color across dimming. The whole point of dimming lights is to lower the color temperature. It is impossible to get a candle like ambiance with LEDs. If you want less total light, it is easy to just turn fewer lights on.

> I dislike the consistent color across dimming. The whole point of dimming lights is to lower the color temperature.

To each his own, but it's funny, I _love_ this about the LED lights. It has been a pet peeve of mine pretty much forever that I cannot get the low level of light I want out of dimmed incandescents because the light becomes unbearably orange when turned down that low.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#126

Post by lutorm »

scurvy wrote: post #49
othello wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually a common misconception: in the US (as in most OECD countries), households consume slightly more energy than the industry. As a case in point, in 2009, industry consumed 256 million tons of oil equivalent, versus 262 mtoe for the residential sector (ie households). http://www.iea.org/stats/balancetable.asp?COUNTRY_CODE=US

Most energy consumption in the US goes towards heating and cooling, not illumination. Making your house more energy efficient starts with your windows and doors, not your lightbulbs.

That depends -- the energy wasted by illumination needs to be cooled away (if you live in a climate where cooling is necessary, obviously), which not only uses energy but also increases the necessary size of the HVAC unit needed. This can be significant in places with a lot of lights so more applies to offices than residences.

OTOH, if you live in a climate where heating is necessary, and even more if you heat with electric heat, there's obviously little gain to be had by switching to LEDs.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#127

Post by Cyranix »

ars wrote: post #107
ck2 wrote: post #20

We talked about this a month or two ago here. The amazing part of this bulb is not it's watts or it's cost. It's that a manufacturer finally put it's warranty where it's mouth is. With a 10 year warranty I will actually buy it compared to the Phillips. BTW I've yet to have a cheap chinese led 110v bulb last more than 3 years.

We talked about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5329732 And the biggest problem with this bulb is the CRI of 80. That's much worse than CFL's which are typically around 90.

Is it correct to assume that CRI stands for color rendering index? New term to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#128

Post by lutorm »

giardini wrote: post #81
chaostheory wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me you're using CFLs as the very least. Yes the upfront price is higher, but these bulbs actually pay for themselves in approximately two years and they start saving you money after that and not to mention time from not having to buy and install new bulbs.

Problem is, the CFLs don't last. They usually don't last even a single year. My story: I got the faith: I replaced every incandescent in our condominium association with CFL. After one year, most all the CFLs had failed, despite having 3- to 5-year warranties. Also noticed another peculiarity: CFLs are stolen more often! Apparently our condominium parking lot has become a CFL bank for individuals who want to lower th…

It's probably a big difference in quality depending on what you get. Most of our CFLs have lasted so long we've physically broken more of them while moving to a new house than have given up in use.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#129

Post by thrownaway2424 »

justin66 wrote: post #123
ars wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We talked about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5329732 And the biggest problem with this bulb is the CRI of 80. That's much worse than CFL's which are typically around 90.

Is that really the typical CFL number? I ask because I've got one of the new Cree bulbs and I find the quality of light really a lot better than that of the (admittedly cheap) CFLs I've bought at Costco. So I guess I'm struggling with the significance of CRI.

Even the top-of-the-line CREE bulbs are only suitable for people who are color blind or habitually not paying attention. I once did an ill-considered change from halogen to LED bulbs in my kitchen, and having done so could no longer see the colors on my dishware. That was ridiculous. I went back to the halogens. My house is in a year-round heating climate anyway so I don't really worry about the waste heat from them.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#130

Post by thrownaway2424 »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #41
Steuard wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an expert (just a physics prof), but my understanding is that LEDs always emit one specific color (wavelength) of light rather than white light (which is a mixture of many wavelengths). So if you want to use an LED to produce white light, you set up a material that absorbs light at one wavelength and then re-emits it in a wide variety of wavelengths (that is, the phosphor). (This is also the way that fluoresc…

If it uses a phosphor coating, isn't it also prone to the same issue of diminishing lumens over time as the CFLs? These bulbs lose up to 30% luminosity in 6 months (the tri-phospor ones, more expensive, can a last a year begore losing 10%/20%). If they lose power like CFLs, even though the warranty is 10 years, you may be forced to replace it way before that.

Power LEDs also age, but CREE uses controllers in their fixtures which adjust the output over the lifetime of the device.
Post reply on HN