Looking For A Bright Low Energy Efficient Light Bulb.

[dance2trance]

What is the equivalent of the old 100 Watts?

[rojash]

"Looking For A Bright Low Energy Efficient Light Bulb."

Good luck with that, you might be better off searching for the Holy Grail or the Elixir of Life.

[whiskeryron]

http://www.lightbulbs-direct.com/?gclid=CKvYt9OAk7UCFe3KtAod-R8Apw

WR.

[SlackAlice]

Closest I've seen is 92 Watts. How do I know that, because I have been trawling the DIY stores for a similar bulb closest to 60 Watts. Closest I can get is 55Watts.

I shall subscribe to this thread in the event finds the 'Holy Grail' as rojash puts it.

[jake-the-peg]

20W is the equivilent of a 100W

Something like this

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Energy-Saving-Spiral-Equivalent-Light/dp/B004HC1LZ0

[jake-the-peg]

or in Halogen 70W is 100W tungsten equivilent - like this:

http://www.gbbulbs.co.uk/gls-halogen-energy-saver-70w-bc.html

- Holy Grails found to order

- Ark of the covenant takes a little longer

[Canary42]

I think it varies depending on bulb type.

Here's one where 23w claims 110w equivalent.

http://www.wickes.co.uk/invt/218974

[The Builder]

Yes, Holy Grails are more readily available, dance2.

Switch Lighting in the US have come up with an LED bulb equivalent to a 100w, but at 120v operating voltage, no use to us.

I don't think I've seen an LED much more than 9w here. Around 500 lumens of light strength. A normal 100w gives out around 1500-1700 lumens.

You would need a new light fitting with three 9w to give the same light.
Or, you could use a "light panel" approx 300mm x300mm (1' square) rated at 1800 lumens.

I don't think the low energy fluorescents get anywhere near that I'm afraid.

[rojash]

"20W is the equivilent of a 100W"

Sorry, JTP, I thought the OP wanted a lamp that was as bright as a 100W tungsten lamp. If they'd asked for a lamp that simply claimed to be as bright as a tungsten lamp, I could have found plenty. :-)

[The Builder]

I take that back after Canary's post. The Wickes' bulb must be worth a look.

[douglas9401]

When I saw a halogen bulb at about £1.60 it wasn't 'holy grail' that was uttered. :)

[beegeebee]

From what I heard/read on Bloomberg a couple of days ago, it would appear Philips (Dutch Company) have cracked the LED andswer to to low cost high power lighting for us ordinary mortals! The soothsayers were opining that Philips will make a fortune before every other manufacturer follow suit?

[Canary42]

Incidentally, the "long life" tag is a myth - I've lost count of the number of such bulbs I've blown in the last ten years (the "average" lifetime claimed for most), and the light output falls much much sooner.

[The Builder]

I was trying not to be too cynical, but as Roj has said........ many do "claim" to be as bright.
I still think LED is the way to go ... eventually.

[jake-the-peg]

Both of those I linked to are equivilent to 100W tungsten

the wattage depends on the technology type - that latter one is hardly Low energy but the former one is.

LED is harder to get closer to originals but I now use these which are as bright as my old ones

http://www.lyco.co.uk/megaman-4w-led-mr11-spotlight-non-dimmable.html

I use them because they are a lot cooler and so safer in my ceiling and are longer life because the old ones were forever overheating and failing

[Canary42]

Just to clarify, my comments refer to fluorescent.

Like Builder, I think development in LED technology does seem to be more promising.

[rojash]

My office is 25 square metres. It has pale cream walls and off-white floor tiles. I used to light it with 3 x 60W tungsten bulbs. It now has 5 x 20w (100w "equivalent" ) energy saving bulbs, and it's as dark as a cave.

[Hymie]

Last weekend I purchased a 40W low energy bulb (for £2.99) with a claimed equivalence of 200W. It has a spiralling tube rather than the conventional straight tube. I would estimate the light output to be nearer a 150W than a 200W bulb. But the light is very harsh (a white/blueish light), rather than a warm incandescent glow.

With a saving of just over 100W, it should pay for itself in less than 200 hours of use.

[heathfield]

I reckon a 120w equvalent CFL is needed to get anything like the light from an incandescent 100w bulb. I put it down to difference in the light spectrum from those CFLs. It's all very well the manufacturers giving us the light output as measured by some electronic lightmeter, but they simply don't look as bright to the human eye. Then there's the gradual dimming of a CFL over its lifetime. By the way, constant switching on and off of a CFL will seriously reduce its lifespan - something they don't mention on the pack. Googling for '120w CFL' reveals that plenty are available.

[ludwig]

I've only ever been able to find the ones that actually seem to make the room go darker when you switch them on.

[dance2trance]

Thanks to all. We are I think agreed that the energy efficient ones are useless, low light levels, and last only 2 years because they fade away. LED clearly better but the COST!!. Still the BBC News reported that Philips thought they had cracked it ie cheap and long lasting. In the meantime we consumers sit in the gloom and await. Cheers.