LED not that efficient.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

The only disadvantage I can think of is your led never burns out, so you keep using say 60lumen per volt amp lights even as 150+ lumen LEDs come available, because your old ones just won't die.

But they *do* put out reduced light. So another disadvantage might be sitting in the dark!

[oil pan 4]

I bought some cheap 100w replacement LEDs from lowes.
Only 50 lumen per volt-amp.
So far these are the worst.
I thought leds were supposed to be getting more efficient.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Sunday I brought out a cheap Harbor Freight dual flood light to work on the car. One of the halogen bulbs went out. What an annoying hassle. I'd pay more up front to not have to replace bulbs and save electricity.

I have some halogens using iodine some how, a "300w improved efficiency" tube only uses around 220w.

[Stubby79]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I bought some cheap 100w replacement LEDs from lowes.
Only 50 lumen per volt-amp.
So far these are the worst.
I thought leds were supposed to be getting more efficient.

People are going to buy them because they're cheap and because they're "better"...and assume that they will automatically be more efficient. (and, compared to an incandescent, even the cheap LEDs will be)

If you want more efficient, you might have to actually pay for it.

[samwichse]

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01MS...9eL&ref=plSrch

You don't really have to pay more. Just check the specs before you buy...
Amazonbasics 100w equivalent. 1400 lunens, 14 watts. Amazonbasics is their bargain brand.

[cowmeat]

Almost all the lights in my house are leds, I have been replacing the existing lights/fixtures as they burnt out. I only have a couple of halogens in the utility room and 3 zenon puck lights to replace. Even the lights in my shed are led now.

I've had the led can lights in my family room and kitchen for at least 8 years and haven't replaced one yet, and if they're putting out less light now it's not a noticeable difference.

[oil pan 4]

Yeah that's pretty close to what i have, a 100w replacement, that "uses" 16watt and 32Volt-amps.
Its not the LEDs fault the rest of the assembly is so inefficient, the LED it's self would run a 99+ power factor on low voltage AC power. The very cheap power supplies are cheap at the cost of efficiency.
It's the cheap power supply killing efficiency.

[samwichse]

Amazon does give power factors on their UK site.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasic..._1519662635464

0.5 for their 60w equivalent bulb. Yuck.

[oil pan 4]

My electronic ballasts for T5 tubes runs a 96% power factor.
The tubes are fairly efficient, but the power supply is very efficient.
Pretty sad that T5 has been doing 90 to 110 lumens per volt amp since the early 2000s, yet gets a bad wrap for being "inefficient".

[Stubby79]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Pretty sad that T5 has been doing 90 to 110 lumens per volt amp since the early 2000s, yet gets a bad wrap for being "inefficient".

It does? We still run T5s at work, and had them completely re-done just a couple of years back.

As a consumer, I like knowing I don't have to take any special precautions win an LED bulb. In fact, the ones i have are not only non-toxic, they're pretty indestructible. Perfect for my work/trouble light!