On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 08:30:42 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
Even that's too much. CFs are crap. After some of the
advertised "long life" ones blew, I started writing the install and
fail dates on the white plastic bases. On average, they last anywhere
from a tenth to a quarter of the advertised number of hours. As soon
as the last of the most recent four-pack fails, I'll send the lot back
under the guarantee. I'd spend the refund on incandescents, but
they'll probably just send another pack of the same ****.

"We're sorry you weren't satisfied with your original
cornholing. Please bend over and we'll do it again for free."

The unfortunate truth is, those life estimates (though factual for what they
are) are based upon installing a lamp in a test jig, and leaving it to burn
until it burns out. The machine has a light sensor and timer and records the
amount of time the lamp burns.

In the real world, however, we turn our lights on and off, and every time we
turn them on, the current inrush significantly decreases the life expectancy
of the lamp. If we simply left them on, they'd last pretty much as long as
claimed. Look at some of those old incandescents that have been used in
inaccessible places without switches, some of which have lasted for decades.


I have a few incandescents (swiched and in daily use0) which
last far longer than the POS CF bulbs.So it's disingenuous 9using my
kindest language) to blare "Outlsts conventionl bulbs 10 - 1" if there
are hidden conditions for that performance. And there's no savings if
I have to run a quarter of the energy four times longer than needed (I
really don't have a need to run my garage lights all day and night) in
order to come up with the specified life.