@@soundspark Hopefully BC will be doing a tear down shortly - I havent seem them yet myself, but it would appear that way. If so... these should be the *standard*, not the ultra.
£31 + £6 delivery for a 7.3W/100W ! That's a single bulb not a pack of 6! I will stick with my old Philips 13W/100W until they get cheaper and pay for an extra 5.7W of electricity.
The Philips A class lamp reminds me of the Philips "Dubai lamp". This A rated lamp, should not only be more efficient, but it should last orders of magnitude longer! Manufacturers have been driving the little LEDs inside the lamps too hard! They were essentially made to fail. Squeezing more light out of the same LEDs also generates more unwanted heat, rather than light. Luckily Big Clive showed us how to hack the cheaper LED bulbs, to last much longer and consume less energy(by reducing the current through those little LEDs). I personally think this new energy rating system is brilliant for the customer.
@@efixx I've been experimenting with running cheaper LED filament style lamps at lower power. It gives you less light output, BUT more lumens per watt! They should also last much longer. I simply put a 330nF capacitor in series with the lamp. This does make the power factor slightly worse. But luckily we don't pay for power factor in residential environments. ruclips.net/video/JH68wBXO5j0/видео.html
The problem with ( everlasting ) lamps is , once sold the company ( eventually ? ) goes out of business .. The whole world relies on a [ PONSEY SYSTEM ] Look it up ! .. pyramid selling , known in the UK , BTW .... this applies to the theory of TOO many BABIES , resulting in World Overpopulation ! ... you heard it hear first ....... DAVE™ ...........
noting that the wasted energy coming out at heat is only "wasted" when you don't have the heating on anyway, so is basically not wasted for much of the year.
Yes I wondered if Phillips was finally going to allow the rest of the world to purchase the magic bulb shown years ago by big Clive. Finally we can. :)
In the last 10 years, I have seen a lot of LED bulbs fail long before their claimed lifetime hours. Without knowing how long a light will really last, it is impossible to calculate which lamp is more economical.
In my experience, it's not unusual for LED units to fail after about 2 years, and some types of small incandescent bulb will regularly die after about half a year. The situation is ridiculous.
Perhaps Phillips is different, but my general experience with LED bulbs is they don't even last as long as incandescent, and you never even come close to recouping the cost difference in energy savings. What a scam. The one place they make sense, is overhead flood lights. Incandescent bulbs have a nasty habit of the glass just dropping out, or breaking when you try to unscrew it to replace it. That's a tremendous pain for an overhead flood and can be dangerous too. ...better to pay the extra cost just to prevent that.
@@eventhisidistaken its possible also worth note is im from the uk and we run 240v ac system at 50 hz which maybe changes some stuff as mentioned by others perhaps try writing the dates on the bases perhaps they are lasting longer and you just dont notice i know i thought replacing bulbs was expensive till i realised i wasnt replacing leds every few months but actually replacing my energy saver cfl bulbs with led every few months till sudenly it stopped when i had no cfls left to replace however it does now occour to me your using phillips bulbs and i assume its the hue smart bulbs so i imagine there always "on" even if there not outputting light so the transformers capacitors and even the wireless circuitry is still energized even if your not using them im mainly using dumb led bulbswhich get fully powered off by the light switch when not in use
2 года назад+27
As far as I'm aware, A60 is just the shape of the bulb. In this case it means that the bulb is 60mm in diameter at its widest point. I can see that it could be confusing, with the 60W bulb being one of the common ones back in the day :) On a different note, it was about time they fixed the system to account for a much more efficient baseline. When I'm looking at products ranging from A to A+++, I'm going to assume that any choice is fine and the top ones are overkill.
A60 is the metric equivalent of an A19 bulb. You are correct in that it is a measurement of the bulb's maximum diameter, in this case 60mm. The 'A' denotes the bulb shape (the A-series), which happens to be the classic old-fashioned shape we all think of as a bulb =💡. A60 therefore is a classic shaped bulb, 60mm wide. It has nothing to do with the wattage or wattage equivalent.
It's good to see the improvement in efficiency. But now when we are getting closer to the theoretical maximum, I hope that the focus will also shift towards the quality of the light - wider spectrum and better color rendering (which is currently represented by CRI - Color Rendering Index). Wider spectrum for visible colors is important for eye comfort and also for the color perception. The sensitivity on the frequencies of visible light varies among population, so if you use very narrow bands for red-green-blue, it will always make the color rendering unnatural for some part of the population. And by concentrating the light energy into narrower bands the phototoxicity for the retinal tissue also increases.
BTW, >95cri lamps often have significantly lower lm/w due to using violet LEDs and blue hues being created by luminophore. It degrades efficiency due to blue light also being made via conversion and violet LEDs being less efficient, but AFAIK luminophores have much wider band and that allows for near 100cri. Also "warmer" bulbs (lower K value) usually have lower lm/w Kinda sad that has to be a tradeoff
Good comment . CRI is not perfect though. It is defined over R1 to r8 usually (Ra value). There is also Re which is Ra extended which covers R1 up to R15. R represents deep red for example . A high CRI lamp often does not even extend to R9 unfortunately. There is no better light than sunlight. The future is sunlight concent... High CRI lamps are crazy expensivee because they are used for high paying niche areas like medicine and cinematography and improving sales of products. Deep red is important for increasing sales of strawberries for example.
@@thepurdychannel8866 but the colour temperature is too low of those, like 2000 K . The sun's surface temperature is 5778 K, and daylight may be even higher depending on the atmosphere.
I think the trouble with the Philips is the unit price when compared to the other lamps. So whilst it maybe the cheapest to run at many times the purchase cost of the others any savings in running costs are pretty well wiped out. Making the cheaper more costly ones still a better choice in domestic. In a commercial environment where you may well need the switching cycles. And factoring in maintenance costs to get someone to change the lamps it may stack up.
With the lamp the extra cost in manufacturing is very small to use more LED modules and better quality parts. The biggest markups in the value chain from the assembler of the lamp to the outlet selling them are the last 2 steps, the retailer and the wholesaler. The production and shipping often are less than a third of the price, the rest is your local markups on the units, and your local taxes and duties. By me that is around 30% of the price, while the price at shipping point where they are made is very much lower than the retail price. The Dubai lamps cost perhaps a third more to make, as you get better volume discounts, and spend a little more for top tier parts, rather than the cheapest ones on market that morning. Might be an extra cent or two per unit in the volumes they are made.
My wife would want a new design light fitting long before the savings become a reality, so get the cheapest,it will be binned long before its life time, in my house, mileage may vary.
I agree, at £9.33 + VAT (£11.20), for the 3000K version, it's questionable whether it would pay for itself in energy savings. Until fairly recently, we still had regular incandescent candle lamps in a light fitting that took 6 bulbs. So, any LED bulb is a saving... with the LED Crompton bulbs we have now, that's 5W×6=30W per fitting, instead of 60W×6=360W per fitting. Also, another key factor is whether you need to replace you dimmers when switching to LED lamps.
Then, as others have mentioned, you need to factor the angle on GU10 replacements, I always look for 120° or more and prefer warm white, either 3000K, or better still, 2700K.
You answered the question before I asked it... the "Dubai lamp" as seen on BigClive. I think efficiency could be increased further though, I doubt the LEDs in the strands would be as efficient as multichip ones, as the phosphor application on those is thinner and better defined
Linear COBs (chip on board) are more efficient than multi-chip SMDs (surface mounted LEDs). This is because COBs allow less spacing between LEDs, thus less packaging, they can be placed closer together, reducing resistance and reducing power usage, and also result in higher light output. If you mean MCOBs then those are the same tech as COBs but just multiple COBs... DIP LEDs are the first tech of LED and those are even worse... so not sure what you're talking about here... If you doubt this you can just search online for "Differences Between LED Technologies: DIP vs. SMD vs. COB vs. MCOB" there's plenty of results to show that COBs are the most efficient tech currently.
@@PM-wt3ye Whilst you guys are arguing about SMD (Surface Mount Diode) versus COB (Chip on board). I should tell you both that the filament LED lamps above use COG (Chip on Glass) technology. Comparisons between SMD and COB are a bit moot really as they have different uses and advantages - it's a bit like asking "Which is better - a Car or a Truck?" It depends if you are moving people or cargo. To be honest, I think that mounting the chips on a transparent substrate is key to the high efficiencies. LED's lose some light because it is emitted down into the substrate, making the substrate transparent allows some of that light to escape (=useful). Reducing the power per chip will increase the efficiency further, but there is a tradeoff as the bulb becomes more complex. P.S. the biggest problem with DIP is the relatively poor thermal management of the larger plastic package. Whilst the LED generates some heat, the junction temperature must be kept below about 120 degrees C. DIP packages were not capable of sinking more than about 50mW of thermal power (aka heat). Whilst some novel designs were tried, the advantage of SMD packages was the ability to mount the devices closer to the circuit board for more efficient transfer of heat. COB improved this further by placing the chips directly on the board. Filament LED's work differently, by using much lower currents to drive the LEDs, they improve efficiency and this means less heat is produced. Thus no heat sink is required.
My Mum was a radar mechanic in WW2. After the war she got a job at Phillips light bulb development department in north London. She was mortified to realise that the problem was bulbs were lasting far to long. The development was to make a bulb that didn't blow to soon but would last for a set amount of time. Then they would sell more bulbs.
There was actually a cartel of bulb manufacturers that conspired to make bulbs not last as long as they could for many decades. While at the time people didn't believe the stories about it, history has shown that it actually happened and was well documented and proven. I'd expect manufacturers are still trying to pull similar tricks, hence Dubai requiring an explicit specification for their bulbs to try and stop it.
I sometimes hear that they didn't have this problem in the Soviet Union, it's said that refigirators from this period are of legendary good quality, they never break down. It's really a tough call, both seem to have downsides. But I guess, capitalism has the favor still, governments need to ensure free markets and competition. Don't give privileges to big companys, because thats what undermining capitalism and fair competition. Both the Soviet Union and our free western capitalist system share the same problem : Human corruption. I wonder if we ever get that in order, what if....
@@edwinbruckner4752 love your comment. I hope you like to discuss? _"governments need to ensure free markets and competition"_ .. problem is parliamentary / representative democracy elects (selfish) individuals into positions of power, with some having nothing better to do than to create or maintain rules (which govern the economic system) to benefit themselves or friends / relatives at the cost of the rest (disabling competition / destroying free markets (1)). Diving further into this problem we find that selfishness is natural for individual living beings, which tells us right away that there is a conflict of interest here. To solve those CoI's people recuse themselves from the process, but politics affects anyone, so anyone being in that position would need to recuse himself. But we need politics to create and enforce rules to create societies in the first place so that opportunists can be punished for asocial behavior.. catch-22. _"Don't give privileges to big companys, because thats what undermining capitalism and fair competition."_ Why just big companies? By protecting small companies you create big companies. And who decides the levels there? Those selfish individuals again? Wouldn't individuals be incentivized to move heaven and earth to skirt / break company size rules to benefit from (at the cost of the rest)? Your assumption seems to be that there is a benevolent entity there that punishes selfish / asocial behavior by opportunists (or groups thereof). But all there is is us selfish individuals to run the show and man those institutions.. conflicts of interests galore. The free market at its core is a transparent, cooperative and competitive process that works by creating a level playing field (all enjoy the same rights and plights) while no one is being treated preferentially (2). So there is no one there that holds a position that is higher than anyone else. By electing representatives we deviate from this principle. We privilege some of us to decide over the rules that govern us, creating -big companies- aeh.. powerful individuals who by their nature will abuse the system for their own benefit (not all and to the same degree, but over time the system will be eroded away, bit by bit). _"[all societal] system share the same problem : Human corruption. I wonder if we ever get that in order, what if"_ 👍👌💯 You're asking the right questions. So that's a start. Without being able to describe the problem we can't work it. Per my analysis corruption is natural and bound to 'survival of the fittest individual by any means available'. In wilderness this works perfectly fine. Societies are a step up of wilderness by enforcing 'private property' and 'personal freedom' so that work sharing / specialization is more effective than wilderness's generalists, so overall comfort raises much much higher. But for those rules to be guaranteed it needs a benevolent monopoly force that violently punishes individual rule breakers while this BMF is being manned by the same type of individual.. this is the core problem and we won't be able to solve it by trying to remove 'corrupt' humans from the gene-pool IMHO, so it's societies and how the BMF works WITH selfish individuals being part of the mix that we need to address. Our political system requiring selfless individuals to function is the problem. The Greeks came up with democracy - a transparent, cooperative and competitive framework to get to rules that govern a people. We call this pure or direct democracy these days.. might be worth looking into as there everybody got a seat a the table when it got to deciding on the rules of the polis - no one was special (but as systems aren't changed top-down it won't help to solve the problem practically, this needs a different take IMHO - maybe we get to this later if you want to discuss). PS: How do you like this label for our real existing societal systems? Monopolism - a societal ideology in which the rule enforcing framework benefits a few at the cost of the rest. 1) the 'free' in 'free market' stands for supply and demand being free to adjust to each other (competition), not for markets free from rules. Markets per definition are the result of rules being enforced and this requires a benevolent monopoly force so that might doesn't make right and specialization is a valid (and superior) survival strategy for the individual. It's obvious that by influencing the rules of the market the even more superior survival strategy is to occupy those positions in society, but that turns the markets into an unfree one, one where supply and demand are not free to adjust to each other anymore.. by enforcing anti competitive rules that protect a few privileged companies. 2) That's only half the truth however as some privileging rules that are being enforced also can originate unintentionally, ala the road to hell is paved with good intentions. But ascribing the malice to individual selfishness for understanding the mechanic is less complex than consider 'accidents' right away (and there are some, one I know is at the core of our societies and causes a lot of problems).
@@edwinbruckner4752 my parents had a fridge(very very small compared to nowadays) and passed down to me, lt never broke down. Eventually I had to get rid of it as because of its size. It was a silent fridge, didn't have a motor! They won't make those anymore.
Without knowing the price difference of the bulbs I would still not know which bulb to choose. One important factor not mentioned that could influence my decision, is how many hours per week it is likely to be used. Yes the Phillips may be more efficient, but if the cheap bulb is only going to be used 10 hours per week then even 1Kw of energy is going to take almost 6 months to recoup. So if the price difference was 3 or 4 pounds and 1kw of energy costs 60p that means it's going to take 2 and a half to 3 years to recoup your initial purchase price. Not sure why you chose not to include the purchase price of these items which would have allowed for a much more in depth assessment of each products true value.
The best thing about this video is the kitchen wired in MICC, I only have a couple sites left (churches) with it in, hardly anyone wants it new and it's rare to need to replace it but it looks so good. Great video, will be sending customers to watch it.
Very pleased to see the Dubai lamp over here, the only problem for me is that the GU10 versions all seem to have a 36 degree angle which I hate - I hope they bring out a 120 degree version of this. Also the colour temperature, I'd rather have 5000K for daylight white.
Is it actually the same Dubai lamp? Or a half way house. The 60W phillips above is 4W and appears to have 8 'filaments' ? The dubai lamp with 8 'filaments' is rated at 2W. So although they have improved it over the others, I could be wrong but it doesn't appear to be a full blown Dubai type?
@@gromett Oh very interesting question, I've had a look back at Big Clive's video and he states that each filament is typically rated for 1W. In this new mster range they appear to be running them at 0.5W and are getting 210lm/W from them. In the Dubai lamps in Clive's video the 2W lamp (Shown as "40W equivalent") produces 400lm and also has 8 filaments which is in the same ballpark as this new version in terms of efficiency, but is only running each filament at 0.25W. Their "60W equivalent" lamp has 12 filaments, consumes 3W and produces 600lm. It's very interesting that they are running each filament twice as hard, but achieving the same efficiency which suggests that the filaments are not exactly the same - It's possible that they have twice as many individual LED chips within them. The efficiency suggests that they are being underrun at the same level and therefore will also benefit from the same improvement in lifespan. It's possible that they have not gone to the same expense in the driver for these, but it is often the LED chips themselves which fail first.
@@gromett I think they adapted it for a broader market. The Dubai lamps were created to specifications set out by the Dubai government, but I think for most people, they would not generate enough light. But even with the higher power and shorter lifespan, these Philips lamps are still incredible when it comes to powerconsumption and lifetime.
The Dubai lamp 60W equivalent is actually a 3W lamp - this new “ultra efficient” range still seems to be saving some costs somewhere. It’s certainly inspired by it having a relative overkill of leds inside though.
@Steve D if you ignore lifetime of the Lamp yes.. the Dubai Lamps are massively under-driven to extend this as long as possible. Probably irrelevant for most, but this was also a requirement for designing the Dubai Lamps and shouldnt be ignored in a direct comparision.
I’ve still got CFL 11W bulbs running that were procured way back in 1996. They were considered “energy saving” back then at 60lm/W. But now I’m reckoning they are gas guzzlers. Great to see energy saving standards getting stronger.
Yes same, got Phillips 22W tornado lamps still around, and they are lasting well, even on as night lights outdoors, there they do around 4 years before failing, which is better than a lot of the LED versions are achieving.
@@SeanBZA i mean the problem with LEDs is the same we had with CFLs at the end of their era: chinese manufacturers making absolute garbage. we got one of those CFLs back in 96 or 97 too, but it was ridiculously expensive, around $25 back then. and it lasted well over 10 years (i actually replaced it because it was dim, not because it failed). the Philips HUE I bought for almost $50 6 years ago are still running strong - the $2 LEDs don't last more than 2 years... you get what you pay for.
@@83hjf Thing is when I bought the tornado by the box they were actually around the cheapest 20W plus CFL around, and I used a lot of them as well. I started using CFL units when they were expensive, and you had a plug in ballast and a separate lamp, so when the lamp went EOL you just replaced it. Still got a few of those around as well, though slowly running out of the PL lamps they use, so eventually they will either get the LED retrofits for PL lamps or will go with LED conversions.
@@SeanBZA the last "tornados" i bought were made by Panasonic and they're still working. they were slightly more expensive than no-name chinese ones. but they didn't sell them at the supermarket...
@@83hjf Yes Panasonic made great lamps, but the Phillips ones were the best, all the innovative technologies that they brought out in basically inventing the CFL lamp. Nicest were the A60 replacement lamps, with the glass inner arc tube that constrained the arc, but still had part in the outer envelope, so they ran cool, but had a great life, though slow to run up to full brightness. They still have some plants making specialist lamps in the EU.
You have not mentioned the power factor or the efficiency of the light. I would ask you to add Enegizer bulbs as well. Also the lamp fitting contributes to the lifespan of the bulb. For example when a LED light is enclosed within the shade it shortens the lifespan. As it runs hotter.
@@gregorymalchuk272 The requirements for PFC increase in line with power consumption on a sliding scale. From memory, once over 25 watts you need full PFC below this. This could have changed it's a while since I designed power supplies. I'll refresh my knowledge and report back.
Often the most efficient lamps don’t produce the best white, as the better performing phosphors let through more of the source blue and have narrower bandwidth. In most rooms I’d rather have CRI of 95+ in the kitchen/dinning room this is critical.
Considering its purchase cost compaired to the far cheaper but higher wattage options, it using the Philips product only makes sense where you expect to use the bulb a lot. So in an office environment they make total sense, but in a home environment there maybe many rooms where the bulb is just not worth installing.
I agree if the philips are £20 and the lesser are £5 what are the philips saving you in a domestic setting, i would get 4× £5 bulbs job done and the cost won't be £80.👍😎🇬🇧
Interesting! It would be useful for reference to include the specs for old-fashioned incandescent bulbs and fluorescent bulbs of similar light output to those you included in your comparison
Efficiency is generally looked at in terns of the energy consumption / running costs and rightly so, but it also impacts the frequency of replacement. A key point with LED lamps is that higher efficiency for a given light output also results in a lamp that runs cooler, and with electronics a lower heat output and lower operating temperature will significantly increase the life of the lamp. One reason that many lamps fail to reach their projected life is that they are often operating without adequate airflow for cooling, and greater efficiency can only help here.
Yes, especially when you know just how hard it is to install that cable and get all those bends exactly even, and all the runs exactly straight. Pyrotenax is not exactly a cable that is easy to work with.
Spot on 👍 During the pandemic Mrs W was working under a 12W LED Lamp. Few weeks later, she decides its not quite bright enough. I fit a 18W LED Lamp. Yet its power consumption is significantly less. Worked out the energy saving would pay for the lamp in 8 months while she was working at home. Bonkers. 12W Lamp was just over a year old. Technology constantly improving.
… 18W is not less than 12W. I mean, maybe it’s more efficient so it’s putting out *more* than 1.5 times as much light, but 18W is still more watts than 12.
Great that you explained the importance of Switching Cycles. AC bulbs are susceptible to line voltage spikes and every On cycle is like a spike working to damage the driver input caps.
That explains it! i purchased some 4.2 watt 40 watt equivalent bulbs from Tesco, their efficiency rating is E. In the past they would have been A or B. They've stopped comparing the efficiency of LED bulbs to the old incandecent bulbs. So it's another example of moving the goalposts. Well at 4.2 watts for 40 watt output that is an A+ rating as far as I'm concerned. Also it's not the led's that fail, it's the components in the base, mainly capacitors that fail long before the LED's.
You kinda do have to move the goal posts though in this case,the system labelled basically everything as A+ just for being not as bad as an incandescent bulb... makes no sense because that's such a low bar now those things are practically outlawed at this point, it was basically impossible to make a light bulb that didn't get an A or a B lol
Now it does make sense to have an efficient bulb where it is switched on for a long time. With that being said I still own a 100W bulb in the food storage closet, but thats on for only a minute at most at a time. Driving fewer LEDs harder is not only bad for the efficienty, but also for longevity. Tough I do have to say usually I tend to see the LED driver die, not the LED itself.
Usually input capacitor failure, leaks onto the pcb blows little fuse/resister. The actual led still works on low voltage dc. To measure real power consumption, run them on dc as power factor upsets ac power.
‘These lamps are dead efficient so we will just leave them all on all the time’. And so overall including the materials and manufacturing the phasing out of incandescent filaments has resulted in more energy used and not less. There are academic studies out there about the irony of unintended consequences.
yes, in Buenos Aires, electricity subsidies were so high that people basically got flat rate electricity. what happened? they just left AC on all day during the summer when they went to work so the house would be cool when they came back.
Nonsense, electricity production (I.e consumption) has been falling since 2005, it’s gone down by about 15-20%. Some of that is down to changing weather but most of it is from efficiency improvements and a lot of that is from lighting. I find it hard to imagine the environmental impact of manufacturing and shipping all those tungsten lamps about wasn’t more significant than an led lamp that lasts a decade. Think of how many electricians vans have driven to replace burnt out lamp holders - MR16 and GU10 nightmares. The only reason we’ve escaped rolling blackouts from our incompetent governments of the last 10 years is because consumption has been trending down - EVs might change that!
Indeed. From a global heating perspective, it's consumption that counts, not efficiency. If efficiency improvements lead to lower energy demand that's great, but efficiency is a means to an end, not the goal in itself.
If you're paying £6 for an a rated bulb on the new system,it has to work at high efficiency for a lot of hours compared to a £2 bulb which is less efficient. Most people will buy the cheaper bulb.Especially in the current situation.
The 'current environment' just makes the pay back period shorter. I don't disagree that many will as you suggest, but that doesn't make it any less short sighted.
Yes but that A lamp has no diffusing so the light is going to cast harsh shadows. Our local fancy supermarket installed similar lamps and the customers looked positively cadaverous. They soon switched them out for some much more pleasing lamps.
Great point. The manufacturers might still opportunistically be hoping that people will mistake it for an incandescent-power-equivalent rating, though. ;)
This change baffled me recently. I have a lot of downights at home, all powered by the same Philips GU10 bulb. I needed a restock so I took out the box to identify the same bulb and it was an A rated bulb, but when searching online it was being reported as a D rated bulb. I spent 30 minutes or so researching various retailers thinking I may find an A rated bulb before realising what had happened.
Bulbs or lamps as my neighbour keeps correcting me is an absolute minefield these days. It used to be fairly simple with the most complications being the type of cap and style of bulb. However you can't guarantee the brightness, colour temp or really how long they will last. And don't get me started on dimmers! However from a power perspective just focus on the ones which are likely to be one for hours each day as those will see the most savings. Also Dunelm have been clearing out their older energy labelled led bulbs so grabbed a few bargains.
As a non electrician may I respectfully suggest that ordinary people like me only rarely look at the packaging. In addition, as I am beginning the process of building a "passive" house right now I wondered if the heat output of the light should be deducted from the total kwH per square metre of revealed floor area to maintain a temperature of 21 C? So the light efficiency is only one measure. I think that the old tungsten filament lights could be relabelled as mini heaters, forget the light output. Also I am wondering whether to put in low voltage DC circuits in the house instead of/ as well as normal mains, given that all my power will come from solar (probably using DC battery system), although I am then left with the puzzle as to what DC voltage to use, 12v, 5v, to avoid converting voltages. There doesn't appear to be a lot of information on low voltage DC circuits. Furthermore as these most lamps seem to assume AC supply the rectification process must consume power, as well as the environmental costs of the circuitry. Making a sensible decision is very difficult, and likely outdated quickly.!
The heat output of *all* devices inside any house contributes to the heating of said house. Anyone claiming otherwise has found a way to break the laws of thermodynamics. If you can do that you can make a perpetual motion machine and there would be no energy crisis.
One of the big DC wiring systems is good-old CAT-5 wiring using the equivalent of power over Ethernet, but without negotiating voltage and current. I'm not sure what the state of your electricity standards are, but it's well accepted in US standards. It uses a lot less copper for wiring, but has more wires back to the power supply. One of the big advantages in the US is that the lighting load is fixed, so a 60W load doesn't need to be assumed for a luminere. It's bigger in commercial lighting than residential.
It's very simple..... buy cheap buy twice!!! But obviously for those who fall within the bracket of being able to afford the best quality lights. Great video again lads👍👌
This issue goes beyond lamps/bulbs. Every other electrical item in our lives has an electrical rating for performance especially those items we use most often compared to infrequently eg TV,Stoves, washing machines to hair clippers, batthery (or phone) chargers etc. Those items like fridges, tv's, and kettles all demand power and are either in constant use or near constant use. So presumably their efficiency has changed too if lamps/bulbs have. It would be interesting to see what these items are really costing us compared to what manufacturers claim they would/will.
I think we need more testing and scrutiny of other basic brands of these new led bulbs, I got loads from home bargains/quality save they are good light wouldn't know what their rating are would be great to see a video to compare the high street bulbs and recommend the best out of the basics
Ya my work shop i rebuikt the t12s that were in it. New ballasts bulbs etc.. I did buy led 8 ft fixtires but i dont like them they interfear with radio and i noticed in general inferfears with radio. Led is also too sensisitive to powergrid ripples. Lights in my house flicker fast slightly every few minutes with led and i hate it
Guys, you missed the opportunity here to compare through life costs, not just cost per hour. If the Philips lights use half the electricity and last twice as long but cost five times more, which then is the best? Also, how do we differentiate between 'old' and 'new' efficiency ratings on the packaging? Is there a risk that old standard A-rated/new standard F-rated old stock still be passed-off as A-rated against the new scale by the unscrupulous or unaware?
I believe I have just about every type of bulb ever made and they are all still functioning. Many are still the old incandescent type, although in limited use for short spans. Years ago I said it myself, I would replace them with something better as they failed. The flip side is I am so aware of turning off lights as I leave a room that everything lasts for decades. Would you believe I have some outdoor floodlights (on motion sensor) that are over 25 years old and counting? The spares I bought back then are so old that the packaging touts "Watt Miser" because a 65 watt version was supposed to replace the old standard 100 watt reflector flood. I cleaned out my folk's house years ago and I still have at least 2 dozen other lamps.... and at 69 years old I doubt I will use them all before I die!
Can you explain to me why the ultra efficient bulbs are only available in screw and not bayonet fittings? Also are there any bulbs particularly appropriate for the bathroom?
Thank you for this. A case of "you get what you pay for". On the matter of electricity costs, the cynic in me wonders if the recent price hikes in supply costs is, in part, due to the number of households switching over to more energy efficient products? Thoughts anyone?
Very enlightening video. 🤭 Since you are using Phillips as a reference, it would be interesting to see how their Hue lamps compare. Obviously they won't be as efficient due to the constant current drain of the internal circuitry but it would be interesting to find out the energy rating when turned on. 😁
As someone that is sensitive to flicker on lights they failed to tell me a couple things i need to know. 1.Is this bulb rectified or are they just running the into the LED's directly. 2.Is the a smoothing capacitor and is it large enough to stop the LED's from dropping bellow there operating voltage. Some bulbs are made very cheaply and I have seen LED's Bulbs that have no smoothing and where not rectified. The result is a flicker that gives me headaches and makes me a little sick if I am around the Bulbs made in this way. Note how easy the flicker can be seen will depend on the person and on where you are in the world as how many Hz the power grid in your country runs at.
Related to cost of electricity: In Serbia max rate you have is 20c per kWh (for use over 1600 kWh per month), normal daytime rate is 10c per kWh. At night, it goes down to 3-6c per kWh. Storage heaters are very common here.
In December we used 864kWh of electricity and 1406kWh of gas (detached house, four occupants). If we had to use electricity instead of gas we might exceed 1600kWh/month. Including the standing charge (fixed amount per day) our electricity works out at about €0.42 per kWh. That's after applying the UK Government's price capping and VAT, but not taking into account the Energy Bills Support Scheme discount of £67 per month per household.
Would be interesting to see the Power Factor of those lamps compared as that will have an impact with modern "Smart" meters set to read apparent power.
I think the EU has high power factor mandates for light bulbs, and possibly has since the compact fluorescent days. Commercial costumers ordering in bulk from lighting supply warehouses always had access to high power factor bulbs due to power factor pricing for commercial customers.
I thought the new ratings came into effect in 2021? Driving up efficiency by redefining the scale is a good thing imo - the lifetime needs to match it however - I’ve had branded bulbs go after less than a year of use 😮
With LEDs, lifetime usually goes up along with the efficiency. This is because the new A rated LEDs are driven with less current which boosts both efficiency and reduces heat, which leads to a longer lifetime. It used to be the other way round with incandescent lamps, where you could either have an efficient lamp or one that lasts a long time.
@@andreasu.3546 indeed this is a given for the technology but the ones that I have had fail have a supposed life of 25000h and a 3 year warranty, which to be fair the supplier honoured and replaced - but the same happened again in a similar manner so I gave up - I guess that's what manufacturers want you to do - at the end of the day if you need a new bulb you need one, most won't bother with the faff of getting a replacement under warranty and hence they can get away with dubious claims without much fallout - CFLs were the same - I was bitten a few times splashing out on more expensive ones with longer life claims and then finding they either failed or lost significant output over time :/
The problem is that LED's are not far from theoretical maximum efficiency, and any future gains are going to be minimal. For reference, a 100W tungsten filament bulb can be replaced with a ~12W LED today. At theoretical maximum efficiency that would be around 8W, which is a tiny ~4W gain over the ~88W gain of current LEDs compared to a tungsten filament bulb. We are also not considering the inefficiency all ends up as heat and well, lights tend to be on when it's dark, which here in the UK is generally in winter when we have the heating on anyway. This further reduces the inefficiency of a light bulb of any description.
What about the investment cost? In my experience, the Phillips ones are extortionate in comparison to the budget ones and never seen premature failure. Total life cost needs to be considered. Regarding switching cycles, rotate your bulbs to even out the wear
Tried the 4W=60W Philips lamps, but the colour seemed a bit greeny yellowy… for the best colour you might not want to go for the absolutely most efficient lamp! But perfect for the outside light!
See if you only had saved all the quality Street wrapping off the strawberry cremes you could have added them as red gel and tuned the light to perfection.....
@@lezbriddon Sadly, for you, Quality Street has now replaced its foil and coloured cellophane wrapping with coloured, waxed, recyclable paper wrappings this year.
@@tikaanipippin this had better be an ugly rumour lol what will the proper of the blue Peter generation do, I cried for weeks when metal clothes hangers all turned to plastic
@@lezbriddon It was on Radio 4 today, but it might have been BBC fake information. There's a lot of it about. I always thought cellophane was compostable anyway, since it is a cellulose derivative, and wettable. I am sorry you mentioned clothes hangers, since I have a phobia towards them, equivalent to unexpectedly touching something cold and slimy.
Nice video, What you did not say is how much the bulb cost in the first place, this should always be a factor in any calculation . Also I am finding in the properties I look after that LED lamps are not lasting any where near as long as the duration times shown on the product packaging .
@@efixx Some are some are not . I am keeping a record . LED replacements for 4 pin square GU 24's are the worst offenders , Typically lasting just over a year which is around half the duration given on the box.
For LEDs I don't really care much about the energy efficiency anymore - it's like comparing two quite similar apples and deciding that green is better than red, but it won't really matter anymore for your wallet or energy draw. What matters to me is more the lifetime of the lamp. If you have to change it every year then it's wasting a lot of energy being manufactured and transported.
an argentinian youtuber tested lamps and proved a lot of the "10W lamps" use only 6W. he got a LOT of hate comment from chinese lover latin americans saying "WELL, IT'S EVEN BETTER BECAUSE IT USES LESS POWER THAN ADVERTISED!" ...even simple things are difficult to understand for most people.
Buy your lamps and bulbs from a reputable store, I wouldn’t buy anything like this from Amazon. However if it’s not a safety issue like say 2” screws go ahead and use em. Amazon =buy be aware, very aware.
Never had a light bulb which lasted up to advertised work hours. Neither Philips nor Osram nor any other brand. There are no serial numbers on bulbs so very hard to claim a replacement if it fails. To conserve energy we need to focus bigger appliances. I’ve replaced my 10 years old Philips LED TV with a new gen LG. There is a huge difference on Power Consumption, the new TV will pay itself just in 5 years with reduced electricity bills. Similar thing is also valid for refrigerators. I’m outside of UK but that doesn’t prevent me to admire your craftsmanship. Keep up the good work guys.
i think its really confusing long term if they re-adjust the labels every few years especially because you cannot easily compare your current stuff with the stuff you buy new... would probably be better with the next re-adjustment to turn around the System (A is worst, and it improves as you go along the Alphabet), and add Letters with specifics of what is required at the end as you get better and better efficiencies, and maybe also add other criteria like eg longevity. And when the current Scale finally goes from U to Z then start over with a new Scale starting with A again (where the new A is equal to the old U)
Sadly it's marketing, grade A is always perceived as the best. I'd like the system to have the currently available best as a grade C maximum. This would encourage further improvements and reflect the inevitable better technology over the next few years.
I don't think most people are going to run out and replace perfectly working bulbs anyway, or trash the spares they might already have, if they're all LED already the difference in energy cost shouldn't be worth the deliberate waste.
Unless I missed it, you dont factor in the price of BUYING the bulbs into the total cost of running them. So it would be harder to work out the total cost of ownership. I get its a paid promotion, so you want to help steer the video towards the Philips looking great. But if the Philips is £20-30, compared to the "Basic" one costing £4-5, your looking at many years to reach a price parity on the over all cost. Would be great if you could re-visit and factor in those numbers as well.
At the time of filming the Philips lamp wasn’t available to buy. Comparing “filament” style lamps on a well known platform I worked out that you’d recap the price difference in 2.5 years based on 1000hr usage. I’ll look to add a TCO in the description
I remember the days of using 100w bulbs to get decent light in a room. Now my entire house uses 300w in total if I’m not doing much, and about 150w if I turn off all the random things I leave on. Mind you, I also remember space heaters advertising they could be left on all day and only use 7p of electricity.
@@EwanV of course, in the days of incandescence, a house full of 60 to 100 watt bulbs could easily be pulling 2,000 watts all together, as much as having two space heaters running all the time, that with the 10.000 to 20, 000 or so BTUs of body heat from each person in the house, made heating the house much less of an issue. Not to mention the much less efficient appliances that were used at the time.
I am now close to 77, have lived in this home for 30 years. I still have about half the tungsten lights I installed for pennies back then, probably 1,000 hours rated, over 30 years they have not reached EOL, suggesting extremely low usage and less potential saving. A few other lights have been changed, with the most heavily trafficked areas now on LEDs, put in about 8 years ago. At that time, I adopted the plan of replacing failures with good, currently available higher efficiency stock. There was no point in ripping out working items with relatively low hours, as any efficiency savings would likely take a long time to accrue. I have no idea what time I have left, the only attraction of ripping and replacing, is the thought that the expenditure might reduce any IHT bill. However, it might also make the house value increase, which would be bad for IHT. Nothing is easy.
And the fluorescent and LED lamps do not seem to last as long. In my opinion the energy rating should incorporate the energy used in manufacture, average lifespan and disposal; I seriously doubt the energy savings are anything like what is claimed.
@@marquisdemoo1792 you get what you pay for. LEDs used to be expensive but for some reason people believe a LED lamp, with a PCB, a power supply, a housing and all should cost the same as a glass bulb with a tungsten filament. It doesn't.
@@83hjf Well I haven't done the maths because I don't have the data, but that is the point, if it costs 10x as much and lasts 10% of the time it is 100 x more expensive. Now that is fine if over the lifetime of the filament bulb the electricity it saves costs more than the difference but somehow, I doubt it (well maybe now that energy costs are through the roof). Furthermore, what are the comparative energy costs to manufacture the two items. Finally, what are the environmental implications, bearing in mind glass is not in short supply.
@@marquisdemoo1792 my point is: a LED bulb is supposed to be rated for 50K hours, and a filament bulb, for 1K hours. if the LED costs 10x as much as the filamente, but lasts 50X longer...well. but the problem is that they now make leds that cost and last the same as a filament bulb used to. they draw less power but probably require more energy to manufacture in the first place... so we're back to the start.
I'm a bit confused Is the energy rating based on lumens per watt or just on the wattage of the bulb. You seemed to suggest the latter.
2 года назад
It is based on the efficiency, lumens per watt, with an additional factor to adjust for the directionality of the light and other minor details. The raw efficiency is the main thing though. Curiously the old labeling system also accounted for lifetime, while the new one does not. I find that a little odd, as energy consumption is now low enough, that the energy spent on the production of replacement bulbs would likely be a significant fraction of its lifetime "consumption".
I was wondering about that just yesterday. Thanks! That being said, these lamps currently cost around 15€ while you can get the F ones for 3€ or even less.
What a bargain it only takes 15 years to get the money back of the more expensive one... I think the new standard was pushed by big brands to help justify the huge price.
@Scaggs I would agree but why do you as a consumer gain by buying a more expensive lamp that can't be paid for on the lifetime of the lamp? It is just a sticker saying you behave well on the university.
Currently in the UK at £0.32 per kwh over 1000 hours a normal 60w lightbulb costs £19.20 to run as opposed to the £1.28 for the Philips one.... does this change your minds?
I sell appliance and lighting at work and trying to explain to customers the two energy rating scales (as there’s still a huge overlap on the market) it’s a constant headache. Especially with things like integrated Fridge freezers where dimensions are restricted so additional insulation takes away internal volume, limiting efficiency, and leaving only the newer criteria about material sourcing/disposal etc to be the only thing to drag things up the scale
Like washing machines where the reduced cold feed only means that the cycle is long. I much preferred my machine with a hot feed that could do very short cycles. I am dreading the time when I have to replace my 2015 machine. My son who inherited my 2004 machine with dual feed had the computer board recently fail. His partner is a computer board expert so is planning to work an making it go again but they have bought a modern slow cycle machine until it is fixed.
Point 1) bulbs grow lamps glow, point 2/ eFixx kitchen that’s a lovely bit of pyro work there I love it, Entertaining and some food for thought. Fantastic video guy’s as always.❤👍
Is that a US English vs UK English thing regarding bulbs? Here in the UK you put a light bulb in your lamp (which is a term for a kind of light fitting).
The Philips was 4W/840lm, the other one 6W/600lm... so more expensive to run BUT what happens when you look at their purchase cost. The Philips is about £12. The Generics about £7, so total cost over 5 years, it's about even. Light level, on the other hand matters and I'd guess Philips will last longer too. Generic brands claiming 25000 hours... not in my experience - the internal drivers fail far quicker but no-one checks this stuff so they can just make these false claims.
I totally agree, it was mentioned 10's of pence to a pound or so difference, but thats not really true is it. Try £10-13 for the phillips and £3-4 for a cheapo actually WHITE light. No we know why there was NO real mention of the purchase price.
When looking at fridge freezers recently, they were nearly all E or F rated. But, no real definition of the parameters considered for the rating. I'm going to trawl through your newly discovered channel to see if you have a video on the subject, because I'm still going to need to get a replacement!
Not many modern fridge freezers stand up to a 1980s or earlier model we have a hotpoint mistral plus to get anything decent now you usually have to go for commercial grade appliances although meile are a good brand they even make their domestic models good
Interesting that they used A and F to reference the class of bulb given that most people (especially in the US associate F with a failing school grade. In this case, an F is still highly efficient and has great benefit to the consumer.
I think you should call out the companies that don’t preform well this would result in manufacturers R&D dept putting more effort into getting best for the consumer & change up the market
This regulation change has been an absolute nightmare in industry, the amount of work that now goes into an individual light is staggering and overly complicated.
No one seems to consider that in many cases lights are used more in the dark winter months when the so called wasted energy generated in heat is not actually wasted because it is actually heating the room. With this in mind it would be interesting to know how this might impact the results.
A I only use incandescent bulbs, because LEDs create harmful dirty electricity and blue light. Also I suggest watch a 13 part series called What on earth happened by Ewaranon to learn that the earth is not a globe. Link in my about tab.
That would need an electricity price that stayed at one price forever, where in reality it is one price today and another price tomorrow, one rate for someone and a different rate for a different supplier. unless you know the price of electricity for the next 5 years (for every deal the supplier's might charge) the cost they'd be giving would just be garbage and just speculative.
@@mrfoameruk No. Present day prices would suffice because it compares like for like. Therefore, the costs for energy would reflect any changes in all the samples. The purchase price is relevant. If a Philips ultra costs 3-4 times more than a cheaper lamp but only lasts twice as long, the cheaper option could still be a better bet cost-wise even if less energy efficient.
@@stevesales4263 but if electricity came down to a very low price the Phillips bulb may be a worse buy even if it did last longer. IT all depends on the price of electricity. Them saying the life cost for each bulb now when we don't know the price of electricity in 6 months will just skew the figure and which could be misleading 6 months from now.
Is some of this not just arguing pennies though? Is saving a quid or two over the lifetime of the bulb really something you’d notice? Feels a bit like they regraded the bulbs because everything was at least A rated, and they couldn’t fit any more + signs on the box. If we can now factor the price of the bulb into the running costs, is it better to buy a cheap and less efficient bulb for areas that don’t get lit up very often, and save the higher priced more efficient bulbs for the main parts where lights can be left on for hours?
Rescaling the energy labeling is partly due to the legislation changes such as RoHS, banning the use of less efficient conventional & fluorescent lighting. So the energy labelling had to move with the times, but also means challenging manufacturers to make their products more energy efficient. And you've nailed it regarding useage. These lamps would really come into their own in large-scale applications with a high burn time, where the savings really add up. Think hotels, care homes, hospitality, etc. If we're just talking a cupboard under the stairs, it does make more sense to buy a low-cost, less efficient, LED lamp.
Just to touch on what you said about buying a new house and it came with light bulbs, EVERY SINGLE LIGHT in this house are halogen. Little micro ones with really odd sockets. Our choices of alternatives are small And the designs themselves were horrible. I need to get them replaced. But when it's EVERY SINGLE ONE in the house, it's hard to get the motivation to do it.
Just pay an electrician to do it, then you don't need to find the motivation, you just need to find the money. They did my flat in a day. All lights. So the labour cost won't be that much. And the cost of parts is going to be the same.
Only really have 2 halogen styles, one 12V and the other 230V, so retrofitting them all is pretty easy, around 2 pounds per lamp. GU10 or MR16 are the 2 standards, one with a plug type base and the other with pins, both available in LED from multiple manufacturers. Yes a pain to replace them all at the same time, but you can buy the lamps a few at a time and do them as they fail.
Best that way as you can put decent quality ones in yourself. Also if the sparks are doing lots of electrical testing you’re less likely to kill a bunch of halogens by mistake.
What is the CRI of the ultra efficient bulb? It’s not a good trade off for me if I get a lot of poor quality light. In other words cheap isn’t always a bargain. Is the cheapest wine the best? Quality matters….
I am a pensioner just found your channel & wonder please can you advise me? I have bought a variety of rechargable lanterns on Amazon & love them. One type lasts about 72 hours on a single charge ( takes a few hours to charge) so they last us 5 to 7 evenings of watching TV...how much electricity do these type of lamps use to charge up. Thanks hope you can help
Great video. Over the last three years I (sad person) have kept a log of ‘average hours used’ for all my bulbs. They have NOT performed to anywhere near the hours before dieing. When I complain to the retailer and then the wholesaler and then the Uk distributor of the product all I get (if anything) is “yours must have been at the (lower) tail end of a normal distribution curve” and “our quoted figures are for the mean time”. As an ex maths teacher, I consider both of these statements are Bol ocks. To get
Projected product life is misunderstood. If you read Philips' own datasheets, you will see that "50,000 Hr runtime" compliance means that of a given test batch, 50% of those lamps will last for 50,000 hours and the other 50% won't.
I'll wait until they get a bit better/brighter/cheaper, glad the technology has advanced though. Already switched to all LED and still seeing the rewards, for now...
Found this very interesting as trying to save energy. I have remote control sockets on table lamps and tv that I click off at night. Is this just the same as turning all the power off or is it better to just switch off each socket. I also have 3 lamps that use the bayonet settings (Lumier candle shape) all state A rating. They do bright white or warm. is there a difference? Thank you.
All the modern bulbs I see seem to only go up to an equivalent of 60W. Are there any 100W or 150W equivalents out there? I do like a bright light to read by, but the purpose made spotlights are very expensive.
very interesting thanks… however I can’t find GU3.5 replacements with at least 600lm that need clearly below 6W. Am I just dumb, or is this a question of time?
so what happened to the low energy light bulbs you used to be able to buy, i have just checked one of my stock and its A rated and a bayonet fitting, but on the packaging it reckons 2.7 hours a day usage, i doubt that most of my lights when used are only on for max 1 hour a day and that is only 2 bulbs in my house (kitchen/utility room), having said that 6 months of electric cost me £174 so i must have got some decent bulbs, no way i am changing to leds until my stock runs out, which i reckon by the number i have left will be in 30 years time ,no bulb fails in the last 18 months , please can you explain the real energy guidance now they have arsed the last A to G scale up for this new fancy one ??
The new system is a nice improvement, it does make sense and will push manufacturers to make even better light bulbs. I guess we've come a long way from those nice old standard 60 W lamps all over the house.
02/10 22 Does this mean all the lamp bulbs & tubes l've replaced throughout the house - not so long ago - to achieve optimum savings, are not now currently the most energy efficient ones available ? Reminds me of the car scrappage scheme when many still fit for purpose vehicles were prematurely scrapped. A wooze to sell more vehicles benefiting manufacturers - similar thing going on now as we're shoehorned towards EVs. kWh prices increased yesterday, with more to follow, liquid fuel costs are now falling - the move to parity of vehicle energy power is under way.
Interesting, why are all the bulbs screw in on the Phillips website? I have precisely 1 uplighter in my house that takes screw in bulbs, are bayonet fittings being phased out?
Bayonets aren't as high demand as they used to be, with many new builds being built with E27 ceiling pendants instead of B22s. Philips are a European company so this range has been launched in E27 to start with. More will be added to the range next year to accommodate more caps such as B22, E14 & GU10, as well as more shapes, colour temperatures, etc
To measure actual power consumption, run the bulb on DC, vary the voltage from 90v to 350v and graph result. The AC power taken by many LEDs is really upset by power factor due to "clipping" with internal rectification. In NZ, 9W A60 shaped bulbs cost NZ$5 box of two. Available in bayonet and screw thread, a variety of "temperature colours" also. I have some on 24/7 for two years.
I wonder how energy efficient the led bulbs are in my living room. 2015 I spent near £40 on 4 sylvania led golf ball style bulbs to replace generic cfl of varying wattage and colours. The result was a better more consistent light.
The Philips lamp used in this video is from the Ultra Efficient range.
👉 hub.efixx.co.uk/ultraefficient
Is the Ultra Efficient basically a rebranded Dubai lamp?
@@soundspark Hopefully BC will be doing a tear down shortly - I havent seem them yet myself, but it would appear that way. If so... these should be the *standard*, not the ultra.
£31 + £6 delivery for a 7.3W/100W !
That's a single bulb not a pack of 6!
I will stick with my old Philips 13W/100W until they get cheaper and pay for an extra 5.7W of electricity.
@@soundspark yes sort of😊😊
CRI = 80. No thanks
The Philips A class lamp reminds me of the Philips "Dubai lamp". This A rated lamp, should not only be more efficient, but it should last orders of magnitude longer! Manufacturers have been driving the little LEDs inside the lamps too hard! They were essentially made to fail. Squeezing more light out of the same LEDs also generates more unwanted heat, rather than light. Luckily Big Clive showed us how to hack the cheaper LED bulbs, to last much longer and consume less energy(by reducing the current through those little LEDs). I personally think this new energy rating system is brilliant for the customer.
This is an evolution of the Dubai lamp. You have hit the nail on the head with key to led life and cost.
@@efixx I've been experimenting with running cheaper LED filament style lamps at lower power. It gives you less light output, BUT more lumens per watt! They should also last much longer. I simply put a 330nF capacitor in series with the lamp. This does make the power factor slightly worse. But luckily we don't pay for power factor in residential environments.
ruclips.net/video/JH68wBXO5j0/видео.html
The problem with ( everlasting ) lamps is , once sold the company ( eventually ? ) goes out of business .. The whole world relies on a [ PONSEY SYSTEM ] Look it up ! .. pyramid selling , known in the UK , BTW .... this applies to the theory of TOO many BABIES , resulting in World Overpopulation ! ... you heard it hear first ....... DAVE™ ...........
whatch his vid, Big Clive, I done the same, hacked the hell out of them :), and they worked, after I did it, :)
noting that the wasted energy coming out at heat is only "wasted" when you don't have the heating on anyway, so is basically not wasted for much of the year.
Thanks to BigClive's videos i understood most of this.
Yea
I love Bigclive
Haha yes!
Yes I wondered if Phillips was finally going to allow the rest of the world to purchase the magic bulb shown years ago by big Clive. Finally we can. :)
I instantly thought of Clive and the Dubai lamps when I noticed it was 8LEDs for 4W. Very nice
I've done the bigclive resistor snip to all my lamps.
In the last 10 years, I have seen a lot of LED bulbs fail long before their claimed lifetime hours. Without knowing how long a light will really last, it is impossible to calculate which lamp is more economical.
I have been writing the install date on the cap to monitor real life because of premature failure.
In my experience, it's not unusual for LED units to fail after about 2 years, and some types of small incandescent bulb will regularly die after about half a year. The situation is ridiculous.
i dont think ive ever replaced a burnt out led bulb other than when i drop them or damage them
Perhaps Phillips is different, but my general experience with LED bulbs is they don't even last as long as incandescent, and you never even come close to recouping the cost difference in energy savings. What a scam. The one place they make sense, is overhead flood lights. Incandescent bulbs have a nasty habit of the glass just dropping out, or breaking when you try to unscrew it to replace it. That's a tremendous pain for an overhead flood and can be dangerous too. ...better to pay the extra cost just to prevent that.
@@eventhisidistaken its possible also worth note is im from the uk and we run 240v ac system at 50 hz which maybe changes some stuff
as mentioned by others perhaps try writing the dates on the bases perhaps they are lasting longer and you just dont notice i know i thought replacing bulbs was expensive till i realised i wasnt replacing leds every few months but actually replacing my energy saver cfl bulbs with led every few months till sudenly it stopped when i had no cfls left to replace
however it does now occour to me your using phillips bulbs and i assume its the hue smart bulbs so i imagine there always "on" even if there not outputting light so the transformers capacitors and even the wireless circuitry is still energized even if your not using them
im mainly using dumb led bulbswhich get fully powered off by the light switch when not in use
As far as I'm aware, A60 is just the shape of the bulb. In this case it means that the bulb is 60mm in diameter at its widest point. I can see that it could be confusing, with the 60W bulb being one of the common ones back in the day :) On a different note, it was about time they fixed the system to account for a much more efficient baseline. When I'm looking at products ranging from A to A+++, I'm going to assume that any choice is fine and the top ones are overkill.
It was my possibly incorrect understanding that the "A" is descriptive of or names the socket it fits.
A60 is the metric equivalent of an A19 bulb. You are correct in that it is a measurement of the bulb's maximum diameter, in this case 60mm. The 'A' denotes the bulb shape (the A-series), which happens to be the classic old-fashioned shape we all think of as a bulb =💡. A60 therefore is a classic shaped bulb, 60mm wide. It has nothing to do with the wattage or wattage equivalent.
@@uncrunch398 It's not the socket but the bulb shape. The A-series looks like the type of light bulb a child would draw. 💡
It's good to see the improvement in efficiency.
But now when we are getting closer to the theoretical maximum, I hope that the focus will also shift towards the quality of the light - wider spectrum and better color rendering (which is currently represented by CRI - Color Rendering Index).
Wider spectrum for visible colors is important for eye comfort and also for the color perception. The sensitivity on the frequencies of visible light varies among population, so if you use very narrow bands for red-green-blue, it will always make the color rendering unnatural for some part of the population. And by concentrating the light energy into narrower bands the phototoxicity for the retinal tissue also increases.
BTW, >95cri lamps often have significantly lower lm/w due to using violet LEDs and blue hues being created by luminophore. It degrades efficiency due to blue light also being made via conversion and violet LEDs being less efficient, but AFAIK luminophores have much wider band and that allows for near 100cri.
Also "warmer" bulbs (lower K value) usually have lower lm/w
Kinda sad that has to be a tradeoff
Good comment . CRI is not perfect though. It is defined over R1 to r8 usually (Ra value). There is also Re which is Ra extended which covers R1 up to R15. R represents deep red for example . A high CRI lamp often does not even extend to R9 unfortunately. There is no better light than sunlight. The future is sunlight concent... High CRI lamps are crazy expensivee because they are used for high paying niche areas like medicine and cinematography and improving sales of products. Deep red is important for increasing sales of strawberries for example.
I use incandecent bulbs they have 100, 99 cri i think
@@thepurdychannel8866 but the colour temperature is too low of those, like 2000 K . The sun's surface temperature is 5778 K, and daylight may be even higher depending on the atmosphere.
@@undefinednull5749 i dont have a problem with it they just look warm white not like the golden colour of a hps lamp
I think the trouble with the Philips is the unit price when compared to the other lamps. So whilst it maybe the cheapest to run at many times the purchase cost of the others any savings in running costs are pretty well wiped out. Making the cheaper more costly ones still a better choice in domestic.
In a commercial environment where you may well need the switching cycles. And factoring in maintenance costs to get someone to change the lamps it may stack up.
Yes if it is in a stairwell where you need scaffolding to change it put the best lamp you can get in there.
With the lamp the extra cost in manufacturing is very small to use more LED modules and better quality parts. The biggest markups in the value chain from the assembler of the lamp to the outlet selling them are the last 2 steps, the retailer and the wholesaler. The production and shipping often are less than a third of the price, the rest is your local markups on the units, and your local taxes and duties.
By me that is around 30% of the price, while the price at shipping point where they are made is very much lower than the retail price. The Dubai lamps cost perhaps a third more to make, as you get better volume discounts, and spend a little more for top tier parts, rather than the cheapest ones on market that morning. Might be an extra cent or two per unit in the volumes they are made.
My wife would want a new design light fitting long before the savings become a reality, so get the cheapest,it will be binned long before its life time, in my house, mileage may vary.
I agree, at £9.33 + VAT (£11.20), for the 3000K version, it's questionable whether it would pay for itself in energy savings. Until fairly recently, we still had regular incandescent candle lamps in a light fitting that took 6 bulbs. So, any LED bulb is a saving... with the LED Crompton bulbs we have now, that's 5W×6=30W per fitting, instead of 60W×6=360W per fitting. Also, another key factor is whether you need to replace you dimmers when switching to LED lamps.
Then, as others have mentioned, you need to factor the angle on GU10 replacements, I always look for 120° or more and prefer warm white, either 3000K, or better still, 2700K.
You answered the question before I asked it... the "Dubai lamp" as seen on BigClive.
I think efficiency could be increased further though, I doubt the LEDs in the strands would be as efficient as multichip ones, as the phosphor application on those is thinner and better defined
Filament also have multi chip leds on it, 210lm/W is pretty damn good when the driver is already included.
The filaments are super efficient
Linear COBs (chip on board) are more efficient than multi-chip SMDs (surface mounted LEDs). This is because COBs allow less spacing between LEDs, thus less packaging, they can be placed closer together, reducing resistance and reducing power usage, and also result in higher light output. If you mean MCOBs then those are the same tech as COBs but just multiple COBs... DIP LEDs are the first tech of LED and those are even worse... so not sure what you're talking about here...
If you doubt this you can just search online for "Differences Between LED Technologies: DIP vs. SMD vs. COB vs. MCOB" there's plenty of results to show that COBs are the most efficient tech currently.
@@NotoriousPyro No, smd is more efficient than cob. Look at the leds with highest efficiency, those are mid power smd leds like samsung lm301
@@PM-wt3ye Whilst you guys are arguing about SMD (Surface Mount Diode) versus COB (Chip on board). I should tell you both that the filament LED lamps above use COG (Chip on Glass) technology. Comparisons between SMD and COB are a bit moot really as they have different uses and advantages - it's a bit like asking "Which is better - a Car or a Truck?" It depends if you are moving people or cargo.
To be honest, I think that mounting the chips on a transparent substrate is key to the high efficiencies. LED's lose some light because it is emitted down into the substrate, making the substrate transparent allows some of that light to escape (=useful). Reducing the power per chip will increase the efficiency further, but there is a tradeoff as the bulb becomes more complex.
P.S. the biggest problem with DIP is the relatively poor thermal management of the larger plastic package. Whilst the LED generates some heat, the junction temperature must be kept below about 120 degrees C. DIP packages were not capable of sinking more than about 50mW of thermal power (aka heat). Whilst some novel designs were tried, the advantage of SMD packages was the ability to mount the devices closer to the circuit board for more efficient transfer of heat. COB improved this further by placing the chips directly on the board. Filament LED's work differently, by using much lower currents to drive the LEDs, they improve efficiency and this means less heat is produced. Thus no heat sink is required.
My Mum was a radar mechanic in WW2. After the war she got a job at Phillips light bulb development department in north London. She was mortified to realise that the problem was bulbs were lasting far to long. The development was to make a bulb that didn't blow to soon but would last for a set amount of time. Then they would sell more bulbs.
There was actually a cartel of bulb manufacturers that conspired to make bulbs not last as long as they could for many decades. While at the time people didn't believe the stories about it, history has shown that it actually happened and was well documented and proven. I'd expect manufacturers are still trying to pull similar tricks, hence Dubai requiring an explicit specification for their bulbs to try and stop it.
Like most things in engineering I suspect there’s a triangle of cost vs performance vs lifetime.
I sometimes hear that they didn't have this problem in the Soviet Union, it's said that refigirators from this period are of legendary good quality, they never break down.
It's really a tough call, both seem to have downsides. But I guess, capitalism has the favor still, governments need to ensure free markets and competition.
Don't give privileges to big companys, because thats what undermining capitalism and fair competition.
Both the Soviet Union and our free western capitalist system share the same problem : Human corruption.
I wonder if we ever get that in order, what if....
@@edwinbruckner4752 love your comment. I hope you like to discuss?
_"governments need to ensure free markets and competition"_ .. problem is parliamentary / representative democracy elects (selfish) individuals into positions of power, with some having nothing better to do than to create or maintain rules (which govern the economic system) to benefit themselves or friends / relatives at the cost of the rest (disabling competition / destroying free markets (1)). Diving further into this problem we find that selfishness is natural for individual living beings, which tells us right away that there is a conflict of interest here.
To solve those CoI's people recuse themselves from the process, but politics affects anyone, so anyone being in that position would need to recuse himself. But we need politics to create and enforce rules to create societies in the first place so that opportunists can be punished for asocial behavior.. catch-22.
_"Don't give privileges to big companys, because thats what undermining capitalism and fair competition."_
Why just big companies? By protecting small companies you create big companies.
And who decides the levels there? Those selfish individuals again? Wouldn't individuals be incentivized to move heaven and earth to skirt / break company size rules to benefit from (at the cost of the rest)?
Your assumption seems to be that there is a benevolent entity there that punishes selfish / asocial behavior by opportunists (or groups thereof). But all there is is us selfish individuals to run the show and man those institutions.. conflicts of interests galore.
The free market at its core is a transparent, cooperative and competitive process that works by creating a level playing field (all enjoy the same rights and plights) while no one is being treated preferentially (2). So there is no one there that holds a position that is higher than anyone else. By electing representatives we deviate from this principle. We privilege some of us to decide over the rules that govern us, creating -big companies- aeh.. powerful individuals who by their nature will abuse the system for their own benefit (not all and to the same degree, but over time the system will be eroded away, bit by bit).
_"[all societal] system share the same problem : Human corruption. I wonder if we ever get that in order, what if"_ 👍👌💯
You're asking the right questions. So that's a start. Without being able to describe the problem we can't work it.
Per my analysis corruption is natural and bound to 'survival of the fittest individual by any means available'.
In wilderness this works perfectly fine. Societies are a step up of wilderness by enforcing 'private property' and 'personal freedom' so that work sharing / specialization is more effective than wilderness's generalists, so overall comfort raises much much higher.
But for those rules to be guaranteed it needs a benevolent monopoly force that violently punishes individual rule breakers while this BMF is being manned by the same type of individual.. this is the core problem and we won't be able to solve it by trying to remove 'corrupt' humans from the gene-pool IMHO, so it's societies and how the BMF works WITH selfish individuals being part of the mix that we need to address. Our political system requiring selfless individuals to function is the problem.
The Greeks came up with democracy - a transparent, cooperative and competitive framework to get to rules that govern a people. We call this pure or direct democracy these days.. might be worth looking into as there everybody got a seat a the table when it got to deciding on the rules of the polis - no one was special (but as systems aren't changed top-down it won't help to solve the problem practically, this needs a different take IMHO - maybe we get to this later if you want to discuss).
PS: How do you like this label for our real existing societal systems? Monopolism - a societal ideology in which the rule enforcing framework benefits a few at the cost of the rest.
1) the 'free' in 'free market' stands for supply and demand being free to adjust to each other (competition), not for markets free from rules. Markets per definition are the result of rules being enforced and this requires a benevolent monopoly force so that might doesn't make right and specialization is a valid (and superior) survival strategy for the individual. It's obvious that by influencing the rules of the market the even more superior survival strategy is to occupy those positions in society, but that turns the markets into an unfree one, one where supply and demand are not free to adjust to each other anymore.. by enforcing anti competitive rules that protect a few privileged companies.
2) That's only half the truth however as some privileging rules that are being enforced also can originate unintentionally, ala the road to hell is paved with good intentions. But ascribing the malice to individual selfishness for understanding the mechanic is less complex than consider 'accidents' right away (and there are some, one I know is at the core of our societies and causes a lot of problems).
@@edwinbruckner4752 my parents had a fridge(very very small compared to nowadays) and passed down to me, lt never broke down. Eventually I had to get rid of it as because of its size. It was a silent fridge, didn't have a motor! They won't make those anymore.
Without knowing the price difference of the bulbs I would still not know which bulb to choose. One important factor not mentioned that could influence my decision, is how many hours per week it is likely to be used. Yes the Phillips may be more efficient, but if the cheap bulb is only going to be used 10 hours per week then even 1Kw of energy is going to take almost 6 months to recoup. So if the price difference was 3 or 4 pounds and 1kw of energy costs 60p that means it's going to take 2 and a half to 3 years to recoup your initial purchase price.
Not sure why you chose not to include the purchase price of these items which would have allowed for a much more in depth assessment of each products true value.
I suspect the ultra efficient ones will come down in price when there are other brands that an offer cheaper alternatives
@@waqasahmed939I don't think that's likely to happen, at least for the time being. I've not seen any other manufacturer offer the same options.
The best thing about this video is the kitchen wired in MICC, I only have a couple sites left (churches) with it in, hardly anyone wants it new and it's rare to need to replace it but it looks so good.
Great video, will be sending customers to watch it.
It’s a work of art!
Yes great to see that lovely neat MICC. It doesn't seem to be used for new work in churches these days either.
A lot of work making off Pyrotenax and Meggaring it.
Very pleased to see the Dubai lamp over here, the only problem for me is that the GU10 versions all seem to have a 36 degree angle which I hate - I hope they bring out a 120 degree version of this. Also the colour temperature, I'd rather have 5000K for daylight white.
Is it actually the same Dubai lamp? Or a half way house. The 60W phillips above is 4W and appears to have 8 'filaments' ? The dubai lamp with 8 'filaments' is rated at 2W.
So although they have improved it over the others, I could be wrong but it doesn't appear to be a full blown Dubai type?
@@gromett Oh very interesting question, I've had a look back at Big Clive's video and he states that each filament is typically rated for 1W. In this new mster range they appear to be running them at 0.5W and are getting 210lm/W from them.
In the Dubai lamps in Clive's video the 2W lamp (Shown as "40W equivalent") produces 400lm and also has 8 filaments which is in the same ballpark as this new version in terms of efficiency, but is only running each filament at 0.25W. Their "60W equivalent" lamp has 12 filaments, consumes 3W and produces 600lm.
It's very interesting that they are running each filament twice as hard, but achieving the same efficiency which suggests that the filaments are not exactly the same - It's possible that they have twice as many individual LED chips within them. The efficiency suggests that they are being underrun at the same level and therefore will also benefit from the same improvement in lifespan. It's possible that they have not gone to the same expense in the driver for these, but it is often the LED chips themselves which fail first.
i need a 2700k 75w Equivalent dubai lamp in e14 long shape
@@gromett I think they adapted it for a broader market. The Dubai lamps were created to specifications set out by the Dubai government, but I think for most people, they would not generate enough light. But even with the higher power and shorter lifespan, these Philips lamps are still incredible when it comes to powerconsumption and lifetime.
The Dubai lamp 60W equivalent is actually a 3W lamp - this new “ultra efficient” range still seems to be saving some costs somewhere. It’s certainly inspired by it having a relative overkill of leds inside though.
@Steve D if you ignore lifetime of the Lamp yes.. the Dubai Lamps are massively under-driven to extend this as long as possible.
Probably irrelevant for most, but this was also a requirement for designing the Dubai Lamps and shouldnt be ignored in a direct comparision.
I’ve still got CFL 11W bulbs running that were procured way back in 1996. They were considered “energy saving” back then at 60lm/W. But now I’m reckoning they are gas guzzlers. Great to see energy saving standards getting stronger.
Yes same, got Phillips 22W tornado lamps still around, and they are lasting well, even on as night lights outdoors, there they do around 4 years before failing, which is better than a lot of the LED versions are achieving.
@@SeanBZA i mean the problem with LEDs is the same we had with CFLs at the end of their era: chinese manufacturers making absolute garbage. we got one of those CFLs back in 96 or 97 too, but it was ridiculously expensive, around $25 back then. and it lasted well over 10 years (i actually replaced it because it was dim, not because it failed). the Philips HUE I bought for almost $50 6 years ago are still running strong - the $2 LEDs don't last more than 2 years... you get what you pay for.
@@83hjf Thing is when I bought the tornado by the box they were actually around the cheapest 20W plus CFL around, and I used a lot of them as well. I started using CFL units when they were expensive, and you had a plug in ballast and a separate lamp, so when the lamp went EOL you just replaced it. Still got a few of those around as well, though slowly running out of the PL lamps they use, so eventually they will either get the LED retrofits for PL lamps or will go with LED conversions.
@@SeanBZA the last "tornados" i bought were made by Panasonic and they're still working. they were slightly more expensive than no-name chinese ones. but they didn't sell them at the supermarket...
@@83hjf Yes Panasonic made great lamps, but the Phillips ones were the best, all the innovative technologies that they brought out in basically inventing the CFL lamp. Nicest were the A60 replacement lamps, with the glass inner arc tube that constrained the arc, but still had part in the outer envelope, so they ran cool, but had a great life, though slow to run up to full brightness. They still have some plants making specialist lamps in the EU.
You have not mentioned the power factor or the efficiency of the light. I would ask you to add Enegizer bulbs as well.
Also the lamp fitting contributes to the lifespan of the bulb. For example when a LED light is enclosed within the shade it shortens the lifespan. As it runs hotter.
Homes in the UK aren’t billed for reactive power. You make a great point about enclosed fixtures and this is worthy of a dedicated video.
@@efixx I thought the EU demanded high power factor in all bulbs starting even in the late compact fluorescent days?
@@gregorymalchuk272 The requirements for PFC increase in line with power consumption on a sliding scale. From memory, once over 25 watts you need full PFC below this. This could have changed it's a while since I designed power supplies. I'll refresh my knowledge and report back.
We aren't billed for power factor in residences...but will be.
Often the most efficient lamps don’t produce the best white, as the better performing phosphors let through more of the source blue and have narrower bandwidth. In most rooms I’d rather have CRI of 95+ in the kitchen/dinning room this is critical.
The Philips lights actually boost efficiency by running them well below their rated current.
Exactly. Unfortunately it's not easy to find affordable LEDs with a CRI of 90+, let alone 95+.
Considering its purchase cost compaired to the far cheaper but higher wattage options, it using the Philips product only makes sense where you expect to use the bulb a lot. So in an office environment they make total sense, but in a home environment there maybe many rooms where the bulb is just not worth installing.
I agree if the philips are £20 and the lesser are £5 what are the philips saving you in a domestic setting, i would get 4× £5 bulbs job done and the cost won't be £80.👍😎🇬🇧
Hi, how can you tell wich standard is used in the package. A+ and A++... for the old one and A, B, C ... for the new one?
Interesting! It would be useful for reference to include the specs for old-fashioned incandescent bulbs and fluorescent bulbs of similar light output to those you included in your comparison
Efficiency is generally looked at in terns of the energy consumption / running costs and rightly so, but it also impacts the frequency of replacement. A key point with LED lamps is that higher efficiency for a given light output also results in a lamp that runs cooler, and with electronics a lower heat output and lower operating temperature will significantly increase the life of the lamp. One reason that many lamps fail to reach their projected life is that they are often operating without adequate airflow for cooling, and greater efficiency can only help here.
Love the copper lamps and cabling, looks amazing.
Yes, especially when you know just how hard it is to install that cable and get all those bends exactly even, and all the runs exactly straight. Pyrotenax is not exactly a cable that is easy to work with.
Spot on 👍 During the pandemic Mrs W was working under a 12W LED Lamp. Few weeks later, she decides its not quite bright enough. I fit a 18W LED Lamp. Yet its power consumption is significantly less. Worked out the energy saving would pay for the lamp in 8 months while she was working at home. Bonkers. 12W Lamp was just over a year old. Technology constantly improving.
… 18W is not less than 12W. I mean, maybe it’s more efficient so it’s putting out *more* than 1.5 times as much light, but 18W is still more watts than 12.
@@JasperJanssen exactly, but that how much of the labelling works. Which makes it very confusing for people that don’t know what a Watt or Lumen is.
Great that you explained the importance of Switching Cycles. AC bulbs are susceptible to line voltage spikes and every On cycle is like a spike working to damage the driver input caps.
That explains it! i purchased some 4.2 watt 40 watt equivalent bulbs from Tesco, their efficiency rating is E. In the past they would have been A or B. They've stopped comparing the efficiency of LED bulbs to the old incandecent bulbs. So it's another example of moving the goalposts. Well at 4.2 watts for 40 watt output that is an A+ rating as far as I'm concerned. Also it's not the led's that fail, it's the components in the base, mainly capacitors that fail long before the LED's.
You kinda do have to move the goal posts though in this case,the system labelled basically everything as A+ just for being not as bad as an incandescent bulb... makes no sense because that's such a low bar now those things are practically outlawed at this point, it was basically impossible to make a light bulb that didn't get an A or a B lol
Now it does make sense to have an efficient bulb where it is switched on for a long time. With that being said I still own a 100W bulb in the food storage closet, but thats on for only a minute at most at a time. Driving fewer LEDs harder is not only bad for the efficienty, but also for longevity. Tough I do have to say usually I tend to see the LED driver die, not the LED itself.
Usually input capacitor failure, leaks onto the pcb blows little fuse/resister. The actual led still works on low voltage dc. To measure real power consumption, run them on dc as power factor upsets ac power.
‘These lamps are dead efficient so we will just leave them all on all the time’. And so overall including the materials and manufacturing the phasing out of incandescent filaments has resulted in more energy used and not less. There are academic studies out there about the irony of unintended consequences.
yes, in Buenos Aires, electricity subsidies were so high that people basically got flat rate electricity. what happened? they just left AC on all day during the summer when they went to work so the house would be cool when they came back.
Nonsense, electricity production (I.e consumption) has been falling since 2005, it’s gone down by about 15-20%. Some of that is down to changing weather but most of it is from efficiency improvements and a lot of that is from lighting. I find it hard to imagine the environmental impact of manufacturing and shipping all those tungsten lamps about wasn’t more significant than an led lamp that lasts a decade. Think of how many electricians vans have driven to replace burnt out lamp holders - MR16 and GU10 nightmares. The only reason we’ve escaped rolling blackouts from our incompetent governments of the last 10 years is because consumption has been trending down - EVs might change that!
Indeed. From a global heating perspective, it's consumption that counts, not efficiency. If efficiency improvements lead to lower energy demand that's great, but efficiency is a means to an end, not the goal in itself.
If you're paying £6 for an a rated bulb on the new system,it has to work at high efficiency for a lot of hours compared to a £2 bulb which is less efficient. Most people will buy the cheaper bulb.Especially in the current situation.
The 'current environment' just makes the pay back period shorter.
I don't disagree that many will as you suggest, but that doesn't make it any less short sighted.
And they'll need to buy three £2 bulbs in the same time span that one more efficient £6 bulb lasts, so what's the conclusion?
Yes but that A lamp has no diffusing so the light is going to cast harsh shadows. Our local fancy supermarket installed similar lamps and the customers looked positively cadaverous. They soon switched them out for some much more pleasing lamps.
There are codes for shapes.
A60 is one shape, 60 mm wide where it is wides and a length of approx 110 mm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-series_light_bulb
Great point. The manufacturers might still opportunistically be hoping that people will mistake it for an incandescent-power-equivalent rating, though. ;)
This change baffled me recently. I have a lot of downights at home, all powered by the same Philips GU10 bulb. I needed a restock so I took out the box to identify the same bulb and it was an A rated bulb, but when searching online it was being reported as a D rated bulb.
I spent 30 minutes or so researching various retailers thinking I may find an A rated bulb before realising what had happened.
The standards have change, the old A rated are all down to D and E
Bulbs or lamps as my neighbour keeps correcting me is an absolute minefield these days. It used to be fairly simple with the most complications being the type of cap and style of bulb. However you can't guarantee the brightness, colour temp or really how long they will last. And don't get me started on dimmers! However from a power perspective just focus on the ones which are likely to be one for hours each day as those will see the most savings. Also Dunelm have been clearing out their older energy labelled led bulbs so grabbed a few bargains.
As a non electrician may I respectfully suggest that ordinary people like me only rarely look at the packaging. In addition, as I am beginning the process of building a "passive" house right now I wondered if the heat output of the light should be deducted from the total kwH per square metre of revealed floor area to maintain a temperature of 21 C? So the light efficiency is only one measure.
I think that the old tungsten filament lights could be relabelled as mini heaters, forget the light output.
Also I am wondering whether to put in low voltage DC circuits in the house instead of/ as well as normal mains, given that all my power will come from solar (probably using DC battery system), although I am then left with the puzzle as to what DC voltage to use, 12v, 5v, to avoid converting voltages.
There doesn't appear to be a lot of information on low voltage DC circuits. Furthermore as these most lamps seem to assume AC supply the rectification process must consume power, as well as the environmental costs of the circuitry.
Making a sensible decision is very difficult, and likely outdated quickly.!
The heat output of *all* devices inside any house contributes to the heating of said house. Anyone claiming otherwise has found a way to break the laws of thermodynamics. If you can do that you can make a perpetual motion machine and there would be no energy crisis.
One of the big DC wiring systems is good-old CAT-5 wiring using the equivalent of power over Ethernet, but without negotiating voltage and current. I'm not sure what the state of your electricity standards are, but it's well accepted in US standards. It uses a lot less copper for wiring, but has more wires back to the power supply. One of the big advantages in the US is that the lighting load is fixed, so a 60W load doesn't need to be assumed for a luminere. It's bigger in commercial lighting than residential.
It's very simple..... buy cheap buy twice!!! But obviously for those who fall within the bracket of being able to afford the best quality lights. Great video again lads👍👌
Buy cheap and you can buy ten for the price of the best quality bulb. PS lamp refers to fluorescent tubes as in "re-lamping a super market".
my experience is that these led lights never last near as long as the manufacturers say they will. In fact, I just had one go out me the other day.
This issue goes beyond lamps/bulbs. Every other electrical item in our lives has an electrical rating for performance especially those items we use most often compared to infrequently eg TV,Stoves, washing machines to hair clippers, batthery (or phone) chargers etc.
Those items like fridges, tv's, and kettles all demand power and are either in constant use or near constant use.
So presumably their efficiency has changed too if lamps/bulbs have.
It would be interesting to see what these items are really costing us compared to what manufacturers claim they would/will.
I think we need more testing and scrutiny of other basic brands of these new led bulbs, I got loads from home bargains/quality save they are good light wouldn't know what their rating are would be great to see a video to compare the high street bulbs and recommend the best out of the basics
Actually still prefer T12 fluorescent, but now have solar panels & battery so don’t feel bad about it any more 😀
Ya my work shop i rebuikt the t12s that were in it. New ballasts bulbs etc.. I did buy led 8 ft fixtires but i dont like them they interfear with radio and i noticed in general inferfears with radio.
Led is also too sensisitive to powergrid ripples. Lights in my house flicker fast slightly every few minutes with led and i hate it
Guys, you missed the opportunity here to compare through life costs, not just cost per hour. If the Philips lights use half the electricity and last twice as long but cost five times more, which then is the best? Also, how do we differentiate between 'old' and 'new' efficiency ratings on the packaging? Is there a risk that old standard A-rated/new standard F-rated old stock still be passed-off as A-rated against the new scale by the unscrupulous or unaware?
There is a mapping table online which shows the old efficiency values and what their new values are.
Is there anywhere online selling the Phillips one used here? They don't seem to be very widely available yet.
I believe I have just about every type of bulb ever made and they are all still functioning. Many are still the old incandescent type, although in limited use for short spans. Years ago I said it myself, I would replace them with something better as they failed. The flip side is I am so aware of turning off lights as I leave a room that everything lasts for decades. Would you believe I have some outdoor floodlights (on motion sensor) that are over 25 years old and counting? The spares I bought back then are so old that the packaging touts "Watt Miser" because a 65 watt version was supposed to replace the old standard 100 watt reflector flood. I cleaned out my folk's house years ago and I still have at least 2 dozen other lamps.... and at 69 years old I doubt I will use them all before I die!
Watt Miser! Brilliant!
Can you explain to me why the ultra efficient bulbs are only available in screw and not bayonet fittings? Also are there any bulbs particularly appropriate for the bathroom?
Thank you for this. A case of "you get what you pay for". On the matter of electricity costs, the cynic in me wonders if the recent price hikes in supply costs is, in part, due to the number of households switching over to more energy efficient products? Thoughts anyone?
Prices have tumbled tbf
Will the light output of the Philips bulb decrease with age, if so can we have the data please. Thank you
Not as rapidly as the cheaper lamps that overrun the LEDs. Data unavailable but I'm certain!
Lovely bit of mineral insulated wiring on the wall, so neat and tidy.
Very enlightening video. 🤭 Since you are using Phillips as a reference, it would be interesting to see how their Hue lamps compare. Obviously they won't be as efficient due to the constant current drain of the internal circuitry but it would be interesting to find out the energy rating when turned on. 😁
As someone that is sensitive to flicker on lights they failed to tell me a couple things i need to know.
1.Is this bulb rectified or are they just running the into the LED's directly.
2.Is the a smoothing capacitor and is it large enough to stop the LED's from dropping bellow there operating voltage.
Some bulbs are made very cheaply and I have seen LED's Bulbs that have no smoothing and where not rectified. The result is a flicker that gives me headaches and makes me a little sick if I am around the Bulbs made in this way. Note how easy the flicker can be seen will depend on the person and on where you are in the world as how many Hz the power grid in your country runs at.
Nice pyro installation
The good old days mate. Give me Pyro over Fire Tuff any day.
Related to cost of electricity:
In Serbia max rate you have is 20c per kWh (for use over 1600 kWh per month), normal daytime rate is 10c per kWh.
At night, it goes down to 3-6c per kWh.
Storage heaters are very common here.
We are moving to Serbia 🇷🇸 😀
1600 kWh per month, who needs that much energy in a home?
@@andreasu.3546 People who use heat pumps for space heating and water heating.
@Steve D Or if you take A LOT of hot showers ;-)
In December we used 864kWh of electricity and 1406kWh of gas (detached house, four occupants). If we had to use electricity instead of gas we might exceed 1600kWh/month.
Including the standing charge (fixed amount per day) our electricity works out at about €0.42 per kWh. That's after applying the UK Government's price capping and VAT, but not taking into account the Energy Bills Support Scheme discount of £67 per month per household.
Would be interesting to see the Power Factor of those lamps compared as that will have an impact with modern "Smart" meters set to read apparent power.
I think the EU has high power factor mandates for light bulbs, and possibly has since the compact fluorescent days. Commercial costumers ordering in bulk from lighting supply warehouses always had access to high power factor bulbs due to power factor pricing for commercial customers.
Power factor for Philips LED lamps is 0.99!
@@towerdave4836 That's good, because most modern LED lights are 0.5 or less.
How are these "Master" lamps different from the green box "Ultra Efficient" ones? Higher CRI? Or just different branding?
I thought the new ratings came into effect in 2021? Driving up efficiency by redefining the scale is a good thing imo - the lifetime needs to match it however - I’ve had branded bulbs go after less than a year of use 😮
With LEDs, lifetime usually goes up along with the efficiency. This is because the new A rated LEDs are driven with less current which boosts both efficiency and reduces heat, which leads to a longer lifetime. It used to be the other way round with incandescent lamps, where you could either have an efficient lamp or one that lasts a long time.
@@andreasu.3546 indeed this is a given for the technology but the ones that I have had fail have a supposed life of 25000h and a 3 year warranty, which to be fair the supplier honoured and replaced - but the same happened again in a similar manner so I gave up - I guess that's what manufacturers want you to do - at the end of the day if you need a new bulb you need one, most won't bother with the faff of getting a replacement under warranty and hence they can get away with dubious claims without much fallout - CFLs were the same - I was bitten a few times splashing out on more expensive ones with longer life claims and then finding they either failed or lost significant output over time :/
The problem is that LED's are not far from theoretical maximum efficiency, and any future gains are going to be minimal. For reference, a 100W tungsten filament bulb can be replaced with a ~12W LED today. At theoretical maximum efficiency that would be around 8W, which is a tiny ~4W gain over the ~88W gain of current LEDs compared to a tungsten filament bulb. We are also not considering the inefficiency all ends up as heat and well, lights tend to be on when it's dark, which here in the UK is generally in winter when we have the heating on anyway. This further reduces the inefficiency of a light bulb of any description.
What about the investment cost? In my experience, the Phillips ones are extortionate in comparison to the budget ones and never seen premature failure. Total life cost needs to be considered.
Regarding switching cycles, rotate your bulbs to even out the wear
Or better yet take the roof off ya house. Boom free light from the street light. Winner winner
Tried the 4W=60W Philips lamps, but the colour seemed a bit greeny yellowy… for the best colour you might not want to go for the absolutely most efficient lamp! But perfect for the outside light!
4000K is classed as ‘cool’ light output
See if you only had saved all the quality Street wrapping off the strawberry cremes you could have added them as red gel and tuned the light to perfection.....
@@lezbriddon Sadly, for you, Quality Street has now replaced its foil and coloured cellophane wrapping with coloured, waxed, recyclable paper wrappings this year.
@@tikaanipippin this had better be an ugly rumour lol what will the proper of the blue Peter generation do, I cried for weeks when metal clothes hangers all turned to plastic
@@lezbriddon It was on Radio 4 today, but it might have been BBC fake information. There's a lot of it about. I always thought cellophane was compostable anyway, since it is a cellulose derivative, and wettable. I am sorry you mentioned clothes hangers, since I have a phobia towards them, equivalent to unexpectedly touching something cold and slimy.
Nice video, What you did not say is how much the bulb cost in the first place, this should always be a factor in any calculation . Also I am finding in the properties I look after that LED lamps are not lasting any where near as long as the duration times shown on the product packaging .
Are they installed in sealed fixtures?
@@efixx Some are some are not . I am keeping a record . LED replacements for 4 pin square GU 24's are the worst offenders , Typically lasting just over a year which is around half the duration given on the box.
For LEDs I don't really care much about the energy efficiency anymore - it's like comparing two quite similar apples and deciding that green is better than red, but it won't really matter anymore for your wallet or energy draw.
What matters to me is more the lifetime of the lamp. If you have to change it every year then it's wasting a lot of energy being manufactured and transported.
I got a
Quite a few budget led lamps like 3€ ones and all lasted more than 3 years.
This Video Lights my day!
cheers from OZ
I'm sure Chinese sellers on Amazon will just relabel old lamps as grade A ultra-efficient and go on selling them.
Yep as well as the improved safety logos. Thank you fakers.
an argentinian youtuber tested lamps and proved a lot of the "10W lamps" use only 6W. he got a LOT of hate comment from chinese lover latin americans saying "WELL, IT'S EVEN BETTER BECAUSE IT USES LESS POWER THAN ADVERTISED!" ...even simple things are difficult to understand for most people.
Buy your lamps and bulbs from a reputable store, I wouldn’t buy anything like this from Amazon. However if it’s not a safety issue like say 2” screws go ahead and use em. Amazon =buy be aware, very aware.
Never had a light bulb which lasted up to advertised work hours. Neither Philips nor Osram nor any other brand. There are no serial numbers on bulbs so very hard to claim a replacement if it fails. To conserve energy we need to focus bigger appliances. I’ve replaced my 10 years old Philips LED TV with a new gen LG. There is a huge difference on Power Consumption, the new TV will pay itself just in 5 years with reduced electricity bills. Similar thing is also valid for refrigerators. I’m outside of UK but that doesn’t prevent me to admire your craftsmanship. Keep up the good work guys.
i think its really confusing long term if they re-adjust the labels every few years especially because you cannot easily compare your current stuff with the stuff you buy new... would probably be better with the next re-adjustment to turn around the System (A is worst, and it improves as you go along the Alphabet), and add Letters with specifics of what is required at the end as you get better and better efficiencies, and maybe also add other criteria like eg longevity. And when the current Scale finally goes from U to Z then start over with a new Scale starting with A again (where the new A is equal to the old U)
Sadly it's marketing, grade A is always perceived as the best.
I'd like the system to have the currently available best as a grade C maximum. This would encourage further improvements and reflect the inevitable better technology over the next few years.
I agree, should've switched to numbers, with 1 as the worst acceptable efficiency.
I don't think most people are going to run out and replace perfectly working bulbs anyway, or trash the spares they might already have, if they're all LED already the difference in energy cost shouldn't be worth the deliberate waste.
and will Phillips be producing them in B22 or just E27 ?
Just starting off on E27 for now but a larger range including B22 will be added in 2023 :)
Unless I missed it, you dont factor in the price of BUYING the bulbs into the total cost of running them. So it would be harder to work out the total cost of ownership.
I get its a paid promotion, so you want to help steer the video towards the Philips looking great. But if the Philips is £20-30, compared to the "Basic" one costing £4-5, your looking at many years to reach a price parity on the over all cost.
Would be great if you could re-visit and factor in those numbers as well.
At the time of filming the Philips lamp wasn’t available to buy. Comparing “filament” style lamps on a well known platform I worked out that you’d recap the price difference in 2.5 years based on 1000hr usage.
I’ll look to add a TCO in the description
Fantastic. Thanks for the update
The fact you guys actually read AND reply to your comments, is what makes you quality RUclipsrs.
I remember the days of using 100w bulbs to get decent light in a room. Now my entire house uses 300w in total if I’m not doing much, and about 150w if I turn off all the random things I leave on. Mind you, I also remember space heaters advertising they could be left on all day and only use 7p of electricity.
Anyone else noticed you need more heating in the winter nowadays as you have more efficient bulbs?
@@EwanV of course, in the days of incandescence, a house full of 60 to 100 watt bulbs could easily be pulling 2,000 watts all together, as much as having two space heaters running all the time, that with the 10.000 to 20, 000 or so BTUs of body heat from each person in the house, made heating the house much less of an issue. Not to mention the much less efficient appliances that were used at the time.
I remember only about 3 years ago being charged about 5p per kWh of electricity... Nostalgia...
We have a 100w in the garage from 1995!
I am now close to 77, have lived in this home for 30 years. I still have about half the tungsten lights I installed for pennies back then, probably 1,000 hours rated, over 30 years they have not reached EOL, suggesting extremely low usage and less potential saving. A few other lights have been changed, with the most heavily trafficked areas now on LEDs, put in about 8 years ago. At that time, I adopted the plan of replacing failures with good, currently available higher efficiency stock. There was no point in ripping out working items with relatively low hours, as any efficiency savings would likely take a long time to accrue. I have no idea what time I have left, the only attraction of ripping and replacing, is the thought that the expenditure might reduce any IHT bill. However, it might also make the house value increase, which would be bad for IHT. Nothing is easy.
And the fluorescent and LED lamps do not seem to last as long. In my opinion the energy rating should incorporate the energy used in manufacture, average lifespan and disposal; I seriously doubt the energy savings are anything like what is claimed.
@@marquisdemoo1792 you get what you pay for. LEDs used to be expensive but for some reason people believe a LED lamp, with a PCB, a power supply, a housing and all should cost the same as a glass bulb with a tungsten filament. It doesn't.
@@83hjf Well I haven't done the maths because I don't have the data, but that is the point, if it costs 10x as much and lasts 10% of the time it is 100 x more expensive. Now that is fine if over the lifetime of the filament bulb the electricity it saves costs more than the difference but somehow, I doubt it (well maybe now that energy costs are through the roof). Furthermore, what are the comparative energy costs to manufacture the two items. Finally, what are the environmental implications, bearing in mind glass is not in short supply.
@@marquisdemoo1792 my point is: a LED bulb is supposed to be rated for 50K hours, and a filament bulb, for 1K hours. if the LED costs 10x as much as the filamente, but lasts 50X longer...well. but the problem is that they now make leds that cost and last the same as a filament bulb used to. they draw less power but probably require more energy to manufacture in the first place... so we're back to the start.
I'm a bit confused
Is the energy rating based on lumens per watt or just on the wattage of the bulb. You seemed to suggest the latter.
It is based on the efficiency, lumens per watt, with an additional factor to adjust for the directionality of the light and other minor details. The raw efficiency is the main thing though. Curiously the old labeling system also accounted for lifetime, while the new one does not. I find that a little odd, as energy consumption is now low enough, that the energy spent on the production of replacement bulbs would likely be a significant fraction of its lifetime "consumption".
I was wondering about that just yesterday. Thanks!
That being said, these lamps currently cost around 15€ while you can get the F ones for 3€ or even less.
correct and this is the missing point in this shill!
What a bargain it only takes 15 years to get the money back of the more expensive one... I think the new standard was pushed by big brands to help justify the huge price.
@Scaggs I would agree but why do you as a consumer gain by buying a more expensive lamp that can't be paid for on the lifetime of the lamp? It is just a sticker saying you behave well on the university.
Currently in the UK at £0.32 per kwh over 1000 hours a normal 60w lightbulb costs £19.20 to run as opposed to the £1.28 for the Philips one.... does this change your minds?
@@boingzebadee5337 the comparison is 3£ led light that costs 2£ to run vs the philips that costs 10£.
A60 presumably doublespeak by manufacturer ( ah so ) but refers to the size of the lamp ( 60mm ).
I sell appliance and lighting at work and trying to explain to customers the two energy rating scales (as there’s still a huge overlap on the market) it’s a constant headache. Especially with things like integrated Fridge freezers where dimensions are restricted so additional insulation takes away internal volume, limiting efficiency, and leaving only the newer criteria about material sourcing/disposal etc to be the only thing to drag things up the scale
Like washing machines where the reduced cold feed only means that the cycle is long. I much preferred my machine with a hot feed that could do very short cycles. I am dreading the time when I have to replace my 2015 machine. My son who inherited my 2004 machine with dual feed had the computer board recently fail. His partner is a computer board expert so is planning to work an making it go again but they have bought a modern slow cycle machine until it is fixed.
Point 1) bulbs grow lamps glow, point 2/ eFixx kitchen that’s a lovely bit of pyro work there I love it,
Entertaining and some food for thought. Fantastic video guy’s as always.❤👍
Is that a US English vs UK English thing regarding bulbs? Here in the UK you put a light bulb in your lamp (which is a term for a kind of light fitting).
The Philips was 4W/840lm, the other one 6W/600lm... so more expensive to run BUT what happens when you look at their purchase cost. The Philips is about £12. The Generics about £7, so total cost over 5 years, it's about even. Light level, on the other hand matters and I'd guess Philips will last longer too. Generic brands claiming 25000 hours... not in my experience - the internal drivers fail far quicker but no-one checks this stuff so they can just make these false claims.
I totally agree, it was mentioned 10's of pence to a pound or so difference, but thats not really true is it. Try £10-13 for the phillips and £3-4 for a cheapo actually WHITE light. No we know why there was NO real mention of the purchase price.
When looking at fridge freezers recently, they were nearly all E or F rated. But, no real definition of the parameters considered for the rating. I'm going to trawl through your newly discovered channel to see if you have a video on the subject, because I'm still going to need to get a replacement!
They changed the scale recently so all those E or F would be probably A with the old one
Not many modern fridge freezers stand up to a 1980s or earlier model we have a hotpoint mistral plus to get anything decent now you usually have to go for commercial grade appliances although meile are a good brand they even make their domestic models good
Interesting that they used A and F to reference the class of bulb given that most people (especially in the US associate F with a failing school grade.
In this case, an F is still highly efficient and has great benefit to the consumer.
I think you should call out the companies that don’t preform well this would result in manufacturers R&D dept putting more effort into getting best for the consumer & change up the market
This regulation change has been an absolute nightmare in industry, the amount of work that now goes into an individual light is staggering and overly complicated.
No one seems to consider that in many cases lights are used more in the dark winter months when the so called wasted energy generated in heat is not actually wasted because it is actually heating the room. With this in mind it would be interesting to know how this might impact the results.
My thought exactly!
A I only use incandescent bulbs, because LEDs create harmful dirty electricity and blue light. Also I suggest watch a 13 part series called What on earth happened by Ewaranon to learn that the earth is not a globe. Link in my about tab.
@@flat-earther i use incandecent and fluorescent bulbs, tubes too
Why didn't you compare whole life costs?
Because the maths is too difficult for some people....
You just know this is close to the truth.
That would need an electricity price that stayed at one price forever, where in reality it is one price today and another price tomorrow, one rate for someone and a different rate for a different supplier. unless you know the price of electricity for the next 5 years (for every deal the supplier's might charge) the cost they'd be giving would just be garbage and just speculative.
@@mrfoameruk No. Present day prices would suffice because it compares like for like. Therefore, the costs for energy would reflect any changes in all the samples. The purchase price is relevant. If a Philips ultra costs 3-4 times more than a cheaper lamp but only lasts twice as long, the cheaper option could still be a better bet cost-wise even if less energy efficient.
@@stevesales4263 but if electricity came down to a very low price the Phillips bulb may be a worse buy even if it did last longer. IT all depends on the price of electricity.
Them saying the life cost for each bulb now when we don't know the price of electricity in 6 months will just skew the figure and which could be misleading 6 months from now.
Is some of this not just arguing pennies though? Is saving a quid or two over the lifetime of the bulb really something you’d notice? Feels a bit like they regraded the bulbs because everything was at least A rated, and they couldn’t fit any more + signs on the box.
If we can now factor the price of the bulb into the running costs, is it better to buy a cheap and less efficient bulb for areas that don’t get lit up very often, and save the higher priced more efficient bulbs for the main parts where lights can be left on for hours?
Rescaling the energy labeling is partly due to the legislation changes such as RoHS, banning the use of less efficient conventional & fluorescent lighting. So the energy labelling had to move with the times, but also means challenging manufacturers to make their products more energy efficient. And you've nailed it regarding useage. These lamps would really come into their own in large-scale applications with a high burn time, where the savings really add up. Think hotels, care homes, hospitality, etc. If we're just talking a cupboard under the stairs, it does make more sense to buy a low-cost, less efficient, LED lamp.
FEWER elements, LESS power
Not quite that simple - watch BigClive’s video on the Dubai lamp and why it achieves the higher efficiencies with more LEDs…
Which you have already apparently done based on a further comment further down 🤷♂️
Just to touch on what you said about buying a new house and it came with light bulbs, EVERY SINGLE LIGHT in this house are halogen. Little micro ones with really odd sockets.
Our choices of alternatives are small
And the designs themselves were horrible.
I need to get them replaced. But when it's EVERY SINGLE ONE in the house, it's hard to get the motivation to do it.
Just pay an electrician to do it, then you don't need to find the motivation, you just need to find the money.
They did my flat in a day. All lights. So the labour cost won't be that much. And the cost of parts is going to be the same.
Only really have 2 halogen styles, one 12V and the other 230V, so retrofitting them all is pretty easy, around 2 pounds per lamp. GU10 or MR16 are the 2 standards, one with a plug type base and the other with pins, both available in LED from multiple manufacturers. Yes a pain to replace them all at the same time, but you can buy the lamps a few at a time and do them as they fail.
Best that way as you can put decent quality ones in yourself. Also if the sparks are doing lots of electrical testing you’re less likely to kill a bunch of halogens by mistake.
All very well explaining the running costs but there was no mention of initial outlay.
does the philips save enough in power costs to cover the price diff to the next in line?
Just ordered one of these bulbs and the light quality is horrible, it's has such a strong green hue to it. Do they not have something warm ?
What is the CRI of the ultra efficient bulb? It’s not a good trade off for me if I get a lot of poor quality light. In other words cheap isn’t always a bargain. Is the cheapest wine the best? Quality matters….
These are CRI80
I'm quite envious of the new grading system you have. Here in the USA gov't is still trying to sell us on incandescents.
I am a pensioner just found your channel & wonder please can you advise me? I have bought a variety of rechargable lanterns on Amazon & love them. One type lasts about 72 hours on a single charge ( takes a few hours to charge) so they last us 5 to 7 evenings of watching TV...how much electricity do these type of lamps use to charge up. Thanks hope you can help
Why will you say the brand of the Philips bulb, but not the 3rd, 'Basic' one? Is there an issue about saying 'Amazon'? Seems odd.
The description 'A60' is not a marketing ploy but a reference to the lamps shape and diameter; A shape (GLS) and 6cm diameter
Great video. Over the last three years I (sad person) have kept a log of ‘average hours used’ for all my bulbs. They have NOT performed to anywhere near the hours before dieing. When I complain to the retailer and then the wholesaler and then the Uk distributor of the product all I get (if anything) is “yours must have been at the (lower) tail end of a normal distribution curve” and “our quoted figures are for the mean time”. As an ex maths teacher, I consider both of these statements are Bol ocks. To get
Projected product life is misunderstood. If you read Philips' own datasheets, you will see that "50,000 Hr runtime" compliance means that of a given test batch, 50% of those lamps will last for 50,000 hours and the other 50% won't.
I'll wait until they get a bit better/brighter/cheaper, glad the technology has advanced though. Already switched to all LED and still seeing the rewards, for now...
Found this very interesting as trying to save energy. I have remote control sockets on table lamps and tv that I click off at night. Is this just the same as turning all the power off or is it better to just switch off each socket. I also have 3 lamps that use the bayonet settings (Lumier candle shape) all state A rating. They do bright white or warm. is there a difference? Thank you.
All the modern bulbs I see seem to only go up to an equivalent of 60W. Are there any 100W or 150W equivalents out there? I do like a bright light to read by, but the purpose made spotlights are very expensive.
very interesting thanks… however I can’t find GU3.5 replacements with at least 600lm that need clearly below 6W. Am I just dumb, or is this a question of time?
so what happened to the low energy light bulbs you used to be able to buy, i have just checked one of my stock and its A rated and a bayonet fitting, but on the packaging it reckons 2.7 hours a day usage, i doubt that most of my lights when used are only on for max 1 hour a day and that is only 2 bulbs in my house (kitchen/utility room), having said that 6 months of electric cost me £174 so i must have got some decent bulbs, no way i am changing to leds until my stock runs out, which i reckon by the number i have left will be in 30 years time ,no bulb fails in the last 18 months , please can you explain the real energy guidance now they have arsed the last A to G scale up for this new fancy one ??
The new system is a nice improvement, it does make sense and will push manufacturers to make even better light bulbs. I guess we've come a long way from those nice old standard 60 W lamps all over the house.
02/10 22 Does this mean all the lamp bulbs & tubes l've replaced throughout the house - not so long ago - to achieve optimum savings, are not now currently the most energy efficient ones available ? Reminds me of the car scrappage scheme when many still fit for purpose vehicles were prematurely scrapped. A wooze to sell more vehicles benefiting manufacturers - similar thing going on now as we're shoehorned towards EVs. kWh prices increased yesterday, with more to follow, liquid fuel costs are now falling - the move to parity of vehicle energy power is under way.
Interesting, why are all the bulbs screw in on the Phillips website?
I have precisely 1 uplighter in my house that takes screw in bulbs, are bayonet fittings being phased out?
Bayonets aren't as high demand as they used to be, with many new builds being built with E27 ceiling pendants instead of B22s.
Philips are a European company so this range has been launched in E27 to start with. More will be added to the range next year to accommodate more caps such as B22, E14 & GU10, as well as more shapes, colour temperatures, etc
@@junglistine Ah, that would explain it, my house is 75 years old so B22's all round here.
@@junglistine Another helpful reply - thanks!
To measure actual power consumption, run the bulb on DC, vary the voltage from 90v to 350v and graph result.
The AC power taken by many LEDs is really upset by power factor due to "clipping" with internal rectification.
In NZ, 9W A60 shaped bulbs cost NZ$5 box of two. Available in bayonet and screw thread, a variety of "temperature colours" also. I have some on 24/7 for two years.
Thanks, I didn't know there was a change or such range in efficiency - good video.
I'm missing a comparison on the costs of the laps. Is the difference in costs covering what you get back in terms of energy savings?
I wonder how energy efficient the led bulbs are in my living room. 2015 I spent near £40 on 4 sylvania led golf ball style bulbs to replace generic cfl of varying wattage and colours. The result was a better more consistent light.