Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
What happens if you put 75 watt bulb in a 60 watt fixture
3,135 views
Skip to first unread message
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 12:56:39 AM1/25/13
to
I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
a 60W bulb.
Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
light, but it gets hot as blazes.
How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
a 60W bulb.
Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
light, but it gets hot as blazes.
How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
Roy
Jan 25, 2013, 1:00:12 AM1/25/13
to
down which ever comes first.
Wes Groleau
Jan 25, 2013, 1:47:57 AM1/25/13
to
--
Wes Groleau
Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest thou also be like unto him.
Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise according to his own conceit.
— Solomon
Are you saying there's no good way to answer a fool?
— Groleau
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 3:41:49 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:47:57 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:
> Get a CFL or LED for _more_ light, less heat.
In my experience, the LEDs are (still) too expensive,
> Get a CFL or LED for _more_ light, less heat.
and I tried and failed with the CFLs.
The main problem with the CFLs is they stick out too far
(for any decent wattage) so, what happens is that they blind
you because you end up seeing the bright bulb outside the
shield.
Also, that tip of the CFL sticking out tends to break off
as these are desk lamps that are moved about.
I wonder if they make a high light output small length CFL?
Nikola Tesla
Jan 25, 2013, 5:30:45 AM1/25/13
to
On 1/25/2013 3:41 AM, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
> In my experience, the LEDs are (still) too expensive,
> and I tried and failed with the CFLs.
When you factor in the cost of operation, LEDs are cheaper than
> In my experience, the LEDs are (still) too expensive,
> and I tried and failed with the CFLs.
incandescents.
Ed Pawlowski
Jan 25, 2013, 5:56:44 AM1/25/13
to
way you want it. Use a plain incandescent and it will diffuse more
rather than hit a localized spot.
Better is to buy a new desk light with a flat fluorescent bulb. Mine
is four short tubes and gives a nice white bright light. I think mine
was about $25.
home...@home.com
Jan 25, 2013, 6:57:44 AM1/25/13
to
this is what you're using, you are in violation of the law. Since you
posted this to a public newsgroup, your local law officers as well as
the FBI know what you're doing. You will likely be arrested in the next
24 hours. The penalty is something like $5000 and 30 days in prison.
YOU'RE IN BIG TROUBLE!
Install a 75W equivalant CFL bulb and the heat wont be a problem, and
you will be legal. You can even use a 100W equivalant CFL. (Then get
rid of those 75W incandescent bulbs before the cops arrive.)
Doug Miller
Jan 25, 2013, 6:58:14 AM1/25/13
to
Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in news:kdt6qn$t60$1...@dont-email.me:
A lot. When we bought our current home, I had to replace all of the light fixtures in the kitchen
because the previous owners had done exactly that: put 75W bulbs in fixtures that were
labeled "60W max". When I took the fixtures down to paint the ceiling, I discovered that the
excess heat had made the insulation on the fixture wires brittle and hard to the point of
cracking and falling off of the conductors. One fixture had an inch and a half of uninsulated
wire.
because the previous owners had done exactly that: put 75W bulbs in fixtures that were
labeled "60W max". When I took the fixtures down to paint the ceiling, I discovered that the
excess heat had made the insulation on the fixture wires brittle and hard to the point of
cracking and falling off of the conductors. One fixture had an inch and a half of uninsulated
wire.
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 7:00:19 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:44 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> The type of bulb you are using is probably not giving the light the
> way you want it. Use a plain incandescent and it will diffuse more
> rather than hit a localized spot.
Maybe I do need to go back to the plain old-style 100W tungsten bulb.
> The type of bulb you are using is probably not giving the light the
> way you want it. Use a plain incandescent and it will diffuse more
> rather than hit a localized spot.
This is what the CFL looks like (see how it sticks out).
Front view:
http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12037559/img/12037559.jpg
Side view:
http://www3.picturepush.com/photo/a/12037561/img/12037561.jpg
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 7:27:45 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:57:44 -0600, homeowner wrote:
> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
That's odd. Today I bought the 75 Watt flood you see in the 1st picture.
> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
Along with 90W (larger) floods (which were too big for this lamp).
And, at the same Home Depot, I saw 200 Watt long-necked incandescent
bulbs, and 150Watt 3-way incandescent bulbs for sale ...
So, they 'might' be banned - but they're certainly still being sold.
home...@home.com
Jan 25, 2013, 7:31:59 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:58:14 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
<doug_at_mil...@example.com> wrote:
>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>A lot. When we bought our current home, I had to replace all of the light fixtures in the kitchen
>because the previous owners had done exactly that: put 75W bulbs in fixtures that were
>labeled "60W max". When I took the fixtures down to paint the ceiling, I discovered that the
>excess heat had made the insulation on the fixture wires brittle and hard to the point of
>cracking and falling off of the conductors. One fixture had an inch and a half of uninsulated
>wire.
How did you fix that? Just curious.
<doug_at_mil...@example.com> wrote:
>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>A lot. When we bought our current home, I had to replace all of the light fixtures in the kitchen
>because the previous owners had done exactly that: put 75W bulbs in fixtures that were
>labeled "60W max". When I took the fixtures down to paint the ceiling, I discovered that the
>excess heat had made the insulation on the fixture wires brittle and hard to the point of
>cracking and falling off of the conductors. One fixture had an inch and a half of uninsulated
>wire.
I've run across many like that, and I always tried to replace the whole
cable. But thats not always possible without ripping apart the whole
house. Other times I had to put an extra box inh the attic and run a
few feet of new wire. I've seen lots of guys just tape up those cracked
wires, but that's not the best fix. I found another method. Put heat
shrink tubing ovet the wires. That works wonders and is easy to do.
However if it's the old BX and the wires are cracked right up to the
metal sheath, you will likely have problems. You're stuck replacing
them.
John Grabowski
Jan 25, 2013, 7:45:21 AM1/25/13
to
don't start a fire unless they are in close proximity to combustible
materials such as curtains or furniture. What usually happens over time is
the lamp socket get brittle and cracks, the insulation on the wire gets
brittle and cracks and eventually sparks fly out and then I get a call.
The 75 watt bulb that you have in the light looks as though it might be a
halogen bulb which gets very hot. I would try a 50 watt PAR 20 bulb. It is
a small halogen floodlight (Actually they come in flood or spot) and puts
out about the same amount of light as a 75 watt incandescent bulb.
Doug
Jan 25, 2013, 8:26:39 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:57:44 -0600, home...@home.com wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:39 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
><j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>>a 60W bulb.
>>
>>Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>>http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>
>>My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>>light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>>How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year. If
>this is what you're using, you are in violation of the law. Since you
>posted this to a public newsgroup, your local law officers as well as
>the FBI know what you're doing. You will likely be arrested in the next
>24 hours. The penalty is something like $5000 and 30 days in prison.
>YOU'RE IN BIG TROUBLE!
>
I bet somewhere in my home, I have one so better come and get me. But
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:39 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
><j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>>a 60W bulb.
>>
>>Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>>http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>
>>My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>>light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>>How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year. If
>this is what you're using, you are in violation of the law. Since you
>posted this to a public newsgroup, your local law officers as well as
>the FBI know what you're doing. You will likely be arrested in the next
>24 hours. The penalty is something like $5000 and 30 days in prison.
>YOU'RE IN BIG TROUBLE!
>
please bring food and a Latte' when you come so I can eat and drink
well before I go into the slammer.
Stormin Mormon
Jan 25, 2013, 8:44:20 AM1/25/13
to
May we see some figures, and cost projections, please?
I got a couple LED flood lights off Ebay, which were very
disappointing. There are some which do a good job. At
church they have put in some LED flood lights, the guy tells
me they cost $40 or so per bulb, but they sure do a good
job of lighting.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Nikola Tesla" <n...@tesla.edu> wrote in message
news:kdtmo...@news3.newsguy.com...
I got a couple LED flood lights off Ebay, which were very
disappointing. There are some which do a good job. At
church they have put in some LED flood lights, the guy tells
me they cost $40 or so per bulb, but they sure do a good
job of lighting.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"Nikola Tesla" <n...@tesla.edu> wrote in message
news:kdtmo...@news3.newsguy.com...
Quinhagak
Jan 25, 2013, 8:46:53 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:39 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni wrote:
> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
> a 60W bulb....
> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
An oversize bulb in a lamp in Mrs. O'Leary's barn is what caused the Great
> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
Chicago Fire.
tra...@optonline.net
Jan 25, 2013, 8:53:58 AM1/25/13
to
On Jan 25, 8:44 am, "Stormin Mormon"
going to last decades in the typical application to recover
the upfront cost. Given my experiences with CFL, I
have good reason to doubt the longevity. If they crap out
in two years, you're a big loser.
<cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> May we see some figures, and cost projections, please?
>
> I got a couple LED flood lights off Ebay, which were very
> disappointing. There are some which do a good job. At
> church they have put in some LED flood lights, the guy tells
> me they cost $40 or so per bulb, but they sure do a good
> job of lighting.
>
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
> .
The big leap of faith is that you have to believe they are
> May we see some figures, and cost projections, please?
>
> I got a couple LED flood lights off Ebay, which were very
> disappointing. There are some which do a good job. At
> church they have put in some LED flood lights, the guy tells
> me they cost $40 or so per bulb, but they sure do a good
> job of lighting.
>
> Christopher A. Young
> Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
> .
going to last decades in the typical application to recover
the upfront cost. Given my experiences with CFL, I
have good reason to doubt the longevity. If they crap out
in two years, you're a big loser.
Tomsic
Jan 25, 2013, 9:32:46 AM1/25/13
to
"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
news:kdt6qn$t60$1...@dont-email.me...
to test and approve the fixture for electrical and fire safety. Using a 75
watt bulb voids that listing. If you were to have a fire that was traced to
the desk lamp and if the fire inspector determined that you had
over-wattaged the lamp, then your fire insurance could be disallowed.
That's not very likely, of course, but it has happened. As others have
mentioned, using a 50 watt halogen PAR 20 might work for you as will using a
CFL or LED bulb, but compare the light output values (lumens). Don't go
just by the "wattage equivalent" charts.
Tomsic
Tomsic
Jan 25, 2013, 9:48:16 AM1/25/13
to
news:kdtto1$39b$2...@dont-email.me...
Only the common 100 watt and the 75 watt household bulbs (as of 1/1/13) are
being phased out so far and both, of course, have lower-wattage
replacements. The 100 watt replacement is rated for 72 watts and they've
been on retails shelves for a couple of years now. The 200 watt and 150
watt 3-way bulbs that you see are not being phased out. They're in an
"exempt" category which includes decorative, colored and other types which
are not widely used. There's not much energy to be saved by regulating them
and so they are not affected by the bulb legislation. There was an
"unintended consequence" to the bulb phase-out legislation. Bulb choices
for consumers actually increased in 2012 and prices of some types (such as
CFLs) came down substantially as bulb manufacturers cranked up their
competitive product offerings.
Tomsic
being phased out so far and both, of course, have lower-wattage
replacements. The 100 watt replacement is rated for 72 watts and they've
been on retails shelves for a couple of years now. The 200 watt and 150
watt 3-way bulbs that you see are not being phased out. They're in an
"exempt" category which includes decorative, colored and other types which
are not widely used. There's not much energy to be saved by regulating them
and so they are not affected by the bulb legislation. There was an
"unintended consequence" to the bulb phase-out legislation. Bulb choices
for consumers actually increased in 2012 and prices of some types (such as
CFLs) came down substantially as bulb manufacturers cranked up their
competitive product offerings.
Tomsic
Peter
Jan 25, 2013, 10:05:25 AM1/25/13
to
On 1/25/2013 3:41 AM, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
http://www.myschoollights.com/products/20w-minitwist-cfl-replaces-75w-bulb
Specs say 4.3" high including base. That might not protrude from the
shade of your lamp.
I know nothing about this web site but if the bulb is made by
Westinghouse, you can probably find it at many vendors.
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 10:07:07 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:53:58 -0800, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> Given my experiences with CFL, I
> have good reason to doubt the longevity.
> If they crap out
> in two years, you're a big loser.
What makes incandescent bulbs wear out?
> Given my experiences with CFL, I
> have good reason to doubt the longevity.
> If they crap out
> in two years, you're a big loser.
Oxidation of the filament, right?
What makes CFL bulbs wear out?
Oxidation of the mercury inside?
What makes LED bulbs wear out?
(something must be wearing out or they'd last forever)
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 10:10:03 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:48:16 -0500, Tomsic wrote:
> They're in an "exempt" category which includes decorative,
> colored and other types which are not widely used.
Makes sense.
> They're in an "exempt" category which includes decorative,
> colored and other types which are not widely used.
> Bulb choices for consumers actually increased in 2012.
Doesn't make sense.
How did removing bulb choices increase bulb choices?
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 10:11:41 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:45:21 -0500, John Grabowski wrote:
> The 75 watt bulb that you have in the light looks as though it might be a
> halogen bulb which gets very hot. I would try a 50 watt PAR 20 bulb. It is
> a small halogen floodlight (Actually they come in flood or spot) and puts
> out about the same amount of light as a 75 watt incandescent bulb.
It 'is' a halogen, and it 'does' get very hot.
> The 75 watt bulb that you have in the light looks as though it might be a
> halogen bulb which gets very hot. I would try a 50 watt PAR 20 bulb. It is
> a small halogen floodlight (Actually they come in flood or spot) and puts
> out about the same amount of light as a 75 watt incandescent bulb.
And, I guess, lumens are all I want (and compact size so it doesn't
stick out of the housing) - so that's a good idea if it works.
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 10:15:40 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:32:46 -0500, Tomsic wrote:
> If the desk lamp also has a UL or CSA sticker, then a 60 watt
> bulb was used to test and approve the fixture for electrical
> and fire safety. Using a 75 watt bulb voids that listing.
Makes sense. But doesn't answer the question.
> If the desk lamp also has a UL or CSA sticker, then a 60 watt
> bulb was used to test and approve the fixture for electrical
> and fire safety. Using a 75 watt bulb voids that listing.
Seems to me bridges are designed to hold twice what they
say they can hold. Elevators are the same. A room placard that
says a ballroom can legally hold 100 people can 'fit' twice
that easily. Speed limits are set but we routinely go twice
the speed limit safely (maybe not twice - but the point is the
same). A rope rated for 100 pounds can handle ten times that.
etc.
It seems, to me, a lamp rated at 60 watts must have been
tested at twice that (or some large number like that) in order
to get the rating.
At least that's how 'other' ratings seem to be done.
Art Harris
Jan 25, 2013, 10:15:46 AM1/25/13
to
Art Harris
Gordon Shumway
Jan 25, 2013, 10:25:53 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:41:49 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:47:57 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:
>
>> Get a CFL or LED for _more_ light, less heat.
>
>In my experience, the LEDs are (still) too expensive,
>and I tried and failed with the CFLs.
This is just a guess but I bet LED's are cheaper than rebuilding your
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:47:57 -0500, Wes Groleau wrote:
>
>> Get a CFL or LED for _more_ light, less heat.
>
>In my experience, the LEDs are (still) too expensive,
>and I tried and failed with the CFLs.
house after it burns down.
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 10:28:24 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:15:46 -0800, Art Harris wrote:
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
> I'd say it's 25% over the recommended maximun.
You are correct. I phrased it incorrectly.
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
> I'd say it's 25% over the recommended maximun.
75 Watts is 25% over the maximum of 60 Watts, or,
125% of the maximum.
Seems to me, 25% is within the safety zone of ????
(what is the safety zone).
I find it hard to believe the safety zone is zero.
I suspect it's more like double the rating (i.e., it's
probably more like 60 x 2 = 120 Watts) but I'm just
guessing.
That's why I asked.
Sjouke Burry
Jan 25, 2013, 10:37:02 AM1/25/13
to
Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in news:kdt6qn$t60$1@dont-
email.me:
> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to
use
> a 60W bulb.
>
> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>
> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>
Those limit rules are there for a reason, you know......
email.me:
> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to
use
> a 60W bulb.
>
> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>
> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>
> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>
Whats the price of a burned down house?
>
>
Those limit rules are there for a reason, you know......
Sjouke Burry
Jan 25, 2013, 10:44:32 AM1/25/13
to
Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in news:kdtto1$39b$2@dont-
email.me:
"special" or "artistic" lights are perfectly legal.
Its just the ordinairy frosted bulb which is illegal(to sell).
Jou can use them for as long as your stockpile lasts.
Just dont try to sell them.
email.me:
Its just the ordinairy frosted bulb which is illegal(to sell).
Jou can use them for as long as your stockpile lasts.
Just dont try to sell them.
EXT
Jan 25, 2013, 11:13:43 AM1/25/13
to
"Roy" <wil...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:49ede647-d801-451e...@googlegroups.com...
> On Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:56:39 PM UTC-7, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
>> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>>
>> a 60W bulb.
>>
>>
>>
>> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>>
>> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>>
>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>>
>>
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
If you (she) insists on using an oversized bulb, be sure the socket is
>> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>>
>> a 60W bulb.
>>
>>
>>
>> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>>
>> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>>
>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>>
>>
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
ceramic. If it is plastic, it will have a very short life as it will
deteriorate quickly. Also, you may want to change the wire cord to a high
temperature wire at least inside the lamp where the heat is. If the switch
is part of the bulb socket, the heat may destroy it, it may be wiser to add
a line switch on the cord to protect it.
If you don't want to start modifying the lamp, you may want to consider
purchasing a new one that has the ceramic socket and switch located away
from the bulb.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Jan 25, 2013, 11:34:20 AM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:30:45 -0500, Nikola Tesla <n...@tesla.edu>
wrote:
Only if they are used for a significant amount of time. If the light
is only used an average of an hour a day or less, the power savings
will take the rest of your life to pay for the LED bulb.
I still like the LED option - regardless.
wrote:
is only used an average of an hour a day or less, the power savings
will take the rest of your life to pay for the LED bulb.
I still like the LED option - regardless.
Gordon Shumway
Jan 25, 2013, 11:38:23 AM1/25/13
to
Dan Espen
Jan 25, 2013, 12:38:53 PM1/25/13
to
I find fixtures even with the correct bulb age over time,
parts get brittle and start to fall apart.
I definitely would not put a 75W incandescent in a 60W fixture.
The risk is no where near the gain. The risk is that your
house burns down and the insurance company denies your claim.
Find a CFL that doesn't stick out so much or go for the LED.
--
Dan Espen
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 25, 2013, 12:56:07 PM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:07:07 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:53:58 -0800, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
>> Given my experiences with CFL, I
>> have good reason to doubt the longevity.
>> If they crap out
>> in two years, you're a big loser.
>
>What makes incandescent bulbs wear out?
>Oxidation of the filament, right?
No. The filament evaporates.
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:53:58 -0800, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
>> Given my experiences with CFL, I
>> have good reason to doubt the longevity.
>> If they crap out
>> in two years, you're a big loser.
>
>What makes incandescent bulbs wear out?
>Oxidation of the filament, right?
>What makes CFL bulbs wear out?
>Oxidation of the mercury inside?
crappy capacitors. Fluorescents also have filaments (you can see the
ends get dark from the deposited metal).
>What makes LED bulbs wear out?
>(something must be wearing out or they'd last forever)
useful amount of light. Cheap knock-offs are worse.
tra...@optonline.net
Jan 25, 2013, 1:01:31 PM1/25/13
to
scare stories at it again. Every time this comes up, I've
asked where all the examples of this kind of thing
happening are. Where are those denied claims?
There are what 100 million homes
in the USA? If insurance companies were actually
denying claims for things like that, it should be easy
to come up with examples. I mean if they are gonna
deny that, then they might as well deny a claim for
the house burning down because you left a pot burning
on the stove. Or because you smoked in bed.
So, example please?
> Find a CFL that doesn't stick out so much or go for the LED.
>
> --
>
> - Show quoted text -
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 25, 2013, 1:08:26 PM1/25/13
to
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 25, 2013, 1:11:25 PM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:32:46 -0500, "Tomsic" <N...@no.net> wrote:
>
>"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
>news:kdt6qn$t60$1...@dont-email.me...
>>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>> a 60W bulb.
>>
>> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>
>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>If the desk lamp also has a UL or CSA sticker, then a 60 watt bulb was used
>to test and approve the fixture for electrical and fire safety. Using a 75
>watt bulb voids that listing. If you were to have a fire that was traced to
>the desk lamp and if the fire inspector determined that you had
>over-wattaged the lamp, then your fire insurance could be disallowed.
Bullshit called.
>
>"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
>news:kdt6qn$t60$1...@dont-email.me...
>>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>> a 60W bulb.
>>
>> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>
>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>
>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
>If the desk lamp also has a UL or CSA sticker, then a 60 watt bulb was used
>to test and approve the fixture for electrical and fire safety. Using a 75
>watt bulb voids that listing. If you were to have a fire that was traced to
>the desk lamp and if the fire inspector determined that you had
>over-wattaged the lamp, then your fire insurance could be disallowed.
>That's not very likely, of course, but it has happened.
Dan Espen
Jan 25, 2013, 1:51:27 PM1/25/13
to
claim.
Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
--
Dan Espen
=
Jan 25, 2013, 1:59:09 PM1/25/13
to
news:kdu78a$4nt$2...@dont-email.me...
Well in the case of the 100 watt bulb during 2012, the 100 watt was replaced
by the 72 watt. It's more efficient and gives about the same amount of
light, costs about the same and is rated to last for 1,000 hours, so that's
one choice.
Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
we didn't have before.
Then there are the screw-in CFLs, usually rated for about 26 watts. The
prices have come down significantly on those and some are also rated for
more light output than the old 100 watt. But it's a 3rd. choice because the
types shaped like the old standard bulbs just appeared last year.
Finally, about mid-2012, the major lamp companies introduced LED equivalents
to the 100 watt also rated about 26 watts. That's a 4th. choice.
So, what I see on retailer shelves is that the old 100 watt bulb can now be
replaced by 3 or 4 alternatives depending upon what you want -- long life,
low initial cost, efficiency, color, dimability, etc. The "2X" isn't in
wide distribution yet; but the others are.
One bulb disappeared and 3-4 alternatives with various performance options
are now on the shelves with the same thing already happening for the 75 watt
that's being phased out now except that the alternatives are cheaper and
more available.
What doesn't seem to make sense is why some people bought stocks of the old
100 watt bulbs and are hoarding them.
Tomsic
by the 72 watt. It's more efficient and gives about the same amount of
light, costs about the same and is rated to last for 1,000 hours, so that's
one choice.
Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
we didn't have before.
Then there are the screw-in CFLs, usually rated for about 26 watts. The
prices have come down significantly on those and some are also rated for
more light output than the old 100 watt. But it's a 3rd. choice because the
types shaped like the old standard bulbs just appeared last year.
Finally, about mid-2012, the major lamp companies introduced LED equivalents
to the 100 watt also rated about 26 watts. That's a 4th. choice.
So, what I see on retailer shelves is that the old 100 watt bulb can now be
replaced by 3 or 4 alternatives depending upon what you want -- long life,
low initial cost, efficiency, color, dimability, etc. The "2X" isn't in
wide distribution yet; but the others are.
One bulb disappeared and 3-4 alternatives with various performance options
are now on the shelves with the same thing already happening for the 75 watt
that's being phased out now except that the alternatives are cheaper and
more available.
What doesn't seem to make sense is why some people bought stocks of the old
100 watt bulbs and are hoarding them.
Tomsic
=
Jan 25, 2013, 2:08:29 PM1/25/13
to
news:kdu7is$4nt$4...@dont-email.me...
It isn't that a slightly higher wattage bulb will immediately cause a fire
or electrical hazard. That will happen over time due to deteriorated
wiring, insulation or structural parts. There are tolerances and variations
that are considered in the UL/CSA tests; but it's a pass/fail system so
electrical inspectors and fire safety people know what to do.
Tomsic
or electrical hazard. That will happen over time due to deteriorated
wiring, insulation or structural parts. There are tolerances and variations
that are considered in the UL/CSA tests; but it's a pass/fail system so
electrical inspectors and fire safety people know what to do.
Tomsic
=
Jan 25, 2013, 2:19:22 PM1/25/13
to
<k...@attt.bizz> wrote in message
news:cli5g8tripf8g4irk...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:32:46 -0500, "Tomsic" <N...@no.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:kdt6qn$t60$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>>> a 60W bulb.
>>>
>>> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>>> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>>
>>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>>
>>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>>
>>If the desk lamp also has a UL or CSA sticker, then a 60 watt bulb was
>>used
>>to test and approve the fixture for electrical and fire safety. Using a
>>75
>>watt bulb voids that listing. If you were to have a fire that was traced
>>to
>>the desk lamp and if the fire inspector determined that you had
>>over-wattaged the lamp, then your fire insurance could be disallowed.
>
> Bullshit called.
>
>>That's not very likely, of course, but it has happened.
>
> Citation needed.
Likely it was in the "Residential Electrical System Aging Research Report"
>
>>
>>"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:kdt6qn$t60$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>>> a 60W bulb.
>>>
>>> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>>> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>>>
>>> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>>> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>>>
>>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>>
>>If the desk lamp also has a UL or CSA sticker, then a 60 watt bulb was
>>used
>>to test and approve the fixture for electrical and fire safety. Using a
>>75
>>watt bulb voids that listing. If you were to have a fire that was traced
>>to
>>the desk lamp and if the fire inspector determined that you had
>>over-wattaged the lamp, then your fire insurance could be disallowed.
>
> Bullshit called.
>
>>That's not very likely, of course, but it has happened.
>
> Citation needed.
published by UL a few years ago. I think it's on line.
Tomsic
micky
Jan 25, 2013, 2:23:27 PM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:39 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>a 60W bulb.
>
>Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>
>My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>
>How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
I put 100 watt bubls in my kitchen ceiling fixture with 3 globes
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
>a 60W bulb.
>
>Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
>http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>
>My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
>light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>
>How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
keeping the heat in, and over a couple three or 10 years, the plastic
around the metal sockets got brittle and fell off in chunks. One
socket stopped working too, bad wire connection at the metal socket.
I also used a 100 watt bulb in a desk lamp with a cone shaped metal
shade, and iover a couple years it damaged the socket, but in this
case the built-in switch. The kind of socket that is colinear with
the rotating knob that is the switch, (like is used in over the bed
headboard lamps with the long salami shaped bulbs) I have to grab
the round thing hard and trun hard, to go from on to off and offf to
on. The next two notches, which are the same thing are easy, but that
makes a full revolution, and the next 2 are very hard again.
No fires. And this is 100 for a 60, not 75 for one (the ceiling
fixture. The desk lamp may have been designed for 75)
BTW, the lamp is probably 50 yeaers old and will last another hundred
after I replace the socket/switch. During the really hot weather I
had to start using CFL in it or it was too hot to get close too, but
the switch was damaged already.
Doug Miller
Jan 25, 2013, 2:53:50 PM1/25/13
to
Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in news:kdts4j$39b$1...@dont-email.me:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:44 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> The type of bulb you are using is probably not giving the light the
>> way you want it. Use a plain incandescent and it will diffuse more
>> rather than hit a localized spot.
>
> Maybe I do need to go back to the plain old-style 100W tungsten bulb.
NOT IN THAT FIXTURE!! Read my other post in this thread...
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:44 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> The type of bulb you are using is probably not giving the light the
>> way you want it. Use a plain incandescent and it will diffuse more
>> rather than hit a localized spot.
>
> Maybe I do need to go back to the plain old-style 100W tungsten bulb.
NOT IN THAT FIXTURE!! Read my other post in this thread...
denni...@gmail.com
Jan 25, 2013, 3:33:43 PM1/25/13
to
On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com wrote:
> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
What's banned is the manufacture and importation of 75 watt incandescent bulbs, except for special-use types (i.e. rough service, floodlights, etc.).
You can still use existing 75 Watt bulbs. You can still buy them as long as supplies hold out. A couple boxes of them will likely last you the rest of your life, and your kids will be used to CFL's so they won't care.
Stormin Mormon
Jan 25, 2013, 3:42:17 PM1/25/13
to
She's going to redecorate the room before then.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:fa69c50a-aa52-42c6...@f8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
The big leap of faith is that you have to believe they are
going to last decades in the typical application to recover
the upfront cost. Given my experiences with CFL, I
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:fa69c50a-aa52-42c6...@f8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
The big leap of faith is that you have to believe they are
going to last decades in the typical application to recover
the upfront cost. Given my experiences with CFL, I
Cliff H
Jan 25, 2013, 4:14:50 PM1/25/13
to
> You will know the answer when (A) the fixture bursts into flame or (B)
> your house burns
> down which ever comes first.
Silly answerer you really can't have B without also having A, so A. Final
anwser.
> your house burns
> down which ever comes first.
Silly answerer you really can't have B without also having A, so A. Final
anwser.
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 25, 2013, 4:41:01 PM1/25/13
to
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 25, 2013, 5:37:44 PM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
sure (which is why I asked).
Nobody cited anything specific - and - well I guess the onus is on me to
figure out what the ratings actually mean.
I presume (but this is an assumption), that a 60 Watt rating means it can
handle at least double that forever - but I am clear that this is just an
assumption.
I hear all the houses-burning-down scare stories - and I don't deny that
(because I don't know) but without any facts to back them up - that
assumption is based on similar logic to mine (i.e., wild eyed guesses).
Of course, the house-burning-down is a MUCH SAFER assumption - so I'm not
poo pooing it - I'm just saying that nobody who said the house would burn
down has shown any proof of it actually happening even once. Of course,
with 150 million homes (or so) in the US, I'm sure houses burn down from
all sorts of things - but I can say I've got a handful of these lamps,
all running the 75 Watt Halogen Par-something bulb - and the only thing I
see so far is that they do get rather hot.
Anyway - I'll stick to the rating being half the actual limit until/
unless someone shows proof otherwise. BTW, I don't disagree with the
statement that the thing will slowly deteriorate with higher heat - but
again, nobody showed proof so that's just an assumption also.
Still - it was a good idea to change out the plastic socket for ceramic
and to move the switch to the cord - so these I will explore.
tra...@optonline.net
Jan 25, 2013, 5:51:49 PM1/25/13
to
On Jan 25, 1:51 pm, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
company denying a claim because someone put in a bulb
that was too large and you were just spreading FUD.
> Dan Espen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I take that to mean you have no examples of an insurance
>
> - Show quoted text -
company denying a claim because someone put in a bulb
that was too large and you were just spreading FUD.
tra...@optonline.net
Jan 25, 2013, 5:59:23 PM1/25/13
to
On Jan 25, 3:33 pm, dennisga...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com wrote:
> > 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
>
> I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
>
> They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
Then if the govt is so broke and mired down, why is the focus of
> On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com wrote:
> > 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
>
> I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
>
> They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
the White House and the libs more gun control instead of spending
cuts to reduce the budget? Polls consistently show that people
put creating jobs and reducing the deficit as top priorities. Banning
assault weapons are way down the list. But it's a nice diversion
courtesy of you libs.
And if they aren't taking your guns, why did NY state just pass a
law that makes the standard magazines sold with probably 90%
of the legal pistols for self defense illegal? Not only are
sales banned of any magazine greater than 7 rounds, but legal
owners have a year to get rid of them. Before
that, NY banned mags greater than 10 rounds. Now it's 7. See
a trend here and why it's obvious what you libs are up to?
>
> What's banned is the manufacture and importation of 75 watt incandescent bulbs, except for special-use types (i.e. rough service, floodlights, etc.).
>
> You can still use existing 75 Watt bulbs. You can still buy them as long as supplies hold out. A couple boxes of them will likely last you the rest of your life, and your kids will be used to CFL's so they won't care.
of you libs. I'm sure you'll do the same thing when you ban fatty
foods and have us all eating soylent green.
Doug Miller
Jan 25, 2013, 6:27:58 PM1/25/13
to
Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in news:kdv1fo$5bu$1...@dont-email.me:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
> I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> sure (which is why I asked).
Well, what *would* you expect to happen when insulation that has been dried up and
embrittled by excessive heat flakes off of the wires, resulting in electrical arcs between the
exposed conductors?
as a result of the previous owners doing *exactly* what you are proposing to do: put 75W
bulbs in fixtures clearly labelled "60W max".
Did you not read that? Or did you just decide to ignore it?
> I presume (but this is an assumption), that a 60 Watt rating means it can
> handle at least double that forever - but I am clear that this is just an
> assumption.
What on earth would make you think that? "60W max" means what it says. The fixture wires
WILL be damaged if you use 75W bulbs.
> Anyway - I'll stick to the rating being half the actual limit until/
> unless someone shows proof otherwise.
You know, I'm beginning to think that you're not very smart.
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
> I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> sure (which is why I asked).
embrittled by excessive heat flakes off of the wires, resulting in electrical arcs between the
exposed conductors?
>
> Nobody cited anything specific - and - well I guess the onus is on me to
> figure out what the ratings actually mean.
I certainly cited something specific -- what happened to the kitchen light fixtures in my house
> Nobody cited anything specific - and - well I guess the onus is on me to
> figure out what the ratings actually mean.
as a result of the previous owners doing *exactly* what you are proposing to do: put 75W
bulbs in fixtures clearly labelled "60W max".
Did you not read that? Or did you just decide to ignore it?
> I presume (but this is an assumption), that a 60 Watt rating means it can
> handle at least double that forever - but I am clear that this is just an
> assumption.
WILL be damaged if you use 75W bulbs.
> Anyway - I'll stick to the rating being half the actual limit until/
> unless someone shows proof otherwise.
Stormin Mormon
Jan 25, 2013, 6:38:34 PM1/25/13
to
Yeah, NYC banned soft drinks over a certain size.
Next, the McBurger ban, and then who knows.
But scientists have shown that flu shots are good
for us, it's the mercury. And Obama was born
in Hawaii. And, Thalidomide is good for pregnant
womens nausea.
news:40b56211-d1da-4eef...@v7g2000yqv.googlegroups.com...
Next, the McBurger ban, and then who knows.
But scientists have shown that flu shots are good
for us, it's the mercury. And Obama was born
in Hawaii. And, Thalidomide is good for pregnant
womens nausea.
news:40b56211-d1da-4eef...@v7g2000yqv.googlegroups.com...
Roy
Jan 25, 2013, 7:13:04 PM1/25/13
to
===
devnull
Jan 25, 2013, 7:36:10 PM1/25/13
to
On 01/25/2013 05:37 PM, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
>
> Anyway - I'll stick to the rating being half the actual limit until/
> unless someone shows proof otherwise. BTW, I don't disagree with the
> statement that the thing will slowly deteriorate with higher heat - but
> again, nobody showed proof so that's just an assumption also.
>
> Still - it was a good idea to change out the plastic socket for ceramic
> and to move the switch to the cord - so these I will explore.
>
Your house, do what you want. We don't really give a fuck!
>
> Anyway - I'll stick to the rating being half the actual limit until/
> unless someone shows proof otherwise. BTW, I don't disagree with the
> statement that the thing will slowly deteriorate with higher heat - but
> again, nobody showed proof so that's just an assumption also.
>
> Still - it was a good idea to change out the plastic socket for ceramic
> and to move the switch to the cord - so these I will explore.
>
Consider this though. The fixture was tested and the highest rating
after testing was 60 watts. If the manufacturer could have squeezed
another 15 watts out of the fixture, they would have.
Gordon Shumway
Jan 25, 2013, 10:40:39 PM1/25/13
to
figure out he's got one wheel in the sand. :-)
Ed Pawlowski
Jan 25, 2013, 11:33:31 PM1/25/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:10:03 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:48:16 -0500, Tomsic wrote:
>
>> They're in an "exempt" category which includes decorative,
>> colored and other types which are not widely used.
>
>Makes sense.
>
>> Bulb choices for consumers actually increased in 2012.
>
>Doesn't make sense.
>
>How did removing bulb choices increase bulb choices?
Makes perfect sense. They eliminated one type of bulb. Two or three
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:48:16 -0500, Tomsic wrote:
>
>> They're in an "exempt" category which includes decorative,
>> colored and other types which are not widely used.
>
>Makes sense.
>
>> Bulb choices for consumers actually increased in 2012.
>
>Doesn't make sense.
>
>How did removing bulb choices increase bulb choices?
other types are on the shelf to replace it and, thus, more choices.
I'm using LED night lights in a couple of spots, but the regular sizes
are still not perfected just yet that I've seen. I think they will be
the light of choice in a few years.
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 26, 2013, 1:00:06 AM1/26/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:33:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> I think they (LEDs) will be
"What's a light bulb"?
Since LEDs will be everywhere - and - they'll be permanent
(once they get the failure items worked out).
> I think they (LEDs) will be
> the light of choice in a few years.
In just 20 years, I predict kids will be asking their parents:
"What's a light bulb"?
Since LEDs will be everywhere - and - they'll be permanent
(once they get the failure items worked out).
Wes Groleau
Jan 26, 2013, 1:00:20 AM1/26/13
to
On 01-25-2013 18:27, Doug Miller wrote:
> Well, what*would* you expect to happen when insulation that has been dried up and
However, if arcing causes a speck of hot metal
to pop out onto a tissue .....
--
Wes Groleau
Ostracism: A practice of sticking your head in the sand.
> Well, what*would* you expect to happen when insulation that has been dried up and
> embrittled by excessive heat flakes off of the wires, resulting in electrical arcs between the
> exposed conductors?
I would expect a circuit breaker to trip.
> exposed conductors?
However, if arcing causes a speck of hot metal
to pop out onto a tissue .....
--
Wes Groleau
Ostracism: A practice of sticking your head in the sand.
Stormin Mormon
Jan 26, 2013, 8:47:58 AM1/26/13
to
It's what I used, when I got off the "rotary dial phone" after I put my "eye
glasses" on, so I could "read" the "label" on the "33 LP album". so we could
"dance" after dinneer. Of course, the quoted items, the kids will need
explained also.
"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
news:kdvrd6$ada$1...@dont-email.me...
glasses" on, so I could "read" the "label" on the "33 LP album". so we could
"dance" after dinneer. Of course, the quoted items, the kids will need
explained also.
"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
news:kdvrd6$ada$1...@dont-email.me...
tra...@optonline.net
Jan 26, 2013, 8:52:56 AM1/26/13
to
Amazing how some folks want the govt to control everything.
Doug Miller
Jan 26, 2013, 9:54:16 AM1/26/13
to
Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote in news:kdvrdl$b37$1...@dont-email.me:
> On 01-25-2013 18:27, Doug Miller wrote:
>> Well, what*would* you expect to happen when insulation that has been dried up and
>> embrittled by excessive heat flakes off of the wires, resulting in electrical arcs between the
>> exposed conductors?
>
> I would expect a circuit breaker to trip.
I would expect an *arc fault* breaker to trip. But a standard circuit breaker may or may not trip --
it depends on how much current the arc is carrying.
> On 01-25-2013 18:27, Doug Miller wrote:
>> Well, what*would* you expect to happen when insulation that has been dried up and
>> embrittled by excessive heat flakes off of the wires, resulting in electrical arcs between the
>> exposed conductors?
>
> I would expect a circuit breaker to trip.
it depends on how much current the arc is carrying.
bud--
Jan 26, 2013, 10:14:34 AM1/26/13
to
On 1/25/2013 4:37 PM, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
> I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> sure (which is why I asked).
Might not cause a fire.
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
> I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> sure (which is why I asked).
Might just cause insulation failure with contact from wire to metal
parts. You might only electrocute someone.
Or you might just have the fixture fail in a relatively short time.
>
> Anyway - I'll stick to the rating being half the actual limit until/
> unless someone shows proof otherwise.
And another great idea - the circuit rating is actually "half the actual
limit". You can replace the 15A breaker on the circuit with a 30A one.
Nothing will happen. (Where is the proof otherwise.)
And if fixture insulation fails and wires short you might not even have
the inconvenience of a breaker trip.
> BTW, I don't disagree with the
> statement that the thing will slowly deteriorate with higher heat - but
> again, nobody showed proof so that's just an assumption also.
people have seen damage from overlamping. I have seen damage.
But go ahead. You may win the Darwin Award.
Tomsic
Jan 26, 2013, 9:50:55 AM1/26/13
to
And take them along when you move.
Tomsic
Tomsic
Jan 26, 2013, 10:21:23 AM1/26/13
to
<denni...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26b94d77-c97f-423e...@googlegroups.com...
the case of light bulbs, the legislation to phase them out started with the
energy advocates. They went to the Congressional staff of the House and
Senate Energy Committees and said that they wanted to regulate certain
inefficient light bulbs so that more efficient bulbs would be used. The
advocates had plenty of support - some utilities, other energy conservation
groups and lots of people who thought saving energy is a good idea. They
organized and took their message to Congress. Then Congress held hearings,
asked folks, including the light bulb manufacturers, what they thought and
the legislation was written. It must have been a fair process because no
one was happy with the results. I haven't found anyone involved who got
what they wanted. Then, the legislation went to Congress, was approved by
both houses and signed by President Bush in 2007. It kicked in 5 years
later - in 2012 with the phase out of the 100 watt bulb - and all of a
sudden the critics woke up and started complaining about government control.
Now, with the free market working, more bulb choices available than ever
before at about any price range that you want and with energy being saved
with all of them, I wonder just what the fuss is about and where critics
were when the laws were being debated.
Tomsic
Tomsic
Jan 26, 2013, 10:40:25 AM1/26/13
to
news:kdv1fo$5bu$1...@dont-email.me...
Before you adopt your made-up "half the actual limit" idea, why don't you
read the UL Standard on the subject which details the test procedures and
assumptions that UL uses. It's UL Standard 8750 and applies to
permanently-mounted light fixtures. Any electrical inspector will have a
copy or you can buy it from UL or CSA since it's harmonized with Canada too.
Tomsic
read the UL Standard on the subject which details the test procedures and
assumptions that UL uses. It's UL Standard 8750 and applies to
permanently-mounted light fixtures. Any electrical inspector will have a
copy or you can buy it from UL or CSA since it's harmonized with Canada too.
Tomsic
Tomsic
Jan 26, 2013, 10:53:04 AM1/26/13
to
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:6c2f0c47-980a-4b0b...@v5g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
very least you'll learn something about the hazards of old wiring in homes
and there are some nifty pictures too. But remember that UL is a
non-government organization started by insurance companies ("underwriters"),
so the UL sticker is an indication of what they think is safe according to
their own standards. In an argument - or court case -between a home owner
and an insurance company about any electrical product that electrocuted
someone or started a fire, who do you think would have the best chances of
winning if the product didn't have a UL sticker?
Tomsic
Tomsic
Jan 26, 2013, 10:59:44 AM1/26/13
to
"micky" <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:nem5g8ppoh7km0v0g...@4ax.com...
reads your post and figures out who you are because I don't want you in my
risk group. And, test your smoke detectors regularly.
Tomsic
Tomsic
Jan 26, 2013, 11:15:29 AM1/26/13
to
"Tomsic" <N...@no.net> wrote in message news:ke0uop$k7k$3...@dont-email.me...
8750.
Tomsic
Dan Espen
Jan 26, 2013, 11:43:00 AM1/26/13
to
I say, screw in those curly Q, mind reading, light bulbs and surrender.
After a few years you won't even notice.
http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=262771
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?46738-CFL-Bulb-Conspiracy
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=46&contentid=8095&page=2
--
Dan Espen
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 26, 2013, 11:55:47 AM1/26/13
to
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:15:29 -0500, Tomsic wrote:
> The lighting fixture standard is UL-1598.
I found that 293-page "Luminaires UL 1598" standard here:
> The lighting fixture standard is UL-1598.
http://file.yizimg.com/173503/20061028163262442236757.pdf
Looking for the wattage-rating test procedure, I scroll through
to page 138 where section 14 seems to cover temperature limits.
Section 14.1.3 Rated wattage of lamp used
Table 14.1.2 Maximum temperature limits
Reading that section over and over, I am not illuminated as to
what excess safety limits are in a 60 Watt rating. I can see it
has everything to do with temperature - since Clause 19.14.1.3
appears to be all about the temperature test box; but I can't
really tell what the safety factor is from reading this document.
Does someone with more acumen than I have insight into where
in that document it spells out the safety factor inherent in
the standard?
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 26, 2013, 12:03:50 PM1/26/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:56:39 +0000, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
I followed your advice and found shorter CFL bulbs.
http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/12046713/img/12046713.jpg
They have about half the light but they don't stick out anymore.
And, those Halogen 75 Watt Par30 bulbs were blazing hot!
The CFL is almost cool to the touch so it's a good solution
that fits the problem set without too many compromises.
Ed Pawlowski
Jan 26, 2013, 12:25:28 PM1/26/13
to
What does light bulbs have to do with cell phones and TVs?
tra...@optonline.net
Jan 26, 2013, 12:48:53 PM1/26/13
to
On Jan 26, 12:25 pm, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 05:52:56 -0800 (PST), "trad...@optonline.net"
> What does light bulbs have to do with cell phones and TVs?- Hide quoted text -
like bulbs that they didn't like. The had a problem with
people being free to choose. It bothered the powers that
be greatly that I might choose a simple 100 watt bulb
for my outdoor shed. You said that's a good thing, because
it leads to more choices. So, why not ban cell phones and
LCD TV's and see what great innovation that leads to?
It's been big soft drinks, salt, light bulbs, the right of
smokers to have a cigar dinner at a restaurant in their
own seperate room. Right now it's guns. See how you
like it when the tell you that soylent green is the only
acceptable food. Sounds like you're ready to chow down.
As for me, just leave me free to choose.
See how you like it when they come for your big
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 05:52:56 -0800 (PST), "trad...@optonline.net"
>
> - Show quoted text -
Last time I checked, it was govt that banned incandescent
> - Show quoted text -
like bulbs that they didn't like. The had a problem with
people being free to choose. It bothered the powers that
be greatly that I might choose a simple 100 watt bulb
for my outdoor shed. You said that's a good thing, because
it leads to more choices. So, why not ban cell phones and
LCD TV's and see what great innovation that leads to?
It's been big soft drinks, salt, light bulbs, the right of
smokers to have a cigar dinner at a restaurant in their
own seperate room. Right now it's guns. See how you
like it when the tell you that soylent green is the only
acceptable food. Sounds like you're ready to chow down.
As for me, just leave me free to choose.
See how you like it when they come for your big
Nate Nagel
Jan 26, 2013, 1:28:32 PM1/26/13
to
On 01/25/2013 03:33 PM, denni...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com
> wrote:
>> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
>
> I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
>
> They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're
> coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and
> mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and
> smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
>
> What's banned is the manufacture and importation of 75 watt
> incandescent bulbs, except for special-use types (i.e. rough service,
> floodlights, etc.).
>
> You can still use existing 75 Watt bulbs. You can still buy them as
> long as supplies hold out. A couple boxes of them will likely last
> you the rest of your life, and your kids will be used to CFL's so
> they won't care.
>
I'll never get used to CFLs, they suck on several levels. The ONLY
> On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com
> wrote:
>> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
>
> I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
>
> They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're
> coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and
> mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and
> smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
>
> What's banned is the manufacture and importation of 75 watt
> incandescent bulbs, except for special-use types (i.e. rough service,
> floodlights, etc.).
>
> You can still use existing 75 Watt bulbs. You can still buy them as
> long as supplies hold out. A couple boxes of them will likely last
> you the rest of your life, and your kids will be used to CFL's so
> they won't care.
>
thing that they have going for them is that they are more efficient than
incandescents.
The good news is that by the time recently-purchased CFLs start going,
LEDs will be widely available and affordable.
I'm using a 9W LED bulb in my bedside lamp; it was on sale at Lowe's for
$10 or so last year. I have no complaints with it at all, although I
don't remember seeing CRI specs on the packaging (one place where CFLs
tend to fall down unless you get expensive ones that you're not likely
to find in retail stores.) It is dimmable, which I've yet to see
acceptably demonstrated with CFLs even ones advertised as such. It also
is at full brightness in a second or so as opposed to a minute or so for
a CFL. If brighter LED bulbs were available for a similar price (and I
expect that they will be in a few years) I'd see no need to ever buy
another CFL again.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
bob haller
Jan 26, 2013, 1:40:13 PM1/26/13
to
realized my pillow must of fallen to the floor so i turned the light
switch on as i walked out of room, figuring my eyes would have time to
adust by the time i got back......
however i saw a super brite flash, turned the switch off and didnt get
any more sleep.
the 50 year old wires insulation was crumbling and started arcing to
the fixture, the breaker didnt trip but a nice shower of sparks came
down on the bed.....
needless to say i replaced all the fixtures in the house most were
showing the same detoriation
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 26, 2013, 3:24:50 PM1/26/13
to
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 26, 2013, 3:27:13 PM1/26/13
to
>Right now it's guns. See how you
>like it when the tell you that soylent green is the only
>acceptable food. Sounds like you're ready to chow down.
>As for me, just leave me free to choose.
>See how you like it when they come for your big
above. It's all about *control*.
"You are sheep! Shut up and act like it!"
cjt
Jan 26, 2013, 3:35:49 PM1/26/13
to
> news:kdu78a$4nt$2...@dont-email.me...
> by the 72 watt. It's more efficient and gives about the same amount of
> light, costs about the same and is rated to last for 1,000 hours, so that's
> one choice.
>
> Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
> announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
> only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
> we didn't have before.
>
> Then there are the screw-in CFLs, usually rated for about 26 watts. The
> prices have come down significantly on those and some are also rated for
> more light output than the old 100 watt. But it's a 3rd. choice because the
> types shaped like the old standard bulbs just appeared last year.
>
> Finally, about mid-2012, the major lamp companies introduced LED equivalents
> to the 100 watt also rated about 26 watts. That's a 4th. choice.
>
> So, what I see on retailer shelves is that the old 100 watt bulb can now be
> replaced by 3 or 4 alternatives depending upon what you want -- long life,
> low initial cost, efficiency, color, dimability, etc. The "2X" isn't in
> wide distribution yet; but the others are.
>
> One bulb disappeared and 3-4 alternatives with various performance options
> are now on the shelves with the same thing already happening for the 75 watt
> that's being phased out now except that the alternatives are cheaper and
> more available.
>
> What doesn't seem to make sense is why some people bought stocks of the old
> 100 watt bulbs and are hoarding them.
>
> Tomsic
>
>
>
>
>
>
The problem I have with some of the new alternatives (e.g. CFL, LED) is
that they don't respond well to the use of conventional dimmers. A 100
watt bulb might be used full-on a small fraction of the time (i.e.
usually dimmed) and hence use much less than 100 watts on average.
Replacing it with a non-dimmable alternative might actually use a
comparable amount of energy, or even in rare instances more energy, with
less flexibility.
We have a mix of lighting technologies in our house -- old fashioned
incandescent, halogen, fluorescent tube, CFL, LED, and even neon -- each
chosen for its particular attributes of light output, energy
consumption, dimmability, color, configuration and mood.
>> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:48:16 -0500, Tomsic wrote:
>>
>>> They're in an "exempt" category which includes decorative,
>>> colored and other types which are not widely used.
>>
>> Makes sense.
>>
>>> Bulb choices for consumers actually increased in 2012.
>>
>> Doesn't make sense.
>>
>> How did removing bulb choices increase bulb choices?
>
>
> Well in the case of the 100 watt bulb during 2012, the 100 watt was replaced
>>
>>> They're in an "exempt" category which includes decorative,
>>> colored and other types which are not widely used.
>>
>> Makes sense.
>>
>>> Bulb choices for consumers actually increased in 2012.
>>
>> Doesn't make sense.
>>
>> How did removing bulb choices increase bulb choices?
>
>
> by the 72 watt. It's more efficient and gives about the same amount of
> light, costs about the same and is rated to last for 1,000 hours, so that's
> one choice.
>
> Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
> announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
> only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
> we didn't have before.
>
> Then there are the screw-in CFLs, usually rated for about 26 watts. The
> prices have come down significantly on those and some are also rated for
> more light output than the old 100 watt. But it's a 3rd. choice because the
> types shaped like the old standard bulbs just appeared last year.
>
> Finally, about mid-2012, the major lamp companies introduced LED equivalents
> to the 100 watt also rated about 26 watts. That's a 4th. choice.
>
> So, what I see on retailer shelves is that the old 100 watt bulb can now be
> replaced by 3 or 4 alternatives depending upon what you want -- long life,
> low initial cost, efficiency, color, dimability, etc. The "2X" isn't in
> wide distribution yet; but the others are.
>
> One bulb disappeared and 3-4 alternatives with various performance options
> are now on the shelves with the same thing already happening for the 75 watt
> that's being phased out now except that the alternatives are cheaper and
> more available.
>
> What doesn't seem to make sense is why some people bought stocks of the old
> 100 watt bulbs and are hoarding them.
>
> Tomsic
>
>
>
>
>
>
The problem I have with some of the new alternatives (e.g. CFL, LED) is
that they don't respond well to the use of conventional dimmers. A 100
watt bulb might be used full-on a small fraction of the time (i.e.
usually dimmed) and hence use much less than 100 watts on average.
Replacing it with a non-dimmable alternative might actually use a
comparable amount of energy, or even in rare instances more energy, with
less flexibility.
We have a mix of lighting technologies in our house -- old fashioned
incandescent, halogen, fluorescent tube, CFL, LED, and even neon -- each
chosen for its particular attributes of light output, energy
consumption, dimmability, color, configuration and mood.
cjt
Jan 26, 2013, 3:43:08 PM1/26/13
to
On 01/25/2013 04:59 PM, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> the White House and the libs more gun control instead of spending
> cuts to reduce the budget?
The cost of reasonable regulations will be far less than the societal
cost of scores of dead children.
Polls consistently show that people
> put creating jobs and reducing the deficit as top priorities. Banning
> assault weapons are way down the list. But it's a nice diversion
> courtesy of you libs.
>
> And if they aren't taking your guns, why did NY state just pass a
> law that makes the standard magazines sold with probably 90%
> of the legal pistols for self defense illegal? Not only are
> sales banned of any magazine greater than 7 rounds, but legal
> owners have a year to get rid of them. Before
> that, NY banned mags greater than 10 rounds. Now it's 7. See
> a trend here and why it's obvious what you libs are up to?
> of you libs. I'm sure you'll do the same thing when you ban fatty
> foods and have us all eating soylent green.
>
Fanaticism abounds on the Right.
> On Jan 25, 3:33 pm, dennisga...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com wrote:
>>> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
>>
>> I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
>>
>> They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
>
> Then if the govt is so broke and mired down, why is the focus of
>> On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:57:44 AM UTC-5, home...@home.com wrote:
>>> 75 watt incandescent bulbs were banned on January 1 of this year.
>>
>> I am so effing sick of this extremist rhetoric.
>>
>> They're not coming to take your light bulbs any more than they're coming to take your guns. Our Federal government is too broke and mired down in its own dysfunction to go around kicking in doors and smashing light bulbs, Elliott Ness style.
>
> the White House and the libs more gun control instead of spending
> cuts to reduce the budget?
The cost of reasonable regulations will be far less than the societal
cost of scores of dead children.
Polls consistently show that people
> put creating jobs and reducing the deficit as top priorities. Banning
> assault weapons are way down the list. But it's a nice diversion
> courtesy of you libs.
>
> And if they aren't taking your guns, why did NY state just pass a
> law that makes the standard magazines sold with probably 90%
> of the legal pistols for self defense illegal? Not only are
> sales banned of any magazine greater than 7 rounds, but legal
> owners have a year to get rid of them. Before
> that, NY banned mags greater than 10 rounds. Now it's 7. See
> a trend here and why it's obvious what you libs are up to?
>
>
>>
>> What's banned is the manufacture and importation of 75 watt incandescent bulbs, except for special-use types (i.e. rough service, floodlights, etc.).
>>
>> You can still use existing 75 Watt bulbs. You can still buy them as long as supplies hold out. A couple boxes of them will likely last you the rest of your life, and your kids will be used to CFL's so they won't care.
>
> Wow, you can still buy them until they run out.... How generous
>
>>
>> What's banned is the manufacture and importation of 75 watt incandescent bulbs, except for special-use types (i.e. rough service, floodlights, etc.).
>>
>> You can still use existing 75 Watt bulbs. You can still buy them as long as supplies hold out. A couple boxes of them will likely last you the rest of your life, and your kids will be used to CFL's so they won't care.
>
> of you libs. I'm sure you'll do the same thing when you ban fatty
> foods and have us all eating soylent green.
>
Fanaticism abounds on the Right.
Ed Pawlowski
Jan 26, 2013, 4:08:49 PM1/26/13
to
point out where I said it was a good thing. Stop putting words in my
mouth that I did not say.
If you read what I did write above, it was about the number of
choices. Yes, one was taken away for whatever reason, good or bad,
but that does not mean we don't have more choices that we did years
ago. Used to be, you bough an incandescent light bulb, your only
choice. Now, you can still find them in most stores, but if not, you
can find CFL, FL, LED, low energy incans, and so forth. They did not
exist some years ago.
Old bulb type = one choice
Many new types = more choices.
You certainly twisted a simple statement.
Oh, I happen to like LEDs and once they have a better price point,
they will be my first choice. I happen to like the white light they
emit.
You seem to have a lot of anger built up.
bob haller
Jan 26, 2013, 4:17:06 PM1/26/13
to
I put a halogen on a dimmer once. It appeared to dim and work fine,
although I decided the dimmer got near zero use so i replaced the
dimmer with a regular switch and installed CFLs
Getting rid of incandescents saves power and avoids power companys
building more power plants that cost big bucks and would impact every
rate payer.......
The LED bulbs in new RVs look really great
although I decided the dimmer got near zero use so i replaced the
dimmer with a regular switch and installed CFLs
Getting rid of incandescents saves power and avoids power companys
building more power plants that cost big bucks and would impact every
rate payer.......
The LED bulbs in new RVs look really great
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Jan 26, 2013, 4:35:40 PM1/26/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net>
wrote:
>"tra...@optonline.net" <tra...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> On Jan 25, 12:38�pm, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> writes:
>>> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:15:46 -0800, Art Harris wrote:
>>>
responsible for the fire due to a faulty product. Use the product
other than as directed and there is no warranty - and no liability on
the part of the manufacturer / seller.
wrote:
>"tra...@optonline.net" <tra...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> On Jan 25, 12:38�pm, Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> writes:
>>> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:15:46 -0800, Art Harris wrote:
>>>
>>> >>> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>>>
>>>
>Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
What will NOT happen is the manufacturer of the lamp being found
responsible for the fire due to a faulty product. Use the product
other than as directed and there is no warranty - and no liability on
the part of the manufacturer / seller.
cl...@snyder.on.ca
Jan 26, 2013, 4:56:29 PM1/26/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:37:44 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
The brass socket style have craft paper type insulator between the
brass shell and the internal socket. Overheat and it burns. Usually no
fire - but now there is no electrical insulation - and the brass,
having been overheated, looses it's temper - gets soft - and now the
pressed together shell gets loose, and it is easily knocked apert - so
the shell now shorts to the exposed terminal on the socket - and the
lamp becomes "live"
>
If it is an open lamp, that's generally the extent of the damage -
untill someone touches it and gets a (possibly serious) shock.
If the lamp is an enclosed fixture, snug to the ceiling or wall, the
insulation in the fixture breakes down - the insulation in the socket
- if brass- deteriorates as above, with the same result - except it
can short to ground - possibly blowing the fuse - possibly
establishing an arc which can ignite anything flamable - including,
possibly, the wire insulation in the box.
The high heat can also melt or warp plastic shades and difusers - and
depending on the design, the plastic can contact the hot bulb -
causing either fire or toxic smoke.
In a best case scenario, the overheated socket simply looses contact
pressure on the center contact, causing the lamp to flicker or not
work. The high resistance connection - if left powered on for too
long, can severely overheat and, again, POSSIBLY cause a fire or
damage to house wiring in the box.
At the very least - the socket/fixture itself is damaged and requires
replacement.
Replacing with a ceramic (not plastic) socket can REDUCE some of the
problems, again depending on the fixture design.
GENERALLY ceramic sockets are rated higher than brass (or steel) and
ALWAYS higher than plastic (which should really be outlawed).
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
>I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
>sure (which is why I asked).
>
>Nobody cited anything specific - and - well I guess the onus is on me to
>figure out what the ratings actually mean.
>
>I presume (but this is an assumption), that a 60 Watt rating means it can
>handle at least double that forever - but I am clear that this is just an
>assumption.
And you know what ASS U ME does - - -
>sure (which is why I asked).
>
>Nobody cited anything specific - and - well I guess the onus is on me to
>figure out what the ratings actually mean.
>
>I presume (but this is an assumption), that a 60 Watt rating means it can
>handle at least double that forever - but I am clear that this is just an
>assumption.
>
>I hear all the houses-burning-down scare stories - and I don't deny that
>(because I don't know) but without any facts to back them up - that
>assumption is based on similar logic to mine (i.e., wild eyed guesses).
What happens depends on the construction of the lamp.
>I hear all the houses-burning-down scare stories - and I don't deny that
>(because I don't know) but without any facts to back them up - that
>assumption is based on similar logic to mine (i.e., wild eyed guesses).
The brass socket style have craft paper type insulator between the
brass shell and the internal socket. Overheat and it burns. Usually no
fire - but now there is no electrical insulation - and the brass,
having been overheated, looses it's temper - gets soft - and now the
pressed together shell gets loose, and it is easily knocked apert - so
the shell now shorts to the exposed terminal on the socket - and the
lamp becomes "live"
>
If it is an open lamp, that's generally the extent of the damage -
untill someone touches it and gets a (possibly serious) shock.
If the lamp is an enclosed fixture, snug to the ceiling or wall, the
insulation in the fixture breakes down - the insulation in the socket
- if brass- deteriorates as above, with the same result - except it
can short to ground - possibly blowing the fuse - possibly
establishing an arc which can ignite anything flamable - including,
possibly, the wire insulation in the box.
The high heat can also melt or warp plastic shades and difusers - and
depending on the design, the plastic can contact the hot bulb -
causing either fire or toxic smoke.
In a best case scenario, the overheated socket simply looses contact
pressure on the center contact, causing the lamp to flicker or not
work. The high resistance connection - if left powered on for too
long, can severely overheat and, again, POSSIBLY cause a fire or
damage to house wiring in the box.
At the very least - the socket/fixture itself is damaged and requires
replacement.
Replacing with a ceramic (not plastic) socket can REDUCE some of the
problems, again depending on the fixture design.
GENERALLY ceramic sockets are rated higher than brass (or steel) and
ALWAYS higher than plastic (which should really be outlawed).
home...@home.com
Jan 26, 2013, 5:24:33 PM1/26/13
to
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:59:09 -0500, "=" <not....@no.net> wrote:
>Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
>announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
>only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
>we didn't have before.
What are they? I assume the 72 watt replacements are halogen, but what
>Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
>announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
>only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
>we didn't have before.
makes these work?
bob haller
Jan 26, 2013, 5:31:19 PM1/26/13
to
On Jan 26, 5:24 pm, homeow...@home.com wrote:
type.
or a regular fuse or circuit breaker that would blow if a too high a
wattage lamp is used
CFLs run so cool the incandescent rating could likely support a twice
the wattage CFL of a standard incandescent
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:59:09 -0500, "=" <not.m...@no.net> wrote:
> >Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
> >announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
> >only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
> >we didn't have before.
>
> What are they? I assume the 72 watt replacements are halogen, but what
> makes these work?
fixtures should have thermal fuse protection, preferably a restable
> >Another choice is the so-called "2X" bulb that a company called ADLT
> >announced. It gives the same light output as the old 100 watt, but draws
> >only 50 watts and is rated for 1500 hours. That's an additional choice that
> >we didn't have before.
>
> What are they? I assume the 72 watt replacements are halogen, but what
> makes these work?
type.
or a regular fuse or circuit breaker that would blow if a too high a
wattage lamp is used
CFLs run so cool the incandescent rating could likely support a twice
the wattage CFL of a standard incandescent
Doug Miller
Jan 26, 2013, 6:18:35 PM1/26/13
to
Joe Mastroianni <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in news:ke11qj$1lf$1...@dont-email.me:
[lots of irrelevant stuff snipped]
in a fixture labelled 60W max. You obviously refuse to accept the idea that the rating is there
for a reason, and you obviously intend on doing what you want to do, regardless of the UL
listing, regardless of all the advice you have received to the contrary -- so why don't you just
shut up and go do it?
[lots of irrelevant stuff snipped]
>
> Does someone with more acumen than I have insight into where
> in that document it spells out the safety factor inherent in
> the standard?
You've been trying for a couple days now to get somebody to tell you it's OK to put a 75W bulb
> Does someone with more acumen than I have insight into where
> in that document it spells out the safety factor inherent in
> the standard?
in a fixture labelled 60W max. You obviously refuse to accept the idea that the rating is there
for a reason, and you obviously intend on doing what you want to do, regardless of the UL
listing, regardless of all the advice you have received to the contrary -- so why don't you just
shut up and go do it?
bud--
Jan 26, 2013, 6:31:51 PM1/26/13
to
On 1/26/2013 5:18 PM, Doug Miller wrote:
>
> regardless of all the advice you have received to the contrary
But in what may be a miracle, I think everyone agreed on this one.
>
> regardless of all the advice you have received to the contrary
gregz
Jan 26, 2013, 9:55:31 PM1/26/13
to
because they are not cost effective. Perhaps we got enough plants.
Greg
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 26, 2013, 10:29:22 PM1/26/13
to
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:18:35 +0000, Doug Miller wrote:
> You've been trying for a couple days now to get somebody to tell you it's OK to put a 75W bulb
> in a fixture labelled 60W max. You obviously refuse to accept the idea that the rating is there
> for a reason, and you obviously intend on doing what you want to do, regardless of the UL
> listing, regardless of all the advice you have received to the contrary -- so why don't you just
> shut up and go do it?
I think you missed the post from this morning (9:03am)
> You've been trying for a couple days now to get somebody to tell you it's OK to put a 75W bulb
> in a fixture labelled 60W max. You obviously refuse to accept the idea that the rating is there
> for a reason, and you obviously intend on doing what you want to do, regardless of the UL
> listing, regardless of all the advice you have received to the contrary -- so why don't you just
> shut up and go do it?
showing that I followed the overwhelming advice o the
group and bought a SMALL set of CFLs to install into
the lamps.
Here's what I had written:
Joe Mastroianni
Jan 26, 2013, 10:31:00 PM1/26/13
to
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:31:51 -0600, bud-- wrote:
> But in what may be a miracle, I think everyone agreed on this one.
Even me!
> But in what may be a miracle, I think everyone agreed on this one.
The 75Watt Par 30 bulb was just too hot for the lamps.
So I replaced all the bulbs with SMALL CFL bulbs.
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 27, 2013, 7:37:40 PM1/27/13
to
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 03:31:00 +0000 (UTC), Joe Mastroianni
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:31:51 -0600, bud-- wrote:
>
>> But in what may be a miracle, I think everyone agreed on this one.
>
>Even me!
>
>The 75Watt Par 30 bulb was just too hot for the lamps.
>
>So I replaced all the bulbs with SMALL CFL bulbs.
>
That may not be such a good idea. CFLs can easily overheat in
<j...@coohoo.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:31:51 -0600, bud-- wrote:
>
>> But in what may be a miracle, I think everyone agreed on this one.
>
>Even me!
>
>The 75Watt Par 30 bulb was just too hot for the lamps.
>
>So I replaced all the bulbs with SMALL CFL bulbs.
>
fixtures that weren't intended for them.
gonjah
Jan 27, 2013, 9:04:39 PM1/27/13
to
On 1/24/2013 11:56 PM, Joe Mastroianni wrote:
> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
> a 60W bulb.
>
> I have a desk lamp of the "brave little toaster" style which says to use
> a 60W bulb.
>
> Inside the light, it 'says' 60 watts.
> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>
> http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/12036539/img/12036539.jpg
>
> My wife insists on a 75 Watt flood, which gives the right amount of
> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>
> light, but it gets hot as blazes.
>
> How much do you think 125% over the maximum matters?
>
The space-time continuum will rip apart and the universe will explode.
>
Dan Espen
Jan 27, 2013, 9:18:52 PM1/27/13
to
Seems like...
> I followed your advice and found shorter CFL bulbs.
> http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/12046713/img/12046713.jpg
>
> They have about half the light but they don't stick out anymore.
> And, those Halogen 75 Watt Par30 bulbs were blazing hot!
>
> The CFL is almost cool to the touch so it's a good solution
> that fits the problem set without too many compromises.
--
Dan Espen
gregz
Jan 27, 2013, 10:18:51 PM1/27/13
to
their expected lifetime expired. I suspect temperature was really high at
times. I ran two CFL's that way until finally went to dark on relay.
Greg
Rick
Jan 27, 2013, 10:25:36 PM1/27/13
to
"Joe Mastroianni" <j...@coohoo.com> wrote in message
news:kdv1fo$5bu$1...@dont-email.me...
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:27 -0500, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
> I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> sure (which is why I asked).
Nothing specific about about the lamp itself, but
>
>> Nothing to worry about except the fire then...
>
> I personally doubt it will cause a fire - but I must say that I'm not
> sure (which is why I asked).
http://thenewsherald.com/articles/2013/01/26/news/doc5102dd038de0e262649155.txt
k...@attt.bizz
Jan 28, 2013, 9:23:15 AM1/28/13
to
=
Jan 28, 2013, 10:29:29 AM1/28/13
to
"Rick" <itsno...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:V6ydnUncgMgzcpjM...@giganews.com...
torchiere which indeed is a fire hazard for lots of reasons including the
high possibility of curtains/drapes blowing onto the hot surface of the
bulb. A few years ago, (1992-97) articles reported that halogen torchiers
were favorites of college dorm students as they could cook on them using the
dimmer to control the heat. Some of those torchieres used 500 watt bulbs
and then, later on, 350 watt bulbs.
But, what triggered the demise of halogen torchieres was the fire that
destroyed the home of Lionel Hampton. When the cause of that fire was traced
to a torchiere, people got excited, the CPSC got involved, UL tests were
changed to require a wire or glass guard around the bulb. Then, as energy
laws were passed in various places, torchieres had to become more efficient
and did so by a redesign using CFL bulbs. Some manufacturers also
redesigned torchieres into floor lamps. Here's the story:
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Torchiere+safety+push.-a019090478 and
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1997-09-17/business/9709170061_1_halogen-lamps-torchiere
Tomsic
gregz
Jan 28, 2013, 9:33:59 PM1/28/13
to
Nice color temp, but of course not as bright as 500 watt. Even used same
dimmer.
Bulb bought at The Home Depot many years ago, as a dim able CFL. It was $
15-20 back then, and apparently a quality lamp.
Greg
=
Jan 29, 2013, 10:34:47 AM1/29/13
to
"gregz" <ze...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:412037122381119720.40...@news.eternal-september.org...
this NG. I've also had some CFLs, including a nice 3-way, that have been
working just fine for 9+ years now. I think buying Energy Star CFLs does
make a difference in the quality of the product.
Tomsic
ron...@sbcglobal.net
Nov 10, 2013, 4:15:47 PM11/10/13
to
You warning for the fool came too late. He's been drawn and quartered, keel hauled, burned at the stake and hung until dead for his hanous disregard for the law.
Stormin Mormon
Nov 10, 2013, 5:59:07 PM11/10/13
to
Order beat his knuckles with a ruler until he
recited ten Mail Hairys.
--
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages