| FILE 8/161 | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|||
|
| File information | |
| Filename: | Screenshot_20210522-113328.jpg |
| Album name: | LAllenLighting / CFL lamps |
| Manufacturer: | Timeguard |
| Wattage: | 36w |
| Date manufactured: | 2000s - 2010s |
| Filesize: | 137 KiB |
| Date added: | 22 May, 2021 |
| Dimensions: | 847 x 671 pixels |
| Displayed: | 421 times |
| URL: | http://80.229.24.59:9232/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=15891 |
| Favourites: | Add to Favourites |
Comment 1 to 5 of 5 Page: 1 |
|
|||
|
That is one funkly lamp eh lol.
|
|
|||
|
I remember when these were sold. There were also versions which were like a normal 20w CFL but on it's side. The main problem with these was that no well known companies made them meaning your only option was to get low quality ones. I think some versions were also PIR and instant start so not good at all. If I had a fitting with one of these I'd either run it on a photocell or have it on 24/7.
|
|
|||
|
Reminds of some things Opple did - Proprietary lamp with questionable future availability. Though it's interesting thought experiment what we would have thought if we would be around in the early 80s when the 2D were introduced....
|
|
|||
|
I’m surprised these didn’t catch on more?, sadly these were cheaply made tube with daylight white halo phosphates!, like Ollie says, if the top manufacturers would have used tri-phosphor T5s and coiled them like this, I reckon they would have found a market in industry?
|
|
|||
|
That would be allready fulfilled by the cheaper to make and better efficiency PL
|
Comment 1 to 5 of 5 Page: 1 |