My Tractor Forum banner

21 - 40 of 45 Posts

·
Make Better Mowers
Joined
·
2,011 Posts
I think of tractors as larger multi-use machines that can have different attachments for different purposes. I think of a riding mower as something that basically only cuts grass. That is what 95% plus of lawn tractors or garden tractors are.
My JD445 comes to mind with this statement. With the deck on, it's about 12 - 13 hundred pounds. Certainly not simply a lawn mower. Yet, that's its purpose to me. Ninty-nine percent of the time, it mows. There are hydraulic hookups for attachments other than the deck, but they're never used. I have hauled a heavy trailer with it but it's used for mowing. You'll never guess how the deck is activated......the PTO is a driveshaft from the hydrostat. That shaft sits just below the other shaft that propels the machine by powering the hydro from the engine. But, it's simply a multi-thousand dollar lawn mower rather than a tractor, I guess. Did I mention the Ag tires?

I've enjoyed the sparring moment we've had here but this is my last response.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #22 (Edited)
PTO typically referred to a shaft for power was taken from a machine or tractor to manually Drive another item or an attachment. A lawn mower cuts grass so the deck isn't actually an attachment it's part of the mower. Once again just a given.
It's also funny how the term pto is used much more for a switch when you have an electric clutch than it is for a lever to engage the blades if you're arguing it is a PTO taking power from the engine to power the deck wouldn't they both be the same and both a pto?
Well, at the risk of going somewhere I don't care to go...

A Power Take Off - PTO - is a term for any of many methods of getting auxiliary power off a machine besides the wheel drive system. Some are shafts that can have a driveshaft attached. Some are belt drives. Some are friction drives - like a flywheel. Some are hydraulic. Many large tractors had belt-drive PTO's, especially older ones before the 3-point hitch. Any PTO has a method of engaging and disengaging, that can include electric clutches, mechanical clutches, gearshift driven from the transmission, hydraulic. My ZTT42 Cub has two pulleys stacked on the engine driveshaft, one for the trannys and one for the deck. The deck one has an electric clutch, making it the PTO. The type of PTO's used would be determined by the intended use and engineering needs for the implements available. A PTO is what manufacturers call all these things.

A lawn tractor/riding lawn mower/garden tractor (take your pick of terms) will have a PTO of some kind to drive the mower deck. Even the machines used only for mowing have a PTO that engages, disengages and drives the deck, exclusive of the ground-drive system. And most if not all of the "tractor-look" machines have a removable deck, so technically it's an attachment, even if it never gets detached.

How a PTO is used depends on the needs of the operator. If, as you say, 99% of the users just mow grass, then all they need is the mower-deck PTO.

A walk behind mower with blades bolted to the engine driveshaft does not need a PTO. And if you want to discuss them there is a forum on this website for them - it's way at the bottom of the forum menu.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
My JD445 comes to mind with this statement. With the deck on, it's about 12 - 13 hundred pounds. Certainly not simply a lawn mower. Yet, that's its purpose to me. Ninty-nine percent of the time, it mows. There are hydraulic hookups for attachments other than the deck, but they're never used. I have hauled a heavy trailer with it but it's used for mowing. You'll never guess how the deck is activated......the PTO is a driveshaft from the hydrostat. That shaft sits just below the other shaft that propels the machine by powering the hydro from the engine. But, it's simply a multi-thousand dollar lawn mower rather than a tractor, I guess. Did I mention the Ag tires?

I've enjoyed the sparring moment we've had here but this is my last response.
I'm not sparring or offended that you have a different opinion just don't try to change mine. I won't try to change yours either but I will always restate mine.
I agree with you that a 455 is a tractor. It is bigger and heavier than a Craftsman LT1000 or a JD LA105, L110, D110, E100, STX 38, even LT133.
These are all riding mowers to me.
None have shaft or PTO driven decks like a 455.
Most of them are not made for attachments unless you call putting a pin through a hole in the back and pulling something an attachment. It is by definition but a far cry away from a snow blower and enclosed cab on bigger JD.

Just because a tractor (455) is only used to cut grass doesn't make it only a lawn mower, but all the others I listed are intended to and basically only capable of cutting grass for the most part.
The fact that I can drive a STX 38 around on a farm, or maybe put a blade on the front and scrape snow or level dirt or gravel...doesn't make it a tractor to me. It is a riding mower with some attachments/accessories available.

We all see things differently. I think JD since know for tractors and farm implements...and darn good ones too, leans toward the name use for perceived quality and durability reasons. It works too.

Also worth mentioning as I touched on before that I think its a F735 JD is not thought of my many or all as a tractor as it is mode funny. A big front beck mower. I don't know what attachments or changes are available but it has multi-cyl water cooled engine, PTO, hydraulic deck lift power steering, all things that a tractor would have but many say it a big lawn mower or call them a zero turn.
My Grasshopper has hydros (eatons even) and PTO shaft with gearbox even to drive deck but and there are accessories like snowblowers, brushes, plows, pull behind powered baggers...yet has anyone ever called a grasshoper front deck a tractor??? Not many. They call them riding mowers, machine, ztr, zero turn or just grasshopper.
Probably varies by regions too.

No hard feelings....take care.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
Well, at the risk of going somewhere I don't care to go...

A Power Take Off - PTO - is a term for any of many methods of getting auxiliary power off a machine besides the wheel drive system. Some are shafts that can have a driveshaft attached. Some are belt drives. Some are friction drives - like a flywheel. Some are hydraulic. Many large tractors had belt-drive PTO's, especially older ones before the 3-point hitch. Any PTO has a method of engaging and disengaging, that can include electric clutches, mechanical clutches, gearshift driven from the transmission, hydraulic. My ZTT42 Cub has two pulleys stacked on the engine driveshaft, one for the trannys and one for the deck. The deck one has an electric clutch, making it the PTO. The type of PTO's used would be determined by the intended use and engineering needs for the implements available. A PTO is what manufacturers call all these things.

A lawn tractor/riding lawn mower/garden tractor (take your pick of terms) will have a PTO of some kind to drive the mower deck. Even the machines used only for mowing have a PTO that engages, disengages and drives the deck, exclusive of the ground-drive system. And most if not all of the "tractor-look" machines have a removable deck, so technically it's an attachment, even if it never gets detached.

How a PTO is used depends on the needs of the operator. If, as you say, 99% of the users just mow grass, then all they need is the mower-deck PTO.

A walk behind mower with blades bolted to the engine driveshaft does not need a PTO. And if you want to discuss them there is a forum on this website for them - it's way at the bottom of the forum menu.
All true but mainly by definition.
I'm not convinced the term PTO even has to mean on a moving tractor or piece of driven equipment. You could have an engine mounted to a table that drives a saw blade through a PTO. That would take out the exclusivity of having or needing a ground drive system to have a 2nd system powered by a PTO.

Of course decks are removable and by definition it is attachment as why I agree all you stated is technically true by definition. Many/most people consider the deck as part or the machine and it's a given.
The transmission is removable too but no one calls it an attachment. They assume and expect it to be there as they do with deck.

Manufacturers use terms very loosely although in PTO they are by definition correct, just not what a lot of people expect or picture when they see the term PTO. Many think more of the shaft or belt drives to items you often hook up and unhook to a machine like you mentioned. Things like pull behind decks, generators, water pumps etc. I don't know many more than that as I am a city boy who uses riding mowers. Country guys use tractors a lot.

Toro, Hondas, JD and others all make walk behind mowers without the blade bolted to the "driveshaft"/ crankshaft. JD and Honda use a clutch and Toro uses a belt and idler.
This by definition is a PTO system but manufacturers rarely if even use PTO to refer to any part on these machines. Odd.

They call a lever or Button switch a PTO often with no mention of PTO switch or engagement lever or switch. They never call the cable that pulls clutch tight or moves idler to tighten belt a PTO cable but riders do. Again odd.

Is not the system of the belt, shaft, idler etc the PTO and not just the thing that engages it??

Not like a manufacturer doing something makes it right or correct but sometimes they do ,maybe by accident, get it technically correct.

Just observations. It is not consistent.

And that walk behind section....It's there but few people end up there posting. I see all new posts and not many pop up.
Today was one about a JS John Deere with running speed issue. I was happy!
My preferences are as I started out. I don't like the word PTO being used for a deck engagement unless it being driven out the front, rear, or side of a machine I don't like the work tractor use for a residential grass cutting machine that is sold in a department store for under 2500--lots under 1500.

My wife doesn't like the word moist although a great cake is very moist and by definition the word is 100% correct whether she likes it or not.

I will call the next thing in front of her that has high water content "tractor"
"These brownies are really tractor" Then I will get to rant all about our discussion here.
Oh....goood times.

"Pastor Buddy OUT!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
The peeve isn't such a big deal - and I agree in general, but not as it relates to this site's name. All manner of mowers and tractors are discussed here, all the way from the tiny grass-cut only machines to those that are as big as a small house.

Probably not the place to get into that discussion in this thread though...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,472 Posts
I also hate the word PTO. Or I guess that's really an abbreviation. There is no power takeoff on a riding lawn mower at least very very very few. This is a tractor term that gets carried over and should have got been gotten rid of a long time ago. Certainly you can say you take power off of the engine for the pulley but duh, if it wasn't for that you'd be sitting there with it humming and not even moving.
That is so very wrong on so many levels.

You say "The pulley". That in itself is wrong. Most lawn an garden tractors these days have at least two pulleys on the crankshaft. The first one is always powered and drives the belt going to the transmission.

The second pulley is usually controlled by a clutch of some sort, usually electrically these days, and provides the power for implements, usually the mower deck, but it can also be used to power a snow blower or a roto-tiller or other things. The ability to turn on and off the power to implements is the very definition of a Power Take Off (PTO). And if you look at the parts drawings from most lawn and garden tractor manufacturers, the pulley that can be switched on and off is called the PTO pulley.

The term PTO is not specific to farm tractors. Ask any dump truck driver what powers the hydraulic pump that provides the power to raise and lower the dump bed of his truck and he will say "a PTO".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
That is so very wrong on so many levels.

You say "The pulley". That in itself is wrong. Most lawn an garden tractors these days have at least two pulleys on the crankshaft. The first one is always powered and drives the belt going to the transmission.

The second pulley is usually controlled by a clutch of some sort, usually electrically these days, and provides the power for implements, usually the mower deck, but it can also be used to power a snow blower or a roto-tiller or other things. The ability to turn on and off the power to implements is the very definition of a Power Take Off (PTO). And if you look at the parts drawings from most lawn and garden tractor manufacturers, the pulley that can be switched on and off is called the PTO pulley.

The term PTO is not specific to farm tractors. Ask any dump truck driver what powers the hydraulic pump that provides the power to raise and lower the dump bed of his truck and he will say "a PTO".
I covered this is a follow up post.
By DEFINITION....yes. It is all correct. I even gave example that a PTO could be for a belt that spans a saw on an engine mounted to table 10 ft away.

Since you (and others) are being picky about fact ans defs. ..Most these days ARE NOT controlled electrically. Most riding mowers....there's that word or words to be picky again, do not have a PTO switch and clutch.
Most RERs, and uo to 42 inch have a lever and you are correct that most manufacturers call it a PTO. Many do not refer to the pulley or idler or the arm that swings when you move the lever as a PTO. I have a Troy Bilt pulled up now and they call the cable a "cable PTO" and "handle asm PTO, and the "manual PTO" diagram only include the handle and cable and no other PTO parts even mentioned in that diagram...but the idler and pulley "floating idler bracket" , "rod asm idler guide", and "flat idler pulley"

So they are not being accurate or consistent in what they call things.

I have said before that I am aware that the definition and the way most people refer and thing of a PTO is the ability to send power to and turn on and off an implement. I just maintain that MOST people do not think of a deck of a mower as an implement. YES. technically it is removable and an accessory but not how most people think of them.
Also note other post that using the definition and not what many or most people think of ...a clutched walk behind mower has a PTO.

NOW??? is the PTO a system? The lever you pull to engage blade? The idler (toro) that moves to tighten belt to engage blade? The pulley on this idler?
Or can it be all or any.....or just whatever you chose to refer to as a PTO.

Big things have PTOs like the dump truck you mentioned. I had a 1947 Mack fire engine that had a PTO for the pump and a lever to engage it. THAT is what most people think of as a PTO. A shaft or belt that send power to something that is additional, not always attached or normally used and doesn't have to be the same attachment each time.
THAT's a PTO to many.

Definitely to me. I use PTOs for tractor PTOs unless it is a real old rider that has a rear PTO then I call it a PTO.

One cane say PTO, PTO switch, blade switch, deck switch, deck/blade engagement switch/button, clutch switch and the list goes on. All of these are correct at least partially.

I will stick to calling the switch a blade clutch switch and the lever the blade lever and calling little 42 inch under 650 lb machines with no extra shafts to drive accessories...riding mowers.
When I have a customer call one a tractor I giggle and think..man they must have never seen a real tractor. But see my definition or though of a tractor is different than some I guess.

I don't think anyone is wrong. Like a "sport car". Many cars are called that by manufacturer and many people would laugh and say they are no sport car but ---by definition----.
That's like using blue book for car prices. I DON'T CARE what any book or anyone says a car is worth.
A car is worth what a fairly large amount or potential buyer will pay for it....it could be said it worth what even one person is willing to pay for it.


Definitions are not ALL THAT matters. That's being pedantic.
As I have now said 3 times in the past 5 weeks.....IT is all RELATIVE...

Exacts are way to likely to keep things inside the box and I'll pass on that.
Everything should considered, questioned, tested, challenged, admired, respected, resisted....to what degree is up to the individual and their goals.
 

·
Make Better Mowers
Joined
·
2,011 Posts
I have seen lots of comments about how awful the Courage single cylinders are (were?), starting right after I bought the ZTT Cub, of course. I had not heard just why the Courage was problematic and your comment answered that. I'm happy to hear that I might be OK.

I had never looked at any of the tractor forums until I started outfitting that tractor so had not found all the good info available from folks. Now I have several go-to sites that are more than helpful - unless it leads to accumulating more tractors - and it has.
What I was referring to was all the plastic parts internally. In my book, plastic has NO place inside an engine.

I've enjoyed Kohler engines over the years, but I can't understand them making inferior ones to sell for less. Like JD selling Tennessee plant mowers to get into the market. All they're doing is hurting their name. People feel "taken" when they realize what it is they've purchased. These items should come with a warning label ie: Kohler - this engine may not perform well, it might cause you to replace parts - it might actually blow up rendering your implement useless JD - this machine does not represent our name's quality, you may find only a years worth of excellent service and with year # 2, find yourself replacing parts, adjusting parts, and/or increasing your 4 letter word vocabulary and finally by year three, replacing the entire machine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
I have come accross this more than once fuel line that collapsed into itself from the inside (Cheap thing to check) the fuel line looks perfect from the outside but is shot on the inside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
I really see no purpose in these shutoffs except to prevent fuel leakage and associated pollution control that is handled anyway by keeping carb systems in good repair. i.e. its overkill.
I.think its actual purpose is to prevent desiling (run on after the engine is turned off.)

Interesting find however. My 2017 Simplicity Broadmoor usually takes around 30 seconds to start, now I'm suspecting I have the same fault. Tax for the follow up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #32
I.think its actual purpose is to prevent desiling (run on after the engine is turned off.)

Interesting find however. My 2017 Simplicity Broadmoor usually takes around 30 seconds to start, now I'm suspecting I have the same fault. Tax for the follow up.
I think you are right about the dieseling function, however my courage engine does not diesel since I disabled the solenoid. It did diesel before I adjusted the valves and hasn't since. It is fairly easy to remove and check the function of the solenoid with some 12 volt leads as directed in the service manual. I'm not sure what engine is in your Broadmoor, and it may have a different style solenoid or none at all.

This thread has some good info about how to go about checking the fuel system - mostly in the early posts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
I.think its actual purpose is to prevent desiling (run on after the engine is turned off.)

Interesting find however. My 2017 Simplicity Broadmoor usually takes around 30 seconds to start, now I'm suspecting I have the same fault. Tax for the follow up.
That could be an added benefit though few mowers diesel anyways. It is referred to as an anti backfire solenoid and put on by the manufacturer to prevent the pop at shutoff and urged by the EPA to prevent wasted fuel each time it's shut down.
 

·
Make Better Mowers
Joined
·
2,011 Posts
That could be an added benefit though few mowers diesel anyways. It is referred to as an anti backfire solenoid and put on by the manufacturer to prevent the pop at shutoff and urged by the EPA to prevent wasted fuel each time it's shut down.
In my world of small tractors, lowering the rpm for a couple of moments before shutdown generally does the trick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
That could be an added benefit though few mowers diesel anyways. It is referred to as an anti backfire solenoid and put on by the manufacturer to prevent the pop at shutoff and urged by the EPA to prevent wasted fuel each time it's shut down.
Typical of the EPA to make something too complicated and unreliable for the purpose. I guess it works perfectly for saving gas if your engine won't run. :sidelaugh

Reminds me of the LEEDS office complex built for our DNRC in Montana - all sorts of cutesy enviro things that just didn't meet muster for usability, like:
- auto light switches that don't work well and are so mysterious no one can figure them out
- LED lights that look like fluorescent tubes - at least 1/3 failed in the first year
- counter tops by bathroom sinks made from recycled paper - stain immediately and need refinishing at least every 6 months.
- recycling holes in counter tops for materials that can't be recycled and take up all the counter space.
- low water toilets with a "yellow" and "brown" button that simply don't flush without several brown button cycles and smell awful - replaced in a year because they were so non-functional.
- Teensy natural-light cupolas that are so far above the ceiling they don't let in much light at all, and add to heat loss.

IMHO these kinds of things don't really contribute to conservation and are gimmicks to make it sound like you are doing something cool and give bureaucrats a job.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Your blamed "bureaucrats" as being at fault for these ****-poor products, but the real fault would lie with the architect, designer or contractor who selected junk. Everything you mentioned has excellent quality counterparts.

I've worked with building codes for years (decades actually, I spent my career as a plans reviewer and inspector; certified or licensed in several states. Most actually.),

The high energy saving codes (you mentioned LEED) is actually an option, and not state mandated. And these codes are performance codes, and don't mandate exactly how the savings are to be obtained.

Based of what was selected, its obvious to me that whoever picked out these products is an amateur. A design professional would never pick products where the customer would not be completely satisified.

But I share your pain. Theres just so much crap on the shelves today, junk coming in from China that's not certified or listed, fakes and copies it's a real challenge just to know what's good and what's not. An example, a couple of years ago or so, we were notified that fake Square D circuit breakers were being sold in the US. And they were failing after a year. I myself found faucets being sold here that were clearly not designed for potable water but not labeled as such.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
Typical of the EPA to make something too complicated and unreliable for the purpose. I guess it works perfectly for saving gas if your engine won't run. :sidelaugh

Reminds me of the LEEDS office complex built for our DNRC in Montana - all sorts of cutesy enviro things that just didn't meet muster for usability, like:
- auto light switches that don't work well and are so mysterious no one can figure them out
- LED lights that look like fluorescent tubes - at least 1/3 failed in the first year
- counter tops by bathroom sinks made from recycled paper - stain immediately and need refinishing at least every 6 months.
- recycling holes in counter tops for materials that can't be recycled and take up all the counter space.
- low water toilets with a "yellow" and "brown" button that simply don't flush without several brown button cycles and smell awful - replaced in a year because they were so non-functional.
- Teensy natural-light cupolas that are so far above the ceiling they don't let in much light at all, and add to heat loss.

IMHO these kinds of things don't really contribute to conservation and are gimmicks to make it sound like you are doing something cool and give bureaucrats a job.
I agree! Most govt messed things up.
Anything that becomes popular enough....here they come to regulate it. Wait, they say to make sure it is safe.
And people buy this line of crap!

There is a new produce inspection going into effect soon. It is actually part of a huge sweeping multi-decade law passed years ago where the requirements go into effect at certain years. Typical of govt to sneak things in this way.
"Don't worry...you have until 20xx to worry about that" well 20xx is here!!

Sad thing is too many people accept it in the name of safety.
My son (almost 22) almost always sides with them. Maybe just to be opposite or me since I am SO ANTI----EVERYTHING!!!
I keep telling him...yes we need some govt and oversights, but not nearly this many and certainly NOT MORE.
You do realize we got this far and built this entire country and survived this long with far fewer (insert word you don't like here- because it's all true)..is what I tell him.
If I get sick from some lettuce, I will stop eating that lettuce or whatever. I certainly don't want the EPA or whoever out at farms and requiring a new lettuce inspection or paperwork audit and whatever else they are talking about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
Your blamed "bureaucrats" as being at fault for these ****-poor products, but the real fault would lie with the architect, designer or contractor who selected junk. Everything you mentioned has excellent quality counterparts.

I've worked with building codes for years (decades actually, I spent my career as a plans reviewer and inspector; certified or licensed in several states. Most actually.),

The high energy saving codes (you mentioned LEED) is actually an option, and not state mandated. And these codes are performance codes, and don't mandate exactly how the savings are to be obtained.

Based of what was selected, its obvious to me that whoever picked out these products is an amateur. A design professional would never pick products where the customer would not be completely satisified.

But I share your pain. Theres just so much crap on the shelves today, junk coming in from China that's not certified or listed, fakes and copies it's a real challenge just to know what's good and what's not. An example, a couple of years ago or so, we were notified that fake Square D circuit breakers were being sold in the US. And they were failing after a year. I myself found faucets being sold here that were clearly not designed for potable water but not labeled as such.
I agree with your assessment in full, but I know whereof I speak, being one of the bureaucrats that was working for the state. The rest of the story includes:

- The state architects bureau (ie bureaucrats) was charged with design and management of the construction. Montana is substantially below surrounding states for State employee salaries. Good folks frequently abandon Montana for better pay.
- They have been obsessed with money savings and cost cutting for my full 35 year career, usually at the cost of quality materials and design. While they are not amateurs as you suggest, their motivation is not customer satisfaction and quality, but least-cost and low-bid as mandated by state law. Some state rules have been adopted to allow for evaluating bids based on quality assurance, but they are largely ineffective or do not accomplish the intent with the evaluation criteria.
- In the old office basement, my desktop thermometer regularly showed 55 degrees in winter due to terrible "insulated" windows and installation, an example of many shortcuts taken in the design, materials and construction in the 1970's. (fortunately I had forestry field duties so could go outside and be warm)
- The new LEEDS office design was selected as a model demonstration of environmental responsibility by the natural resource agency and has a huge poster touting it as such.
- While the new design has many desirable features, like a window in every office (mine looked out at the electrical transformers), wood truss construction, recycled materials, efficient HVAC (maybe), the list I mentioned is just some of the many idiotic things done under the guise of environmental conservation.

My main observation and gripe here is that many things are being done that don't really further the cause of conservation that they promote, or they substitute other costs like manufacturing and materials that aren't compensated by energy usage savings. An example of this is CFL light bulbs that don't save a lot, have many poorly made versions where 7-year life is really 7-month life, and take several minutes to fully light up especially in cold environments.
 

·
Make Better Mowers
Joined
·
2,011 Posts
Oh yes, light bulbs. Bureaucrats and their "let's get rid of incandescence". I've used incandescent lighting for years, often for the heat they emit. Ideal for keeping young chickens warm and in the "pumphouse" for keeping the pipes from freezing. When their damned laws passed, I had to quickly order cases of the bulbs so that I wouldn't have to figure out new processes!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
Discussion Starter #40
Oh yes, light bulbs. Bureaucrats and their "let's get rid of incandescence". I've used incandescent lighting for years, often for the heat they emit. Ideal for keeping young chickens warm and in the "pumphouse" for keeping the pipes from freezing. When their damned laws passed, I had to quickly order cases of the bulbs so that I wouldn't have to figure out new processes!!!
I, too use light bulbs for keeping pipes from freezing. Not many things work better.

I absolutely was astonished by the "100 watt equivalent" program that was going on for a while where they substituted a 79 watt bulb for a 100 watt-er, and then tried to compare CFL's, incandescents and halogen bulbs by "equivalent watts" ("say whaaat?"). Sorry, but 100 watts =/ 79 watts, and other types of bulbs do not use the same wattage/light produced as incandenscents. I was trying to balance some indirect highlight spot lights with dark areas for a projection screen and it drove me batty trying to find the right amount of light, and include dimmers (har-har). And of course the color spectrum adds another level of confusion. Mostly, the main outcome was way too little light. I have quite a collection of useless light producing devices. Recently, when LED's became more affordable and some decorative and useful designs appeared, I finally found something workable.

I would like to use all my CFL's for target practice, but then I would have to sweep up all the toxic materials to protect the environment...

One note: I have been in the business of environmental conservation for nearly 50 years, and these trendy EPA things really irritate me because of their hypocrisy and deception (or ignorance) when looking at the comprehensive environmental costs...like the fuel-saving carb solenoid.
 
21 - 40 of 45 Posts
Top