induction lighting...converting my Scottsdale lights

[coincarwash.ca]

I am thinking of converting all my Scottsdale Metal Halide light lights and my parking lot lighting to induction lamps. I did one as a test with an 80 watt induction lamp and the colour temperature of the light is very good and the brightness of the light compaires to my 320 watt metal halide light is far brighter. The bulbs last 20 years and the electrical bill savings are huge.
It will cost me $120 to retrofit each bay if I do the installation myself, it takes about 10 minutes. Where is the best place to buy the bulbs and the ballasts.
I was going to order them from inductionlamps.com but not sure if they are cheapest...I was getting $20 off for buying 38 of them.

 

[pitzerwm]

If you are really saving electricity, then talk to your utility, they might have a program to help with the cost.

 

[Bubbles Galore]

Do you have a website where I can get more information? I was looking at switching to 6 bulb F8T32 electronic ballasts from my 175 W metal halides, but this sounds like a viable solution also.

 

[Bubbles Galore]

Nevermind, I missed the initial link...my bad...

Maybe I just need more education on lighting systems, but if the Lumen Efficacy is essentially the same between the two bulb types (+/- 5) then how can you have an 80 watt induction bulb put out as many lumens as a 320 watt metal halide?

This is the chart I'm referencing.

Thanks!

 

[bigleo48]

It will cost me $120 to retrofit each bay if I do the installation myself, it takes about 10 minutes.

How big are the ballasts? I have the Scottsdale units also and so I was wondering if they fit in the fixtures or are you using remote ballasts?

Big

 

[Greg Pack]

Same number of lumens or more than the Scottsdales?

I've got to replace a few ballasts-I wouldn't mind trying them. Keep us posted on this!

 

[MEP001]

Looking at their chart (which is a little confusing) the efficacy seems greater than the Scottsdale's pulse-start lamp. It doesn't look like anything larger than the 80-watt will fit inside the lens. The ballast itself is very small, smaller than the coil-and-core transformer that's in it now.

Going from 320-watt to 80-watt would pay for the conversion in energy savings over just one year.

 

[Ghetto Wash]

the efficacy seems greater than the Scottsdale's pulse-start lamp.

Efficacy - meaning lumens per watt, correct?

What about total lumens compared to total lumens. If I don't want to add additional fixtures, just convert the existing Scottsdale's, I would like equivalent "light".

 

[MEP001]

Efficacy - meaning lumens per watt, correct?

Sort of - it's a rating of lumens against energy consumed, but it scales the same as just comparing lumens per watt. I looked on some other sites and found one that claimed an efficacy rating of 150. The best fluorescents and pulse-start metal halides are 90.

What about total lumens compared to total lumens. If I don't want to add additional fixtures, just convert the existing Scottsdale's, I would like equivalent "light".

You won't get it with these conversions. The amount of light that can be produced is limited by the surface area of the bulb with phosphor coating. I saw some impressive fixtures on one site that were 4' long and had a long rectangular "circle" bulb - 200 watts at the efficacy rating of these conversions would almost equal the light a 320W Scottsdale at a huge energy savings.

 

[coincarwash.ca]

I have taken a photo of two of my Scottsdale lights
the one of the left is the original, the one on the right is the 80 watt induction bulb retrofit.....which looks better?
I didn't even put the shiny reflector back in yet.

 

[bigleo48]

Had a look at the street lights yesterday and they're bright. Don't really notice the difference, so that's good.

 

[bigleo48]

I have taken a photo of two of my Scottsdale lights
the one of the left is the original, the one on the right is the 80 watt induction bulb retrofit.....which looks better?
I didn't even put the shiny reflector back in yet.]

No a fair comparison if the MH bulb is older.

How much was the entire retrofit (ballast & bulb)?

 

[coincarwash.ca]

$120 US for the bulb and ballast combined...when I buy 20 of them.
$140 for each set if bought not in bulk.
Yes my old lights were 3 years old, but the new ones stay constant for years

 

[Bubbles Galore]

I'm going to have to claim complete ignorance, but if I have (2) 175 W metal halides and put up 2 of the 80 W induction fixtures in their place, will I at least equal to or greater light output with less electrical usage?

Thanks guys!

 

[Ghetto Wash]

I gotta say - it looks promising. I think I'll get on and try it on my next Scottsdale that goes out.

 

[coincarwash.ca]

I'm going to have to claim complete ignorance, but if I have (2) 175 W metal halides and put up 2 of the 80 W induction fixtures in their place, will I at least equal to or greater light output with less electrical usage?

Thanks guys!

I would say you only need 2 40w fixtures...a lot cheaper and only 80 watts of power usage. It will be way brighter than what you already have.

 

[soapy]

I recently replaced some metal halide bay lights with CFL lights. I replaced 900 watts of MH lights with only 210 watts of CFL lights and the bays are just as brite. I used 5- 42 watt CFL wall paks with great results. Cfl will not burn as long as the inductive lights but are a lot cheaper to purchase.

 

[MEP001]

I'm going to have to claim complete ignorance, but if I have (2) 175 W metal halides and put up 2 of the 80 W induction fixtures in their place, will I at least equal to or greater light output with less electrical usage?

If I read the chart right, if you're going from standard (not pulse-start) metal halides you'll actually get more light with less wattage.

I have taken a photo of two of my Scottsdale lights
the one of the left is the original, the one on the right is the 80 watt induction bulb retrofit.....which looks better?
I didn't even put the shiny reflector back in yet.

Two things about your photo: first, it's pretty well known that 3-year old Scottsdales that have been running 11 hours a night will be producing only a fraction of the light than when they were new. Second is that the lens is designed to cast light evenly in all directions from the bulb mounted in the center, and you've replaced that bulb with a ring that's almost touching the lens, completely changing how it lights an area. Without actually visiting your wash and seeing how well the bay is lit now than before, it's very difficult to tell the overall effectiveness of a conversion like that from a simple photo. The energy savings is obvious given the wattage change, and I wouldn't be surprised that the conversion is bright compared to a very aged metal halide, but there's simply no way you can get as much light from that 80W conversion than you would get from a properly functioning 320W pulse-start metal halide.

 

[Bubbles Galore]

If I read the chart right, if you're going from standard (not pulse-start) metal halides you'll actually get more light with less wattage.

I would assume that this would include less electrical usage correct? There isn't any point in me changing lights if there isn't any electrical savings.

What about cold starts? I know the F8T32 have the 0 degree electronic ballasts.

Thanks!

 

[soapy]

From what I read the inductive lights are good to -40 below for starting. The CFLs I recently put in are good to starting down to -13.