Popular Mechanics Puts Efficient Light Bulbs to the Test
Popular Mechanics just tested seven common energy-efficient, compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) for brightness, color, and power use. Can they compete with the traditional incandescent light bulbs that most of us use?
They sure can. Although the old-fashioned incandescent bulb measured slightly brighter than the equivalent CFLs, the test subjects in the Popular Mechanics study couldn’t see any significant difference. In fact, when it came to the overall quality of light, every single CFL scored higher than the incandescent: “In other words, the new fluorescent bulbs aren’t just better for both your wallet and the environment, they produce better light.”
To track the results, PM used a Konica Minolta CL-200 chroma meter to measure color temperature and brightness, and a Watts Up?
The N:Vision Soft White bulb got the highest score of an “A.” The study found it to be “one of the top bulbs for reading and illuminating faces, the best-in-test N:Vision was noticeably ‘slow to warm.’ Still, it was ‘nice, pleasing and good overall.” The N:Vision has an average cost of $5.97 each.
CORRECTION: I had previously noted that the Sylvania Double Life Soft White was the lowest rated CFL. This is incorrect: The bulb is not a CFL but the incandescent against which the other CFLS were measured. It received the lowest score of all bulbs.
The lowest rated CFLs were the GE Soft White (which produced “accurate” color but made details hard to distinguish) and the Westinghouse Soft White (which was an average scorer overall but hurt one person’s eyes while reading). Both bulbs earned a B+.
I regret the error.
See a comparison of all the CFLs tested here.
