They look very nice.
If you're getting 160 lumens, that's 160/683 watts as light, or 234 mw. If they consume 2.4 watts of electricity, then their efficiency is 0.234/2.4 or 9.76% efficiency.
The claims for the LED strips come out to 6% efficiency. The claims for your LEDs come out to 9.76%.
The claim of 6% efficiency is about right for most inexpensive conventional LEDs, which of course is what are in the 5-meter LED strips.
The claim of nearly 10% efficiency is believable too. Philips, for example, manufactures new-technology LEDs that are in that range. They are considerably more expensive.
You get what you pay for, of course. To me, the advantage I anticipate from the LED strips is (1) astonishingly low cost; (2) light that is much whiter than the light from my incandescent lamps; (3) better efficiency than my incandescents; and (4) most important for me, the strip is apparently only about 5/16 of an inch wide, and can be mounted where I need it, which can't be done with anything else I've seen, including incandescents and LED lamps (or fluorescents) intended to replace incandescent lamps in the same fixtures.
But I would also like to do, gradually, what you've done: replace the incandescent lamps in existing fixtures with efficient LED lamps that simply plug in. They would greatly improve my dry-camping house-battery endurance. Where'd you get'em?
__________________
-- Carl
|