View Single Post
  #8  
Old 05-20-2013, 08:00 AM
Lite4's Avatar
Lite4 Lite4 is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,986
James, I'm not sure I completely agree with this one. Most companies have and still are going integrated because it is the best way to sink the LED's. I can't speak for you personally because I don't read minds, but I can tell you that the mass majority of companies making LED's in MR16, Par20, Par30 and so on are looking at the big picture. Some smart entrepreneur saw that there were millions of existing fixtures already installed around the world and that energy restrictions are only getting tighter. They knew that they could fill an enormous need by creating a lamp that would "fit" right into the existing housing of these fixtures that were created for halogen or incandescent lamps. I find it difficult to believe that all of these "retro-fit" lamps were created just for the tiny sliver margin of "new fixtures" being released to market. That would be very short sighted.

Now, I was speaking in generalities regarding the broad spectrum of the LED marketplace to include interior lighting also. In the realm of "landscape lighting", I will go along with you in the fact that there really is not an acceptable integrated LED on the market with the tight binning tolerances and consistent and high CRI for the landscape lighting industry. (All you kichler guys, just sit back down , take a deep breath and count to 3, it will be alright; I promise). I too use the Illumicare lamps in standard fixtures that were meant for halogen lamps- What choice do I have at this point in time, but you have to admit; Illumicare saw the bigger picture of taking a circuit board and squeezing it down to fit in a traditional "halogen" style housing so it could be used to replace the millions of existing fixtures already out there in the field- Yes? That is called "retro-fitting"
__________________


Tim Ryan
Lite4 Outdoor Lighting
www.lite-4.com
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.04294 seconds with 7 queries