Is anyone else out there having difficulty with the new HPL lamps that have a ceramic heat sink? I can't seem to keep them seated in the Source 4 par lamp socket. The metal heat sink lamps work geat but are oddly a bit harder to come by.
Hi - This might be as much socket related as lamp base related. The old TP22 - the Source Four socket for the last 200 years - will wear out eventually and not do a great job holding the lamp in the PAR socket. In the last 2-3 years, we have gone to using either a Bender & Worth socket or a new Sylvania socket - the TP22H. Both of these have better designed contacts that do a better job of holding the lamp.
About the HPL lamp. We license the manufacture of the lamp to Ushio, Osram Sylvania, and GE - they have tolerances that they have to meet to keep building the HPL lamp. While I hear that some prefer one brand over the other because of past problems - this could be batch related rather than an overall indication that, "one is better than the other." I hear this about all the brands. Me? I'm neutral. I think everyone is currently using ceramic bases rather than metal. There were some issues with earlier ceramic bases not being as consistant size-wise - but I don't hear that these days. The tolerances used in HPL manufacturing are: Watts +/- 5%, Lumens +/- 7%, Color Temperature +/- 50K. I'm told that these are pretty tight tolerances in the world of tungsten lamp building.
I could say that a Source Four with an HPL -7% lumens under spec is still a lot brighter than any other ERS fixture of the same wattage...but that would be shameless posturing, so I won't say it.
