"So in my case I could benefit marginally from the LED lamp (85 vs 70"

  Did you consider the power savings and life of the bulb? NOt a big
things, as the socket will rust away before the bulb dies, but the power
mean a little less strain the the electrical systems.  These become
significant if you are running a lot of light, like a tow rig, or
pulling a trailer.

Jaap Nauta wrote:

>My assumptions were:
>
>- No reflector: apparently the US and European units not only differ in
>the lamp layout, but also in having reflectors or not. Mine has none,
>along with a lot of others. Without a reflector roughly 2/3 of the light
>of an incandescent bulb is lost, leaving only 135 lumen. The LED throws
>all of its 85 lumen towards the lens.
>
>- The lens is red, so (estimated) 50% of the light of an incandescent bulb
>is filtered out, whereas the LED is already red. That leaves about 70
>lumen.
>
>So in my case I could benefit marginally from the LED lamp (85 vs 70
>lumen). but better would be adding reflectors :-)
>Anyone a picture of an US unit with reflectors?
>
>Jaap,
>'87 Caravelle diesel
>
>
>
>>At 05:42 AM 2/6/2008, Jaap Nauta wrote...
>>
>>
>>>Has anyone tried these:
>>>http://www.superbrightleds.com/specs/115x-xLX3.htm ?
>>>
>>>These are wide angle high power LEDs, which in theory are brighter
>>>than
>>>incandescents
>>>
>>>
>>Not even close.
>>
>>The 1157 LED replacement is rated at 30/85 lumens flux. A real 1157
>>bulb has 3/32 mean spherical candlepower, which is 37/402 lumen. Not
>>only is the direct beam of the real 1157 incandescent bulb brighter,
>>but the reflector will add additional light.
>>
>>In reverse, the LED bulb, with a 130 degree beam, is only providing
>>0.73/2.08 mean spherical candlepower. (1 lumen = .07958 MSCP, 130
>>degree cone = .32175 of a sphere)
>>
>>
>
>
>