Return to the thumbnail page Display/hide file information See previous file See next file

Leotek E-Cobra LED Street Lights early EOL in Detroit

Leotek E-Cobra LED Street Lights early EOL in Detroit

Click to view full size image

The news showing dimming/failing Leotek streetlights that were installed on a couple of years ago in Detroit which is the subject of a lawsuit and will all be replaced with Cree XSPs from what they've shown. Note the charred LED element which appears on most of the fixture's elements. They indicate the other brands installed (cooper, king, cree) at the same time have all performed without issues.

20190805_201904.jpg 20190618_122514.jpg Untitled~5.png 20190610_100825.jpg

Light Information

Light Information

Manufacturer:Leotek
Model Reference:E-Cobra
Lamp
Lamp Type:LED

File information

File information

Download: Download this File
Filename:Untitled~5.png
Album name:GeorgiaLights / Various Southern Bulbs
Keywords:Lanterns
File Size:787 KB
Date added:Jun 13, 2019
Dimensions:2001 x 579 pixels
Displayed:100 times
URL:https://www.lighting-gallery.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-160635
Favorites:Add to Favorites
Comments
streetlight98
Sr. Member
****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329
View Gallery

Mike McCann


GoL Mike McCann 88219189@N04/albums
View Profile WWW Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 03:18 PM Author: streetlight98
Leotek provides a 10 year warranty on their street lights so I'm struggling to understand why a lawsuit is necessary when they can just make a warranty claim. Unless of course the company is trying to say the failures are the result of something not being kosher on the city's end (improper installation, act of god, etc).

Please check out my newly-updated website! McCann Lighting Company is where my street light collection is displayed in detail.

lightinglover8902
Hero Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 556
View Gallery

Power distributor: CenterPoint Energy. 120 V60Hz


GoL UCP_yo1gHzReqS19MjJMXUKg
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 04:16 PM Author: lightinglover8902
They should recall the fixtures then...

Save the Cooper OVWs!! Don't them down by crap LED fixtures!!!

takemorepills
Full Member
***
Offline

Posts: 158
View Gallery


View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 06:11 PM Author: takemorepills

Leotek provides a 10 year warranty on their street lights so I'm struggling to understand why a lawsuit is necessary when they can just make a warranty claim. Unless of course the company is trying to say the failures are the result of something not being kosher on the city's end (improper installation, act of god, etc).


Because it is extremely expensive to have crews go out and r/r fixtures. The crew and overhead cost more than a fixture.
streetlight98
Sr. Member
****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329
View Gallery

Mike McCann


GoL Mike McCann 88219189@N04/albums
View Profile WWW Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 06:48 PM Author: streetlight98
There's no reason Leotek should be responsible for the labor to replace the fixtures. They provided the fixtures. The fixtures are defective. Therefore they provide new fixtures. That's all there is to it. If the fixture fails during the warranty period, a replacement fixture or a refund equal to the original purchase price is all that is required by law in most states. Every manufacturer warranty I've ever seen clearly states that labor is not part of the warranty. The suit-happiness of society is sickening.

Please check out my newly-updated website! McCann Lighting Company is where my street light collection is displayed in detail.

wide-lite 1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 353
View Gallery


View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 06:56 PM Author: wide-lite 1000
the charring has to be an overheating issue. I have a bunch of LED lights from ambulances and when steady burned, they get as hot as a halogen lamp ! In that particular case, the manufacturer, (Whelen) , actually warns NOT to steady burn the light head as SEVERE DAMAGE WILL RESULT! Maybe these Leoteks need better/bigger heat sinks ???

Collector,Hoarder,Pack-rat! Clear mercury Rules!!

takemorepills
Full Member
***
Offline

Posts: 158
View Gallery


View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 07:46 PM Author: takemorepills

There's no reason Leotek should be responsible for the labor to replace the fixtures. They provided the fixtures. The fixtures are defective. Therefore they provide new fixtures. That's all there is to it. If the fixture fails during the warranty period, a replacement fixture or a refund equal to the original purchase price is all that is required by law in most states. Every manufacturer warranty I've ever seen clearly states that labor is not part of the warranty. The suit-happiness of society is sickening.


I work in a DOT.

When you replace legacy fixtures that EVERYONE knows lasted basically forever (seriously, majority of legacy street lighting was replaced due to incan>MV>HPS, not due to fixture failure) with LED fixtures that fail very early, we do make an issue out of it. We are not "sue happy", we are stewards of tax dollars, and when something seriously under-performs there will be consequences. Legally, the warranty may exclude lawsuit, BUT, as a large municipality we can certainly threaten them with dropping them as a vendor.
This is not as simple as a relamp. There may be other considerations to fixture replacement also such as in residential areas like mine, where many fixtures have light masks on them and would need to likely remake new lightmasks for a different vendors fixture.
This is a serious issue with LED fixtures, it is not feasible to service them. Try to explain to City Council that we needed to pay for labor on lighting that was "guaranteed" to last 20 years, after a few years. Literally, someone will ask "can't you just replace the bulb?" And it's not an unreasonable question. Management has to explain the circumstances of LED lighting failure to non-technical people. We don't operate under "open checkbook" principle, we have a budget to stick to and a mass fixture replacement will require asking for more money.
Also, some departments/employees/advocates may have "egg on their face" for pushing/advocating for lighting upgrades OR a certain style/vendor, so they too may be aggressive to the vendor.
streetlight98
Sr. Member
****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329
View Gallery

Mike McCann


GoL Mike McCann 88219189@N04/albums
View Profile WWW Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 08:23 PM Author: streetlight98
It's an unfortunate turn of events and you certainly can threaten to switch manufacturers but a law suit is over the top imo. I dont mean this toward you personally, but local, state, and federal governments are by no means good stewards of tax payer dollars. There is way too much irresponsibility with taxpayer dollars. I'm not talking about things like this, but in general. Using taxpayer dollars for things other than they were intended for, etc. There is no shortage of money. We are all paying more than enough money in taxes. The taxes collected are just being misappropriated. The DOT is a victim in this too. Roads and bridges crumbling because funds allocated for maintenance are being used for other things. Politicians would rather let something crumble and rebuild it instead of properly funding and maintaining it. That way they can cut the red ribbon with their giant scissors and show everyone what a great job they're doing.

Please check out my newly-updated website! McCann Lighting Company is where my street light collection is displayed in detail.

Patrick
Webmaster
Sr. Member
*****
Offline

Posts: 439
View Gallery


LightingGallery
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 08:42 PM Author: Patrick
Based on the articles I read, the Detroit PLA filed a warranty claim, and while Leotek had not rejected it, they weren't meeting the lighting authority's timetable. I also get the feeling that this is a public relations issue for the city as well. They don't want months of negotiations followed by a drawn out process to identify and replace each and every under-performing fixture over the next several years. They don't want their reputation of having a dysfunctional public lighting system to return. They want to show the city is on the up and up, and that means fixing these lights immediately.

Patrick C., Administrator
Lighting-Gallery.net

takemorepills
Full Member
***
Offline

Posts: 158
View Gallery


View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 09:05 PM Author: takemorepills

It's an unfortunate turn of events and you certainly can threaten to switch manufacturers but a law suit is over the top imo. I dont mean this toward you personally, but local, state, and federal governments are by no means good stewards of tax payer dollars. There is way too much irresponsibility with taxpayer dollars. I'm not talking about things like this, but in general. Using taxpayer dollars for things other than they were intended for, etc. There is no shortage of money. We are all paying more than enough money in taxes. The taxes collected are just being misappropriated. The DOT is a victim in this too. Roads and bridges crumbling because funds allocated for maintenance are being used for other things. Politicians would rather let something crumble and rebuild it instead of properly funding and maintaining it. That way they can cut the red ribbon with their giant scissors and show everyone what a great job they're doing.


I agree, but some things actually do get scrutinized properly, the city has to feel like it is "doing it's job" every now and then, and a mass-scale lighting failure is a way put up a show as if they "care".

BTW, speaking of wasting money, for every City employee you see working, there is an entire upside-down bureaucracy attached to that employee. I would guess the ratio of workers-to-overhead is like 1:14 IMO.

Every 6 months, my employer likes to put us in "RSJI" (Race and Social Justice Initiative) where they accuse all white people of being racist and having privilege. I hate it so much I am very strongly considering quitting my job.
lightinglover8902
Hero Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 556
View Gallery

Power distributor: CenterPoint Energy. 120 V60Hz


GoL UCP_yo1gHzReqS19MjJMXUKg
View Profile Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 14, 2019 at 09:06 PM Author: lightinglover8902
I think that they should recall them...

Save the Cooper OVWs!! Don't them down by crap LED fixtures!!!

dor123
Hero Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2556
View Gallery
Other loves are computers, office equipment, A/Cs


View Profile WWW Personal Message (Offline)
Jun 15, 2019 at 03:52 AM Author: dor123

There's no reason Leotek should be responsible for the labor to replace the fixtures. They provided the fixtures. The fixtures are defective. Therefore they provide new fixtures. That's all there is to it. If the fixture fails during the warranty period, a replacement fixture or a refund equal to the original purchase price is all that is required by law in most states. Every manufacturer warranty I've ever seen clearly states that labor is not part of the warranty. The suit-happiness of society is sickening.


This is exactly whats happens with Juganu and Ma'alot Tarshiha. Juganu provides 10 years warranty for their LED lanterns to Ma'alot, and every time a lantern is failed, Ma'alot replaces it free.

I"m don't speak English well, and rely on online translating to write in this site.
Please forgive me if my choice of my words looks like offensive, while that isn't my intention.

I only working with the European date format (dd.mm.yyyy).

I lives in Israel, which is a 230-240V, 50hz country.

© 2005-2019 Lighting-Gallery.net | Powered by: Coppermine Photo Gallery