LCD TV with DVD Player

[Rich Stidger]

Due to the impending demise of analog TV over-the-air signals in June (unless the bozos in Washington delay it again) I have been researching small LCD flat panel TVs with and without a DVD player. And I have been following the discussions on this site also looking for some specific recommendations.

Last weekend I was visiting friends in northern NJ and they had just bought a Coby 15" TV without a DVD player for their kitchen. The price seemed very good- only $138+tax, so I went shopping.

I really wanted a unit with a built-in DVD player and I wanted one that would accept 12V input power directly. This means that it would use a "wall wort" or an external power converter (120VAC to12VDC). Although the Coby TV without the DVD pl;ayer requires 120VAC direct input, the model with the DVD player uses a external converter to 12VDC.

Long story short- I bought the Coby TV with the DVD player. It is model TF-DVD1591 and it is a 4:3 format (not letterbox) and it will display all resolutions from 480i (current analog quality) to 1080i (HD quality) Display modes can be 4:3 or letterbox on the screen. It has mounting holes for the standard VESA 75 mount, and inputs for a PC monitor, A/V inputs, and more. Price was $187 +tax.

About power consumption- the LCD flat screen TVs are generally power-hungry. Not a good thing to be if you live on a sailboat. So I made some measurements, hoping that the results would not demand that I install a second diesel generator.

At standby, the unit draws 37mA. I can't imagine why anyone would let the set be powered on all the time, but that works out to about 0.89 AH/day. In TV playing mode, the current draw is 1.8A and with a DVD playing the draw is 1.9A. As my wife would say, This was a good buy. I just saved $9000 bucks on not needing a second generator!

I'm happy.:dance: This compares very favorably with my old 9" TV with a VHS player that pulled down 4-5A when in TV mode. So this new TV will use less than half the power of my old set.

Drawbacks- Isn't everything a comprise?:cry: The printed manual with the unit is poor. It doesn't really explain all of the controls and settings. Thankfully most of that is fairly intuitive. The only other negative is the remote control. Other than the buttons for the channel and volume and on/off, the remaining buttons are very small and the labels equally small.

See the pix below for visual details.

 

[Ron20324]

I remember this thread- and they guy who could not comprehend why the owner's manual said nothing about using it on a 12-volt source.

Have you worked up a ship's battery-to-TV cable, or can the TV handle more than 12 volts? Could be a high charger rate (>12) could toast the TV?

How much for the cable to stay connected to shore cable TV? Just kidding.

 

[Scott B]

The only other negative is the remote control. Other than the buttons for the channel and volume and on/off, the remaining buttons are very small and the labels equally small.

Here you go.... for the old farts..

 

[Stu Jackson]

Wonderful Report Rich

You have not only fulfilled all the obligations required in the "How to Post a Question on this Message Board" but you've included not only pictures, but a model number and source. OMG!

We are now considering you for the ace star reporter job at the local soon-to-expire newspaper because it's going out of business because people only read what you write on the internet.

Congratulations and have a great season.

PS Can YOU get me the bootleg copy of "Captain Ron"???

 

[wfgunn]

first, IMHO,3:4 is quite old school format forcing all the new HD to a smaller window than on the same size 16:9 LCD, and COBY is not the best (cheapest yes) for being able to take the shock of bouncing around on a rough sea/lake/bay whatever.... and you still need an external antenna for decent reception.

Last year I planned to be on my boat in Chicago 5 out of 7 days and explored how to be entertained while at the dock. TV, internet, and email seemed to be necessities. And, when i compared all the costs involved with each separately, this is what I wound up doing:

I've found using my 17" widescreen laptop to be much more functional and versatile with two other components: wireless connectivity (a wi-fi card which is evermore becoming free with cell service) and a Slingbox device connected to my cable box back home. Of course, my laptop can use the 12V connector on the boat while cruising or the 120VAC sockets at dockside; so, in addition to dockside, now i can be going across the lake (Michigan), put someone else at the helm (or launch the laptop in the cockpit) and watch either or both CUBS or WHITE SOX as I cruise. Plus, instead of just broadcast, I can watch CNN or any other cable channel I subscribe to back home. The cooler thing is that I can be any where in the world and access the same programming over the internet. You can find a Slingbox on Ebay, new for about $128 without taxes.

 

[Steve Dion]

Here is one site to check out. There are NOT a lot of factory ready AC/DC models.

http://www.bundlecity.com/Televisio...e8d3fad3dff4&gclid=CPm_kIXFsJkCFRo-awodsAcW6g

 

[Maine Sail]

Nice job

Rich,

As you found out there are not many TV's still out there using a 12v wall wort. I bought this Polaroid TDX-01930B: 19" HD LCD TV/DVD Combo unit and ditched the "wall wort". It runs perfectly on 12v

It is stated by many companies, and correct using their lab testing methods on specific type loads, that inverters are about 10% inefficient when converting from 12 volts DC to 120 volts AC. I was curious, and had a sinking feeling, that 10% was a very optimistic number when using the general every day items one might choose to use on a boat such as an LCD TV..

This questions was posed a few days ago on another forum so I did a little photo experiment to help show just how inefficient inverters really are in the "real world"..



To accomplish this test I used our 19" Polaroid boat TV that runs on either 12 volts or 120 volts (not sold as such). What I really wanted to achieve was less "lab" or "theoretical" numbers and more "real world" on a device that can operate on both DC and AC and one that would give a steady output from which to measure. I could have used a laptop computer but any one who's used one knows that the current draw is highly variable and NOT at all steady. My Macbook Pro uses between 3.1 amps (with the lid closed) to 7+ amps depending on the software and program it's running. So a laptop was not used because I could not get a steady current draw from it.


To make sure my TV was consuming a fixed amperage I loaded a DVD into it and then paused it at exactly the same spot in the "Elmo" disc of my daughters. All other devices and charging sources were turned off including my solar panel. The Xantrex XBM battery monitor read 0.0 amps before turning anything on.


The on screen shot is showing the TV paused and running off of 12 volts DC:

Here is the Amp Load at 12 volts DC:

This photo shows the DVD paused in almost the exact same spot though this time it's running on 120 volts AC through my larger 1200 watt inverter.

And the amp draw! There is no trickery here and the Xantrex battery meter is not lying. Running this same exact TV on 120 volts AC through a 1200 watt inverter uses 5.8 amps per hour vs. 3.9 amps per hour!!

When compared to running this SAME EXACT TV on 12 volts DC the inverter has a 32.8% efficiency loss or a far cry from the 10% inverter inefficiency claimed by most manufacturers using very non-real word, not lab numbers..??

Yes, if you're wondering, I do have a lot of junk on the boat! Big deal... It does make for some interesting experiments though.

For this second test I used my smaller 400 watt inverter. This is the one that I power my laptop and camera chargers with. My reason for doing this test is to show that an inverter sized closer to the load can sometimes be slightly more efficient and that perhaps different brands of inverters can offer slight advantages in efficiency.

Once again the screen shot:

And the result!

So maybe it's not that much more efficient but 6 tenths of an amp hour is nothing to snub your nose at. The 400 watt inverter ran the TV using only 5.2 amps per hour and was a mere 25% inefficient. Again, this is a far cry from the 10% claimed by many manufacturers.

This certainly was NOT a very scientific experiment but rather a REAL WORLD experiment designed to show what one item, a TV designed to run on both 120 volts AC and 12 volts DC, will do run both ways. It is important to note that most all LCD TV's run on DC power whether it is converted internally or externally using a "wall wort". The clincher though is that not all LCD TV's run on 12 volts and some may need 19 or 24 volts..

As far as I know I have never seen an item designed to run on both AC and DC tested in the real world on a boat with a real system and not in some theoretical BS mathematical equation that shows a misleading 10% inefficiency with the inverter run a full load on a purely resistive load like a stove burner. Most folks run things like lap tops, tvs and the like not stoves, toasters or electric ranges with inverters.

It is clear to me that if you have the option to buy a device that will run on 12 volts DO IT!!

Inverting power from 12 volts DC to 120 volts AC is a terribly inefficient way to power devices off your boats house bank of batteries! I'm sure inverters vary in efficiency as my two inverters do but I'd be very surprised to see an inverter meets the claims of 10%, in the real world, using the same device on both 120 volts AC and 12 volts DC..

Just food for thought, and evidence, to show why using a 12v tv will be a LOT more efficient..

 

[kloudie1]

Great job, Rich.
I was looking for this item and gave up.. Now using 17" laptop computer HiDef to view DVD's on boat. A digital add on card will convert it to TV. Still may buy a Coby for those times at home when Power is out ..