Automotive Air Conditioning Information Forum (Archives)

Provided by www.ACkits.com

We've updated our forums!
Click here to visit the new forum

Archive Home

Search Auto AC Forum Archives

Given a choice which refrigerant would you use? Pages: 12

frank1 on Fri August 05, 2005 5:40 AM User is offline

In an older vintage car designed for R12, cost not being an issue, which Refrigerant would you use after an A/C repair? 134a, r12, Freeze 12, 12a, or anything else you can legally use? Reason?

Everyone seems to have a different preference. I seem to think R12 is still the coldest and the best for an older car. I read today that 12a, and 502a are supposed to be good, but the old timers seem to think R12 is still the best.

Thanks in advance for your time and replies,
frank1

Chick on Fri August 05, 2005 5:54 AM User is offlineView users profile

The best is "always" what the system was designed for. I would only consider changing it to R134a if it were R12. Reason being is blends are really not an option for me. MVAC by design always leak, and blends don't leak at the same rates. One componant always leaks out beore the other, which makes topping off impossible. Each time the refrigerant gets a little low, the system has to be evacuated and recharged to keep the mix the same..Alternative refrigerants are just for the DIY'er in my opinion, and not for the AC tech. Especially when the law is you must have specific machines and equipement for each refrigerant. So with all the alteranative refrigerants out there (All claim to be the best) you would need a large shop just to store the equipment for them all... We don't make the law, but have to follow it..Just my opinon though...

Alos, you can have your car serviced anywhere with R134a, not so with blends..Many shops will not touch them due to the laws about the equipment, and the fines attached if they are not followed, and the fact that HC's are banned is around 18 states and the District of Columbia.

-------------------------
Chick
Email: Chick

---------------------------------------------

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

frank1 on Fri August 05, 2005 6:40 AM User is offline

Which gas is going to give the coldest vent temps? The blends all seem to advertise colder vent temps. The old timers say R12 is still the best. I tend to agree, and after reading your comments about the blends and one component leaking out faster than another that seems to turn me off to the blends.

Thanks

Chick on Fri August 05, 2005 6:50 AM User is offlineView users profile

It all comes down to system design..After all, they make freezers that run on R134a..They are designed for it..Bought a "cheap" window unit for my bedroom, which runs on R22, yet my son bought a "bigger" window unit for his houuse that cools the entire first floor and it runs on R134a. new cars cool as well as older cars..Retrofits can cool as well as factory R12 systems if done right, some a little less efficient than other of course.. But all in all, if the system is designed for R134a, it will cool as well as a system designed for R12..But in my opinion, stay away from blends of any kind, as they are more trouble than they arworth. Peoplecome here all the time wondering why their "blend" doens't work as well, asking for directions on how to charge it etc..Most AC techs that do it for a living, only use R12 (still available) and R134a as they are the industry standard and you can have your system serviced anywhere...Hope this helps.

-------------------------
Chick
Email: Chick

---------------------------------------------

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

NickD on Fri August 05, 2005 8:24 AM User is offline

Chick, why would you even suggest blends may be okay for the DIYer? A DIYer would more than likely install a blend in his own vehicle and would have be faced with the very expensive consequences of using such a refrigerant. Besides the unequal leak down rate that "will" cause excessive pressures or loss of the carrier refrigerant, most blends are R-134a based and you must address the compatibility issues as well. R-134a, even in a small proportion will tear apart the dryer bag leading to catastrophic failure. This is a small detail the blend marketers fail to point out, but lately, some have stated you have to change the dryer as well.

The key purpose of a blend is to enable the user to simply recover the R-12 and dump in the blend, but it doesn't work that way unless all of the compatibility issues are also addressed. Namely removing the compressor and draining out the old oil, if any oil is left to drain, repairing any leaks in the system, flushing the rest of the system out, replacing the dryer and perhaps the orifice with an R-134a compatible type, changing the cycling switch, and filling the system with the correct type and amount of oil. If all this is done, no reason to use a blend.

The only two homogenous refrigerants on the market today for MVAC use, homogenous meaning the refrigerant is one specific type, are R-12 or R-134a. Some R-12 systems convert well, but others need more fans or a parallel flow condenser due to the higher operating pressures of R-134a, this is very vehicle dependent.

My opinion is for an R-12 system that only leaks one or two ounces per year, cheapest just to top it off with a good check for any oil leaks, if you can get R-12 unlike our British and Canadian friends. Lately, the EPA has been pushing the recovery of R-12 for reuse, quite a change from even five years ago.

Who knows, could be the ozone depletion of R-12 is going to prove a farce like I feel very firmly it is and with the global warming potential of R-134a, they will go back to R-12. One thing for sure, this is more of a political than a scientific issue.

One thing I am noticing about R-134a vehicles, they leak, even the EPA admits 10% "normal" leakage of passenger vehicles and 50% per year for commercial vehicles. These are leaks that cannot be repaired unless the entire system is redesigned. Didn't have this problem with R-12, so really questioning, which of the two are the environmentally friendly refrigerants?

MrBillPro on Fri August 05, 2005 9:28 AM User is offlineView users profile

Well maybe I was just Blessed with my conversion on my 86 Monte Carlo SS, but the vent temps and the performance of the 134A is just as good as the R-12 was, I like many was skeptical for years, try to keep the old R-12 system up and going as long as possible until all avenues were exhausted. I even hated to think about changing to an alternative the thought was scary. Well now that I did the conversion and did it by the book changed everything except the condenser and evap. just cleaned and cleaned and cleaned them both out very well, and to this day I wished I would have just done it years ago and saved myself all the frustration on trying to find R-12 and keep the old system going.
Do many have the results I did? I don't know but my guess would be if they did the conversion properly yes they are very satified with the results. I will say if a person does want to change from R-12 to 134A take your time do it "properly" no short cuts ask any questions here if your not sure before you proceed, and you "will" see the fruits of your labor

-------------------------
Don't take life seriously... Its not permanent.

Chick on Fri August 05, 2005 9:32 AM User is offlineView users profile

Nick, in my feable explaination, I really meant that the DIY'ers are the ones keeping blends "alive" No self respecting ac tech would use them.. At least none that I know of... No sense in saying you can't use them, because you can use them..The distinction is in who uses them...

Also, look at the time of that post..I just woke up..Leave me alone,,,, Are you trying to get me banned...

-------------------------
Chick
Email: Chick

---------------------------------------------

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

Edited: Fri August 05, 2005 at 9:34 AM by Chick

meaux on Fri August 05, 2005 9:50 AM User is offlineView users profile

Nick says, "One thing for sure, this is more of a political than a scientific issue."

"One thing I am noticing about R-134a vehicles, they leak, even the EPA admits 10% "normal" leakage of passenger vehicles and 50% per year for commercial vehicles. These are leaks that cannot be repaired unless the entire system is redesigned. Didn't have this problem with R-12, so really questioning, which of the two are the environmentally friendly refrigerants?"

LOL, Reminds me of the Federally mandated 1.6gal. toilets that need to be fully flushed 3 times, rather than have a 3.0gal. toilet that you only partially flush once.

I just had to watch (and laugh) "The Day after Tomorrow" the other night, and the line that struck me was, "It (global cooling/warming) might not happen for a hundred years, or maybe a thousand years, but we have to do something"!!!

Hollywood, the same group that glorified smoking and made it cool, are now telling us this crap....

-------------------------
Lazy bum who lives off his wife.

01 BMW 530i Sport, 92 Porsche 968, 85 F150, 72 911, 08 GM SUV, 01' Ford Lightnin'

NickD on Fri August 05, 2005 10:26 AM User is offline

Quote
..Leave me alone,,,, Are you trying to get me banned...

Yes Chick, am trying, please send the viewers over to ACSauce to buy stuff, LOL, to learn if Tim bans you from here.

In theory, R-134a should cool better than R-12, has a much high latent heat transfer, some contribute this extra heat transfer to the reason why the condenser gets hotter causing pressures to rise. The cheap cure is not to put as much in, but foam doesn't cool very well either. Most adequate R-12 systems convert well, Mitch was going to get to the bottom of problems some were having with POA systems, but POA systems were always difficult to charge by pressures. That is why GM said recover, measure, and weigh the refrigerant adding what you need to meet OE capacity and their charging station. Never read a post where the guy just added 90% of the weight of R-12 using R-134a, and don't have anything that old around here to try it. The other minor problem with POA systems, those cars generally used high octane leaded gas, maybe it's time to move on.

Don't see where conversion is much of an issue anymore, most R-12 vehicles are at least eleven years old and in our salt climate, can't even find cars that old for sale anymore.

Bigchris on Fri August 05, 2005 10:44 AM User is offline

Quote
Originally posted by: NickD

Don't see where conversion is much of an issue anymore, most R-12 vehicles are at least eleven years old and in our salt climate, can't even find cars that old for sale anymore.
Think about that! My '90 Caprice wagon doesn't have any body rust, blows nice little R12 frost clouds out the vents on humid days, and Los Hombres wash it cheap. Maybe you ought to leave the frigid north!

meaux on Fri August 05, 2005 10:44 AM User is offlineView users profile

I'm simply amazed at my R12 89 Nissan Maxima (210K miles) that runs like stink, and I've had the A/C worked on one time by the dealer in 1995. Why dosen't that dang thing leak?

Now that I've said that, it'll be dry tonite...:-)

My 94 Q45 hasn't ever been touched, and it's on R134A. What do the Japanese know that we don't?

The only time the R12 Ford truck was anywhere near dependable was in 1990, when I replaced everything but the knobs on the dash, all hoses, comp., evap, condensor, etc, set me back 7 or 8 hunderd bucks, and it only lasted till 1996, then I needed a can per year.....

-------------------------
Lazy bum who lives off his wife.

01 BMW 530i Sport, 92 Porsche 968, 85 F150, 72 911, 08 GM SUV, 01' Ford Lightnin'

Edited: Fri August 05, 2005 at 10:51 AM by meaux

NickD on Fri August 05, 2005 10:54 AM User is offline

We parted with our beloved 86 Maximum about four years ago, only problem with that is the clutch speed sensor cracked and rather than pay the dealer 115 bucks for that piece of crap, you never embed magnet wire in epoxy like they did, have to tape it first and use a silicon buffer, I simply routed the tach signal also into the sensor input changing one resistor value. Ours had 200K on it with an untouched R-12 charge, but it was rusting out to the point of embarrassment. But the AC worked quite well.

NickD on Fri August 05, 2005 10:57 AM User is offline

The Japanese also know how to screw an aluminum head to a cast iron block with reusable bolts and no head gasket leaks.

JJM on Fri August 05, 2005 2:38 PM User is offline

R-12, no question! It's safe, highly effective, has a long proven track record, and contrary to popular belief, does NOT harm the environment.

R-290 (propane) and R-600 (butane) are even better refrigerants, and you'll get great vent temps with those, which is why they're components in so many blends. Problem is, they're flammable, but so too is gasoline, and as NickD points out, we think nothing of driving around with a tankful of that stuff.

But as Chick explained, a system will work with the type of refrigerant for which it was for.

In time, I think we're gonna end-up right where we started, using R-717 and R-764, and end-up with people getting killed by their refrigerators again. After all, ammonia and sulfur dioxide is natural and environmentally friendly, so who cares if people die.

Joe

Bigchris on Fri August 05, 2005 8:54 PM User is offline

Quote
Originally posted by: JJM

In time, I think we're gonna end-up right where we started, using R-717 and R-764, and end-up with people getting killed by their refrigerators again. After all, ammonia and sulfur dioxide is natural and environmentally friendly, so who cares if people die.
Joe

Who's more unfriendly to the environment than people, Joe?

Don't worry, Mother Nature will be here long after we're gone.

meaux on Sat August 06, 2005 11:21 AM User is offlineView users profile

Bigchris asks, "Who's more unfriendly to the environment than people, Joe?"

Sorry to butt in, but I don't think I understand the question. Are you saying "people" are the problem?

What "enviroment" are you talking about? An enviroment that is better for people, or the enviroment "Mother Nature" creates? "Mother Nature" itself, is harmful to a "people" enviroment, but not to "Mother Nature's" enviroment...The earth is billions of years old, and has been through alot, by our human standards anyway, but maybe not alot by earths' standards, all without our help. Who knows what the earth is meant to be? When the time comes, Mother Nature will dispense of us all, nothing we can do about it...something happened to the Dinos, and we still don't know what...

Bigchris states..."Don't worry, Mother Nature will be here long after we're gone."

Thats correct, we can't change that one way or the other...

Cheers...



-------------------------
Lazy bum who lives off his wife.

01 BMW 530i Sport, 92 Porsche 968, 85 F150, 72 911, 08 GM SUV, 01' Ford Lightnin'

Bigchris on Sun August 07, 2005 2:49 AM User is offline

meaux, I probably shouldn't have made that comment because it was largely philosophical and definitely not intended to trigger an argument which I have no desire to sustain. But to answer your question, I was talking about the earth's environment - that soup of factors that allow thousands of species of life to be sustained on this planet. Some of those species are traceable back to the dinosaurs, making them much older than people. If you could poll them all, I strongly suspect that only people would care if people die and no species could be found as guilty of peeing in the environmental soup as people are. If people became extinct or migrated off the planet, who would miss us? And yet we people are already realizing that extinction of other species might not be such a good thing.

I don't know if such a thing as a people friendly environment is achievable. Try to define it. City dwellers are uncomfortable in the country and country people feel the same way in the city. I wouldn't live in Phoenix and Tim probably wouldn't live here or in Wisconsin. There are thousands of people that love the beach and thousands more that can't stand it. Husbands and wives can't agree on where the thermostat should be set. A person may achieve an environment that is comfortable for that individual, but that may meaningless if you try to apply it to "people".

meaux on Sun August 07, 2005 11:13 AM User is offlineView users profile

Bigchris, I didn't want to get into a long argument either, but the earth does pollute itself far more than man does. Did you know the entire population of the earth can reside inside Texas?

You're right, animals wouldn't miss us, perhaps maybe Fido, but I'm sure he would get over it...:-)

My only point is, we cannot "kill the earth". The earth is not fragile...we are only here for the "wink of an eye", relative to the earth's age...

For the thing that happened in that goofy movie (Day After Tomorrow), the earth would have to stop spinnin...stop rotating in the universe...:-) What an accomplishment for mere humans!

Now they are saying, Global Warming will cause Global Cooling, seems like I heard that 30 yrs. ago...Wonder how we will put out the sun?

What BS...:-)



-------------------------
Lazy bum who lives off his wife.

01 BMW 530i Sport, 92 Porsche 968, 85 F150, 72 911, 08 GM SUV, 01' Ford Lightnin'

Bigchris on Sun August 07, 2005 6:56 PM User is offline

Quote
Originally posted by: meaux
Bigchris, Did you know the entire population of the earth can reside inside Texas?
I sure didn't meaux, but I'd sure like to see it...from a distance!

NickD on Sun August 07, 2005 8:06 PM User is offline

Ah, let's see, each person gets a room 15 by 15 feet for 225 square feet and kick in another 216 square feet for access to that room, would need about 6 billion such rooms to house the world human population. Such a building 200 stories high would require an area of 474 square miles, with the area of Rhode Island of over 1,500 square miles, would still leave an extra 1,000 square miles for a front and a back yard. Should be big enough.

Texas with an area of 270,000 square miles would be way too large, but based on the RI dimensions, should be able to contain at least a trillion people.

Getting back to RI, a 474 square mile building would have overall dimension of 21 by 21 miles give or take a tad, but if the building were made 600 stories high, would cut the square down to about 12 miles, within walking distance so no vehicles would be required to visit anyone.

Just a thought, but wouldn't want to be around if half the population should decide to flush the toilets all at the same time.

TRB on Sun August 07, 2005 8:42 PM User is offlineView users profile

Quote
Originally posted by: Bigchris
I wouldn't live in Phoenix and Tim probably wouldn't live here or in Wisconsin. As long as it does not snow and has good mountain biking trails I'm game! That's one thing I like about Phoenix. 1.5 hour drive and I'm in the pines!

Got the fan banner fixed for you!

-------------------------
When considering your next auto A/C purchase, please consider the site that supports you: ACkits.com
Contact: ACKits.com

bohica2xo on Sun August 07, 2005 8:46 PM User is offline

Nick:

The japanese managed to create the density record around 1959. On an island coal mine that once belonged to Mitsubishi - now abandoned:

"The population of Hashima reached a peak of 5,259 in 1959. People were literally jammed into every nook and corner of the apartment blocks. The rocky slopes holding most of these buildings comprised about 60 percent of the total island area of 6.3 hectares (15.6 acres), while the flat property reclaimed from the sea was used mostly for industrial facilities and made up the remaining 40 percent. At 835 people per hectare for the whole island, or an incredible 1,391 per hectare for the residential district, it is said to be the highest population density ever recorded in the world. Even Warabi, a Tokyo bedtown and the most densely populated city in modern Japan, notches up only 141 people per hectare."

It was complete city on the island - hospitals, schools, markets, barbershops.... even a brothel.

.

-------------------------
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
~ Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi, An Autobiography, M. K. Gandhi, page 446.

Bigchris on Mon August 08, 2005 2:33 AM User is offline

Quote
Originally posted by: TRB
Quote
Originally posted by: Bigchris
I wouldn't live in Phoenix and Tim probably wouldn't live here or in Wisconsin. As long as it does not snow and has good mountain biking trails I'm game! That's one thing I like about Phoenix. 1.5 hour drive and I'm in the pines!
Got the fan banner fixed for you!
I've got nearly a dozen huge pines in my front yard and a little over an acre of pines and white oaks in the back but pine needles and grass are a tough combination. Nothing moves the needles but hand raking and they don't come easily. But left in place they kill the grass. If I had my druthers a bunch of those pines would be sugar maples because I love their fall colors and the leaves are easier to deal with but sugar maples aren't as happy in this climate as they were in Jersey and points north.

Snow is a different story. We typically see one or two 1-2" storms a winter and it's melted in a couple of days. But a few years ago we got a 22" snowfall and everything stopped for a week.

We've got lots of bike trails but this is the flatlands. If you want mountains, that's about 2 hours to the west, but there are still stills in our mountains and some of the mountain folk don't take too kindly to strangers. But some do.

Thanks for fixing the banner, I was starting to feel dyslexic!

Chick on Mon August 08, 2005 5:50 AM User is offlineView users profile

Now thats just not right!!!

-------------------------
Chick
Email: Chick

---------------------------------------------

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

NickD on Mon August 08, 2005 8:25 AM User is offline

I walked past "The Day After" many times feeling its yet another Hollywood disaster BS movie when my wife said, let's watch it. Sure enough, over a period of maybe a week, someone started their truck and triggered off an ice age, and with repeated warnings from the so-called hero, the president of the USA would do nothing. But what the heck, the hero's son, visiting a now frozen New York City was safe, so the movie had an happy ending. Ha, if you start your car this morning, that may be the straw the broke the camels back, so walk instead.


Mother Nature is a very sloppy person, did walk through virgin timber land that was left in Wisconsin, or tried to walk, huge fallen trees, some 8 feet in diameter, loaded with dead underbrush. Each tree drops thousands of seeds and one might say, each seed is a precious form of life. Most can only grow a few feet, but mom is blocking the sunlight, so they die. The man planted forests of the depression are neat to walk through with a clean pile of pine needles that leave some kind of acid where nothing can grow. The spacing of the tree is as such so each can have symmetrical branches.

Without mans' intervention, required about ten square miles of mother natures land to support one family and not very well at that and if the Colorado river was not controlled, about 33 million people in the southwest would not have a drink of water this time of the year. Under our current EPA rules, the Hoover Dam could not be built today.

Wisconsin has this bug now about saving wetlands, not sure why, but the Lyme disease and other deer killing diseases are very prevalent in these areas. Maybe some environmentalists would come out and state that the HIV virus also has a right to life and ban all antibiotics so man killing bacteria can also live long happy lives. Any military organization is exempt from all environmental rules that are imposed on the rest of us. One may think way of life is more important than life itself.

Also exempt from the EPA are these large SUV's, if that isn't a passenger carrying automobile, I will eat one. Practically all of our environmental rules are based on money, the money collected is not used to improve the environment, but ends up in someone's pocket. And if you have the money, can do practically anything you want to.

Still no controls over what the OE's are doing to prevent refrigerant leakage by the EPA, the bottom of the ladder AC tech has this responsibility and still a mystery what happens to recovered refrigerant, least around here. Recycling responsibility is put on the consumer, but yet anything we buy today is in the throwaway class, bugs me that one or two replacement parts is more expensive than buying a new unit excluding the labor.

Feel that our current government regulations are crap designed to make more money for a very few and they really don't care about the environment.

Back to Off Topic Chat

We've updated our forums!
Click here to visit the new forum

Archive Home

Copyright © 2016 Arizona Mobile Air Inc.