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

Views on discussing unaccepted refrigerants?

TRB on Fri February 06, 2004 3:41 PM User is offlineView users profile

This topic has again raised a bad taste for many of the members here. I would like some opinions if we should allow these types of discussions or not.


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

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

Chick on Fri February 06, 2004 3:51 PM User is offlineView users profile

My opinion is that they should be allowed...to a point.. Once it's seen that no ligitimate information is given, or on our side, can be given, the thread should be shut down or locked..The board should not become an advertisement site for refrigerants that void warranties on new or remanned parts, and of course labor for the customer should the part fail..As far as a DIY'er goes, they can, and do, use just about everything that can cool a car.."If" a question regarding a specific alternative refrigerant can be answered by a member or contributor of this board, then let them do it..But safety first and foremost...If the question cannot be answered, then they should be told why, and then asked if they want to do it the way our industry recommends. If not, kill the thread...But, that is just my opinion....

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

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

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

Karl Hofmann on Fri February 06, 2004 4:55 PM User is offlineView users profile

Some work, some dont, some are dangerous and some are marketing hype. At least if the topic is discussed we can steer folk in the right direction, give our views to ballance out the manufacturers guff and allow folk to form their own opinion.

-------------------------
Never knock on deaths door... Ring the doorbell and run away, death really hates that!

TRB on Fri February 06, 2004 5:03 PM User is offlineView users profile

I agree there should be discussion. I'm just tried of the pi**ing match that always occurs with these individuals. They never answer a direct question so at that point should we just delete the thread, not respond or what?

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

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

NickD on Fri February 06, 2004 5:11 PM User is offline

United States Patent 6,336,333, by Gary Lindgren January 8, 2002 is on his blend of propane and butane that he was awarded after a ten year battle.

These are the claims from that patent:

"1. In an existing refrigeration system mechanically designed for use with refrigerant R-12, said system utilizing a refrigeration circuit comprising a compressor, a condenser, an expansion valve means, an evaporator, and a refrigerant for transport of thermal energy between the evaporator and the condenser, wherein said refrigerant is evaporated in said evaporator to produce a gas which is compressed by said compressor and thence sent to the condenser to be condensed to produce a liquid for metering into said evaporator by said expansion valve means,

the improvement comprising a method of substitution of said R-12 refrigerant with a hydrocarbon based refrigerant mixture, said method accomplished by substantially purging said R-12 refrigerant from said refrigeration circuit, and then inserting said hydrocarbon refrigerant mixture into said refrigeration circuit, wherein said substitute hydrocarbon refrigerant mixture comprises a mixture of propane and butane, and wherein the amounts of said propane and said butane in said mixture are sufficient to provide physical properties of said mixture which approximate the physical properties of R-12 with respect to evaporation and condensation temperatures when under pressure, so that said hydrocarbon refrigerant mixture is utilized in said existing refrigeration circuit.

2. The process of claim 1, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises at least about twenty five percent (25%) propane by liquid volume.

3. The process of claim 1, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises at least about fifty percent (50%) propane by liquid volume.

4. The process of claim 1, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises approximately sixty percent (60%) propane by liquid volume.

5. The process of claim 1, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises about seventy five percent (75%) propane by liquid volume.

6. The process of claim 1, wherein said refrigeration system is employed in a motor vehicle.

7. The process of claim 6, wherein said motor vehicle comprises an automobile.

8. The process of claim 1, wherein said refrigeration system is employed in a residential refrigerator.

9. The process of claim 1, wherein said refrigerant mixture comprises

about fifty (50) to sixty (60) percent propane by liquid volume, and

about fifty (50) to forty (40) percent butane by liquid volume,

with the liquid volume percentages of said components being the volume percentages of the overall refrigerant mixture.

10. The process of claim 1, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises approximately sixty percent (60%) propane and forty percent (40%) butane by liquid volume.

11. The process of claim 1, wherein said mixture of propane and butane consists essentially of sixty percent (60%) propane and forty percent (40%) butane by liquid volume.

12. The process of claim 1, wherein said existing refrigeration system further comprises a refrigerant oil composition, and wherein said refrigerant oil composition of said existing refrigeration system and said hydrocarbon based refrigerant mixture are compatible.

13. The process of claim 1, wherein after the step of substantially purging said R-12 refrigerant from said refrigeration circuit, said process further comprises the step of leaving said refrigerant oil composition in said refrigeration system.

14. In a refrigeration system mechanically designed for refrigerant flow rates compatible with use of refrigerant R-12, said system utilizing a refrigeration circuit comprising a compressor, a condenser, an expansion valve means, an evaporator, and a refrigerant for transport of thermal energy between the evaporator and the condenser, wherein said refrigerant is evaporated in said evaporator to produce a gas which is compressed by said compressor and thence sent to the condenser to be condensed to produce a liquid for metering into said evaporator by said expansion valve means,

the improvement comprising a method of utilizing a hydrocarbon based refrigerant mixture, said method accomplished by purging said refrigerant circuit, then inserting said hydrocarbon refrigerant mixture into said refrigeration circuit, wherein said hydrocarbon refrigerant mixture comprises a mixture of propane and butane, and wherein the amounts of said propane and said butane in said mixture comprises at least about twenty five percent (25%) propane by liquid volume.

15. The process of claim 14, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises at least about fifty percent (50%) propane by liquid volume.

16. The process of claim 14, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises approximately sixty percent (60%) propane by liquid volume.

17. The process of claim 14, wherein said mixture of propane and butane comprises about seventy five percent (75%) propane by liquid volume.

18. The process of claim 14, wherein said refrigeration system is employed in a motor vehicle.

19. The process of claim 14, wherein said motor vehicle comprises an automobile.

20. The process of claim 14, wherein said refrigeration system is employed in a residential refrigerator."

Claims 1 and 14 are the base claims all the rest are satellite claims, kill claims 1 and 14 and the entire patent tumbles down. The key limits the US Patent imposed on Gary is the claim wording, "In an existing refrigeration system mechanically designed for use with refrigerant R-12" that is key in both claims. In other words, the entire patent can be scratched if a system were designed primarily for either pure propane or butane, which of course in not an R-12 system. I can tell by viewing the references, that Gary put a lot of work and money into this patent. Gary is from Post Falls, ID, and apparently he licensed his patent out to Oz Technologies or is part of it, not clear on that.

I can appreciate the efforts of Gary to try to ease the pain of R-12 vehicle owners with an economical solution. And he really has an uphill battle with the EPA. Couldn't help but noticed the EPA specifically stated Oz HC refrigerants are on the unacceptable list pointing the finger directly at Gary and his company.

I do not believe even a DIYer can use any refrigerant he so deems without some kind of penalty, and regardless of the efforts that Gary has made, I still hate blends. As pointed out in his patent, those ratios are quite critical and if one leaks out, dangerous pressures can be encountered. So you can save a couple of bucks and while doing so risk a major expense later. Not my way of doing engineering.

Nevertheless, there is a lot of research being done on HC refrigerants from a huge host of qualified people so this subject should not be dropped from this board.

And who knows what the future will bring with HC's and maybe a homogenous HC refrigerant will be developed, but I do not feel the contributors of this board are in any position to change government laws and until they are changed we cannot neither recommend nor assist those in attempting to make a conversion. But a good technical discussion on their merits is welcomed done in a polite and mannerly fashion. And those posting a question should state whether HC's are legal in their country or not, and since this is a MVAC site, it should be clearly for a MVAC application, and not a coke machine.

I don't have a bad taste in my mouth, but disappointed that I couldn't get direct answers to direct questions. Guess the gentlemen involved don't have the answers.


NickD on Fri February 06, 2004 5:15 PM User is offline

Ha, if you delete the thread, you will delete a lot of work for finding the facts, providing web sites, and letting viewers gain more knowledge on this touchy subject as to precisely what the law states.

TRB on Fri February 06, 2004 5:35 PM User is offlineView users profile

Current thread is what it is. My concern is with future posts. I'm not for deleting stuff, but at some point these threads always turn from providing information to the we are out of touch because we don't agree with the propaganda.

I guess I'm just tired of going over and over the same crap year after year. Always a new set of people pushing the same sites with the same BS. What does bother me is the person that starts the thread wanting information and all they see is name calling and so on.

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

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

NickD on Fri February 06, 2004 5:59 PM User is offline

I see Oz removed all the MVAC stuff from his site and is strictly stationary applications, but he does provide some comparative data. I was looking over his comparative tests on a 3 ton Lennox unit, R-22 versus HC-22a, too close to really tell as the inaccurate ampere rating does not account for power factor variations under different loads, but then only a 7% less current but the ambient is also 2*F less so who knows. And what about the BTU output? But nothing like the up to 30% savings in the literature and the terms of the guarantee are not given in the site. So what happens if the refrigerant blows the system? Do you get a new system or a free can of refrigerant?

I frankly feel any refrigerant is good if the condenser is made large enough in terms of efficiency. Ambient doesn't mean anything if the condenser is running 70*F greater than it, got to keep that temperature down. (Larger condenser?).

I agree this hype gets boring very quick and it seems to be predominate in the HC refrigerant field. What is lacking in the Oz site, is unacceptable for MVAC applications, but just some lose talk on the already nebulous EPA regulations.

Suppose you can ban the poster in particular if they use false pretenses to push a product.

Stevo30 on Fri February 06, 2004 6:17 PM User is offline

Hey Tim!

As far as I'm concerned, it's your server and you have the right to set any rules you want. Participation is a privilege, not a right...

My suggestion is to specifically clarify the rules for the discussion of alternative refrigerants. I would keep the retro and conversion section to discussion of approved refrigerants and workmanship like tips and procedures. To me, it would be great if you got a moderator on that board that knew which of these mixes were truely approved in each country. That's a tall order, but would keep the threads more professional and the advice worth more than just chat. If nobody steps up, I'd just use the SNAP guidelines. If it's an important topic for non-USA readers, someone will step up and take on the moderator duties.

The off topic board is a fine place to discuss the other "alternatives". But I would put up a header on that section stating that any advice on that board is purely for entertainment purposes and the use and misuse of it is up to the reader. Especially regarding the use of unapproved refrigerants. Not trying to go legal on anyone, but it might help the occasional poster to know what to trust and what to be suspicious of. Then, if I can contribute to that board, I will. If I can't, then I'll stay on the sidelines. I think that anyone reading it even casually will soon figure out what posters to pay attention to and who to ignore.

Personally, I don't care for any of the personal bashing that seems to go hand in hand with the whole HC discussion. Regardless of who the poster is. If I was in charge, I'd delete those posts that don't fit your standards for courtesy and professionalism with suspension of posting privileges for any poster that repeatedly breaks the rules.

My big turn off with the other board was that there weren't any rules and there wasn't any moderator. The "discussions" quickly became flaming contests. After a while I got tired of reading the fantasies that were being spun. I've got better things to do with my time.

Just my $0.02...


Stevo30

TRB on Fri February 06, 2004 7:59 PM User is offlineView users profile

Quote
Originally posted by: Stevo30


My big turn off with the other board was that there weren't any rules and there wasn't any moderator. The "discussions" quickly became flaming contests. After a while I got tired of reading the fantasies that were being spun. I've got better things to do with my time.

Stevo30

That comment is exactly why I brought up this question. Most of us have been to a site that is uncontrolled. I’m not saying we are better than anyone else. But I will say we have a moderated forum!

Let’s say we set up an alternative forum which I not saying I will. The problem I have with doing so is it gives creditability to the products. If you keep the forum only for SNAP accepted refrigerants the others would surely find their way in. Which brings us back to where we are now.

The ACKits.com Forum is not just here for ad revenue. I guess that is why I take such a strong stand on these issues. Anyone that has read my posts over the years knows I’m not for products that are not accepted by the industry. It’s not that I let the industry tell me which direction to follow. But there has to be some sort of procedures to follow when using these products. You have to be able to use them and still offer the same warranty as with other industry standard products. You can’t have a law in one state not be illegal in the next. Maybe we should change the title of our support forum to something like United States Automotive A/C Information Forum, USAAC Information Forum. That way it is plain and simple. Follow the EPA and Industry guidelines or post is removed.

I don’t know but I will tell this, I am reading every response with an open mind. I want us to be just like FOX (Fair and balanced). As I have said before I may pay the bills but this site is all of ours. So keep the suggestions coming and I’m sure we will come to a happy conclusion that works for all!




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

Bigchris on Fri February 06, 2004 9:42 PM User is offline

I think everyone brings some bias to the forum. Mine is that I have no use for non Snap accepted chemicals. That said, I consider discussions of substitute chemistry either political, engineering or lunatic fringe. Non of those are mainstay material for ACKits.

I think there should be clear written description in "Automotive AC Procedures and Tips" of what the US rules are regarding unaccepted substitutes as well as the known shortcomings of using them. That becomes the first reference for anyone asking about them. It should also state ACKits policies regarding discussing them. The moderator should continue to have full discretion when it comes to deciding whether to lock or delete abusers.

If a separate forum for discussion of alternatives is provided, its name should clearly indicate that the material contained therein may be nonsensical and does not necessarily represent ACKits view, but I share your concern that providing such a "bucket" would only encourage its use. The title "Whimsy and BS" comes to mind, but I doubt such a category would bring any value added to ACKits.

HerkyJim on Fri February 06, 2004 11:11 PM User is offline

No. ONE of you knowledgeable regulars should point out the often unlawful nature, and sometimes potentially dangerous consequences of using these chemicals. After that; ignore them. You've just been egging these guys on, and arguments with fools (them) are pointless. My $0.02

TRB on Fri February 06, 2004 11:17 PM User is offlineView users profile

Thanks for you input Jim.

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

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

MrBillPro on Fri February 06, 2004 11:25 PM User is offlineView users profile

Personally, I would only accept to talk about the auto mfg. accepted refrigerants at least that way most of us here could give good advise answers to them. When you get off topic auto mfg. refrigerants I agree it usually from my experience turns into a big free for all, and has an opportunity to cause some enemies, and i sure would hate to be the advisor on non auto accepted refrigerants and have someone get hurt, anyway that's all up to Tim and I think he is more than capable of making the right decision and which ever decision he makes i will stand with him.

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

k5guy on Fri February 06, 2004 11:45 PM User is offline

I have no problem with an objective discussion of HC. I have no problem with them stating we did this..., and this is the results got. I have a problem with the one-upmanship of "my refrigerant is better than your refrigerant" discussions. It is petty, and it doesn't help anyone. Even worse, it makes the DIYer think that it's a good alternative to using EPA approved methods and refrigerants.

Yes, I would kill the current thread, but don't ban talking about HC. Guns are considered to be bad, but they are also used in self-defense, and to win wars. It's not the guns that are bad, it's the person pulling the trigger. Same thing here with the HC discussion. HC isn't the problem. It's the reckless, lawless discussion of them by the irresponsible few. I say, warn the people to tone it down. If they don't, boot them.


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


Send me e-mail

Edited: Fri February 06, 2004 at 11:45 PM by k5guy

NickD on Sat February 07, 2004 7:19 AM User is offline

LOL, they come and go, salespersons come here pushing a product that first off aren't even well versed with AC systems with additives, refrigerants, and guaranteed incredible results that led Tim to conduct some tests of his own.

That subtle approach, my AC was blowing warm air so I added some xyz to the system, now I am getting -40*F air and my gas mileage went from 14 to 80 mpg kind of thing. Naturally such claims generate some interest, but historically, but questioning these claims, suddenly you have your head up your backside or some other insulting remark.

Yeah, good to delete these posts and warn the poster, it doesn't serve any good.

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.