Putting R12 into a R134 vehicle

[Raizinman]

Has anyone been putting R12 into R134a vehicles to get colder temperatures? In Texas temperatures have risen to 112 degrees and R134a vehicles cannot keep up with this heat. I'm hearing through the mechanic grape vine that many shops are pulling out the R134a and putting in R12 to get lower vent temperatures. Supposedly the shops are having the vehicle owners sign some sort of release. Anyway, it seems if you can retrofit and replace R12 with R134a, then the opposite should also be true. Changing the end couplings of your R12 gauges with R134a couplings makes adding R12 very easy and due to the lack of demand of R12, the prices have actually been coming down.

 

[NutBucket]

Are they running the R12 with the higher pressure of the R134 systems? Seems like something is bound to go wrong.

 

[CombatChuk]

They would have to do a complete flush of the system and possibly replace the R134a hosing that's in place (Since the oil that R134a was in is not compatible with R12)... But if there's a leak in the system, R12 (Freon for people that don't know) will escape which is bad for the ozone layer (which is why we moved to R134a in the first place)

 

[Zenmervolt]

Assuming that the systems have been completely flushed and the appropriate oils are used, putting R12 in an R134a system will result in:

- Longer system life (R12 carries lubrication oil better than R134a)
- Lower system pressures (also contributes to longer life)
- Superior cooling

The only mechanical differences between an R12 system and an R134a system are that R134a systems typically have larger condensers and more powerful compressors. This is because R134a doesn't cool as well and needs a larger area to dissipate heat and is charged to higher pressures.

That said, the oils used by R12 and by R134a are different and not compatible. If mixed, they form an acidic sludge that is bad for the system. To properly switch from one to the other, you need to evacuate all oil and change the receiver/drier (which will have some of the old oil absorbed in it). Also, R12 is currently about $60/lb. This would be a very expensive option.

ZV

 

[tortillasoup]

If you want improved performance without the risk of damaging your current system, I suggest going with a hydrocarbon refrigerant instead:http://www.duracool.com/

Hydrocarbon refrigerants are better than R134a or R12 and don't damage the ozone layer or cause global warming like R12 or R134a does. Duracool will cool much better than R134a and a bit better than R12.

 

[Zenmervolt]

If you want improved performance without the risk of damaging your current system, I suggest going with a hydrocarbon refrigerant instead:http://www.duracool.com/

Hydrocarbon refrigerants are better than R134a or R12 and don't damage the ozone layer or cause global warming like R12 or R134a does. Duracool will cool much better than R134a and a bit better than R12.

While I've had success with Duracool in stationary (industrial) applications, it's important to note that duracool is NOT approved in the US for use in motor vehicle A/C systems. No hydrocarbon refrigerant is approved for retrofitting in motor vehicle A/C systems in the US, as a matter of fact.

From a system perspective, duracool will work quite well, but it's not legal and no shop is going to perform the retrofit. Also, there's a risk of fines if anyone ever checks the system. The OP is free to decide for himself, but he should be aware of the full situation.

ZV

 

[drnickriviera]

Also, R12 is currently about $60/lb. This would be a very expensive option.

ZV

You can buy all you want on ebay for less than that. 30 lb cylinders for a max of $20/lb. Hunt your local craigslist and you can find it for $5/lb

 

[Bartman39]

One other thing to point out is the orifice for R134a & R12 is different so if its an orifice tube system it will have to be changed and if its an expansion valve system they it will have to be changed which can be a problem since R12 was not used in most autos since the early 90`s...

Zenmervolt... Not to totaly disagree but we used to run 134a right on top of the reg mineral oil from an R12 system we just pulled a good vac on it to remove any freon that was dissolved in the oil... Never had an issue with the oil it was found to still go around in the system just not in a mist but in droplets... Would think R12 going into the synthetic oil used in 134a would be about the same as long as a good vac was pulled...?

BTW if 134a was to replace R12 because of the ozone issue then why in the hell do we also have to recover R134a...? Real safe huh...?

 

[skyking]

A better solution is to put an electric fan in front of the condenser with a relay. Have that fan come on with the clutch cycle. Cheaper, works better when stopped in traffic, no monkeying with illegal refrigerant change, mixing oils, etc.

 

[dud]

Ironic thread as I am needing to convert my existing R12 system to 134a. I have a slow leak and suspect an O-ring has gone as the system is 18 years old.

ZV, have you had any luck converting systems to 12 to 134a? I would do it but am not certified and do not have a vacuum.

Any suggestions?

 

[herm0016]

instead of converting, we have been running 409 in our R12 systems.
We have a friend that is an old industrial HVAC guy that has all the stuff, its what he runs in his old cars too.

http://www.arkema.com/sites/group/e...hemicals/forane/refrigerants/forane_409a.page

it works great and does get colder than the R134a

 

[Zenmervolt]

You can buy all you want on ebay for less than that. 30 lb cylinders for a max of $20/lb. Hunt your local craigslist and you can find it for $5/lb

Not legally you can't. You need to have an EPA certification to buy R-12. Anyone who sells R-12 to someone without a cert or who buys R-12 without a cert is taking some serious legal risks.

Zenmervolt... Not to totaly disagree but we used to run 134a right on top of the reg mineral oil from an R12 system we just pulled a good vac on it to remove any freon that was dissolved in the oil... Never had an issue with the oil it was found to still go around in the system just not in a mist but in droplets... Would think R12 going into the synthetic oil used in 134a would be about the same as long as a good vac was pulled...?

The oil needs to be dissolved in the refrigerant. While oil circulating as droplets can work for a while, overall system longevity will be compromised.

ZV

 

[tortillasoup]

While I've had success with Duracool in stationary (industrial) applications, it's important to note that duracool is NOT approved in the US for use in motor vehicle A/C systems. No hydrocarbon refrigerant is approved for retrofitting in motor vehicle A/C systems in the US, as a matter of fact.

From a system perspective, duracool will work quite well, but it's not legal and no shop is going to perform the retrofit. Also, there's a risk of fines if anyone ever checks the system. The OP is free to decide for himself, but he should be aware of the full situation.

ZV

http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc-12a.html
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc12alng.html
The only thing that is 'illegal' is it replace R12 with a hydrocarbon refrigerant.. There is nothing preventing you from replacing R134a with a hydrocarbon refrigerant on the federal level.. There are some states that have outlawed the use of hydrocarbon refrigerant for cars with Arizona being one of them, but for the most part, it is legal so long as the car is either R134a or has already been fully converted to R134a use before the conversion to hydrocarbon refrigerant. Essentially, the EPA doesn't want people doing "sham retrofits" which is to fake convert to R134a just so they can convert to a hydrocarbon refrigerant. The whole "snap" program is really stupid IMO and they should just allow the direct conversion of R12 to hydrocarbon refrigerant..

 

[Zenmervolt]

http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc-12a.html
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc12alng.html
The only thing that is 'illegal' is it replace R12 with a hydrocarbon refrigerant.. There is nothing preventing you from replacing R134a with a hydrocarbon refrigerant on the federal level.. There are some states that have outlawed the use of hydrocarbon refrigerant for cars with Arizona being one of them, but for the most part, it is legal so long as the car is either R134a or has already been fully converted to R134a use before the conversion to hydrocarbon refrigerant. Essentially, the EPA doesn't want people doing "sham retrofits" which is to fake convert to R134a just so they can convert to a hydrocarbon refrigerant. The whole "snap" program is really stupid IMO and they should just allow the direct conversion of R12 to hydrocarbon refrigerant..

I don't think there's a court in the country that would agree with your reasoning. The court would take one look at the reasoning and the records around the law and you'd be sunk.

Also: http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/lists/unaccept.html

It's unacceptable under EPA regulations for any use other than industrial process refrigeration, even in "new" applications where it's not replacing anything.

Now, the chances of being caught are minuscule, that I'll admit. However, it's irresponsible, and flat wrong, to claim that duracool is legal if you're replacing R-134a.

ZV

 

[drnickriviera]

Not legally you can't. You need to have an EPA certification to buy R-12. Anyone who sells R-12 to someone without a cert or who buys R-12 without a cert is taking some serious legal risks.

ZV

And that cert is an online, open book test. Anyone that wants R-12 should have no problems getting it.

 

[herm0016]

did anyone read my post? probably not. rather argue.

 

[Zenmervolt]

And that cert is an online, open book test. Anyone that wants R-12 should have no problems getting it.

True, but that information was absent from your post.

ZV

 

[Ronstang]

I'm sure glad I have a brand new 30lb bottle of R12 and about 10 of the small cans.

 

[tortillasoup]

I don't think there's a court in the country that would agree with your reasoning. The court would take one look at the reasoning and the records around the law and you'd be sunk.

Also: http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/lists/unaccept.html

It's unacceptable under EPA regulations for any use other than industrial process refrigeration, even in "new" applications where it's not replacing anything.

Now, the chances of being caught are minuscule, that I'll admit. However, it's irresponsible, and flat wrong, to claim that duracool is legal if you're replacing R-134a.

ZV

Not trying to be rude or anything, but I think you're glossing over important details.

Substitute (Name Used in the Federal Register) ODS Being Replaced End-uses Reason
All flammable refrigerants, including OZ-12® (Hydrocarbon Blend A), HC-12a® (Hydrocarbon Blend B), and Duracool 12a except HFC-152a in new MVACs CFC-12 Motor vehicle air conditioning, retrofit and new Lack of adequate assessment that characterizes incremental flammability risk
OZ-12® (Hydrocarbon Blend A), HC-12a® (Hydrocarbon Blend B), and Duracool 12a CFC-12

If you read the chart on the actual site instead of my poor excuse for a quote, under the "ODS being replaced" it says Duracool and then it says CFC-12 which is also known as R-12.. Like I said, you're not allowed to replace an A/C system with that is designed for R-12 with a hydocarbon refrigerant due to the "snap" rules.. However, that does NOT mean you can't replace an A/C system that is designed for R134a with a hydrocarbon refrigerant. Now if that chart had said you "ODS being replaced", CFC-134a, you'd have a point.

Finally, if you had read the links I posted earlier in this thread, you might have come across this:

"What is a "sham retrofit" of a motor vehicle A/C system?
EPA does not regulate the use of hydrocarbon refrigerants such as HC-12a® and DURACOOL 12a® as substitutes for HFC-134a in motor vehicles. Certain materials have circulated claiming that by first converting a system from CFC-12 to HFC-134a, the system may then be converted to use a hydrocarbon refrigerant without violating the original prohibition against using hydrocarbons as substitutes for CFC-12. Thus, the question arises about the definition of a legitimate retrofit. This definition hinges on two distinct principles: complying with the conditions placed on using HFC-134a under the SNAP program, and the intent of the retrofit. "

http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc12alng.html

Is it legal to replace HFC-134a in a motor vehicle with hydrocarbon refrigerants such as DURACOOL 12a® and HC-12a®?
In certain circumstances, the replacement of HFC-134a in a motor vehicle with hydrocarbon refrigerants might be permitted. At a minimum, in order to avoid violating the Clean Air Act, the motor vehicle A/C system must have either been originally designed for use with HFC-134a refrigerant, or must have been previously retrofitted from CFC-12 to HFC-134a refrigerant, AND no sham retrofit must have occurred to convert the system to the hydrocarbon refrigerant. In order to avoid violating other laws, the replacement of the refrigerant must not violate any state or local prohibition on the use of flammable refrigerants in motor vehicle A/C systems.

The following 19 states ban the use of flammable refrigerants such as HC-12a® and DURACOOL 12a® in motor vehicle air conditioning, regardless of the original refrigerant: Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

Again, it's legal to do it if you follow everything you're suppose to do and do it in a state that allows for it.

 

[Bartman39]

instead of converting, we have been running 409 in our R12 systems.
We have a friend that is an old industrial HVAC guy that has all the stuff, its what he runs in his old cars too.

http://www.arkema.com/sites/group/e...hemicals/forane/refrigerants/forane_409a.page

it works great and does get colder than the R134a

Yes herm0016 did read your post and the link and even saved it for future idea`s...:thumbsup: One question where to buy it...?

 

[Zenmervolt]

Not trying to be rude or anything, but I think you're glossing over important details.

I'm sorry, but it's you who is glossing over even the most basic tenants of statutory interpretation.

If you read the chart on the actual site instead of my poor excuse for a quote, under the "ODS being replaced" it says Duracool and then it says CFC-12 which is also known as R-12.. Like I said, you're not allowed to replace an A/C system with that is designed for R-12 with a hydocarbon refrigerant due to the "snap" rules.. However, that does NOT mean you can't replace an A/C system that is designed for R134a with a hydrocarbon refrigerant. Now if that chart had said you "ODS being replaced", CFC-134a, you'd have a point.

I have read the chart, thank you. Note that it says that Duracool is prohibited in, "Motor vehicle air conditioning, retrofit and new." If the intent were to prohibit duracool only when replacing R-12, there would not be a prohibition against using it in new systems (since a new system cannot possibly ever be a "retrofit").

Finally, if you had read the links I posted earlier in this thread, you might have come across this:

http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc12alng.html

Again, it's legal to do it if you follow everything you're suppose to do and do it in a state that allows for it.

It may simply be that the EPA doesn't have the authority to regulate replacements for R-134a at this time. However, the current trend is to grant the EPA more authority, not less, and there are substantive risks involved in using duracool. If the OP wants to go that route it's fine. Duracool is very likely perfectly safe. However, it's important that he be aware of the risks involved.

Even if not illegal per-se in his state, there's still increased tort liability risk and the potential for insurance not to cover things if the flammability causes an issue.

Again, I'm not saying don't do it, I'm saying be aware of the potential risks.

ZV

 

[herm0016]

we were getting it local at an industrial HVAC place.

 

[tortillasoup]

I'm sorry, but it's you who is glossing over even the most basic tenants of statutory interpretation.



I have read the chart, thank you. Note that it says that Duracool is prohibited in, "Motor vehicle air conditioning, retrofit and new." If the intent were to prohibit duracool only when replacing R-12, there would not be a prohibition against using it in new systems (since a new system cannot possibly ever be a "retrofit").

What you're not understanding is that the snap rules were instituted by the Clean Air Act of 1990 and a final rule released in March 1994 and hasn't changed since then.. http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/fact.html

The phrase "and new" alone doesn't imply any specific technology though at the beginning of the paragraph, you're suppose to already know what refrigeration system they're referring to....CFC-12 (R12) The whole purpose of this snap rule was to prevent automakers or auto technicians, in a bid to save money or for convenience, from taking their R12 airconditioning technology and just adding in a hydrocarbon refrigerant and then calling it "compliant" without giving any additional thought to the refrigeration system. They found that bothersome since typically, it's a good idea when building a refrigeration system to design it with a refrigerant in mind and not just use another refrigerant in its place just because it works and it complies with govt. requirements. That's why they say it's prohibited in retrofit applications and new applications. It's important to understand the context of the rule and why it was created. They're not outright banning hydrocarbon refrigeration systems in cars, it's that they want automakers to make a refrigeration system with a refrigerant from the ground up designed to be compliant with the Montreal Protocol and not just put in an alternative refrigerant. If you read the guidelines and or message board chat about R12 to R134a conversions, there are all these rules you have to follow and the purpose of this is to prevent people from going back to R12 refrigerant.

If you don't believe me, check out this link which was posted earlier in this thread:
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc12alng.html
and the quote that agrees with what I said:

Gasoline and brake fluid are flammable, but they're allowed in cars. Why not hydrocarbon refrigerants?
Because EPA has been directed by Congress, under the SNAP program, to consider the safety aspects of alternative refrigerants for CFC-12 (as well as their environmental characteristics), it is necessary to address the safety aspects of using a flammable refrigerant in motor vehicle A/C systems originally designed for CFC-12, before that refrigerant can be approved.

There are good reasons why gasoline and other fluids may be used safely while the use of hydrocarbon refrigerants in A/C systems may not be safe. Gasoline and other flammable substances are used in systems designed specifically for flammable fluids. A gas tank is deliberately placed in the middle of the rear part of a vehicle to protect it against collisions. Air conditioner condensers, in contrast, are placed at the very front of the car to maintain good air flow. Unfortunately, this location means that condensers may be punctured during a front-end collision. Another difference is that unlike gasoline lines, air conditioners include lines that provide cooling directly to occupied areas -- in this case, passenger compartments. Flammability risk is extremely dependent on the specific system being considered; the simple presence of other flammable fluids in a car does not address the safety of using hydrocarbon refrigerants in an automobile air conditioner.

It may simply be that the EPA doesn't have the authority to regulate replacements for R-134a at this time. However, the current trend is to grant the EPA more authority, not less, and there are substantive risks involved in using duracool. If the OP wants to go that route it's fine. Duracool is very likely perfectly safe. However, it's important that he be aware of the risks involved.

I can agree with this assessment but at the same time, the worst case scenario I could imagine would be the removal of the A/C system but that's an extreme scenario. If I were OP and I knew my A/C system was actually working properly yet wasn't cooling enough, I'd switch to a hydrocarbon refrigerant and call it a day. I'd also remind them that once they switch, that system is going to be near impossible to service since most shops don't want to contaminate their systems with a foreign substance like a hydrocarbon refrigerant or any other odd refrigerant.