i was in checker and they sell the fittings w/ a filler hose- they keep it in back. all i needed was a can of freeze 12, so i dont know how much it was.

__________________
1984 123.193 372,xxx miles, room for Seven.

1999 Dodge Durango Cummins 4BTAA 47RE 5k lb 4x4 getting 25+mpgs, room for Seven.

They don't really spell it out, but congress only ever authorized the EPA to regulate the retrofitting "class I" (CFC) and "class II" (HCFC) regrigerants. That is, if you are replacing a refrigerant that is neither a CFC, or an HCFC (such as R134a which is an HFC), you do not have to listen to any of the EPA's crap.

As for the AC service industry, they have detectors to analyse the contents of people's systems because a bunch of people have mixed refrigerants (how many people top up R12 systems with R134a?).

The Parts Source/ The Canadian Tire auto parts place, sells a refridgerant that might meet your needs...

Tabor,
In any random group of people there are always 10 percent who either can't read, can't understand what they read, refuse to follow rules, think there are conspirators against them, etc....
It is in everyone's interest to follow the unique fittings system .... even if you are one of the above subset of any random crowd.

"In the course of retrofitting a motor vehicle air-conditioning
(MVAC) system, servicers of these systems, whether professional
technicians or do-it-yourselfers, must affix fittings that are designed
to work only with that refrigerant."

Where I live, the figure is way over 10%.

Since you are so good at reading, and I am so bad, I suggest you go and read the Clean Air Act. The clean air act is the only federal legislation to ever authorize the EPA to regulate refrigerants. Actually, since the Clean Air Act is a 466 page document, I will help you out: Only sections 601-617 apply to refrigerants.

As I mentioned in my previous post, and as the EPA admits on its own website, "Under the SNAP rule, EPA regulates substitutes for ozone-depleting substances. CFC-12 depletes the ozone layer, so EPA reviews substitutes for CFC-12; acceptable alternative refrigerants used to directly replace ozone-depleting substances such as CFC-12 are called 'first-generation' substitutes. Certain first-generation substitutes, such as HFC-134a, do not threaten the ozone layer, and EPA was not directed by Congress to review substitutes for these refrigerants. Substitutes for non-ozone-depleting first-generation substitutes (such as substitutes for HFC-134a) are called 'second-generation' substitutes."

If it is hard for you to understand why the EPA can not regulate something that congress never gave it authority to regulate: then I am sorry. I am done trying to explain such a simple concept. The EPA has a history of trying to downplay its ability to regulate second generation non-ozone depleting replacements (does OZ-12 ring a bell?).

PS- The unique fittings thing is, as far as I can tell, an adminstrative rule that the EPA came up with on their own. I can not find any reference to it in the Clean Air Act (but hey, you are a lot better at reading than me, maybe you can find it). The unique fittings thing is stupid because: There are an infinite number of unique blends of refrigerants that are legal to use as second generation substitutes. Requiring a unique fitting for each and every one of them is overly restrictive especially when it does not stop people from mixing refrigerants in any way. If you are responsible, you will label your system accordingly. If you are irresponsible unique fittings are not going to fix that. In short, unique fittings are an unnecessary expense that provides no advantage.

"Since you are so good at reading, and I am so bad,"--Tabor

I did not say you were not good at reading.. although if you thought I said that then maybe you are not. If I had to guess I figured you would come under the " refuse to follow rules ".

Lets cut to the essence of this conversation. Do you not agree that for the sake of people who will be owning or working on your car in the future that the $17 it would cost to install the correct fittings ( for Freeze12 in this discussion ) is out of line to avoid unintentional mixing of refrigerant ?

Actually that $17 quote includes the charging hose, can tap,and one pair freeze 12 high and low-side service port fittings and a freeze 12 system label.

http://www.sherco-auto.com/fr4012.htm

Yea, especially since I was the one who told Matt L that Freeze 12 IS ozone depleting and as such you must use the special fittings.

Tabor,
With regards to your ' PS' section above :

1. The vast majority of laws in the US are " administrative rules" promulgated by agencies... as compared to voted on laws..
2. Just because there are an infinite number of blends which could be used.. does not mean people are trying to do their own blending.. they want to buy something in a CAN which they can put into their system... and those refrigerants have designated and specified cheap screw on unique fittings which everyone should use for what should be obvious reasons by now.

" If you are responsible, you will label your system accordingly. If you are irresponsible unique fittings are not going to fix that."--Tabor

Very true, wish you had left it at that...

"In short, unique fittings are an unnecessary expense that provides no advantage."--Tabor

But it is an incredibly small expense... less than half what you are going to spend just on your new R/Dryer...

If your wife or child is the one who is driving your car when the AC quits and they pull into an AC service place... then the unique fittings gives a signal to that shop as to what they are dealing with. Or the next owner knows what his system has in it.

The EPA website states that they do not regulate the replacement of a non-ODP refridgerant with another. Thanks, Tabor, for pointing out that Freeze-12 is ODP.

SNAP is all about replacing ODP refridgerants and nothing else. The requirement for unique fittings is part of SNAP, and does not apply to newer cars that were built for 134a.