I am a big fan of DuraCool because of its performance compared to R134 and comparable performance to R12. I bought a case and have converted all three of my cars, one of which is a 1985 300d cali model, and the GM style A/C Pump is no longer rockin' and rollin' anymore because of the lower head pressure. The cooling is incredible compared to the 134 that was in there as well. This to me means that my system should last longer, especially the compressor, because of the lower pressure.
thanks, adam

Adamb, I do not think anyone has disputed Duracool being better than 134a. The problem arose when Redfox tried to extend his claims to cover R-12 ( alternatives to R-12 being the subject title of this thread ).

CoachGeo's statement about ammonia is no doubt true... many systems use it... BUT if those beer coolers had wheels and were hurtling towards others with the same configuration at 70 mph or more.. then I expect the Insurance underwriters, National Highway Safety Board , and some politicians trying to score points would suggest a less caustic substance be used in them also.... thankfully refrigerators inside motor homes which crash seldom get ruptured in the impact.

R-12 does not occur in nature.. it was designed with certain parameters to fit the criteria needed. It is considered non flammable.... and even IF they were COMPLETELY equal on all other points.... I would consider that reason enough to use it in machines with a potential of crashing.

For REDFOX when he wakes up.

How do we get around the following info from the epa web site.

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

Item #1

Misleading Use of "Drop-in" to Describe Refrigerants
Many companies use the term "drop-in" to mean that a substitute refrigerant will perform identically to CFC-12, that no modifications need to be made to the system, and that the alternative can be used alone or mixed with CFC-12. However, EPA believes the term confuses and obscures several important regulatory and technical points. First, charging one refrigerant into a system before extracting the old refrigerant is a violation of the SNAP use conditions and is, therefore, illegal. Second, certain components may be required by law, such as hoses and compressor shutoff switches. If these components are not present, they must be installed. See the section below on use conditions for more information on these points. Third, it is impossible to test a refrigerant in the thousands of air conditioning systems in existence to demonstrate identical performance. In addition, system performance is strongly affected by outside temperature, humidity, driving conditions, etc., and it is impossible to ensure equal performance under all of these conditions. Finally, it is very difficult to demonstrate that system components will last as long as they would have if CFC-12 were used. For all of these reasons, EPA does not use the term "drop-in" to describe any alternative refrigerant.

item #2

REMOVE ORIGINAL REFRIGERANT:
The original CFC-12 must be removed from the system prior to charging with the new refrigerant. This procedure will prevent the contamination of one refrigerant with another. Refrigerants mixed within a system probably won't work and could damage the system. As mentioned above, this requirement means that no alternative can be used as a "drop-in."


item #3

Unacceptable Substitutes (2) Name (1) Date Manufacturer Reason
OZ-12® 3/18/94 OZ Technology Flammable blend of hydrocarbons; insufficient data to demonstrate safety
R-176 3/18/94 Arctic Chill Contains CFC-12, which is inappropriate in a CFC-12 substitute
HC-12a® 6/13/95 OZ Technology Flammable blend of hydrocarbons; insufficient data to demonstrate safety
Duracool 12a 6/13/95 Duracool Limited This blend is identical to HC-12a® in composition but is manufactured by a different company
R-405A 6/13/95 Greencool Contains a perfluorocarbon, which has extremely high global warming potential and lifetime


Note 2

See text for details on legality of use according to status
Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions regarding fittings, labeling, no drop-in, and compressor shutoff switches.
Unacceptable; illegal for use as a CFC-12 substitute in motor vehicle air conditioners

Duracool is considered "unacceptable" for motor vehicle use

Now be carefull with your answer, As a sales rep for Duracool If you violate Federal Law you open the corporation or yourself to federal action for violating EPA law.

How do you get around the info above when telling people that Duracool is a R12 drop in?

Duracool can not be added to a system with R12. But you yourself have said that you have done this? Does Duracool Limited know your stating this or are you considered an "independent agent" who sells Duracool and the corporation will not legally back anything you say?

You offered to refund someones money if they tried it and were not happy with the results. WILL YOU reimburse the TOTAL expense of having the sytem reconditioned after adding Duracool ( which is shown above to be illegal) if we are not happy with the results. Of course that will include new drier, oil, a flush of the entire system and possibly a new compressor if damaged.
And destruction of the contaminated R12.


You have to ask yourself how much do you believe in Duracool??? Will you cover that cost????


Dave

dmorrison

I just returned from the airport and now I have time to answer your questions. I mentioned this forum to the general manager of Duracool when I picked him up at his motel this morning. He told me to state that we are a ''drop-in" replacement for R-12 in every country in the world eccept the USA. The EPA told us to put in our literature that we are designed as a "drop-in" replacement for R-12. They have always admitted that we are a "drop-in" for 134a. One of the biggest lies in this country in my opinion is "We are here from the federal government [IRS, EPA, FDA, ATF, DOT, etc...] and we are here to help you. When you acquire your EPA certifications to buy R-12 at that point you do come under their jurisdictions. Many of the people on this forum have never acquired this certification to my knowledge. Most of the mechanics that I know personally that have their certification know very little about how an a/c system actually works. Once I checked into the certification process I decided not to apply. I do not come under their jurisdiction. Personally I think it is wrong to release any chemical refrigerant into the atmosphere. Have I added Duracool to a R-12 system, Yes, I'm not ashamed to admit it. Do I release R-12 into the asmosphere ? No. Do I believe Duracool that Duracool works better than R-12 in practically every application ? Yes.

The reason that the general manager was in Nashville this week was to meet with the buyers for a major corporation that has stores in the US and Canada. I was pleased to learn that the corporation had done their homework. They knew about all the things we have discussed on this thread and were still very interested in handling the product. They have already done their purchasing for refrigerant this season for the US so they invited us to meet with them again in October. One of their buyers stated that he couldn't believe how 134a was ever put on the market. I agree. Go back to one of coachgeo's previous statements.

If you are a certified EPA technician and you desire to put Duracool into an R-12 system. First you must recover the R-12 that is in the system. Second install 134a fittings. Third install 134a into the system. Fourth recover the 134a. Fifth install Duracool12a into the system. Sixth label the system. Each of our cases comes with 12 labels. I am not a certified EPA technician so these rules do not apply to me.

The EPA has stated that we cannot mix refrigerants at a meeting of Enviromental Canada. The general manager asked him why the EPA had approved blends of refrigerants in the cans or cannisters. He couldn't answer the question legitimately.

I do not work for Duracool. I buy their product and resell it. They are not responsible for what I say. I am. On this thread I don't think I have ever called Duracool a "drop-in" replacement for CFC12. If I did I apologize. Do I say that Duracool will work excellently in a CFC12 system without any changes? Yes.

Duracool is the only refrigerant that I know of that has an insurance policy covering the damage that Duracool could possibly do to a system. They have never had a claim found against them to my knowledge.

If anyone has any questions that they would like for me to answer personally my phone number is listed below.

"we are a ''drop-in" replacement for R-12 in every country in the world eccept the USA."

Well, in spite of all the dumb things that are forced upon us by the US Congress in their infinite wisdom, I guess this shows that in some areas, we in the US are smarter than the rest of the world. At least in 18 of our states for sure.

Have a great day,

leathermang

You are right R-12 was designed with certain parameters back in the 30s to replace hydrocarbons in refrigeration systems. In my opinion most operations went to it because it was cheaper than hydrocarbons and they could patent it. Albert Einstein had the first three patents on hydrocarbon refrigerants in the 20s. Safety was not Dupont's first concern because all refrigerants are flammable once they are mixed with the oil mist in the system. R-12 when it burns produces a deadly gas called phosgene. Being cheap it ruled the industry until they started jacking up the prices in the 80s and 90s. Hydrocarbons are expensive to refine and it is hard to get pure product. Most countries around the world do not have access to pure hydrocarbons. That is why they are not used more often around the world. Why do you think R-12 is cheaper in other countries than it is here? It is because markets cannot be manipulated as easily in other countries by the government as they can in the US.

So in my opinion hydrocarbons are the legitimate refrigerants and their chemical cousins are the cheap copycats that can be patented.

Larry Bible

To my knowledge there are only two states that it is law that has been through the legislature TX and AZ, but their wording also states that it cannot be toxic, so how can they sell 134a which is now listed as practically non-flammable and toxic. The other states that I know of it is done by agency regulation which can be enforced as law as long as it is not challenged in the courts which has been done sucessfully in some of these states. R-12 is also toxic.

Believe me government agencies can be bought even local ones that was brought to my attention again as I talked to a police officer at the local market this morning while I was returning from the airport. When he was a rookie ten years ago it upset him now he just thinks it's funny. He said money can get alot of things done. He told me that he had only lost three court cases in his fifteen years and money worked in all of those and he explained to me how it happened. He knows this is not a perfect world.

Not all government agents or agencies can be bought. I have a friend who works for the state EPA and he explained to me that 5% of all pollution is done by the general public the other 95% is done by big business. The 5% done by the general public is the easiest to control. He explained that big business will keep them tied up in court until they give up. The US has the largest number of lawyers per capita of any country in the world. Do you know how to get a lawyer out of a tree? Cut the rope.

....

.....

There may only be two where Duacool is specifically named as illegal, but there are eighteen where flammable refrigerants are illegal.

I would be totally ashamed to even talk about corruption of government agencies. I realize that there is massive corruption and it is pathetic.

If you want to bribe local agencies to purchase illegal product, that is your business, but I find it appalling.

As long as your conscience can deal with putting flammable substance in multiple mobile air conditioning systems and you can sleep at night, then that is your business.

I, personally, could never sleep at night knowing that I had such a huge part in putting flammable substances in mobile air conditioners in vehicles in which innocent human beings are riding an operating.

I'm out of this thread now for GOOD!

leathermang

Who do you think might have written that description of R-12? Could it have been the manufacturer? Do you think they might mislead you for any reason? Possibly money. I just looked up chlorine in the dictionary. Chlorine- a greenish yellow,poisonous, gaseous element Fluorine- a pale, greenish yellow, pungent, corrosive, and extremely reactive gaseous element.

I also looked up the R-12 MSDS Incompatible with magnesium, potassium, sodium, calcium, powdered aluminum and zinc.

It is also known to cause irregular heartbeat and possible death.

Now R-12 used in the proper environment with the proper safety precautions I don't have a problem with it and never have, but don't try to make me believe it is not toxic and dangerous to my health. I've been around and I've used the old propane leak detectors. I know what the stuff will do to your breathing. The problem is most people cannot afford R-12 or it is not available to them anymore.

Larry

You try to make it sound like I'm the one who has possibly bribed someone or bought something illegal. I order Duracool in 100 case quanities and the freight companies deliver it to my door within two days. Usually I order 300 cases or more at a time to save on freight. I have ordered as much as 2000 cases at a time, but that is too much to keep up with at a time. Quite often I deliver as much as 100 cases at a time out of my van and my children sometimes ride with me. If I thought there was any serious danger I would never let my children ride with me. I have never had a problem with sleeping. I do the best job I can with what I have to work with. Duracool is warehoused in Kansas and they probably keep over 100 pallets in stock at all times. I advertise in several major magazines and I don't believe my advertising is misleading in any way. You've tried to make me look like I'm some shady character that operates in the dark out of the trunk of his car. Well I'm not and I have tried to buck the system honorably. If anyone can tell me how to do it better I am willing to listen.

Larry

One more thing, I don't know of any state that has named Duracool in their regulations or law.

"problem is most people cannot afford R-12 or it is not available to them anymore"---Redfox

It is available to anyone that takes the online open book test and pays about $20.

The average car takes 3 cans (12oz) or less at $20 a can right now. So $60 to have the referigerant the old car system was designed to work with.