I know I am going to hear how I have just made a possible "car bomb" but any car is a bomb when you look at motor oil, fuel, brake fluid etc. I don't consider 12oz of refrigerant to be that big a deal. I used to drive a truck with 3 large O2 tanks and 2 acetylene along with 5 gallons of lacquer thinner and many gallons of thinner based paints and solvents so 12oz of refrigerant is not much of a threat in my book.
I had to rebuild the A/C on a 64 ford this week and after I was finished the 134 just flat didn't work very well. Same problem with the 240d I brought home a couple of weeks ago. It was cold at temps below 90 but sucked at 90+ and the compressor sounded very overworked. Kind of the same deal with the Ford.(both York type) I can buy r12 but at $65.00 can or $800.00 for 30lb bottle it is way over priced. Why give Dupont all that money? So I started to look into the r12a stuff used in Europe and Canada, and legal in 43 US states. Figured I would give it a try and man WHAT A DIFFERENCE! In the 240d I get vent temps of 36, down from 55 when it's 90+. Not only that but high side pressure is down to 150psi, low side is at 28 psi. Same on my 300d. After seeing the difference I had all the 134 removed from it as well and redid the system with 12oz of duracool vs 2.8 lbs of 134a. Vent temps are 37f at 96f outside. I don't feel any drag on the motor like I used to when it kicks on either. Pressures are way down on the 300d as well. 33 low side, 160 high.
Yes the stuff will burn. So will 134a at some mixtures. You are also using it in a sealed system. Even if something like a compressor blows and caused spark you end up with a possible flash fire. Moving down the road at any speed if this happened would be no big deal. In 25 years of driving I have yet to have a compressor blow. In a wreck you may have a flash fire that would burn out in a matter of a couple of seconds. You could have this anyway since the oil used in your A/C system burns quite well when atomized into a vapor and that is what will happen if the system is broken open. I will take the colder vent temps, less strain on my A/C system, and much lower cost not to mention the 0 cfc content. It is harmless to the ozone.

I bought 7 cans of r12 for $18 per can this last week... I have seen the 12 oz cans go from $15 to $23 dollars... so why not use what the system was designed for... ?

You are stretching the physics and situation descriptions in order to justify your use of the Duracool... but it is your car ( or bomb-eek ) .... this has been discussed a lot lately and I think it is interesting that you started a new thread which would not have all the previous discussion in close proximity to your statements....

Since r12 is one of the most ideal molecules for the automobile situation ,, I find it hard to believe that some other medium would funcion as well or better using one third the weight in the same system.... does the can explain why that would be possible ?

Did you drive your truck around with the gauges attached or with the safety caps on those cylinders.... your answer to that may explain a lot about your risk taking philosophy....

It almost sounds like you want to hear about the bomb situation... you have already read the other posts... you could run Duracool for a hundred years and we would never know you had it.. Of course this has not been a long term test on your part... if your system crashes in four months will you come back and tell us about it ? , Greg

That stuff sounds cool... heh heh no pun intended. Keep us posted on how it does with long term use! When I first got my car I was unhappy with the AC. Now that I filled up my R12, not completely as I only have 12oz cans of it and the whole can was gone and it wasn't completely full, it cools very nicely. It looses some cooling capacity at idle, but once I'm moving it's nice and chilly. But if I could do better I would. So if this stuff works for ya I'll look into it!

__________________
1984 190D 2.2 Auto 220k
2001 Jeep Cherokee Sport 70K
2004 Lexus RX-330 ??K
2005 Chrylser Crossfire LTD 6K

Play guitar? Go to www.cyberfret.com for free online lessons!

Here is the link:

http://www.duracoolusa.com/

The guy that you talk to when you call the 800 number (Don) is a MB diesel fanatic too.

__________________
Jim

Did I drive with the caps on the tanks? Well on the ones not upright with gauges attached yes, on the ones in use, no. DOT does not require that as long as the tanks are bolted in.
How can 12oz work as well as 36oz of r12? Don't know, don't care. It just works. Proof is in the guage readings and vent temps. Florida is one of the states that bans the use of anything but 134a and r12. this being the case r12 is still priced way out of line. Why not use what the car was designed for? Well if the PO of both diesels has not had them converted to 134a when there was a problem I would have stuck with r12. Because of the conversion both systems have been filled with an oil that does not work with r12. This would mean a total system flush, new drier etc and still not guarantee that all the ester oil was out of the system. Using 12a I could keep the same oil, not break open any part of the system, and just pull a -10 vac before refill. 134a is not the final solution. It will be taken off the market or restricted within the next few years.
Why start a new post? Well most every post on this topic are from people asking about using 12a and then all the horror stories of how you will blow yourself up start. Most people decide to go the 134 route. I found only one post where someone is using duracool and had someone else put it in. I posted with my experience and numbers from 3 different cars done this week. Two being 123 style diesels with two different kinds of A/C systems and compressors. yeah the thngs may burn up and I am out a compressor, but by the way they sound now with the lower operating pressures and less drag on the motors I think they will live longet than with 134. Time will tell.

Where'd you get it? And what about switch operation at the lower pressures?

The link has an 800 number that you can purchase it straight from them. It comes from Chattanooga, Tn. $39 for a conversion kit which is enough to do one car.

__________________
Jim

the low pressure switch does not kick out till pressures fall to almost zero. The high temp switch to kick in the fan seems to come on about the same time as always. The operating pressures are very close to what r12 freon was for these cars when designed. Using 134 you are pushng them to almost double what the cars were designed for, my guage readings were 55 low-225 high on the 300d and 52 low 220 high on the 240d at 90f. This is what it took to make the low side "sweat" and was still below what my books show to be a proper charge for 134. If I went any higher vent temps went up. Guages are needed to use the duracool if you are wanting to buy the big 50lb cylinders. Going by the bubble in the sight glass all three of the cars I did look to be very under charged. If you just use the small cans it seems that 2 of them or 12oz is about right. Guage pressure at idle on the 300d was in the 30's, when pushing about 2500 rpm it would drop to the low 20's.

Jim, have you tried it? Surely there is a dealer nearby. My MB, even with a new Nippondenso compressor and new vacuum elements fights a losing battle at temps over 90 F with R134a. My Honda and Toyota will freeze your fanny off with it but not the Benz.

Rebootit , You live in FLORIDA..... you come on here and post saying " I know FLORIDA BANS EVERYTHING EXCEPT 12 AND 134.... " and that you installed SOMETHING ELSE.....

I think this may indicate your risk taking philosophy is pretty high....

You say that due to that ban r12 is still "priced out of line"... I am sorry to hear that Florida does not have access to the internet or to the US POSTAL SERVICE, UPS... etc..... Someone should do something about that.....

I believe one of the oils will work with either 134 or 12... either the PAG or the Ester....they tell which to use depending on whether you flush the system....

I have flushed many ac systems...and you would be surprised at the gunk you get out of one even without a compressor meltdown... in fact one of the main things to fail is the holder of the desicant in the reciever/dryer... so I do not consider it an advantage not to have replaced the reciever/dryer,,, it only cost $36 for my 240d and every ac pro I know of , and the compressor manufacturers , consider replacing it as CHEAP and NECESSARY INSURANCE....

Once those little dessicant particles attach themselves to moisture,,,and that is their function,, to take hold of moisture ...keeping it out of the rest of the system.... you can not get it away from them with a vacuum... that is why one should replace the receiver/dryer everytime you get the chance....and that is why they warn about not opening it up until you are ready to attach it to your system... because it will gather moisture and you can not then get it out with the vacuum you would do next anyway.... otherwise it would not hurt to get some moisture in it... you would just boil it off and take it out of the system with your vacuum pump....

Why would you be pleased that you only had to pull -10 ? Do you think it is hard to pull 29+ inches of vacuum once you have the vacuum pump attached ? Why do you think that pros would try for 29+ to boil off all the moisture they can if 10 would work just as well ? They would sure be finished faster with the vacuuming.

TXBILL, Thanks for the lob... will put it out of the ballpark....

FROM MY BRAIN :

1. "from the website" certainly an unbiased source....

2. What respectable investigator would do a study on the risk " INSIDE THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT " ? It sounds like one of those studies commissioned by the manufacturer who then specified the parameters so as to not include the most obvious dangers....

The risk is from the fact that the condensor is in front of the radiator at the utmost front of the automobile... in a front end collision you would expect this to be the first pressure system to be broached. So you have the potential of sparks from clashing metal, you have air to provide the oxygen source, and you have the exhaust/catalytic converter to provide the ignition source.... and introducing a volitile gas into that situation , when it is unnecessary ,,, is _______________ I will let you fill in the blank... but CAUTIOUS is not one of the available choices...

Thanks Bill, don't know if it was intentional but it felt good anyway....

Leathermang, I may be reading something into this, but I get the impression you don't think this is a good idea.

Cap'n , I tried to be subtle but with close reading you figured out my true feelings ...

with 134a you have a flammable gas (read the MSDS) mixed with flammable oil. It is in the front of the car in the same place and you have 4x more of it. In a crash it's the same thing, IE possible flash fire. You also have 2 gallons of motor oil connected to an oil cooler right next to the A/C system with a flash point of +- 425f, about 1 qt of diesel fuel in the lines and filters right behind that , pint of brake fluid etc. You also have superheated coolant that can burn you lots worse than 12oz of refrigerate. I'm sorry I just won't fall for the govt BS that this stuff is a hazard. Yeah you could fill the inside of your car with it if it leaked from under the dash. You would also smell it big time. Think lp gas. So if I smell a strong gas odor inside my car I don't think I will fire up a cigar to see if it will explode. Dow chemical wants you to believe the only solution for A/C is what they make and hold patents on. Funny how all of a sudden r12 was going to kill the planet in 1992, which is the same year the patent expired. Call me crazy but I don't believe for a second that Dow is looking out for the ozone layer and decided that r12 should be banned because it cares.

Bill, when you get here Sunday we ARE going to play with volitile gases... we will see what you think about this risk next week...