134a deal on Amazon

[Rich_NYS]

(12ea) 12oz cans for $46.14 on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Johnsens-6312-12PK-R-134a-Refrigerant-Pack/dp/B00C873Y60/ref=sr_1_1?t=slickdeals&tag=slickdeals&ascsubtag=e79215e3f9994b72a0f822237036b362&ie=UTF8&qid=1400809999&sr=8-1&keywords=r134a

[NightFlyer]

Even cheaper :biggrin:

http://www.amazon.com/Ultra-Duster-Canned-Air-Pack/dp/B008BU67DK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1400962749&sr=8-1&keywords=ultra+duster

Not to mention more efficient to use in a converted R-12 system :wink:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71H382mOxeL._SL1500_.jpg

[Bitsyncmaster]

You will need to get a side can tap for those air dusters.

[Chris4099]

Air dusters don't use R-134a these days either (too high on the GWP scale) although I supposed R-152a would still work as a refrigerant as long as you had the right oil and managed to extract just it out of the can and not any of the air. LOL

When I converted my AC system to R-134a years ago, I bought a 10 pack off eBay. Used it to charge my system and several other cars. With a properly converted system, a 12 pack will last a lifetime!

[Rich_NYS]

With a properly converted system, a 12 pack will last a lifetime!

If I finish getting my major stuff sorted in time to make the drive to DCS, a 12-pack won't last long! :cheers: :partyhat:

[NightFlyer]

Air dusters don't use R-134a these days either (too high on the GWP scale) although I supposed R-152a would still work as a refrigerant as long as you had the right oil and managed to extract just it out of the can and not any of the air. LOL

When I converted my AC system to R-134a years ago, I bought a 10 pack off eBay. Used it to charge my system and several other cars. With a properly converted system, a 12 pack will last a lifetime!

Ultra Duster and Dust Off are pure R-152a. People running it in their (non-DeLorean) systems report verified near freezing vent temps on YouTube.

I'm going to find out how well it will work in my D :biggrin:

[D Knight]

You don't want to use this in your AC. It won't carry the required amount of oil to keep the compressor from detonating.


-D Knight-

[NightFlyer]

You don't want to use this in your AC. It won't carry the required amount of oil to keep the compressor from detonating.


-D Knight-

???

Are you referring to R-134a or R-152a?

"In general it can be stated that the R-12 alternative blends based on R-142b are more miscible with mineral oil than those based on R-152 (R-22 common to both), and both are more miscible than those based on 134a."

"Replacing mineral oil with alkylbenzene will improve oil miscibility with R-12 alternatives."

http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1443&context=iracc

So, as you can see, oil miscibility in general is better in R-152a than it is in R-134a. And by using ester oil, you can greatly increase the miscibility of both refrigerants.

For the record, after doing my flush, I'll be refilling the system with ester oil (not mineral oil).

Several people are using r-134a and r-152a in their r-12 systems successfully, and there aren't any 'starving the compressor of oil' reports from such people that I'm aware of.

Where are you getting your info from exactly?

[NightFlyer]

For those who doubt my wisdom, I give you more primary sources of information. Anyone ever hear of SAE - the Society of Automotive Engineers? Well, here's what SAE had to say about R-152a (and 12a refrigerants, aka propane/butane):

"They have considerably less global warming impact and better transport properties than R134a. However, in an automotive air conditioning set up, R152a and cyclo-propane (RC270) exhibit superiority as refrigerants when compared to R134a." (emphasis added)

"R152a and cyclopropane, when used as refrigerants in a direct A/C system (i.e. conventional system), have higher COPs than the R134a baseline system. At road load conditions, R152a and cyclopropane systems outperform the baseline by 11% and 9% respectively."

That's right - R-152a provides 11% better performance than R-134a, and 2% better than 12a hydrocarbon blends (propane/butane).

http://am.delphi.com/pdf/techpapers/1999-01-0874.PDF

And here's what KAIST, the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, had to say about R-152a:

"At the same compressor speed, R152a system with readjustment of an expansion valve showed better performance compared to R134a system:
- 20 ~ 41% higher cooling capacity
- 27 ~ 42% higher COP
- 33 ~ 48% lower evaporator pressure drop
- 6.4 ~ 10.8C higher discharge temperature"

http://www.sae.org/events/aars/presentations/2008/manhoekim.pdf

Note that the discharge temperature test measured the amount of heat that the refrigerants expelled from the testing apparatus - it is not vent temps. Thus higher is better. This directly corresponds with the SAE's conclusion that R-152a is 11% more efficient than R-134a.

Thus, it's exactly like I said - R-152a provides users with lower head pressure (which means less compressor cycling, which translates to less wear on system components and better fuel economy) and lower discharge temperatures.

Honestly, this is a no-brainer here, isn't it?

So, anyone going to continue to try to claim that R-134a is better than my Dust-Off / Ultra-Duster?

[NightFlyer]

Taking a look at things objectively: R-152a (Dust-Off / Ultra Duster) vs R-134a

Availability:

R-152a is just as readily available as R-134a is, if not more so. Advantage: it's a draw.

Price:

R-152a is currently cheaper than R-134a - both locally and online. I just paid $3.99/10oz can. Advantage: R-152a.

Amount Required:

It takes 1.21 pounds (20 ounces) of R-152a to obtain a full charge on our systems. It takes 1.87 pounds (30 ounces) of R-134a to obtain a full charge on our systems. Less product, less expense. Advantage: R-152a.

What's Needed For Conversion From R-12:

You don't need any special tools to use R-152a, at least no more so than using R-134a in an R-12 system requires. To use R-152a, you need a side can tap - that's the only thing special. Otherwise, you can still use your R-12 service ports without modification just fine. You can even continue to use mineral oil if you so desire, although system lubrication is enhanced with the use of ester oil. Compare to using R-134a in an R-12 system - you need new/different oil (it's not optional as it is with R-152a), you need service port adapters or custom made hoses, and you still need a can tap of some sort. Advantage: R-152a

Miscibility (the ability of the refrigerant to carry oil):

As shown by the Purdue University study cited in one of my previous posts, R-152a has superior miscibility properties vs R-134a. That means better protection of the compressor and greater system performance. Advantage: R-152a.

Efficiency/Performance:

As shown by the SAE paper and the KAIST study cited in one of my previous posts , R-152a provides lower head pressures (which translates to less compressor cycling, which means less wear on system components and better fuel economy) and and an 11% greater efficiency with lower vent temperatures vs R-134a. This is objective science here folks. Advantage: R-152a

A/C Shop Willingness To Service:

As venting R-152a to atmosphere isn't unlawful or destructive of the environment, A/C shops don't have to worry about recovery. Thus, they should be just as willing to work on systems with R-152a in them as they are in systems with R-134a in them. Advantage: it's a draw.

Environmental Safety:

R-152a does not cause ozone depletion if vented to the atmosphere. R-134a, while better than R-12, still depletes ozone (just not as bad as R-12) when vented to the atmosphere. Also, R-134a is a global warming contributor, while R-152a is not. R-134a is already on the EPA's phase out list in accordance with the Montreal Protocols. Advantage: R-152a

Longevity of Product in the Marketplace:

R-152a is not on the EPA's phase out list, thus you don't have to worry about converting to something else in the future. R-134a is on the the EPA's phase out list, thus it's going to be like R-12 all over again when the phase out comes to fruition. Voluntary phase out by manufacturers begins in 2016. Mandatory phase out kicks in in 2020. Near to complete phase out is supposed to happen by 2024. Advantage: R-152a

Summation:

We have have two draws and 7 categories in which R-152a holds clear advantages over R-134a.

Subjectively speaking, using R-152a as opposed to R-134a can be seen as an active protest against government imposed conformity, crony capitalist laws that subvert the free market and favor a single corporation over others (in this case, DuPont), and in keeping with the spirit of allowing the market to decide what the best and most effective/efficient product for usage is.

Of course it's a to each their own situation.

But I for one will run and support R-152a :cool1:

[DMCMW Dave]

:

As long as you don't start telling us you're "burning your A/C".......

[Rich_NYS]

Taking a look at things objectively: R-152a (Dust-Off / Ultra Duster) vs R-134a

Availability:

R-152a is just as readily available as R-134a is, if not more so. Advantage: it's a draw.



No it's not; I have a case of R134a but I have no 152a, so the 134a is totally available and the 152a is not at all available. :biggrin:


(BTW, I watched the 152a in action on Youtube....looks pretty righteous.)