Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 99

Thread: r22 conversions

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    swan valley idaho
    Posts
    720

    r22 conversions

    Wow! r22 at johnstone today wass 599 dollars. my god.
    what is everyones opinion on the favorite replacement for low temp,med temp, and ac?

    whats worked best so far? also are txv's being changed regular or have they generally worked ok as is with adjustment?

    johnstone is pushing 422b, also mo99 looked ok? lets get the opinions flyin!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vancouver , BC
    Posts
    280
    407a

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vancouver , BC
    Posts
    280
    There's a few threads on this subject and 407a . Lots of good info.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North sweden, Umeå, Where the birches growing without limits.
    Posts
    89
    Here in sweden the R22 is commonly replaced by 407C or 410A for air cond and chillers, 404A/507 for low and mid temp, sometimes even for low temp chillers (even 134a is used for mid temp on applys earlier used R22).

    Imho I'd prefer 507 for low and mid temp, chillers also, makes the compressor runs much softer and a li'l bit "colder" discharge temp than a equal charged with 404A, besides that it has greater capacity for picking up energy and "leaving" it.

    407C for airconds, but however, i really dont like it... for f*** sake... Put 507 there too

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Guayaquil EC
    Posts
    10,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Putte View Post
    Here in sweden the R22 is commonly replaced by 407C or 410A for air cond and chillers, 404A/507 for low and mid temp, sometimes even for low temp chillers (even 134a is used for mid temp on applys earlier used R22).

    Imho I'd prefer 507 for low and mid temp, chillers also, makes the compressor runs much softer and a li'l bit "colder" discharge temp than a equal charged with 404A, besides that it has greater capacity for picking up energy and "leaving" it.

    407C for airconds, but however, i really dont like it... for f*** sake... Put 507 there too
    We have R507 here, but you don't see much of it except for some supermarket chains. R404A is much more common.

    Actually, I've been leaning toward using R404A for R22 medium temp conversions...similar to what you're doing with R507. It reminds me of 20-30 years ago when we had compressors dual rated for either R22 or R502 MT.

    R407C for A/C work is pretty good, but MO99 (R438A) is fast becoming the flavor of choice because it's quick and easy, but there's no reason R507 (or R404A) won't work for A/C as well.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    swan valley idaho
    Posts
    720
    has anyone had luck with mo99 in walk ins, reach ins. going to a class about conversions tomorrow, so any opinions based on experiance would be great.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Banana Republic,Florida
    Posts
    400
    Quote Originally Posted by icemeister View Post
    We have R507 here, but you don't see much of it except for some supermarket chains. R404A is much more common.

    Actually, I've been leaning toward using R404A for R22 medium temp conversions...similar to what you're doing with R507. It reminds me of 20-30 years ago when we had compressors dual rated for either R22 or R502 MT.

    R407C for A/C work is pretty good, but MO99 (R438A) is fast becoming the flavor of choice because it's quick and easy, but there's no reason R507 (or R404A) won't work for A/C as well.
    (R438a) is been used alot in the A/C conversions down here in the big supermarket chains and 407a for racks it was R422d but that faded quick..
    Mastic its whats for dinner!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    2,985
    The definitive publication on this subject https://www.rses.org/assets/rses_jou...ompressors.pdf
    If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. – Abraham Maslow

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    790
    For small refrigeration and comfort cooling, I don't see the need for conversions of existing equipment at this time. $20/lb is not much when you are only talking about a few pounds of refrigerant.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    fort walton beach fl.
    Posts
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by kklobas View Post
    has anyone had luck with mo99 in walk ins, reach ins. going to a class about conversions tomorrow, so any opinions based on experiance would be great.
    I recently decided not to purchase anymore R-22. I had a walk in cooler the other day that blew the charge. Repaired the leak, replaced the dryer and charged with MO99. No problems so far, I did notice a lower head pressure. Also, I had to open the TXV a little bit since it was running a little higher superheat. This was the first time using MO99. Hopefully no problems in the future.

    Another thing too, If you have been in the field for a while. We had to do the same thing when R-12 was being phased out. I figured we did it then, might as well do it now.
    http://acfwb.com/

    "The best preparation for good work tomorrow is to do good work today"

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    swan valley idaho
    Posts
    720
    thanks everyone. Andy that chart is pretty scary- 20-30% capacity loss? that's total capacity if i'm reading write. Seems most equipment would not work after conversion with that much capacity loss? m0-99,422b examples.
    Anyone else have good luck in walk ins?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,064
    been using and will continue to use R-407F for MT/LT over the rest.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Guayaquil EC
    Posts
    10,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Schoen View Post
    The definitive publication on this subject https://www.rses.org/assets/rses_jou...ompressors.pdf
    Thanks for writing this and posting it for us here Andy.

    For me, it stresses an important point which, I must admit, I have often overlooked when analyzing system performance...ie, volumetric efficiency, and the factors which can affect the volumetric efficiency of a compressor and so, its performance. As you explained about clearance volume and re-expansion, all compressors are not alike, and so the effect of something like pressure ratio will have a greater affect for some more than others...thus the need for calorimeter testing.

    What really surprises me however, is the huge difference between the expected performance stated here and that which we have been told to expect from the refrigerant manufacturers.

    For example, this article from DuPont includes a chart indicting expected performance of -6% for MO99 (R438A) vs R22 for low temp at -31.7ºF SST/40.6ºF SCT (-25ºF/105ºF) while your results for -10F/115F show a loss of nearly -20% (even at a slightly lower pressure ratio).

    They state their numbers are based on calorimeter tests, but they don't say what type of compressor was used. Have they got a secret supercompressor for testing just to make their data look good, or what?

    I suspect the answer lies in "or what".

Page 1 of 8 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event