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

Thread: r22 conversions

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    swan valley idaho
    Posts
    728

    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
    283
    407a

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vancouver , BC
    Posts
    283
    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
    96
    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
    10,427
    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 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!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    12,709

    Remember R-12/R-502 compressors ?

    Do you remember when compressors were dual-rated for R-12 & R-502 ? <g>

    PHM
    ------




    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.
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Guayaquil EC
    Posts
    10,427
    Quote Originally Posted by Poodle Head Mikey View Post
    Do you remember when compressors were dual-rated for R-12 & R-502 ? <g>

    PHM
    ------
    Copeland appears to be heading back to doing that with their new FFAP scroll condensing units which are compatible with R134A, R404A, R22 and R407C:

    Copeland FFAP.pdf

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    12,709
    Good - that will save me working out the performance numbers on my own.

    As soon as one of my A/C units needs anything I am going to build my next A/C unit to use R-134A.

    PHM
    ------



    Quote Originally Posted by icemeister View Post
    Copeland appears to be heading back to doing that with their new FFAP scroll condensing units which are compatible with R134A, R404A, R22 and R407C:

    Copeland FFAP.pdf
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    swan valley idaho
    Posts
    728
    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.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,987
    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

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Guayaquil EC
    Posts
    10,427
    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".

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Pas, Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    212
    Starting to sound like vehicle mpg ratings from the manufacturer. Does anyone out there feel like a volunteer refrigerant tester? Will there ever be a permanent replacement? I don't think so.

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