Hello,
According to predictions, the cost of 22 will skyrocket in 2020 or maybe a little earlier. IMO 410 is a ba*tard freon that is not the latest and greatest, but a step backwards.

The world hates F410, with the exception of the USA. 410 has been hyped as the best thing since toilet paper, but in reality it is not so good. For one instance, 410 is azeotropic. This means it is a blend of multiple freons. Each freon has a different pressure. When you have a leak the different freons leak at different proportions, which requires removal of the remaining freon and replacing it with new freon. If this is not done the 410 mixture will not work as designed. I would imagine many techs do not remove 410, and claim they do not need to do so, but the manufacturer says this is what is needed to maintain a proper charge. Another issue is that the freon works at a higher pressure. Equipment does not use thicker copper, so the higher pressure will cause the copper to fail, unless everything is perfect. No one is perfect. A third issue is that 410 is caustic and eats copper. This will cause a coil to leak and require expensive repairs much quicker than 22. When the manufacturers wake up and use Stainless Steel, then 410 might last as long as 22, but this requires a major change in the way HVAC is installed. Contractors and manufacturers are not willing to change enough to insure a 410 system is properly installed. As evidence of this statement, I have read of many Carrier and Trane bad coils. I don't read about as many Goodman bad coils. Goodman is #2, Trane is #3. Trane pushes 410, Goodman pushes 22.

Hopefully before 410 becomes a major issue in 2020, something else will be developed or Ammonia will reemerge as a solar heated system.

Bob Brown wrote:

'For one instance, 410 is azeotropic. This means it is a blend of multiple freons. Each freon has a different pressure. When you have a leak the different freons leak at different proportions,'.

If this was the case, then the mixture could not be azeotropic. From the wikipedia article linked below:

'An azeotrope is a special mixture of 2 or more compounds (molecules). The ratio of the compounds, say in an azeotrope consisting of two compounds X and Y, is exactly the same in both the vapour form of the mixture, X:Y as in the liquid phase.

Due to the uniformity of liquid and vapor, chemical composition of the azeotrope cannot be changed by simple boiling (distillation).'

There can be no differential leaking due to 'the different pressures'. If there was, it would be a simple mixture, not an azeotrope.

As for the rest of your post, I seriously doubt manufactures would use lines which are not rated for the pressure used in a 410a system. Do you have any field experience of failures due to insufficiently specified lines?

As for r410a being 'caustic', do you have any citations for this? At least one of the components of r410a, pentafluoroethane, is rated as completely non-corrosive - so much so that it is used in fire supression systems for such high value assets as computer installations. I doubt it would be used if it was corrosive.

Here is a link that might be useful: Wiki article on azeotropes

I am not a fan of R410a but what bob is saying is totally wrong.

1. "When you have a leak the different freons leak at different proportions" That is totally wrong. From everything I've read fractionalization is not an issue.
2. "the freon works at a higher pressure" That's true, 410 is higher pressure than R22
3. "410 is caustic and eats copper" I have never heard this. Please provide a source that explains this "fact" that you are proposing.

With all due respect to Bob, he is totally wrong.

1. R-410A or more technically HFC-410A is a zeotrope, not an azeotrope with a glide of ~ 1 F which means (in layman's terms) if some refrigerant leaks, you can add more to the system without having to evacuate the entire charge and then re-charge.
2. R-22 or more technically HCFC-22 is being phased out. In 2010 all newly manufactured HVAC equipment cannot be made with HCFC-22 and in 2020 production of HCFC-22 will cease.
3. Notice the 1st "C" in HCFC, that stands for chlorine which contributes to the destruction of the ozone layer, hence the phaseout.
4. HFC-410A does operate at a higher pressure but the HVAC equipment and piping systems (brazed copper) are plenty strong enough to handle this.
5. HFC-410A does not eat copper, this statement is false.

Hello,
As I said the techs do not know squat. Google 410 and read about it. It is real simple type google.com then in the search go for any of the articles that discuss 410. The hype is worse than the hype Debeers did on diamonds. 410 is a mixture. Manufacturers say to remove all of it instead of adding to it. Kinda like freeze 12 that replaced 12 in automobiles. Ignorance is no excuse. Remember to read the facts as I have stated them Google freon 410.

pyropaul, funnycide and bigfunky, apparently you guys are fairly new to this HVAC forum or you don't visit this site often enough, but this is the typical world according to bob brown. If you guys are HVAC techs, you're dumb and lazy, just like me and just like the other techs who contribute here. Keep on reading his posts, you'll get the idea.

But, what would you do now guys? If you buy a new system today and expect it to last 20 years. That 2026. It's also 6 years after 2020. What would you do-r22 or r410?

Hello Brand X,
It is always unpleasant to be bashed. Either in jest or truth. I love to educate people towards my point of view. Having someone like you as a competitor is probably one of my greatest achievements on the web. As I read your posts, I find a comparable individual that is as opinionated as I am. You seem to have great feelings towards fellow workers. Although I find them wrong, I respect your opinions. To grow in life one needs opposition. You are good opposition. I do not appreciate people that live on feelings alone. This includes poorly educated experts. You obviously are highly trained in HVAC. When I get opposition from you, I try to see where I went wrong. I then rephrase my comments, until I get positive feedback. You are probably the best opposition that I have found. Even when you attempt to subvert me. When you insert a truth that I proposed earlier, I feel gratified. This is the process of education. As an electronics teacher many years ago, I only had 2-3 students that seemed to excel. When they challenged my knowledge, my comment was; I present the facts, I try to teach you how to find the facts so you can make your own decision. This was many years before the web, and the ease of finding all opinions on a subject. Posting on a forum like this one has an implied obligation to other readers. This obligation is to present the facts, discuss the facts, and try to convince the readers that what is said is the truth. Reputation is difficult, to transcend on the web, because many people can parrot comments and the comments look like the truth. Keep on trucking.

As to the misinformed or should I just say stupid posts, When a freon must be charged liquid, it is a mixture. 410 is to be charged as a liguid QED.

What is the difference between zeotropic and azeotropic when we are talking about a mixture of freon that must be charged as a liquid? Basically this says that if you have a leak the system must be evacuated and recharged.

When I took the cfc class, I was taught compounds like 410 are azeotropic. When I apply the definition of zeotropic to 410 it seems to fit. At the same time zeotropic appears to be a subset of azeotropic? Using the wikipedia definition, zeotropic mixture will seperate into seperate distillates at boiling, so it must be charged as a liquid.

If I accept that zeotropic is a better definition than azeotropioc, I was right in my claim that 410 is azeotropic, but wrong in the better definition of zeotropic. This is a word that was known but not understood. When I took the cfc class 410 was not in existence, it was offered in systems 3 years later. Since I do not work on 410 systems, it is a moot point for me.

I must appologize on this misinformation of mixture definition of zeotropic. As to corrosive properties, This year Carrier introduced a coil designed for 410. It is not pure copper, it is a compound of copper and zinc, which would suggest that Carrier recognized the issue and has offered a solution to the problem of corrosiveness. As I have earlier said copper is not strong enough for 410. I also must preface this statement with, coils made by Carrier and several other companies were made of a thinner walled tubing, which inherently had problems because of the thickness of the walls. They were very difficult to repair. Many companies used standard thickness tubing for coils that never fail. Now that Carrier is selling a coil with a 10 year warrantee, I would have to believe they have improved the coil.

I have questioned the systems offered for several years. I have felt they were like the early 134 systems used by GM. Repairs were difficult, and the oil caused a lot of problems. The systems did not cool good either, in comparison to f12 systems. Today most of all problems are solved. For several years, mechanics were frantic when attempting AC repairs in GM products. I believe that companies always offer a first generation that marginally works, then improve it in following years. Why should HVAC be different? With of the exception of several companies offering cr*p that has a high SEER rating, and will never work as intended, I would expect in the next generation systems, the bugs will be corrected. I am trying to keep my system operational until the major companies settle down and produce a better product. One voice will only alarm a few people, many voices will cause change.

In answer to your question, it probably does not matter for most equipment, because it will need to be replaced before 2020. The typical HO can use either 410 or 22 without problems of obtaining freon for the next 10 years. I would expect 22 to be available after that period, but be more costly like 12 is today.

I'm not sure if you payed me a complement or not Bob. Doesn't matter really, my beef with you is how you are constantly putting down your fellow tradesmen and at the same time sort of putting yourself on a pedestal. Aside from that you are probably a very nice man overall and if the people down in your neck of the woods are satisfied with the services you perform for them then I guess you're alright with me too. It's just when you call HVAC technicians lazy and stupid, Boy that really makes my butthole pucker,,, know what I mean? You're feelings about 410A sound like an old timer who is having a hard time adjusting to change. Just like alot of the old boys who thought that by getting rid of the old fashioned standing pilot was going to cause all kinds of problems with equipment. Well it did for those who never took the time to understand the new technology.
The problem with leaks in a refrigeration system has nothing whatsoever to do with the copper tubing. It is the soldered or brazed connections where the problems occur. Any leaks I've ever seen in tubing where the result of something rubbing the tubing. You must also be aware that certain foods (like tomatos) will reach to copper though and can cause pitting and pinholes eventually. So don't ever store excess vegetables in your air handler! As for the refrigerant being caustic,,, think about that one Bob. Refrigerant and oil are miscible correct? So this oil and vapor mixture is what cools the winding in a hermetic compressor, correct again Bob? Are you with me now? So just what do you think a caustic mixture like this would do to the windings of that compressor motor? Impossible to be caustic don't ya think Bob. You're just having a hard time adjusting to change ain't ya big fella? It's here to stay Bob, the whole trade is changing. Adjust to the change, you'll sleep better knowing the hole isn't growing and those poor little penquins living in Antartica aren't getting skin cancer anymore.

Thanks for all of the input. From the responses above my take on the issue is that at this time it is a toss up between the two systems. I could get a R22 system now for less money than a R410 but when I need to have the system recharged the R22 should still be around but will probably be alot more expensive or I could pay more for a R410 system now and less to have the system recharged later.

Hello,
6 months ago, I didn't know what to think about 410 or higher SEER ratings. This forum caused me to research the subject. I asked questions until I became discouraged with the way the new higher SEER rated equipment was a cheap attempt to screw the public.

I asked my peers what they thought on this site and other sites. I did not get answers from the guys. If anything I was insulted and comments about drug induced behaviour were made.

All I can surmise is no one knew anything past what the hype was. I asked about the very high SEER claims, and after reading about the rating system, decided it was garbage. I spent the best part of 3 months studing the SEER rating system, and found it was full of inaccuracys. If I wanted to claim a SEER, it would be doubtful that anyone would ever object, short of me breaking the law. The rating system is full of fuzzy math inaccuracys.

For all the twits that think there is no link between CFCs and ozone depletion, the linked article below gives the mechanism of both the generation of ozone in the atmosphere and how chlorine from CFCs is involved as a catalyst in its destruction. As for the Cl2 that was released in the first world war, that is tiny in comparison to the millions of tons that were released as CFCs in the 1960s and 1970s. By the way, just to be clear, there is no connection between ozone depletion and global warming (even if CFCs, HCFCs and HFCs are greenhouse gases - their volume in the atmosphere is miniscule compared to CO2 and CH4).

As for Bob Brown's continued wilful ignorance on azeotropic mixtures, words fail me.

Here is a link that might be useful: Ozone Hole Tour: the chemistry

Hey Bob... this happens when you go "google freon 410."
(Even though R410a is NOT freon. Freon is a trademarked Dupont name for CFCs, and R410a is NOT a CFC.)

The first link you get is this:
http://www.gossettair.com/freon.htm
There, it has a link to this: http://www.honeywell.com/sites/sm/410a/Myths.htm
All about the myths of R410a, each of which DISPROVES everything you wrote.

Example "The higher pressures of R-410A cause air conditioners to break down more often.

Evidence shows this is not only untrue, but that R-410A air conditioners can be remarkably more reliable than air-conditioners that use R-22.

First, air-conditioners that use R-410A are designed to be heavier-duty, with a thicker compressor shell. Usually this results in smaller, sturdier pieces of equipment that vibrate less, putting less strain on the piping connections that are the source of most leaks.

Second, most air-conditioner manufacturers require their technicians to be fully trained on R-410A before they can sell or service that manufacturers R-410A equipment. As a result, the dealers and technicians that offer and install R-410A are often better trained and have the right tools to give you a more reliable installation.

One major air conditioner manufacturer who has been selling air conditioners for over 50 years tells us that their R-410A air conditioners and heat pumps are the most reliable systems theyÂve ever introduced!"

I think we all can agree that the bolded part is the most important.

The second link is to this:
http://mn.centerpointenergy.com/for_your_home/heating_cooling/buying_guide.asp

"Do I have to worry about the refrigerant in an air conditioner I buy?

Yes. Most older air conditioners use a refrigerant called Freon, or R-22, that has been found to be harmful to the environment. Freon is scheduled to be phased out by the Environmental Protection Agency. During the phase-out period, production of Freon and equipment using it will be reduced and eventually eliminated. As a result, the price of refrigerant needed to service an older air conditioner will increase."

So, thanks again for helping us all understand where the junk science is coming from -- not from Google.

Um, the ozone hole was found in 1904 I think, when was freon invented?
also, directly below the ozone hole... GIANT volcano's spewing out... chlorine...
also, uh, freon is heavier than air, and it dissolves into ground water and does not travel into the vapor of evaporated water... how exactly is it getting into the atmosphere?
anyway. there is speculation that the biggest reason for the puron/410 is that the patents expire, and Dupont wants more money.
John

vstech wrote:

"Um, the ozone hole was found in 1904 I think, when was freon invented? "

Freon was invented around the 1930s. The ozone hole was discovered in the 1970s. Doesn't matter if freon is heavier than air - it's a gas so it mixes. CO2 is heavier than air but that doesn't pool on the ground. Does no-one study chemistry and physics anymore? Also, what giant volano erupted in antarctica in the past 50 years?

Ozone levels halved starting around 1975. Take a look at this:

Hell DB,
Once again you show your ignorance on HVAC.

A 50 year old company? Advertizing that the current system is the best ever made? I wonder how defective the previous designs were? Pure Hype.

Average life of current computer controlled thin walled coil HVAC systems is about 10 years. F22 will still be available for most systems during this period. The very few that survive longer than 10 years will probably not need much Freon. They will be the exception to the rule. They will be the systems that were installed correctly. At that age, it will be time to replace the system.

In older systems, the life was 30-50 years. Higher efficiency reduced the life of the systems. This is not cheapening of manufacturing, but increasing efficiency.

Coca Cola has spent millions of dollars trying to differentate the name Coke from Coca Cola. Generic advertizing still calls all carbonated beverages with a flavor, Coke. If it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, flys like a duck and looks like a duck, it is a duck.

With the exception to Ammonia based systems, all other refrigerents are called Freon. Freon defines the chemical that is most used in refrigerated cooling systems.

As to purchasing and servicing f410 based systems, you are wrong. I can buy f410 all day long almost anywhere in the world. I cannot buy Puron from the 2 primary pushers of Puron systems. There is no requirement that technicians get more training to service f410 systems, beyond the requirements of the 2 primary companies. The second largest manufacturer of HVAC does not have this requirement.

In an alternate universe f410 systems can be more reliable. At this time they are mostly inferiour. They require more service, and usually cost more to operate. BUT they are more profitable to the HVAC contractor.

I only rebutt your arguments, because I want to remind people that do not read this forum that you are not a HVAC technician. You are not trained in HVAC and any comments you make are emotional not based on fact, but on fictional sales hype. I do need to apologize on the usage of Google. That was an emotional appeal used during a weak moment. When I later tried the same search, I got conflicting references. I decided that Google is a equal oppurtunity advertizer, with results tied to the amount of money spent on Google. I cannot duplicate my initial search. I recently found a reference to one of my postings on page 2 of a Google search. The next day I found the reference on page 153. The next time I did the search, my posting was not found.

screw 410A and 22. Bring back R-12

Nah, forget R-12 - far too safe. Bring back SO2 ... like my brother-in=law "found" in the old fridge he was taking apart in our basement. Even after 80 years, pressure was good and high until he cut the lines. Fire department sent 6 tenders, an emergency evacuation bus and blocked off the street at two ends. The readings were 50,000ppm of SO2 in our living room ... three hours later (with temperatures about 10 below freezing) and some industrial strength ventilation equipment, it was down to an acceptable 50ppm. Sure scared the hell out of the cat!

Paul.

I'm EPA608 Universal certified so let me set the record straight:

1. R410 is in fact a blended refrigerant however it behaves like an azeotropic refrigenerant. That means it can be topped off as needed.
(negligable temp glide)

2. It does not eat copper.

3. R410 is not environmentally friendly. It still contributes to greehouse gasses if vented (illegal). It does not contribute to ozone depletion since it's chlorine and bromine free. R22 can be environmentally friendly as long as it's in a leak free system and recovered when decommisioned.

4. There won't be a sudden supply disruption in R22 like there was in R12. Nor is a huge price increase likely. It'll be manufactured thru 2020 and reclaimed after that. Beside that ask yourself how long a new R22 system will likely last before replacement. (hint: 15 year life is about average)

5. R22 is tried and true technology but I'd say R410A is also tried and true at this point.

6. R410A can net you a little higher SEER's however the refrigerant and equipment commands a higher price.

7. R410A operates at higher pressures. A properly installed system will handle it just fine.

Picking the best installer for your job is priority #1. Worrying about the refrigerant is secondary.

Bob said:
Coca Cola has spent millions of dollars trying to differentate the name Coke from Coca Cola. Generic advertizing still calls all carbonated beverages with a flavor, Coke.

The Coca-Cola company said:
"have a coke and a smile"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola_slogans

1948 - Where there's Coke there's hospitality.
1952 - What you want is a Coke.
1958 - The Cold, Crisp Taste of Coke
1963 - Things go better with Coke.
1976 - Coke adds life.
1979 - Have a Coke and a smile
1982 - Coke is it!
1986 - Catch the Wave (for New Coke)
2006 - The Coke Side of Life.

cherry Coke, Coke II, Diet Coke, Diet Coke wiht Lime, Diet Coke Black Cherry Vanilla....
All Coca-Cola Company brands.

U.S. Trademark Registration Number 415755 for the mark COKE is owned by the Coca-Cola company.

It just struck me as kind of funny, the exact opposite of what Bob said is true, Coca-Cola has spent millions promoting the connection between Coca-Cola and Coke.

Bob, we can all benefit from your knowledge of HVAC but a man has to know his limitations. Stay away from chemistry, stay away from physics and stay away from general questions about US culture. Do explain as much about HVAC as you feel like, it is often useful and informative.

Don't you have anything else to do with your free time?

Hello,
I guess you just read the basic dates on the Coca Cola history site. Coke made disasterous changes in the formula, that lost millions in market share. This is the reason for the descriptor of classic coke in the name. The add campaign against the word Coke was early on, after competitors used the generic name of coke. Coke was not invented in 1948, but in the 1800's many years before. I would imagine the Coca Cola name recognition fight is a milestone court decision, that shaped advertizing and the use of trademarks.

Coca Cola stopped it's campaign to eleminate the usage of the word Coke, when courts ruled against them. Geesh, can't you get anything right?

You have used selected examples to support your argument. I guess you work in advertizing where truth is not part of the equation.

Bob... you forgot... Coke eats copper.

Hello,
I guess when you can't beat truth, you try to discredit the truth. Sounds like Advertizing 101.

As far as I know Coke is a superiour heat source, made from crushed coal, to smelt Iron ore in Steel production.

Actually, Coke is a solid carbonaceous leftover derived from the destructive distillation of low-ash, low-sulfur bituminous coal.

Destructive distillation (i.e. coking) is done by baking in an airless oven at temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius so that the fixed carbon and residual ash are fused together.

No crushing required. Science and truth shall set you free... ;-)

Chill fellas :-)

Myth: Manmade chlorine is insignificant compared to natural sources

Another objection occasionally voiced is that It is generally agreed that natural sources of tropospheric chlorine (volcanoes, ocean spray, etc.) are four to five orders of magnitude larger than man-made sources. This falls into the

"true but irrelevant"

category as tropospheric chlorine is irrelevant; it is stratospheric chlorine that matters. The chlorine from ocean spray is in the form HCl and is soluble; it never reaches the stratosphere. CFCs, in contrast, are insoluble and long-lived and hence do reach the stratosphere. Even in the lower atmosphere there is more chlorine present in the form of CFCs and related haloalkanes than there is in HCl from salt spray, and in the stratosphere the organic source gases dominate overwhelmingly. This includes the CFCs and methyl chloride, which has both natural and man made sources (FAQ, Part II, section 4.3).

Another point to note when evaluating the contributions of various gases to stratospheric ozone is that methyl chloride molecules contribute only a single chlorine atom, but CFC molecules contribute multiple chlorine atoms. Very large volcanic eruptions can inject HCl directly into the stratosphere, but direct measurements (FAQ, Part II, section 4.4) have shown that their contribution is small compared to that of chlorine from CFCs.
per wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_hole

Man I would love to see the "scientific" studies that show the MILLIONS of tons of HCL and CL gas PER DAY is insignificant compared to the amount of CFC's being used.
What are the "scientists" going to say in the future when ALL CFC's are gone from the earth, but the ozone hole stays?
that the damage done will take too long in our lifetime to repair itself?
search hard enough and you will find that all protocols arise from a need for more money or power.
John

Bob, there is an element of tragedy (in the classical sense) in this, you are no doubt a fine HVAC tech but you discredit yourself with these nonsensical posts. The fact that coke is not used generically and never has been is irrelevant, the important thing is that you get your facts wrong, stake out an incorrect position and then defend it with vague misinformation. When you defend a position do it with references to a reliable source, that will convince even the most hardened skeptics, assuming they have any reasoning ability at all, this is Debating 101. It is easy to look up the real facts, go ahead and take a look and while you're at it look up Ohm's Law, try to apply it to a neon light, that should be enlightening, basis of all electronic design, what rot. We're old dogs but we can still learn new tricks, we just have to want to.

Someone stated R22 would become very expensive in the year 2020. got news for the poster R410 is damned expensive now.

Oh my gosh.........just go with the best deal for now and get a good nights sleep. Scott

All very interestng arguments; however, I am convinced that all the CFC hype is just so much mfr BS just to get new patent royalties and to charge more for equipment.
EPA and other gov't agencies don't care a hoot about atmospheric CFC's.
My brother lives in a large Virginia city. Their City refuse collection department requires junk refrigerators to be placed by the curb by a specific early morning hour and the disposer must call a number before a specific time to report a refrigerator on the curb for pick up. He told me - and I believe him- that he placed an old refrigerator which was still fully charged with F12 by the curb, called per the City's rules. Soon afterwards, a city vehicle pulled up outside, a man went to the refrigerator for three or four minutes and left. He walked out to see what the man did. He found that the city employee had cut the refrigerant line and dumped all the F12 and had placed a sticker on the refrigerator that read "No Freon".
Later that day, a truck arrived, loaded the refrigerator and hauled it away.

I have access to a municipal refuse disposal site. County trucks pick up refrigerators from various county public refuse collection sites and haul them to the county refuse disposal site. They are picked up with a machine that regularly damages the refrigerant systems. The refrigerators are off-loaded at the county disposal site by dumping them off the truck. Heavy equipment is used to push the refrigerators - along with the washing machines, driers, bicycles, etc. - into a pile about thirty feet high. Periodically, a large truck comes and hauls all the crushed junk to some recycle center elsewhere.
NONE of the refrigerant is evacuated for recyle. I filed a report, nothing ever became of it!!
Likewise, junk automobiles go to the junk yards, I don't regularly go to pull my own used auto parts but when I do, I see evidence that no CFC is evacuated for recycle.
It is not economically feasible to recycle CFC's; HOWEVER, if CFC spillage were such a problem, there would be better controls.
It's all hype to protect new patents and royalties and to justify mfrs' gouging the public for more profit on replacement equipment. If they can make repairing a system expensive enough - like extreme prices to recharge a system - people will buy new equipment; and they do!
When our grand leaders in DC start sending inspectors out to find and penalize people who dump CFCs then you guys can continue your argument!! Otherwise, its all irrelevant!!!

ocie wrote:

"l very interestng arguments; however, I am convinced that all the CFC hype is just so much mfr BS just to get new patent royalties and to charge more for equipment."

Ocie, there are many citations in the posts above that demonstrate your convictions are ill-founded. Whilst some CFC replacements are patented, many are not so your assertions don't hold up to scrutiny.

It amazes me how many people, like you, publicly display their willful ignorance on sites like this. You should be ashamed of yourself, as should all the other fools who are incapable of reasoned debate.

All that said, it is sad that your commendable action of reporting the municipal refuse disposal site for violation of CFC recuperation regulations fell on deaf ears. Just because regulations are not correctly enforced does not make them irrelevant. However, the biggest reduction in the atmospheric emission of CFCs was their replacement as the propellant in aerosols.

Paul.

Interesting stuff, seriously! However, I've got a real world problem. One month ago, my installer put in a Trane Seer-14, 2.5 ton unit with R410A with a Space-Pak air-handler designed for R22 (and dated from March of 2003). We are already experiencing problems. It seemed to freeze up at one point, and now acts downright wacky, and doesn't seem to take the humidity out of the air. And sometimes it blows and sometimes it doesn't so much. It never really put the pressure out that we were led to believe. I would be really interested to hear your input. The house, by the way, is a 2,700 sq. ft. cape cod, but the installer supposedly did a load calculation to come up with the 2.5ton. It is a high-velocity system; cost = $9,700.

Specifically, what are the issues of using R410A in an R22 air handler? What is the small blue stain on the floor next to it? Is it natural to get a 4-year old air handler in a new system??

Thanks for ALL of your insights.

Nick

You cannot mix r22 systems with r410a systems- everything must match!
There are coils that will work on both, but the proper TX valve for that refrigerant must be installed on the coil.

"What is the small blue stain on the floor next to it"

- It's either the fluid that is used to check leaks on newly brazed joints or the Windex bottles are having sex near the air handler.

I have read that R410a can be topped off and I've read it should be evacuated and fully recharged virgin.

What is right and what is wrong? What is hype and what is not?

First you have to realize they are trying to sway the market to be able to sell it as an alternative to R22. They want to continue the cash cow of being able to recharge systems on a whim rather than doing the right thing and repairing the leak. They want to appeal to the R22 slackers of choice who would rather keep topping a system off than fixing the leak.

The answer lies in how they tell you to charge a system.

They tell you to charge R410a in liquid form. Anyone in this trade for even a small amount of time knows with certainty most leaks are in vapor form.

I have heard some skirt the issue by saying "if it's a small leak" then it's ok to top off. Ok then how small is small?

Where do you draw the line? Fact of the matter is if the system is a 16 SEER or higher system there is no way you can say (with a straight face) that topping off an R410a system that it will now magically work as if you had evacuated and recharged from virgin in liquid form.

For that matter you wouldn't even be able to claim a 13 SEER is a 13 or 14 SEER a 14... if you catch my drift.

Customer probably won't realize the difference but that is not the point is it?

By saying it's ok to top off rather than fix the leak, but saying you absolutely must charge in a liquid... what would you call that???

Can someone tell me. I have a old r22 system and I am going with the new r410 my question is how do you clean the old line set and are sure there won't be any trouble with the compressor. Do I have to install a new line set?

my outside unit was stolen.was told if unit on top of furnace said r410 he could replace outside unit,if it says r22 the unit on top of the furnace and outside unit will both have to be replaced.it's a trane. he also suggested a 2ton unit for a 2 story 1750 sq ft house.i really don't know anything about hvac except the system is brand new,never been run and i believe it was manufactured in 2005. just don't want to get ripped off again thanks todd