 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / May 2005Maxi-Frig for R12/R134A ?
Has anyone used Maxi-Frig? It sounds too good to be true? http://www.maxifrig.com/moreinfo.html tnx Hank Yet another brand name for the same old illegal, dangerous hydrocarbon (isopropane/isobutane) blend. Does it work? Yeah, it works. Is it safe? The sellers say yes, but can't seem to provide enough supporting data, despite 15 years of trying, to pass the refrigerant safety tests ALL refrigerants are required to pass before they're legally approved. The sellers claim it's due to politics and Big Refrigerant Inc's desire to own the market. You decide. Is it smart to use? No. Virtually no A/C service shop will *touch* a system that has had a hydrocarbon refrigerant installed. Working on it would contaminate their equipment and their stocks of reclaimed and recycled refrigerant. Those few shops willing to work on such tainted systems charge a great deal of money to get rid of the illegal refrigerant, flush the system and install legal refrigerant. > Has anyone used Maxi-Frig? It sounds too good to be true? > http://www.maxifrig.com/moreinfo.html > > tnx > Hank Ask at www.aircondition.com, but since no information is given about what the product is, I have great doubts. It may be like OZ-12, which was nothing but a blend of propane and butane, something you definitely don't want in a car. > Ask at www.aircondition.com, but since no information is given about > what the product is, I have great doubts. It may be like OZ-12 Is. The "MX-12a" nomenclature gives it away. > Ask at www.aircondition.com, but since no information is given about > what the product is, I have great doubts. It may be like OZ-12, which > was nothing but a blend of propane and butane, something you definitely > don't want in a car. The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, ES-12a "EnviroSafe", etc. -- they're all the same illegal hydrocarbon blend. > > Ask at www.aircondition.com, but since no information is given about > > what the product is, I have great doubts. It may be like OZ-12, which > > was nothing but a blend of propane and butane, something you definitely > > don't want in a car. > The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, ES-12a > "EnviroSafe", etc. -- they're all the same illegal hydrocarbon blend. What country are they illegal in??? Yeah, I thought so... Read up on the stuff and see what you think. It is no more dangerous than that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving your vehicle. That is my opinion... > What country are they illegal in??? Yeah, I thought so... Read up > on the stuff and see what you think. It is no more dangerous than > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving > your vehicle. That is my opinion... The "large tank with gasoline that resides behind you" is subjected to crashworthiness testing when the car was manufactured. Its in a protected location, with various protections to prevent it from spilling, rupturing, or bursting into flame. The AC condensor that is the FIRST thing to break in a head-on collision is NOT crashworthiness tested when filled with butane/propane blend. The blower motor inside the car with the evaporator coil is not spark-arrested for use in an environment where butane/propane might leak out. Do I think cars with propane/butane refrignerant are rolling time-bombs? Not really. But its foolish to pretend that they don't have a higher risk of fire or explosion. The question I'd ask myself, is "why take ANY risk when there are so many safe, non-flammable alternatives?" >> What country are they illegal in??? Yeah, I thought so... Read up >> on the stuff and see what you think. It is no more dangerous than [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >risk of fire or explosion. The question I'd ask myself, is "why take ANY >risk when there are so many safe, non-flammable alternatives?" sorry, I came in late on this thread, but what is a safe non-flammable alternative? There is an older car in the family that has an r12 system that will need to be recharged when the leak is fixed. ------------- Alex > sorry, I came in late on this thread, but what is a safe non-flammable > alternative? There is an older car in the family that has an r12 > system that will need to be recharged when the leak is fixed. Why worry about an alternative? There's lots of R-12 still available and from what I understand R-134 prices have gone up so much lately that there's not much of a price difference. And, R-12 will probably give better results than an alternative (in a system designed for it). Get the leak fixed and re-charge with R-12. > sorry, I came in late on this thread, but what is a safe non-flammable > alternative? R12, which is still available and legal in the US, or R134a. >> sorry, I came in late on this thread, but what is a safe non-flammable >> alternative? >R12, which is still available and legal in the US, or R134a. R134A is not an option since it performs poorly in a system designed for R12. ------------ Alex >>R12, which is still available and legal in the US, or R134a. > > R134A is not an option since it performs poorly in a system designed for > R12. That depends ENTIRELY on the system in question. Many R-12 systems work absolutely great when converted to R-134a (properly converted, that is). Only a few really can't be converted because they're so marginal on R-12 The Ford Aerostar comes to mind as one that doesn't convert well. > R134A is not an option since it performs poorly in a system designed for > R12. Only if you're shortsighted enough to do a "suck and dump" job. If a proper retrofit is done, there's no performance reduction. >>>What country are they illegal in??? Yeah, I thought so... Read up >>>on the stuff and see what you think. It is no more dangerous than [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > ------------- > Alex Lots of people have had good luck with R-406A. The one car I've done, I just went straight to R-134a because the system had been open 10 years anyway. Its been working great for 3 years, in fact I just drove it 100+ round-trip miles to a car show today in 95-degree MUGGY weather- worked great. I did do a thorough conversion, including flushing every line, a new high-side hose, new O-rings, a new drier, and new expansion valve (but that should be SOP on any major A/C job. The only extra thing I did was a little re-engineering to change it from an EPR-valve system to a cycling-clutch system, but if you're not converting an old Mopar that's not usually an issue. I even re-used the old compressor that came with the car that had been sitting for so long, I just drained all the mineral oil out and didn't re-fill it with POE oil until 10 minutes before I buttoned the system up and charged it (POE oil absorbs moisture like brake fluid- can't leave a system sitting open with POE oil in it.) >> What country are they illegal in??? Yeah, I thought so... Read up >> on the stuff and see what you think. It is no more dangerous than [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >risk of fire or explosion. The question I'd ask myself, is "why take ANY >risk when there are so many safe, non-flammable alternatives?" Have you EVER heard of the use of this stuff actually causing harm? This hysteria reminds me of the "don't use your cell phone at a gas station or you'll blow up nonsense". > Have you EVER heard of the use of this stuff actually causing harm? The EPA has the current number of injuries documented. Last time I checked, it was mostly service personnel who were injured due to the systems not being labeled as flammable. > This hysteria reminds me of the "don't use your cell phone at a gas > station or you'll blow up nonsense". It shouldn't. AFAIK, No government agency has set regulations regarding cell phone use at a gas station. Just like the last ten years, a new crop of respondents making the same old tired arguments. >Have you EVER heard of the use of this stuff actually causing harm? >This hysteria reminds me of the "don't use your cell phone at a gas >station or you'll blow up nonsense". This was an episode on mythbusters. Maybe this flamable referigerant can be another episode. ------------- Alex The US for one. ANY flammable blend is illegal. The EPA has made it illegal to use flammable refrigerants in motor vehicle air conditioning systems. Each potential new refrigerant must be tested according to the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) E-681 testing method to determine flammability. In addition to testing the refrigerant itself, if a blend contains a flammable component, the EPA requires leak testing to ensure that the composition does not change during a leak and become flammable. http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/hc-12a.html OZ-12 - unacceptable - 3/18/94 OZ Technology Flammable blend of hydrocarbons; insufficient data to demonstrate safety. R-176 - unacceptable - 3/18/94 Arctic Chill Contains CFC-12, which is inappropriate in a CFC-12 substitute. HC-12a - unacceptable - 6/13/95 OZ Technology Flammable blend of hydrocarbons; insufficient data to demonstrate safety. R-405A - unacceptable - 6/13/95 Greencool Contains a perfluorocarbon, which has extremely high global warming potential and lifetime. There has also not been any single refrigerant or blend that is a direct drop-in for R-12 in automotive air conditioning systems.  SignatureSteve Williams > > > Ask at www.aircondition.com, but since no information is given about > > > what the product is, I have great doubts. It may be like OZ-12, which [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving > your vehicle. That is my opinion... > The US for one. ANY flammable blend is illegal. > > The EPA has made it illegal to use flammable refrigerants in motor > vehicle air conditioning systems. If you mouse around on the websites selling this stuff, you'll find them talking about "legal 2nd-generation drop-in" refrigerant. This is a bit of doublespeak. Here's how it works: It's illegal to replace R12 with hydrocarbon refrigerants, but it's not illegal to replace R134a with hydrocarbon refrigerants. A law against the latter was never written, 'cause there's no reason why anybody would ever replace R134a with hydrocarbons. Unfortunately, that legal omission is being treated as a loophole by those selling hydrocarbon refrigerants. The idea, they say, is to convert your system over to R134a (which is legal), then replace the R134a with hydrocarbons. Nudge nudge, not illegal, wink wink, elbow in the ribs, and if you happen, wink wink, to forget the "change to R134a" step, wink wink, why, that would be awful. Wink wink. Just terrible. Wink wink. > Each potential new refrigerant must be tested according to the American > Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) E-681 testing method to determine > flammability. In addition to testing the refrigerant itself, if a blend > contains a flammable component, the EPA requires leak testing to ensure > that the composition does not change during a leak and become flammable. Yep. EPA also knows the difference between chicken salad and chicken sh.t. The marketeers of hydrocarbon refrigerants tried playing leapfrog by renaming their product -- EnviroSafe, HC-12a, OZ-12, MX-12a, ES-12a, HC-12a, ("anything"-12a) -- every time EPA would ban the product. It did not take EPA long to ban the isobutane/isopropane blend itself, regardless of name. > There has also not been any single refrigerant or blend that is a direct > drop-in for R-12 in automotive air conditioning systems. Legally there is no such thing as a drop-in. This is to support and preserve the refrigerant recycling program. It's important for systems with R12 fittings to contain ONLY R12, systems with R134a fittings to contain ONLY R134a, etc. > > The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, ES-12a > > "EnviroSafe", etc. -- they're all the same illegal hydrocarbon blend. > > What country are they illegal in? The US. > It is no more dangerous than > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving > your vehicle. The fuel system is specifically designed to store and transport flammable fluid. The A/C system is not. >> It is no more dangerous than >> that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving >> your vehicle. > > The fuel system is specifically designed to store and transport flammable > fluid. The A/C system is not. Tell that to the Pinto crispies. (and numerous others) > > > The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, ES-12a > > > "EnviroSafe", etc. -- they're all the same illegal hydrocarbon blend. > > > > What country are they illegal in? > The US. It is not approved for automotive use in the U.S. It is not illegal to sell or own... People love to scream "illegal" from a keyboard. Run into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try screaming "illegal" and see how it goes... > > It is no more dangerous than > > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving > > your vehicle. > The fuel system is specifically designed to store and transport flammable > fluid. The A/C system is not. In a new vehicle. Once the years and rust sets in it is another story. In any serious motor vehicle accident there is always the threat of fire from the primary fuel source. Now we have hybrids that are a lovely mix of high voltage and gasoline. I would use Hot Shot in something like that just for spite. > It is not approved for automotive use in the U.S. Actually, it is not approved for automotive use on public roads and highways. You can put it in your car and drive around your own private property all you want. > It is not illegal to > sell or own... No one said it was. The OP posted to rec.autos.tech, so it's implied that he was inquiring about using it in a street driven vehicle. > People love to scream "illegal" from a keyboard. Your imagination is running wild... > Run into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try screaming > "illegal" and see how it goes... Pointless since it's sold in droves at any hardware store, usually in the same isle as propane torches and soldering irons, or, in with the camping equipment. > > > It is no more dangerous than > > > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > In a new vehicle. Once the years and rust sets in it is another story. Exactly. So, adding another flammable failure point makes sense? > In any serious motor vehicle accident there is always the threat of fire > from the primary fuel source. Is it raining where you are, because I think your straw man is starting to rot. > Now we have hybrids that are a lovely mix > of high voltage and gasoline. I would use Hot Shot in something like that > just for spite. Cars have been high voltage and gasoline since 1975. FYI, the brand name "Hot Shot" refrigerant is an acceptable substitute according to the EPA. What was it you said about "screaming" from the keyboard? If you want to do something for spite, try robbing a bank, there's more money in it. > > It is not approved for automotive use in the U.S. > Actually, it is not approved for automotive use on public roads > and highways. You can put it in your car and drive around your > own private property all you want. You're right. You can also snort it. > > It is not illegal to > > sell or own... > No one said it was. The OP posted to rec.autos.tech, so it's > implied that he was inquiring about using it in a street driven > vehicle. Read back through the thread. > > People love to scream "illegal" from a keyboard. > Your imagination is running wild... Not really. Seems that people scream illegal or junk when something is in their opinion not fit for use. > > Run into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try screaming > > "illegal" and see how it goes... > Pointless since it's sold in droves at any hardware store, > usually in the same isle as propane torches and soldering irons, > or, in with the camping equipment. > So why scream illegal?? > > > > It is no more dangerous than > > > > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > > > In a new vehicle. Once the years and rust sets in it is another story. > Exactly. So, adding another flammable failure point makes sense? To some people it does. > > In any serious motor vehicle accident there is always the threat of fire > > from the primary fuel source. > Is it raining where you are, because I think your straw man is > starting to rot. That is your opinion. > > Now we have hybrids that are a lovely mix > > of high voltage and gasoline. I would use Hot Shot in something like that > > just for spite. > Cars have been high voltage and gasoline since 1975. Ever seen how a hybrid is wired? A little bit more than an ignition system is involved. > FYI, the brand name "Hot Shot" refrigerant is an acceptable > substitute according to the EPA. > What was it you said about "screaming" from the keyboard? I chose the wrong brand. Would you accept maybe topping off R-12 with R-22 or should I think of something worse?? > If you want to do something for spite, try robbing a bank, > there's more money in it. Or you could just tell it like this. Maxi-Frig in a older vehicle that has a A/C system that is in decent shape could be a cost effective solution. It is not approved for automotive use by the EPA and all warnings should be read and understood before it's use. Robbing banks is illegal, Maxi-Frig is not. > > > It is not approved for automotive use in the U.S. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You're right. You can also snort it. Yup, you can also drink it, rub it on your body or use it to brush your teeth if you want. > > > It is not illegal to > > > sell or own... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Read back through the thread. I read the thread. Didn't see any mention of off-road use. > > > People love to scream "illegal" from a keyboard. > > > Your imagination is running wild... > > Not really. Seems that people scream illegal or junk when something is in > their opinion not fit for use. A reasonable assumption that the OP intended to use it in a street driven vehicle, in which case, it being illegal, is not an opinion, it is a matter of fact. If in fact you and the OP and the others intend to use it off road, Daniel and Steve and I will do everything we can to see that you and the other off-road users receive a refund from your ISP for us having wasted your bandwidth. > > > Run into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try > > > screaming [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > So why scream illegal?? Who screamed? The context in which the question was asked is germane to whether or not it would be used in an allowed or legal manner. > > > > > It is no more dangerous than > > > > > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > To some people it does. Some people are ridiculous. > > > In any serious motor vehicle accident there is always the threat of fire > > > from the primary fuel source. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > That is your opinion. Yes it is. It also happens to be true. > > > Now we have hybrids that are a lovely mix > > > of high voltage and gasoline. I would use Hot Shot in something like that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Ever seen how a hybrid is wired? A little bit more than an ignition > system is involved. So what? > > FYI, the brand name "Hot Shot" refrigerant is an acceptable > > substitute according to the EPA. > > What was it you said about "screaming" from the keyboard? > > I chose the wrong brand. Would you accept maybe topping off R-12 with > R-22 or should I think of something worse?? It's your compressor, if you want it to seize up, that's your prerogative. From a legal stand point, for an automotive system that falls under EPA jurisdiction, topping off an R-12 system with -any- other refrigerant including those that are acceptable* under section 609 without first recovering the original refrigerant is against the law. (* R-22 is a component of many different substitute refrigerant blends allowed under section 609 by the EPA) > > If you want to do something for spite, try robbing a bank, > > there's more money in it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > solution. It is not approved for automotive use by the EPA and all > warnings should be read and understood before it's use. I wouldn't tell it like that unless I knew for sure that the OP or any other poster inquiring about it was not going to use it in a vehicle that would be operated on a public street or highway. > Robbing banks is illegal, Maxi-Frig is not. Using hydrocarbon blend refrigerants in a motor vehicle on public roads is illegal. There, no screaming, no opinion, just fact. Hope this clears any confusion. There is no such thing as a "drop in substitute" refrigerant that can be used in a motor vehicle that is operated on public roads and highways in the United States. No screaming, no opinion, just fact. It is illegal to vent any refrigerant from a motor vehicle into the atmosphere, regardless of its use in the United States whether it is ozone depleting or not, thusly making the use of any hydrocarbon blend refrigerant impractical to use for all intents and purposes. No opinion, no screaming. There is no known "unique identifier" service fitting available for hydrocarbon blend refrigerants for use in automotive refrigerant systems, thus making it impossible to legally retrofit an automotive air conditioning system for use on public roads and highways in the United States. Anything else you'd like clarified? > > > > It is not approved for automotive use in the U.S. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > You're right. You can also snort it. > Yup, you can also drink it, rub it on your body or use it to > brush your teeth if you want. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > > Read back through the thread. > I read the thread. > Didn't see any mention of off-road use. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Not really. Seems that people scream illegal or junk when something is in > > their opinion not fit for use. > A reasonable assumption that the OP intended to use it in a > street driven vehicle, in which case, it being illegal, is not an [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that you and the other off-road users receive a refund from your > ISP for us having wasted your bandwidth. Another is if a person can buy it where he lives and wants to try it not saying he was even going to drive the car... Nitpicking a subject can work either way. > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > > So why scream illegal?? > Who screamed? > The context in which the question was asked is germane to whether > or not it would be used in an allowed or legal manner. Did someone ask for permission or just wanted to know how and if something worked? > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > > > To some people it does. > Some people are ridiculous. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > > That is your opinion. > Yes it is. It also happens to be true. Which is another opinion that is in your mind. > > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ever seen how a hybrid is wired? A little bit more than an ignition > > system is involved. > So what? So why would you want to compare an ignition system to the electrical engineering behind a hybrid car? Thats what. > > > > FYI, the brand name "Hot Shot" refrigerant is an acceptable [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I chose the wrong brand. Would you accept maybe topping off R-12 with > > R-22 or should I think of something worse?? > It's your compressor, if you want it to seize up, that's your > prerogative. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > (* R-22 is a component of many different substitute refrigerant > blends allowed under section 609 by the EPA) Nope, watch the head pressures, A little shot of R-22 can work wonders. > > > > If you want to do something for spite, try robbing a bank, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > solution. It is not approved for automotive use by the EPA and all > > warnings should be read and understood before it's use. > I wouldn't tell it like that unless I knew for sure that the OP > or any other poster inquiring about it was not going to use it in > a vehicle that would be operated on a public street or highway. Thats why there are other people that will. > > > > > Robbing banks is illegal, Maxi-Frig is not. > Using hydrocarbon blend refrigerants in a motor vehicle on public > roads is illegal. There, no screaming, no opinion, just fact. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > any hydrocarbon blend refrigerant impractical to use for all > intents and purposes. No opinion, no screaming. > There is no known "unique identifier" service fitting available > for hydrocarbon blend refrigerants for use in automotive > refrigerant systems, thus making it impossible to legally > retrofit an automotive air conditioning system for use on public > roads and highways in the United States. > Anything else you'd like clarified? You can preach all you want but it is not the reality of the situation. Once the temps start to rise this stuff is being used all over the country. People use this stuff based on results. Telling people that it is illegal does not mean anything when it is this easy to buy. Answering their questions and allowing them to make their own choice is the way to go. You seem to enjoy enforcing you opinion using the word illegal. I don't... > Another is if a person can buy it where he lives and wants to try it > not saying he was even going to drive the car... > Nitpicking a subject can work either way. Fine. the first nit was yours, so is the last. > > Who screamed? > > The context in which the question was asked is germane to whether > > or not it would be used in an allowed or legal manner. > > Did someone ask for permission or just wanted to know how and if something > worked? What good would asking permission here do? No one here can grant permission to the OP. The OP didn't ask whether it worked. He originally asked: >> Has anyone used Maxi-Frig? It sounds too good to be true? The answers that you seem to take issue with do in fact address the question that he posed. > > So what? > > So why would you want to compare an ignition system to the electrical > engineering behind a hybrid car? > > Thats what. Don't know, you brought up high voltage hybrid cars... > > It's your compressor, if you want it to seize up, that's your > > prerogative. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Nope, watch the head pressures, A little shot of R-22 can work wonders. A little shot of R-22 where? > > > Or you could just tell it like this. Maxi-Frig in a older vehicle that > > > has a A/C system that is in decent shape could be a cost effective [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Thats why there are other people that will. f.ck the rules, 'eh? > > Using hydrocarbon blend refrigerants in a motor vehicle on public > > roads is illegal. There, no screaming, no opinion, just fact. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > You can preach all you want but it is not the reality of the situation. Actually, it IS the reality of the situation. Choosing to ignore the laws of the US is hardly considered to be reality. > Once > the temps start to rise > this stuff is being used all over the country. No shortage of stupid people out there. > People use this stuff based > on results. All the while ignoring the consequences. > Telling people > that it is illegal does not mean anything when it is this easy to buy. Well, Henry (the OP) did ask if it was too good to be true. Pardon us for giving the answer he was looking for. > Answering their questions and > allowing them to make their own choice is the way to go. Exactly what was done. > You seem to enjoy > enforcing you opinion > using the word illegal. I don't... You seem to have trouble distinguishing fact from fiction. > > Another is if a person can buy it where he lives and wants to try it > > not saying he was even going to drive the car... > > Nitpicking a subject can work either way. > Fine. the first nit was yours, so is the last. > > > > Who screamed? > > > The context in which the question was asked is germane to whether > > > or not it would be used in an allowed or legal manner. > > > > Did someone ask for permission or just wanted to know how and if something > > worked? > What good would asking permission here do? > No one here can grant permission to the OP. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The answers that you seem to take issue with do in fact address > the question that he posed. Have you answered the OP's question? Have you ever used Maxi-Frig? Or just given your opinion on whatever he wonders if it's too good to be true in. > > > So what? > > > > So why would you want to compare an ignition system to the electrical > > engineering behind a hybrid car? > > > > Thats what. > Don't know, you brought up high voltage hybrid cars... > > > It's your compressor, if you want it to seize up, that's your > > > prerogative. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > > Nope, watch the head pressures, A little shot of R-22 can work wonders. > A little shot of R-22 where? Low pressure, (suction), port. > > > > Or you could just tell it like this. Maxi-Frig in a older vehicle that > > > > has a A/C system that is in decent shape could be a cost effective [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > > Thats why there are other people that will. > f.ck the rules, 'eh? > > > Using hydrocarbon blend refrigerants in a motor vehicle on public > > > roads is illegal. There, no screaming, no opinion, just fact. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > > > You can preach all you want but it is not the reality of the situation. > Actually, it IS the reality of the situation. > Choosing to ignore the laws of the US is hardly considered to be > reality. > > Once > > the temps start to rise > > this stuff is being used all over the country. > No shortage of stupid people out there. > > People use this stuff based > > on results. > All the while ignoring the consequences. > > Telling people > > that it is illegal does not mean anything when it is this easy to buy. > Well, Henry (the OP) did ask if it was too good to be true. > Pardon us for giving the answer he was looking for. If you never used it how would you know?? > > Answering their questions and > > allowing them to make their own choice is the way to go. > Exactly what was done. > > You seem to enjoy > > enforcing you opinion > > using the word illegal. I don't... > You seem to have trouble distinguishing fact from fiction. No fiction here except for the fact that you think that calling something illegal will stop people from using something that you do not approve of. Now, after using Maxi-Frig did you find it to be too good to be true?? > Have you answered the OP's question? Have you ever used Maxi-Frig? That is just half of what he asked. > Or just given your opinion on whatever he wonders if it's too good > to be true in. Opinion? I think not. > Low pressure, (suction), port. In an automobile that already has R-12 in it? > If you never used it how would you know?? How do you know I never used "it?" > No fiction here except for the fact that you think that calling > something illegal will stop people from using something that you > do not approve of. It's the EPA that doesn't approve of its use in an automobile which is used on public roads and highways. You seem to have a hard time accepting this fact and for some reason choose to assign to me that which the government dictates. > Now, after using Maxi-Frig did you find it > to be too good to be true?? How do you know if I've used "Maxi-Frig?" > > Have you answered the OP's question? Have you ever used Maxi-Frig? > That is just half of what he asked. > > Or just given your opinion on whatever he wonders if it's too good > > to be true in. > Opinion? I think not. You have either used it or not. Which is it?? > > Low pressure, (suction), port. > In an automobile that already has R-12 in it? Yes. > > If you never used it how would you know?? > How do you know I never used "it?" I don't. I'm asking have you ever used Maxi-Frig. > > No fiction here except for the fact that you think that calling > > something illegal will stop people from using something that you > > do not approve of. > It's the EPA that doesn't approve of its use in an automobile > which is used on public roads and highways. > You seem to have a hard time accepting this fact and for some > reason choose to assign to me that which the government dictates. Nope. I just deal with the reality of the situation. > > Now, after using Maxi-Frig did you find it > > to be too good to be true?? > How do you know if I've used "Maxi-Frig?" Again, I ask have you ever used Maxi-Frig and did you find it too good to be true. You can give a one word answer to each part... > > Opinion? I think not. > > You have either used it or not. Which is it?? Are you a priest? > > > Low pressure, (suction), port. > > > In an automobile that already has R-12 in it? > > Yes. Just wanted to be sure. > > How do you know I never used "it?" > > I don't. I'm asking have you ever used Maxi-Frig. Are you a priest? > > It's the EPA that doesn't approve of its use in an automobile > > which is used on public roads and highways. > > You seem to have a hard time accepting this fact and for some > > reason choose to assign to me that which the government dictates. > > Nope. I just deal with the reality of the situation. When no one is looking. > > How do you know if I've used "Maxi-Frig?" > > Again, I ask have you ever used Maxi-Frig and did you find it > too good to be true. Are you a priest? > You can give a one word answer to each part... Hilarious. > > > Opinion? I think not. > > > > You have either used it or not. Which is it?? > Are you a priest? Is that the best you can come up with? > > > > Low pressure, (suction), port. > > > > > In an automobile that already has R-12 in it? > > > > Yes. > Just wanted to be sure. > > > > How do you know I never used "it?" > > > > I don't. I'm asking have you ever used Maxi-Frig. > Are you a priest? Are you praying for an answer?? > > > It's the EPA that doesn't approve of its use in an automobile > > > which is used on public roads and highways. > > > You seem to have a hard time accepting this fact and for some > > > reason choose to assign to me that which the government dictates. > > > > Nope. I just deal with the reality of the situation. > When no one is looking. > > > How do you know if I've used "Maxi-Frig?" > > > > Again, I ask have you ever used Maxi-Frig and did you find it > > too good to be true. > Are you a priest? > > You can give a one word answer to each part... > Hilarious. No, It is just typical. With no real experience I guess that this is the best that you can do... > Another is if a person can buy it where he lives and wants to try it > not saying he was even going to drive the car... > Nitpicking a subject can work either way. I have to wonder why some people defend this stuff so strongly. What's the "compelling reason" to take a half-assed approach? It doesn't even save a significant amount of money over just doing a real conversion to 134a. > > Run into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try > > screaming "illegal" and see how it goes... > > Pointless since it's sold in droves at any hardware store, usually in > the same isle as propane torches and soldering irons, or, in with the > camping equipment. Well...not really, no. Propane and Butane aren't the same as Isopropane and Isobutane. Also, camping fuel is almost always extremely wet. Running camping fuel in a MVAC is a sure-fire ticket to an instantly saturated filter-dryer and massive internal system corrosion. > > > > The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, ES-12a > > > > "EnviroSafe", etc. -- they're all the same illegal hydrocarbon blend. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try screaming > "illegal" and see how it goes... There are a number of products on the market that use flammable hydrocarbons (propane, butane, isobutane in many combinations). Here are a few that we know about: OZ-12, HC-12a, Duracool 12a, Enviro-safe, Red Tek, Maxi-Frig, ES-12a and Auto Cool. According the EPA SNAP list, these are illegal to use in mobile A/C systems. The following refrigerants are EPA accepted, but contain up to 4% butane or isobutane: FRIG-C (FR-12), R-406A/GHG/McCool, GHG-X4/Autofrost/Chill-it, Hot Shot (Kar Kool), GHG-HP, GHG-X-5. Following is a list of 18 states that have passed laws prohibiting the sale of flammable refrigerants (hydrocarbons or HC's) for use in mobile air conditioning systems including those used off-highway. Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, District of Columbia How do you like your crow served? Hot or cold? > > > It is no more dangerous than > > > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are driving [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > of high voltage and gasoline. I would use Hot Shot in something like that > just for spite. > > > > > The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, > ES-12a [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > into a shop or store that has the stuff on a hot day and try screaming > > "illegal" and see how it goes... > There are a number of products on the market that use flammable > hydrocarbons (propane, butane, isobutane in many combinations). Here are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > R-406A/GHG/McCool, GHG-X4/Autofrost/Chill-it, Hot Shot (Kar Kool), > GHG-HP, GHG-X-5. > Following is a list of 18 states that have passed laws prohibiting the > sale of flammable refrigerants (hydrocarbons or > HC's) for use in mobile air conditioning systems including those used > off-highway. > Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, > Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, North Dakota, > Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, District of > Columbia > How do you like your crow served? Hot or cold? 18 out of 50. Thats the best you can do? > > > > It is no more dangerous than > > > > that large tank with gasoline that rides behind you when you are [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > that > > just for spite. > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- ("Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1>) scribbled: > > Ask at www.aircondition.com, but since no information is given about > > what the product is, I have great doubts. It may be like OZ-12, which [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The Maxi-Frig designation MX-12a is a dead giveaway. HC-12a, ES-12a > "EnviroSafe", etc. -- they're all the same illegal hydrocarbon blend. ... and "free-zone" ? http://www.heco.net/freezone.html [...] "Free Zone does not contain flammable materials, such as butane, isobutane, or propane." [...] Signature<< http://michaeljtobler.homelinux.com () >> Before Xerox, five carbons were the maximum extension of anybody's ego. > ... and "free-zone" ? http://www.heco.net/freezone.html > "Free Zone does not contain flammable materials, > such as butane, isobutane, or propane." It is primarily r134a mixed with r142b (I'm to lazy to check up on that right now) and a petrolium-based lubricant. I assume the r142b is rich in CFCs, so that might be the major drawback. If everything the website said was actually true about Freezone, it would be fairly decent. They even mention that it requires unique fittings, but how many people are really going to use them? I thought the concept of charging it as a liquid to preserve the built-in lubricant was interesting. I mean, seeing that the lubricant is "blended at the factory and won't fractionate" why would that be a concern? Toyota MDT in MO > It is primarily r134a mixed with r142b (I'm to lazy to check up on that > right now) and a petrolium-based lubricant. > > I assume the r142b is rich in CFCs, so that might be the major > drawback. ... I think that's also known as Freeze-12. As I understand it, the 142 is there to act as a carrier for the R-12 compatible mineral oil (which would be there in a former R-12 system that wasn't flushed). That's what supposedly makes it a replacement for R-12. The 142 will also leak out before the 134, leaving the system without a carrier for the oil which will probably result in compressor failure. I guess if the system was completely leak-free it would work OK, but I'm not sure there is such a thing. > Has anyone used Maxi-Frig? It sounds too good to be true? > http://www.maxifrig.com/moreinfo.html > > tnx > Hank Here we go again... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.