Bad crash test losers and rolling time bombs

jack_christie

jack_christie

Forum Addict
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
9,646
The most dangerous cars

Bad crash test losers and rolling time bombs, which have the dangerous killer refrigerant R123yf aboard - autobild.de shows models in which an accident can go very bad.
Click to expand...
http://www.autobild.de/bilder/ueberblick-die-gefaehrlichsten-autos-3714313.html

Die-gefaehrlichsten-Autos-644x363-41058c4767a11367.jpg


New air-con refrigerant R1234yf is corrosive, noxious and highly flammable!
Die-gefaehrlichsten-Autos-729x486-569356a63c15c146.jpg
 
Re: Bad crash test losers and rolling time bombs

Mercedes noticed the issue with the new refridgerant, and decided to swap it for the older stuff in vehicles that shipped with the new stuff.
 
Why is it that every time they introduce a new, more 'environmentally friendly' refrigerant, it gets more and more dangerous and actually more hazardous to the actual environment it's in? :p

Thanks, I'll stay with R-12 where I have that option. :p
 
Spectre said:
Why is it that every time they introduce a new, more 'environmentally friendly' refrigerant, it gets more and more dangerous and actually more hazardous to the actual environment it's in? :p

Thanks, I'll stay with R-12 where I have that option. :p
Click to expand...

That's why I like the idea of using CO[sub]2[/sub] as a refrigerant (codename R-744). Unlike R-12/134a/1234yf, it's not flammable, is the most environmentally friendly, and it has the potential to be even more efficient than R-12 was.
 
CO2 has been tried before, back in the early days of refrigeration, and R-12 kicked it out of the market for good reasons - CO2 systems operate around 440 to 3000psi and the compressor outlet temperature runs about 320F. This can be useful for some purposes, but it also means that just like in the ancient days of refrigeration, a leak or loss of containment has a very good chance of being fatal. I'm pretty sure I don't want to be in the area when a 3000psi hose ruptures or when a seal blows out venting a nominal 300F gas jet at 2500psi into the legs, torso, etc., of the vehicle's occupants.

As I said, there's good reasons why CO2 was rejected by the marketspace in the 30s when a better alternative came about. Those reasons haven't gone away.
 
Last edited:
chaos386 said:
I'm pretty sure R-12 will be a lot hotter than 320?F once it ignites, so I don't see how it's any safer. Cheaper, yes, but not safer.
Click to expand...

Uh... R-12 isn't flammable. In fact, it was used as a fire extinguishant - ever heard of Halon fire suppression systems? So, uh, no.

There's also the "silent but deadly" issue with leaks on the non-R-12 systems.
 
Last edited:
Spectre said:
Uh... R-12 isn't flammable. In fact, it was used as a fire extinguishant - ever heard of Halon fire suppression systems? So, uh, no.

There's also the "silent but deadly" issue with leaks on the non-R-12 systems.
Click to expand...

Yep, you're right. My bad. :)
 
chaos386 said:
Yep, you're right. My bad. :)
Click to expand...

I better be, that question is a common one to appear on the EPA refrigerant licensing exam - I have an EPA MVAC refrigeration system tech license, which means that I can legally buy R-12 and all the exotic refrigerants you need a license for. Mind, the license exam is a joke, but it is one of the things you are tested on. :p

So, again, everything we've tried to replace R-12 with turns out to be worse. :p
 
German environment agency urges compromise in Daimler-EU spat
Carmakers switching to CO2 need until end-2015 - UBA

We have been warning about the dangers (of HF0-1234yf) for years. Daimler's internal tests proved not only that our own fears were justified but also that we may even have underestimated the risks

Volkswagen patriarch Ferdinand Piech told Auto Bild magazine in November that a CO2-based air conditioning system was in fact the better solution since it is inherently non-flammable.

Earlier this month, BMW joined Daimler and Volkswagen's Audi in resigning from an industry research group looking into the safety of HFO-1234yf, due to concerns over the scientific thoroughness of the investigation.
Click to expand...


http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/14/daimler-honeywell-refrigerant-idUSL5N0BDEGD20130214
 
Yikes...
 
YF19pilot said:
Compromise? Well, just drop some Hot Shot (R-414B) and be done with it. Why play around with some bs refrigerant that has too many numbers?
Click to expand...

Nah, R-414A. B has some performance issues.
 
Basically this is a case of the carmaker's lobby totally fucking up - the reason the EU mandated the switch to HF0-1234yf is cause the chemical industry pressured for it. And unlike most other cases of legislation, where the carmakers are quick to step in and have the rules made in their favor, they totally missed this one, allowing another pressure group to take over.
 
Okay, here's a solution: Everyone claiming it's safe should be held personally liable and financially responsible (not as an organization, but personally) for injuries and damage if it turns out not to be.
 
Another downside of HFO-1234yf is that it costs like ten times as much as R134a. Guess what that'll do for service costs?

Also, I wonder what they'll come up with for R134a systems once the refrigerant is banned completely, like R12 is now. There are billions of R134a cars on the road.

It would be neat though if HFO-1234yf was less "viscous" than R134a, which leaks through gaskets and straight through hoses a lot easier than good old R12.
 
You can still get R12, by the way. Also, HFC-1234eieioWTFBBQ is corrosive in atmosphere, so guess what it's going to do once it starts leaking at a fitting? I see a lot more hardware repairs in store for cars using it - right now if you develop a leak at a fitting, you just clean up the mess, replace seals with new ones, vacuum and recharge.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top