R-22 vs. R410a (Puron)

Page 3 of 3  


Actually it is, as R-410a is a more efficient refrigerant than R-22, because it takes approximately half of the amount of refrigerant to do the same job.

Again, as I asked before, what actual hands on experience do you have with *ANY* R-410a refrigerant or equipment??... specifically equipment designs manufactured after January 2006. Have you even *SEEN* any of the new equipment?? Have you been to any of the classes or training for R-410a or the new equipment and technologies??

ummmm....yeah, ok... typical Carrier sales stuff for their older equipment.

This has nothing to do with the current conversation. If your trying to confuse the issue as you like to do, please take it somewhere else. If you have the training, education and experience with any of the new equipment and technologies on the market, then by all means continue, but please try to keep on track.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noon-Air writes:

No. Efficiency is a ratio of HEAT TRANSFERRED to ENERGY CONSUMED. No mass or volume factors in that ratio.
Maybe you are a Carrier salesman or ad-copy writer, in which case facts don't matter? "Efficiency" is then a puff word, not a physical measurement. Or maybe you are a tradesman who passes this phoniness along to the homeowner to justify your unearned profits from trade regulation and collusion. You just want to believe it because otherwise you feel you haven't honestly earned the exorbitant prices you charge.
Carrier is just making a big lie out of this, saying Puron "lends itself" to efficiency. "Lends itself" just means "more expensive to make an air conditioner with it" for the same efficiency. So you can only sell the more efficient models, since the extra costs of 410a vs 22 are buried in dual-speed and other expensive gadgetry.
To you and Carrier, one 14 SEER unit is "more efficient" than another. Baloney.

Tradesman's swagger doesn't enlighten you in the least on this question.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah Asshole, understand there's a difference in the two following statements...
"R410 refrigerant is more efficient than R22"
"An R410 14 SEER unit is more efficient than a R22 14 SEER unit"
Now look at the thread title, it says "R-22 vers R410". It says nothing about complete systems!
If you had a brain, you wouldn't be agruing about this.
Also, if you were informed, you would already know what brand Noon-Air sells... hint, it's not a Carrier product. Now crawl back in your hole and shut the hell up.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sounds like you're talking about two different measures of efficiency. One is saying that R-410 is a more efficient *refrigerant* because it provides more cooling per unit of refrigerant pumped around the system. The other is saying that both *systems* have the same efficiency in terms of cooling provided per watt-hour of electricity consumed.
    Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Martindale writes:

Yes. My right one, and the other wrong one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

By tranplanting a 410-A compressor of the same HP into an existing R-22 system, and charging the system with 410-A and replacing the TXV, the SEER of the system will be greater after the changes.
What this means is that R-410_A can achieve the same SEER by using a physically smaller compressor (smaller because mass flow rate requirement is lower) and smaller coils. Refrigerants can actually be rated in efficiency (EER) compared to each other, and specifically in regards to the application. They are correct, and you are wrong. The problem is that they didn't know why they were right.
hvacrmedic
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
hvacrmedic writes:

This is quite confused. Efficiency is a property of a refrigeration system, not a refrigerant. It also varies with conditions. There is no such thing as comparative efficiency of refrigerants, as opposed to system efficiency under specific conditions.
You may be confusing refrigerant properties like molar heat capacity with efficiency. R410a is "better" in that regard than R22, and worse in other properties important to refrigeration. Which one performs better depends on the systems employed and the operating conditions. You can cook up examples where either outperforms the other.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Kinch, Your trolling is getting a bit tiresome. Maybe if you got your nose out of the books, and actually worked with these refrigerants and this equipment in real life, you would have a better understanding of what we are talking about.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Noon-Air writes:

You may be tired, but there's no trolling going on.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sorry, wrong anwer. Welcome to my killfile.
*PLONK*
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For the specific application where it is used, there is nothing worse about 410-A. Whether we can cook up other applications where it is worse is immaterial. There is probably some scenario possible, some universe, where 410-A causes a planet to explode, but that would have no bearing on the systems in which it is used on our planet in our universe.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just blow your lines out. Install a suction line filter/drier. Hire a pro, with a warranty. No worries ;)
Your biggest concern is suction line size. If the old size doesn't match up with the 410a specs, then forget it. Drywall and mudd are cheap...
-Canadian Cool
-- --------------------------------- --- -- - Posted with NewsLeecher v3.8 Final Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet ------------------- ----- ---- -- -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just blow your lines out. Install a suction line filter/drier. Hire a pro, with a warranty. No worries ;)
Your biggest concern is suction line size. If the old size doesn't match up with the 410a specs, then forget it. Drywall and mudd are cheap...
-Canadian Cool
-- --------------------------------- --- -- - Posted with NewsLeecher v3.8 Final Web @ http://www.newsleecher.com/?usenet ------------------- ----- ---- -- -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16 May 2007 19:17:35 GMT, DANgER (danger< snipped-for-privacy@heat.com) wrote:

Im guessing you use your mouth.

Why? Its not a burn out. Some manufacturers dont like suction line driers installed permanently. They are for clean up then remove them. That suction line drier is going to be a little silly on the line set of a heat pump.

Wow! You do have at least part of a brain.

Ooops. Never mind. You just lost that piece of brain I thought you had.

You really are still brain-dead.
Bubba
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.