410A coils

Yes..

If want a properly matched system and one that is warranted by the OEM, you will need to replace the condensing unit along and together with the evaporator coil, the interconnecting refrigerant piping, and a refrigerant filter-drier as recommended by the OEM.

A properly completed evacuation of the evaporator and lines set is also needed.

The right way is the only way.

And your

point is?????????

Sorry I have been a professional since 1988 so it doesn't matter to me who or what you are or think you are.

In my opinion what you said or implied is wrong and until I see a PDS with a "converted" evaporator showing the manufacturer's superheat and subcool and enthalpy ratings I will not believe your malarkey........

and you should refrain from passing off your info as approved by all manufacturer's in a blanket statement that is incorrect.

I got plaques too and a slew of NATE certs but it not about accolades. So what????????? BFD.

So exactly what is your point?????

A new R410A system is just that, a new system with a new evaporator coil, period.

Not throwing stones, Mr. Broome, just keeping it real.

It is about time that YOU did the same.

Best regards.

alan

What broome says is true,most newer coils are rated for 410a as well as 22.

Are you saying the wall thickness of acr copper has changed as well?

Have gotten plenty of coils where the only difference is the txv.

Would i do it on a 10 year old system?,no.

The coils themselves don`t give a damn about the refrigerant, they`re all brazed the same as they used to be the difference is the surface area of a 10 seer vs a 16 seer or higher.

You start mismatching equipment you don`t get the efficiency you paid for.

As far as nate testing it just means you test well,i`m sure there are guys with the practical know how who could run circles around a tech with a wallfull, of certificates.

Not that I need to

defend Mr. Broome (largely because he is correct), but most manufacturers re-tooled as a result of the Montreal Protocols to build evaporators which would handle multiple refrigerants.

They saw the coming of new refrigerants and decided not to have two parallel coil manufacturing lines going especially during this transition time. They are already tooled up for 2010 so no down-time. They got the differences down to the TX valve, not bad. I say good for them.

Naturally there would be some compromise when serving two or more different fluids but the performance differences are held to reasonable levels within the characteristics of each refrigerant. ARI certification completes the documentation so one knows what you are getting.

Nothing I saw in what Mr. Broome said was absolute, that "all" coils could be interchanged, just that many if not most had already achieved interchangability. Naturally, any thoughtful technician would know what they are working on before cracking the valves. Mr. Broome did not have to say that any more than he had to give a run-down on charging procedure.

As far as ACR tube wall thicknesses, ASTM B-280 does not show a reduction that I can find.

Circle the wagons....

a "rookie" per Mr. Broome has expressed an opinion that is contrary to a shared belief.

An opinion and apparently a belief, which by the way, is still incorrect.

Since you chose to parse this thread so you can attempt validate your misconception. Let us review what Mr. Broome stated, please refer to his post:

"Get with the times.
True (p) one time you did need to change the indoor coil. Most major mafg (sp) have now a kit to convert existing coils to handler(sp) 410A."

Bottom line, you cannot "convert" just any existing evaporator coil to operate with R410A.

The statement is incorrect and I expressed an opinion to that extent. Mr. Broome chose to respond as noted in his posts and mention his credentials and senority and belittle my questioning of his "authority".

Sugarcoat this any way you want..........

but you cannot convert just any existing evaporator coil to work with R410A.

If he felt that their were certain evaporator coils that could be "converted" and that was his point, then he should have qualified his statement to reflect that caveat before escalating his "verbal" communications via the Wall.

Tony, I do look before I leap.
Be careful of what horse you hitch your wagon to..

Now I remember why I usually choose to watch rather than participate. Oh well, too late to turn back..

Thanks for your input.

Passionate, not heated, debate

Not to get philosophical, but this thread ilustrates one very impportant thing .... we are all passionate about our industry.


When asked, I always recommend replacing both the indoor and outdoor sections of a split system. As Alan mentioned in his orginal post,it seems to be the right thing to do. Since this is not always in the customer's best interest, at least financially, it is great to know that there are now alternatives, where a few years ago it seemed there were none.

It's also nice to know that the manufacturer's have stepped up to the plate to make it somewhat easier for the service tech to navigate the situation.

Here are a couple of things to keep in mind:

If you are planning to reuse an existing evaporator coil, be sure to check the factory test presure to make certain that it is at least 235 psig.

If the existing coil is to be reused with the existing (fixed bore) metering device, expect higher superheat and a starved evaporator coil.

The resulting efficiency with a mis-matched system will be lower than that of a properly (manufacturer recommended match) matched system.

Here is ARI's (AHRI) take on the situation:

http://www.ari.org/Pages/ShowMeMore.aspx?src=single&lpk=324

If you use the directory from AHRI, you can determine what efficiency you can expect to get with various combinations of indoor and outdoor units.

Guys, as we all know, THE WALL is a great place as it gives industry people the opportunity to share information and learn from each other. It's threads like this one that speak volumes about how much we all care about this industry and truly want to do what's best for our customers.

Just THE PROFESSOR chiming in!

I am not

sure what you are referring to, since it appears it is YOU who cannot read and comprehend that which you are reading.

Why don't you re-read the original posts and reconsider, because I think you missed something or have some another agenda in mind......

You know....

this is really getting to be fun or rather boring.

I responded to the original question by Josh as an advocate of doing a job in a professional matter.

I was taken to task by Mr. Bromme and have been ridiculed by most of the other posts, except for the ONE that really means anything and has credibility.

I have only responded in fashion that mirrored the attitude of those who treated me a negative way.

Call me any name or insinuate anything, the bottom line is and has been: the original posting by Mr. Bromme is incorrect.

Check with the ARI.
Assuming, that is, you know what the ARI is.

No, I am not always right, wish I was (no, not really).

But on this one and this ONE alone; Yes, I am right.

The next time you want to debate this issue, gave me a heads-up.
I will tie one-half of my brain behind my back, just to make it fair.

Good night and good riddance.

As a matter of fact

I was at a supply house last week. They had an uncased coil on display. As I looked at it, I thought of this thread.

Looking closer at the coil, I saw it was rated at a max pressure of about 350 psi (could have been 450). Even though it was a flow rater coil as opposed to a TXV, it was approved as either a 410 coil or a 22 coil.

This tells me that at least this coil was approved for either and that a TXV could be installed for the 410.

Coils are not rated per se, but they match with a condensing unit for a rated efficiency. This particular coil could no have been rated with anything out now, as it was too small to give the matching 13 SEER requirements. Down here, there are still quite a lot of 10 and 12 SEER systems that the coils start leaking on long before the system goes bad. Not may supply houses stock 10-12 SEER coils, but a few do. Most of these are 'after market' coils like ADP and AllStyle. They work but probably don't actually match the efficiency of the original system.

It's my opinion that the line set as well as the coil and condenser be replaced when going with a R410 system when the original system was a R22. I say this because of the incompatibility of the oils (POE vs mineral oil). I have lost work because of this stand, I'll admit.