Oh, I realize that, but sometimes I don't want the A/C compressor running. Plain old A/Cless defog worked fine for decades, and it works well enough for most situations now. I like the system where you pick which set of ducts you want the air to come from, then use another selector to pick A/C or not. The biggest reason, is I like to use defog as my standard heat setting. I hate hot air on my feet, and a lot of times I don't want a breeze in my face. I like the indirect heating you get from defog.
I like the system where you pick which set of ducts you want the air to come from, then use another selector to pick A/C or not.
Because of this:
I mean I can argue about it to some extent, it just depends on people's answer to this question. Sometimes you guys make smart assed comments that have no bearing on reality, or are very broad generalized statements that can't be backed up.
A manufacturer's generic warning statement that is reprinted as a thoughtless, broad disclaimer I'm not going to believe especially when I can easily prove otherwise through my own testing and the testing of others. Most of the time manufacturers are correct in their warnings and they can indeed be proven to be useful in actual practice like the warning not to run such and such compressor for more than 10 minutes at a time to prevent overheating. Or don't smoke/make any sparks near a charging battery because the hydrogen could be ignited and explode. Or "high voltage", dangerous, etc etc. I can probably think of 100 things where the manufacturer's stern warning is valid and should be followed for every warning where it's just a load of crap and is for a limited circumstance. This whole bit about tire pressure thing is one of those, and in my experience and the experience of others has shown otherwise. What and how they come up with these warnings is perfectly logical, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it especially if I can prove otherwise.
It has nothing to do with an A/C system that has a leak, but instead you purposefully release some of the refrigerant in the A/C unit to that lower level. Apparently I'm getting mixed answers as to why a unit would Ice up or get colder. I'm not going to argue with anyone unless someone starts spouting off about how this cannot happen because it can and does happen. This thread was mostly inspired by this:Dear Fleabag
Your mechanical questions that you have been posting of late are gibberish. You need to stop posting stupid questions in atot and you need to go back to kindergarten and re learn... well everything.
Please cease and desist these constant stupid threads.
Sincerely
Sea Moose
ps, having an ac system short on refrigerant mean that your system has a leak. You will find that having a system with a known leak goes against your local environmental laws.
[SIZE=-1]How come the air is too cold or too warm?
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Too warm: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Too cold: [/SIZE]
- [SIZE=-1]Compressor may not be working or the system may have a leak and has lost the entire refrigerant charge. [/SIZE]
- [SIZE=-1]The automobile may have been overcharged with too much refrigerant. Check to pressures to know whether or not the system has been overcharged. A DURACOOL® pencil gauge or the DURACOOL® low side pressure gauge can be used to check the low side fitting psi. Low side pressure should ideally be in the 28-45 psi range. [/SIZE]
- [SIZE=-1]The system may need another ounce or two of DURACOOL® refrigerant. A system running too cold can indicate that it has been undercharged. Check the pressures to determine whether or not the system has been undercharged. A DURACOOL® pencil gauge or the Duracool® Low Side Pressure gauge can be used to check the low side fitting psi. If the system is undercharged the pressure will generally read less than 28 psi. Low side pressure should ideally be in the 28-45 psi range.
Failsafe? Wtf? Firstly, it's not like I'm exceeding the pressure on the sidewall by very much if at all, so therefore anything about "built in safety factor" is a load of crap. There are plenty of people who have had success adding air to their tires to the pressure stamped on their wall with little adverse affects. Just because something bad happens like rolling over or spinning out, it doesn't necessarily mean the pressure is the cause of the problem. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes there are factors that while should be foreseen, are not because the person conducting the analysis has a bias. What would it take for you to believe that there are few adverse effects to running higher tire pressure?<snip> This whole bit about tire pressure thing is one of those, and in my experience and the experience of others has shown otherwise.
Fleatard - 'others' comrade? Please, name the "others" that have come forward in defense of your inane max sidewall obsession. And dont claim anecdotal (people in the parking lot of Walmart) or reference the voices in your head. Those dont count.
Tell me - name names. Who has supported your max side wall claims? All I have ever read is a wide range of experienced, educated, certified, articulate etc etc ATOT people explaining why you are wrong and to pull your head from your stubborn ass - on this issue. Information fails. Civility fails. Accuracy fails. Discourse fails. Discussion fails. Reality fails. 20+ years experience in the field - fails.
Who the hell are you talking about? This is your lame chestnut. You own it by yourself
<snip> What and how they come up with these warnings is perfectly logical, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it especially if I can prove otherwise
You can PROVE otherwise. A sample size of 1 in a narrow set of conditions. The only thing you demonstrate (you aren't proving jack my friend) is the value of statistics - (distribution, frequency, standard deviation etc) and why poorly based inferentially lacking observations and subsequent generalizations are misleading and potentially dangerous. The flawed 'results' are what you then tout as proof - as to the validity of your 'argument'. FAIL FAIL FAIL.
I believe most manufacturers and testing takes people like you into consideration, like engineers overbuilding / strengthening something, just to account for the random event / outlier that maxes the system. They anticipate your idiocy and build in a fleabag buffer so when you push the limits is still doesnt fail. But you see that as proof or validity for your argument. Failster beats the experts yet again. Congratulations - you is teh smart. Keep on sticking it to the man (and woman).
Well couldn't you just put an underdrive pulley on the compressor so that it doesn't accomplish as much work and therefore wouldn't be given the opportunity to ice up the condenser? It's my simplistic answers such as the one in this very post that I ask this question in the first place.To Fleabag.
When a air conditioning system has a low gas charge it will cause the coil temp to drop below zero degrees Celsius and will cause the coil to ice over. Refrigeration is a delicate balance of pressures and temperatures.
If you are having problems with your car air conditioning system, take it to an accredited and licensed repairer. You should not work on your car. I do not believe you have the mechanical skills to sharpen a pencil in a child's safety sharpener.
Sincerely
Sea Moose
Well couldn't you just put an underdrive pulley on the compressor so that it doesn't accomplish as much work and therefore wouldn't be given the opportunity to ice up the condenser? It's my simplistic answers such as the one in this very post that I ask this question in the first place.
Failsafe? Wtf? Firstly, it's not like I'm exceeding the pressure on the sidewall by very much if at all, so therefore anything about "built in safety factor" is a load of crap.
Hand slapping forehead. You deliberately exceed a manufacturer's recommended limit without immediate consequences invalidates a built in 'safety factor' is crap how? How about they anticipated your douche move - correctly I might add.
<snip> There are plenty of people who have had success adding air to their tires to the pressure stamped on their wall with little adverse affects.
Who? Again you claim plenty of people but provide evidence of none. Calling bullshit on this one AGAIN.
<snip> Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes there are factors that while should be foreseen, are not because the person conducting the analysis has a bias.
Ok. Now you are just tossing out things that you have apparently read somewhere but never really considered. The incoherence created by juxtaposing these two sentences is quite revealing.
Correlation does not equal causation. Agreed. But sans actual evidence and testing and relying on our (n=1) fleabag sample (or looking at real analysis and listening to people with experience which you shun like an 'aggressive' woman who is hitting on you) this statement is useless.
You are ignoring all the evidence put forth that has suggested a correaltion causation link does in fact exist.
(snip> What would it take for you to believe that there are few adverse effects to running higher tire pressure?
A brain hemorrhage might do it.
Little actually because I dont have the desire to willfully and deliberately ignore years of research and the collective opinion of many people with far more knowledge in this field. Opinions and experienced expressed on ATOT forums.
This is your idiotic battle with empirical reality. Not mine.
So much fail in such little time.
Failsafe? Wtf? Firstly, it's not like I'm exceeding the pressure on the sidewall by very much if at all, so therefore anything about "built in safety factor" is a load of crap.This is taking the topic off track, I'd love to respond to your posts but the point of this thread is about refrigerant, not about how you'll trust some CHP's conjecture about why some woman flipped her SUV on the highway. I also love how everyone cites the fact that the tires will wear unevenly but when I tell them how my tires used to wear unevenly now all of a sudden wear evenly, they just go back to their point about listening to the manufacturer regardless.Hand slapping forehead. You deliberately exceed a manufacturer's recommended limit without immediate consequences invalidates a built in 'safety factor' is crap how? How about they anticipated your douche move - correctly I might add.
<snip> There are plenty of people who have had success adding air to their tires to the pressure stamped on their wall with little adverse affects.
Who? Again you claim plenty of people but provide evidence of none. Calling bullshit on this one AGAIN.
<snip> Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes there are factors that while should be foreseen, are not because the person conducting the analysis has a bias.
Ok. Now you are just tossing out things that you have apparently read somewhere but never really considered. The incoherence created by juxtaposing these two sentences is quite revealing.
Correlation does not equal causation. Agreed. But sans actual evidence and testing and relying on our (n=1) fleabag sample (or looking at real analysis and listening to people with experience which you shun like an 'aggressive' woman who is hitting on you) this statement is useless.
You are ignoring all the evidence put forth that has suggested a correaltion causation link does in fact exist.
(snip> What would it take for you to believe that there are few adverse effects to running higher tire pressure?
A brain hemorrhage might do it.
Little actually because I dont have the desire to willfully and deliberately ignore years of research and the collective opinion of many people with far more knowledge in this field. Opinions and experienced expressed on ATOT forums.
This is your idiotic battle with empirical reality. Not mine.
So much fail in such little time.
This is taking the topic off track, I'd love to respond to your posts but the point of this thread is about refrigerant, not about how you'll trust some CHP's conjecture about why some woman flipped her SUV on the highway. I also love how everyone cites the fact that the tires will wear unevenly but when I tell them how my tires used to wear unevenly now all of a sudden wear evenly, they just go back to their point about listening to the manufacturer regardless.
Dear Fleabag
During this thread I have answered your question.
Cease and desist.
Sincerely
Sea Moose
Wait why is nobody concerned that he says that he got a job as a tire expert at the corner garage? I mean I know he's probably making shit up but he just might be fucking with ppl's cars. I'd be worried if I lived on the same continent.
Wait why is nobody concerned that he says that he got a job as a tire expert at the corner garage? I mean I know he's probably making shit up but he just might be fucking with ppl's cars. I'd be worried if I lived on the same continent.
Dear Fleabag
the simple is : why bother.
why fuck up a system that has been designed by engineers. Engineers that can operate child safe pencil sharpeners. If you have a problem with your car ac take it to a qualified repairer.
Sincerely
Sea Moose
It has nothing to do with an A/C system that has a leak, but instead you purposefully release some of the refrigerant in the A/C unit to that lower level. Apparently I'm getting mixed answers as to why a unit would Ice up or get colder. I'm not going to argue with anyone unless someone starts spouting off about how this cannot happen because it can and does happen. This thread was mostly inspired by this:
http://www.duracool.com/Duracool/faqs.html
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[/LIST]
Which confused me.
Wait why is nobody concerned that he says that he got a job as a tire expert at the corner garage? I mean I know he's probably making shit up but he just might be fucking with ppl's cars. I'd be worried if I lived on the same continent.
So much fail in such little time.
This is taking the topic off track, I'd love to respond to your posts but the point of this thread is about refrigerant, not about how you'll trust some CHP's conjecture about why some woman flipped her SUV on the highway. I also love how everyone cites the fact that the tires will wear unevenly but when I tell them how my tires used to wear unevenly now all of a sudden wear evenly, they just go back to their point about listening to the manufacturer regardless.
And my last comment as well. You bring it home so well Failbag
<snip> I also love how everyone cites the fact that the tires will wear unevenly but when I tell them how my tires used to wear unevenly now all of a sudden wear evenly
One last time. A SAMPLE SIZE OF (N=1) and a SINGLE observation hardly constitutes significant enough proof to overturn a conclusion / recommendation based on large scale analysis conducted with multiple groups, over time, and in a variety of conditions.
Your ability to fail continues unabated.
Your miracle tires may just fall in the margin of error. Congratulations. That doesn't make you accurate or right. I's ask what part of this dont you understand but clearly the answer is EVERYTHING.
What is next? You smoke, you dont have cancer therefore there is no link?
This discussion is so typical for you. You never fail to demonstrate that your methodology is usually flawed. Your 'proof' is 99% of the time arm chair knee jerk or anecdotal at best. Your analytical and argumentative skills are immature. And your self reflective skills are apparently nonexistent. And when pressed for details or numbers or presented with your own words - you flee.
Failbag to Failtard to Fleetard to FleaTroll. The evolution of any fleabag thread.
Until next time. Stay off the grass and away from small children.