Slow AC evaporator leak '96 LHS

'96 Chrysler LHS - California rules.

Problem: very slow AC refrigerant leak; works satisfactorily for 6-8
weeks before needing recharge. Testing under the hood is negative to
electronic sniffer and blacklight visual inspection for dye leakage.
Electronic sniffer appears to be positive inside the interior vents,
suspect evaporator section or its connectivity

Repair consideration: disassembling the dash to access the evaporator
section will be labor expensive and 'awkward'

Workaround: my mechanic is 'compatible' with my doing some of my own
recharging and he is willing to (also/alternatively) recharge with his
shop's recovery system *BUT* it is his belief that R-134a recharges
which contain leakseal are bad for his recovery system, and he doesn't
want me to use those types when I recharge.

Conflict: I would like to continue to use both my own DIY recharging as
well as periodically having him fill it up properly; but I would also
like to see if the leakseal would help my situation.

Questions: Is it a myth or not that leakseal fouls up recovery systems?
Can anyone provide me with any 'documentation' or a link of a discussion
on this subject so that I can present my arguments to him for 'allowing'
me to use leakseal? The local auto parts store sez that they've never
heard of leakseal fouling/damaging recovery systems. Is there a
difference in this context in the danger of the older leak seals for
Freon systems vs for newer 134a leak seal additives?


--
Mike Easter

Mike Easter wrote:
> '96 Chrysler LHS - California rules.
>
> Problem: very slow AC refrigerant leak; works satisfactorily for 6-8
> weeks before needing recharge. Testing under the hood is negative to
> electronic sniffer and blacklight visual inspection for dye leakage.
> Electronic sniffer appears to be positive inside the interior vents,
> suspect evaporator section or its connectivity
>
> Repair consideration: disassembling the dash to access the evaporator
> section will be labor expensive and 'awkward'
>
> Workaround: my mechanic is 'compatible' with my doing some of my own
> recharging and he is willing to (also/alternatively) recharge with his
> shop's recovery system *BUT* it is his belief that R-134a recharges
> which contain leakseal are bad for his recovery system, and he doesn't
> want me to use those types when I recharge.
>
> Conflict: I would like to continue to use both my own DIY recharging as
> well as periodically having him fill it up properly; but I would also
> like to see if the leakseal would help my situation.
>
> Questions: Is it a myth or not that leakseal fouls up recovery systems?
> Can anyone provide me with any 'documentation' or a link of a discussion
> on this subject so that I can present my arguments to him for 'allowing'
> me to use leakseal? The local auto parts store sez that they've never
> heard of leakseal fouling/damaging recovery systems. Is there a
> difference in this context in the danger of the older leak seals for
> Freon systems vs for newer 134a leak seal additives?

I know I'm not answering the question you asked, but I don't know if
I've heard of a single case of sealer actually working for any length of
time.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Bill Putney wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:

>> Questions: Is it a myth or not that leakseal fouls up recovery
>> systems?

> I know I'm not answering the question you asked, but I don't know if
> I've heard of a single case of sealer actually working for any length
of
> time.

I am also interested in that experience information.

If you ask the stores that sell the stuff whether or not anyone ever
reports it working, naturally they say Yes. HoweverAnd, those stores
also sell refrigerant without leak seal.

And also naturally the shops that fix the systems which DIY attempts
with leak seal which didn't work (permanently) are going to see 100%
eventual failures. I would think no one would come in to the car AC
repair shop to report a system which isn't leaking any more.

I haven't reviewed the chronology properly, but I think this leak's time
between recharge is getting smaller/less in terms of weeks.


--
Mike Easter

Mike Easter wrote:
> Bill Putney wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>
>>> Questions: Is it a myth or not that leakseal fouls up recovery
>>> systems?
>
>> I know I'm not answering the question you asked, but I don't know if
>> I've heard of a single case of sealer actually working for any length
> of
>> time.
>
> I am also interested in that experience information.
>
> If you ask the stores that sell the stuff whether or not anyone ever
> reports it working, naturally they say Yes. HoweverAnd, those stores
> also sell refrigerant without leak seal.
>
> And also naturally the shops that fix the systems which DIY attempts
> with leak seal which didn't work (permanently) are going to see 100%
> eventual failures. I would think no one would come in to the car AC
> repair shop to report a system which isn't leaking any more.
>
> I haven't reviewed the chronology properly, but I think this leak's time
> between recharge is getting smaller/less in terms of weeks.

If that's the case, chances are a bad evaporator - it almost always is
on the 2nd gen LH's, and they use the same evap. part as 1st gens.

Also someone posted in the past that a trick for detecting a bad evap.
in a system that has the dye already in it is to check the end of the
condensate tube with a black light - if evap. leaks, the dye will get on
the outside of the evap. and get picked up by the condensate - hence
glowing inside of condensate tube. Clever, eh?

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Bill Putney wrote:

> Also someone posted in the past that a trick for detecting a bad evap.
> in a system that has the dye already in it is to check the end of the
> condensate tube with a black light - if evap. leaks, the dye will get
on
> the outside of the evap. and get picked up by the condensate - hence
> glowing inside of condensate tube. Clever, eh?

I'm (pretty) sure we/he didn't look there with his light. Good idea.

The next time I'm in there to chat with him, we can take a peek.

I don't know my generations, so I don't understand this very well:

> If that's the case, chances are a bad evaporator - it almost always is
> on the 2nd gen LH's, and they use the same evap. part as 1st gens.

Does this mean that the 96 is a 2nd generation, but the evaporator is
'no better' than the earlier generation or what?


--
Mike Easter

Mike Easter wrote:
> Bill Putney wrote:
>
>> Also someone posted in the past that a trick for detecting a bad evap.
>> in a system that has the dye already in it is to check the end of the
>> condensate tube with a black light - if evap. leaks, the dye will get
> on
>> the outside of the evap. and get picked up by the condensate - hence
>> glowing inside of condensate tube. Clever, eh?
>
> I'm (pretty) sure we/he didn't look there with his light. Good idea.
>
> The next time I'm in there to chat with him, we can take a peek.
>
> I don't know my generations, so I don't understand this very well:
>
>> If that's the case, chances are a bad evaporator - it almost always is
>> on the 2nd gen LH's, and they use the same evap. part as 1st gens.
>
> Does this mean that the 96 is a 2nd generation, but the evaporator is
> 'no better' than the earlier generation or what?

Yours is 1st gen. 1st gen was '93-'97. '98-'04 was 2nd gen. (no 300M
in 1st gen, and not until '99 MY). 2nd gen was new body style and
engines and many re-designed mechanical parts (same tranny).

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Bill Putney wrote:

>>> If that's the case, chances are a bad evaporator - it almost always
is
>>> on the 2nd gen LH's, and they use the same evap. part as 1st gens.

> Yours is 1st gen. 1st gen was '93-'97. '98-'04 was 2nd gen. (no 300M
> in 1st gen, and not until '99 MY). 2nd gen was new body style and
> engines and many re-designed mechanical parts (same tranny).

Oh, I get it now. You are accustomed to diagnosing 2nd gen AC problems
and they are frequently evaporator -- which is the same evaporator part
as the previous gen/models.

Thanks.



--
Mike Easter

In article >,
"Mike Easter" > wrote:

> '96 Chrysler LHS - California rules.
>
> Problem: very slow AC refrigerant leak; works satisfactorily for 6-8
> weeks before needing recharge. Testing under the hood is negative to
> electronic sniffer and blacklight visual inspection for dye leakage.
> Electronic sniffer appears to be positive inside the interior vents,
> suspect evaporator section or its connectivity
>
> Repair consideration: disassembling the dash to access the evaporator
> section will be labor expensive and 'awkward'
>
> Workaround: my mechanic is 'compatible' with my doing some of my own
> recharging and he is willing to (also/alternatively) recharge with his
> shop's recovery system *BUT* it is his belief that R-134a recharges
> which contain leakseal are bad for his recovery system, and he doesn't
> want me to use those types when I recharge.

He's correct. Also, the leak seal products are bad for your AC system.
Two types of sealer; the ones that harden plug the passages in the
evaporator, condenser, orifice tube, accumulator, compressor, muffler.
The ones that swell seals are ineffective on an evaporator or other
hardware component and they also damage the system by softening the
inside of the hoses (they eventually turn to goo) allowing the hose
material to contaminate the entire system.

AC sealer products are for those who don't know any better.
Once installed, you can pretty much consider the entire system 'totaled.'

> Conflict: I would like to continue to use both my own DIY recharging as
> well as periodically having him fill it up properly;

This makes no sense. What is the advantage to alternating back and
forth?

> but I would also
> like to see if the leakseal would help my situation.

Not only will it not help, it will increase the cost of a proper repair
drastically.

>
> Questions: Is it a myth or not that leakseal fouls up recovery systems?

No myth.
In addition to it fouling recovery equipment (which the customer should
be on the hook for) if I dug around thru my bookmarks I could find links
to a Ford pick up truck that had sealer installed, the explosion took
out the compressor, the condenser, the radiator and one of the valve
covers on the engine. The sealer has installed by a HVAC "pro."

> Can anyone provide me with any 'documentation' or a link of a discussion
> on this subject so that I can present my arguments to him for 'allowing'
> me to use leakseal?

There is no shortage of stories out there that claim "it worked great."
More important is what they're not telling, i.e., that they system
eventually failed catastrophically, or that subsequent repairs involved
replacing every component in the system, or that they scrapped the car
shortly after.

> The local auto parts store sez that they've never
> heard of leakseal fouling/damaging recovery systems.

And how would they know? They're not in the repair business, they're
not in the equipment business, they're not in the AC business. They are
in the ring up your purchase business.
By and large, parts stores are bad places to go to for advise.

> Is there a
> difference in this context in the danger of the older leak seals for
> Freon systems vs for newer 134a leak seal additives?

None what so ever.

I can tell you from 40 years of experience, 30 of them doing AC repairs
that short cuts never work and more often than not, back fire and wind
up costing much more than a proper repair.

aarcuda69062 wrote:
> "Mike Easter"

>> Conflict: I would like to continue to use both my own DIY recharging
>> as well as periodically having him fill it up properly;
>
> This makes no sense. What is the advantage to alternating back and
> forth?

My mechanic is very reasonable in his charges for me. Now that he has
completed all of his troubleshooting to his satisfaction, he is
comfortable with just evacuating and charging the system and charging me
'modestly' for the r134a. used, and he buys it a lot cheaper per pound
in his tank than little cans at the retail consumer auto parts store.

My personal experience with recharging with a kit - so far - is
currently zero, but it seems easy enough, considering that I know when I
start that -1- the system is empty and -2- it doesn't take very much
refrigerant for the AC to work satisfactorily for me.

The evidence to me for #2 above is that the AC works adequately right up
until the time that it is virtually completely empty.

If I were going to charge it, I might just put in a can or less than a
pound. Maybe 2 cans, a bit over a pound and a half. If he were going
to charge it, he would fill it.

I don't know exactly from him how 'bad' the evaporator R&R labor costs
would be, but my reading of the description in the Chilcott manual
sounds pretty extensive to remove the dash.


--
Mike Easter

For what it's worth, a can (12 oz.) of R134 at Auto Zone cost $8.99.

A case of 12 (12 oz.) cans at Sams is $39.

If it goes 6-8 weeks on a addition of R134, get a case at Sams.