Posted by Street Rodder on September 28, 2001 at 07:59:41: via: or 207.207.20.212
In Reply to: Re: My take on that article. posted by L.D. on September 27, 2001 at 22:14:13:
While there are certainly a lot of discrepancies in the article as many have stated in replies above, it appears to me that each side (pro-HC and anti-HC) tend to be very polarized for their side, this is a very explosive (pun intended) issue. The original question posed by JG was for factual evidence, he is looking for objective information. It appears that most of the fears of HC fires are unfounded, as it seems no one can come up with objective evidence to demonstrate a HC fire problem. There is a lot of subjective opinion, but we all know about opinions. From what I can determine a properly functioning A/C system with HC refrigerant is just as safe as another with R-134a or whatever. It is very funny how people don't think anything about disposable lighters, but they are quite similar from a fire or explosion standpoint.
Another point to consider: some vehicle fires after accidents are actually the anti-freeze burning. Yes that is true, the anti-freeze is a glycol solution, which is an alcohol, alcohols burn. When the anti-freeze hits something like a hot exhaust manifold, the vapors can ignite and burn. Many fires are not leaking fuel, or even HC's, but can be the anti-freeze. I just feel that a lot of the irrational fear of HC can not be supported and there is a lot of need for objective reasoning on this issue.