GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Friendly format provided to inquire about automotive a/c systems.
Archived Forum

Moderators: bohica2xo, Tim, Dougflas, HECAT

User avatar
Cusser
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2016 6:29 am

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby Cusser » Sat Aug 26, 2017 7:58 am

71403 wrote: Unless you dealt with R4's when they were common in daily drivers 15+ years ago you don't appreciate what a headache they were.


My only experience with R4 compressors was on my own '88 and '94 Suburbans, which were orifice tube in front and expansion valve in the rear. The 1988 was R-12, the 1994 factory R134a.

Yes, I had to replace the AC compressors in both, and I remember reading that these same R4 compressors lived a lot longer in similar GM trucks that were front-only AC, and the issues were related to the Suburban's dual AC. Even so, the R4 compressors lasted a several years at least, in Arizona and with daily use. So could work fine for poster's application.
User avatar
bohica2xo
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 4:12 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby bohica2xo » Sat Aug 26, 2017 10:08 am

waid1017 wrote:
bohica2xo wrote:There are probably only a half million Ford small blocks in junkyards with factory installed FS6 compressors with serpentine drives.

.


I have complete serpentine system from the Explorer and and Mustang (including the compressor) but does not fit the Falcon Engine Bay. The Falcon Engine Bay is actaully tigher than 1965 Mustang. Compressor hits the drivers side sock tower.

Waid


Go ahead & tell me how this one runs in to the shock tower - the dam valve cover is wider.

Image

You seem very fixated on the R4.

FYI they used that mount as late as 1993, and I believe as early as 1980.
waid1017
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:48 am

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby waid1017 » Sat Aug 26, 2017 4:07 pm

My car is not a Foxbody Mustang. It's 1964 Falcon. Engine bay's are not the same. See the picture below. I have about 1/4" clearance between nose of short Explorer Water Pump and Electric Radiator Fan. Foxbody Water Pump is even longer and there is no room and therefore Foxbody Serpentine system does not work. See the picture of the Explorer AC compressor and bracket. The AC hoses are right at the shock tower.

Am I fixated on the R4? Not really. That's why I have 5 different AC Compressors. I have R4, Explorer, Sanden, late model Chevy Sonic and Spark. The R4 does seems to fit in my case. The R4 Scroll from Global Parts Distributors, L.L.C. (GPD) is appealing to me since they have legitimate website and is available though RockAuto. They are based out of Macon, GA. Not sure sure about the eBay version.

Waid
Attachments
20170826_183223.jpg
20170826_183223.jpg (126.52 KiB) Viewed 252 times
20170826_183105.jpg
20170826_183105.jpg (84.39 KiB) Viewed 252 times
20170518_204342 (1).jpg
20170518_204342 (1).jpg (145.82 KiB) Viewed 252 times
71403
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 12:46 pm

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby 71403 » Sat Aug 26, 2017 6:47 pm

I'll gamble a V5 with top mount hose block - see '97 Caddy Catera or '05 Buick Century - or a Sanden 7176 would work in place of the Explorer compressor.

Ask GPD for a performance chart for their R4 scroll. Maybe you'll get a different answer than I did.
User avatar
bohica2xo
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed May 11, 2016 4:12 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby bohica2xo » Sat Aug 26, 2017 6:53 pm

waid1017 wrote:My car is not a Foxbody Mustang.

Waid


Neither is the car in the picture - it is a 1965 Mustang -the same basic car as the Falcon.
waid1017
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:48 am

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby waid1017 » Sun Aug 27, 2017 6:57 am

While they share lots of the stuff, the Falcon's Engine Bay is smaller than Mustangs. That's why drags link are not interchangeable because Mustangs engine bay is wider but the control arms are the same. The early 1962 Falcons are even tighter. The later Mustang's had even more room blue picture with AC compressor sitting on top. I would love to do that but can't. I might try to mount the alternator up high on drivers side and see if I can get any compressor to fit low on passenger side.

I forgot to mention that I am using a T5 transmission out of a SN95 (1994-1995) Mustang which is about 1" longer input shaft. This forced me to push my engine forward maximum as possible to clear the larger bell housing.

Here is my car. I am doing a complete restoration.

Waid
Attachments
wiring18.jpg
wiring18.jpg (78.37 KiB) Viewed 232 times
20170430_155739.jpg
20170430_155739.jpg (128.76 KiB) Viewed 234 times
20170430_155746.jpg
20170430_155746.jpg (118.58 KiB) Viewed 234 times
waid1017
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:48 am

Re: GM R4 Compressor - New Scroll Design. Better than Piston Type ?

Postby waid1017 » Tue Aug 29, 2017 10:05 am

.
.
Ok. Plan B. I am not set on R4 !!!

I relocated the Alternator to Drivers side and installed Sanden (for mock-up) way low on Passenger side. This might work.

Couple of equations.

1. Which one should I get. V5 or V7 compressor ?

2. There are so many versions of V5 V7, which one should I get? I was thinking S10 ?

3. Will it work with Under Dash AC Evaporator which has the TVX ?


Thank you so much

Waid
Attachments
20170829_125508.jpg
20170829_125508.jpg (218.41 KiB) Viewed 195 times

Return to “Automotive Air Conditioning Forum”