When I grew up, AC was very uncommon, and I remember sweltering through many 100+ deg days sweating my rear off in my dad’s car. When I finally bought my first car with AC, I said to myself I’d never buy another daily driver without it, and I never have. I LOVE AC. Dry heat my hind end. Your oven has dry heat. Set it at 100 deg, and stick your head in there for an hour and tell me how you like it.
People who refuse to use their AC think it’ll be fine, but along with the refridgerant, there’s also lubricant for the compressor bearings and seals. Don’t use it, the seals will dry up and fail.
Remove the system from a car and sell the pieces off? Really? Seriously? Are you guys really that cheap? The modern AC is so integrated into the car’s climate control system, the rest of the system probably wouldn’t work because the computer will sit there wondering where the heck the AC components are.
About 20 years ago, my sister-in-law’s husband, a notorious cheapskate, bought a car without AC. Dealer tried to talk him out of it, but he stuck to his guns. Then, about 6 years later, he decided to sell the car. The prospective buyers would show up and upon finding out there was no AC, all immediately said “sorry, not interested” and walked away. He eventually did sell it for quite a bit less than he wanted simply because no one was interested in a car without it. And that was in Minnesota!! He later admitted to me it was a mistake he would never repeat.
No you don’t need to maintain it and I agree with George SanJose who suggests removing and selling the compressor and evaporator for a few extra bucks. These could be sold on EBay or Craigslist as suggestions. There is scant reason for using the air conditioner for defrosting in the winter except as an excuse by designers to run the compressor to help preserve the rotary shaft seal. If you will keep the car to scrapyard value and live as you say where air conditioning is infrequently needed as I do, have at it! My wife would not agree to do it but I would be happy to save new car money for an air conditioner deletion option.
Removing it would be nuts, in my opinion.
Next to no benefit.
Huge cost - try and sell a non-ac car that’s been butchered.
Everybody wanted air conditioning because the manufacturers removed flow through ventilation and vent windows. The last car I owned with actual ventilation was an 81 Horizon and it was quite comfortable without a/c. I then got an 87 Reliant w/o a/c and it was unbearable in the summer because it had no cowl vents.
Actually, using the air conditioner in the system for windshield defrosting has real benefits. It isn’t just an excuse by the designers to keep the seals healthy.
Fog develops on the glass when warmer moisture-laden air comes up against the colder glass and the barrier layer temperature drops, reducing the amount of moisture the air can carry, and the moisture gets deposited on the glass as condensation. Remember that cooler air has less moisture carrying capability than warmer air; hence “relative humidity”. “Relative humidity” is a “rating” of the humidity being carried by air relative to its capacity. 60% RH in 40F air is a lot less moisture than 60% RH in 80F air.
Removing moisture from the air coming through the defroster vents very much improves the function of the defroster by moving warmer air with low RH against the glass, which will tend to absorb the fog on the glass, removing the fog and/or frost. Moving moist warm air against the glass can actually increase the fog. Like fogging a mirror by breathing on it. Hence, the AC is pu in series in the system to remove the moisture from the defroster air. Keeping the seals healthy is only a secondary benefit.
As regards removing the components and trying to sell them for parts, I think it’s foolhearty. I cannot imagine anybody paying any worthwhile amount for used parts of unknown history. And you’ll never get anywhere near the price necessary to offset the amount it’ll devalue your car.
The engine would, however, not care as long as you redid the belt(s) properly to compensate for he missing compressor. The choice is yours.
Some cars after the 87 Reliant had it still. My early 90’s Corolla has excellent fresh air ventilation.
Back in the late 1960s, my dad and my brother both owned 1963 Buick LeSabres. My dad’s Buick had almost all the options. It also had a Mitchell Mark IV add-on air conditioner. These were heavy units with a box under the dash that contained the evaporator coil and the blower. The compressor was, of course, under the hood driven by a belt. I am sure that the facory air was,more efficient, although the Mark IV cooled.the car well, My brother’s 1963 LeSabre had no power steering or brakes and even bad a 3 on the column manual transmission which was quite rare on a Buick. On a 375 mile trip where my dad and mother followed my brother and his wife with the cars similarly loaded, my dad’s Buick with the air conditioning on averaged 19.7 mpg. My brother with his strippo Buick averaged 19.2. Now I am sure my brother had the windows open which probably added to the drag. However, the Dynaflow automatic transmission on my dad’s Buick wasn’t the most efficient automatic. Both Buicks were well maintained and in good tune. I know which vehicle I would prefer for the trip. Now I am certain today’s factory air conditioning is much more efficient than the old Mark IV add-on unit. I really don’t think removing the air conditioning will have a noticeable effect on the.gas,mileage and not using the air on the highway will reduce the mileage if the windows are opened.
You still have to turn on the A/C from time time. I tried not using it and when I turned it on, it emitted a foul smell.
