User Name:   
Password:   



Thread Number: 26718
Best Washing Machine for Lint Removal
[Down to Last]

automaticwasher.org's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 410363   1/28/2010 at 19:13 (1,676 days old) by rdmatos (Tracy, California)        

Hi all. I am curious if any one here knows what brand/model washer is best at lint removal. I have 3 dogs and getting their hair off my laundry is a nightmare. Does anyone know if they still make machines with manual lint traps? I have searched with no luck. Any feed back would be great! :-)




Post# 410412 , Reply# 1   1/28/2010 at 21:20 (1,676 days old) by toggleswitch2 ()        

I'm just gonna say this once.

General Electric Filter-flo.



:-)


Post# 410419 , Reply# 2   1/28/2010 at 21:38 (1,676 days old) by appnut (TX)        

appnut's profile picture
Robert, the last of the GE Filter-flos wer made in 1994. Keep an eye out on CraisList and ask us to verify something you find.

Post# 410463 , Reply# 3   1/28/2010 at 23:58 (1,676 days old) by scrubflex (bronx, new york)        

Keep an eye also for a 1972-1974 GE Filter-Flo Versatronic PROGRAMMED FABRIC SELECTION washer that has the timed bleach and fabric softener dispensers. I want this washer.

Post# 410508 , Reply# 4   1/29/2010 at 03:16 (1,676 days old) by volvoguy87 (Cincinnati, OH)        
GE Filter Flo.

volvoguy87's profile picture
The best lint removal, Bar None!
An old Maytag with the turquoise agitator is nothing to sneeze at, but a GE Filter Flow will out perform ANYTHING on the market today or in the past in terms of good lint removal, regardless of efficiency, or top or front loading.

A GE Filter Flo (GE FF) works by using the pump to pump the wash water through a flume all through the wash and rinse cycles. The flume dumps the water into a huge filter pan on top of the agitator. You must remove the ball of lint from the filter at the end of the wash cycle.

GE FF, it was good then, it's better now,
Dave


Post# 410514 , Reply# 5   1/29/2010 at 05:30 (1,676 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA)        
Modern Washers

mrb627's profile picture
Why does it seem that for modern washer manufacturers that lint removal is of little concern? Almost a non-issue in the washing machine. And the lint screen in he dryers have gotten smaller. Seems that the older machines used to have ultra large lint screens (like the Whirlpool top pill out that was 3 feet long). Now it is a little square inside the front door.

What are they thinking?

Malcolm


Post# 410525 , Reply# 6   1/29/2010 at 06:32 (1,676 days old) by toggleswitch2 ()        

~Seems that the older machines used to have ultra large lint screens (like the Whirlpool top pull-out that was 3 feet long).


Some filters of the 29" wide engeeered Whirlppol/Kenmore/Roper family were a yard/meter long in that the exhaust outlet was near the floor. [Their airflow was in and out from the rear bulkhead]. The exhaust outlets were near the top of the machine with other models [i.e. much older versions] of those brands and models.


Their 27" engineered dryers hae a different air-flow pattern (back to front) putting the lint filter near the main loading door.


Post# 410576 , Reply# 7   1/29/2010 at 11:03 (1,676 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii)        

laundromat's profile picture
Agitator washers cause lint. The difference between the tumble type and agitator type washers is irremarkable.I had so many customers that I converted from top to front loaders come back to ask why there was no lint collecting in their new dryer or current one that was originaly drying clothes out of their top loaders.I explained to them that theagitator washer's vigorous agitation with the sharp blades as aposed to the smooth,perforated arms in the front loaders create ware on the fabric and cause the fibers to tare or break which causes lint.

Front loaders will more thoroughly remove sediment like dog,cat,human and dust hair easily without taring the fabrics.The clothes rubbing against each other along with gravity and hundreds of perforations in the wash cylinders are how it works.no need for recirculating water or filter pans.I do check my "button trap"once a month but never much lint there. Just a few coins and other debres that had acumulated.The worst case was when I was with my room mate of 12 years,Orma,in florida and a metal part of one of her bras had come apart getting stuck in between the inner and outer tubs.removing the arm in my kitchenAid Ensemble unit helped to get parts of it broken down enough for it to reach the button trap and remove all the residue left.Whirlpool needs to make their button trap accessable to the owner/user instead of having it hidden behind the front service panel.Frigidaire too.


Post# 410579 , Reply# 8   1/29/2010 at 11:27 (1,676 days old) by mixfinder (Stuart Mountains)        
LIne 'em Up

mixfinder's profile picture
Less housewives used a dryer for everything in the 50's and 60's so more effective lint removal was indicated in line dried clothing. When the American populace went to machine dried clothing the dryer removed a large portion of the lint from the wash and so mega filtering became a lesser priority to the buyer.

Post# 410594 , Reply# 9   1/29/2010 at 13:02 (1,676 days old) by volvoguy87 (Cincinnati, OH)        
Lint.

volvoguy87's profile picture
My mother has a GE Adora front loading washer and dryer. A normal cycle on the Adora washer is about an hour and a half and it could not remove cat hair! I put my laundry in it with the cat hair and it looked like it hadn't been washed at all once it had been dried. I understand that front loaders are supposed to be easier on the clothes and wash better, but I have yet to experience it in any front loader I have used.

I'll stick with my Filter Flo for the linty stuff,
Dave


Post# 410600 , Reply# 10   1/29/2010 at 13:51 (1,676 days old) by toggleswitch2 ()        

Maybe the gentler wash-action in a tumble washer
(front-loader) is gentler, but a super fast 1,000+ RPM spin CAN'T be good on fibers.......





Post# 410607 , Reply# 11   1/29/2010 at 14:27 (1,676 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)        
There is a difference...

ronhic's profile picture
...between 'lint' which is created during the washing process and animal hair/fur.

Front loaders, generally speaking, produce much less actual lint during washing which is why they don't have lint filters. As an example, I have just dried (ok, last night) a full load of mixed items in the dryer and got less than a tightly 'scrunched up tissues' worth of lint off the screen....

Front loaders, however, are not good at removing pet hair....that generally needs water to 'float' them off and a decent filter, such as a GE filter-flo, to catch them.

....which is part of the reason we have 'non-drop' dogs...

Go the Soft Coated Wheaten terriers!


Post# 410626 , Reply# 12   1/29/2010 at 16:20 (1,676 days old) by favorit ()        
are you sure med and high spin speeds are really wearing ?

Toggles,
you can't make a statement that applies to every fabric.

For sure 1000 rpm are bad on silk fabrics, but not on wool. Vintage Mieles spin wool @ 900 rpm, modern ones @ 1200 rpm.
Actually wool can't bear any agitation while wet (felting and shinkage) but it can be spun at these medium speeds. Cotton and linen haven't any problems with 1600 rpm or even more.

Anyway even dry cleaning machines have high extract speeds to save money on perc distillation during the drying cycle. Usually drycleaners deal with those garments one wouldn't ever dare to handwash

In my household vintage sheets and towels last longer than kitchen/table clothes. Both have been spun @ 1100 (lately 1200) rpm in the last 25 years. The factor that makes difference is LCB ... my gran was addicted to it *LOL*

Carlo


Post# 410796 , Reply# 13   1/29/2010 at 23:36 (1,675 days old) by jons1077 (Portland, OR)        
Maytag or FilterFlo

jons1077's profile picture
Honestly, having both an older filter flo and Maytag, I've noticed a pretty big difference between the filtering abilities as well as two different substances being filtered out of the wash. Ronhic pointed out that "lint" is in fact comprised of small fibers of fabric mostly created by the washing action of the machine. Pet hair is totally different and some ways of filtering work better than others for this.

Many say the filter flo is best for removal of lint and pet hair. The difference I've noticed between the Maytag and Filter-Flo is there being generally more LINT found in the filter pan of the GE. The Maytag generally does not produce much lint. This would make some since considering the wash action seems to be more of a gentle nature compared to the GE on normal speed.

Our golden retriever has been shedding buckets of hair lately and the hair is on EVERYTHING!!! Particularly, hair is on the bedding. I can say that the GE catches a fair amount of hair, but hair generally seems to float in the wash water. Since the filter stream is pulled from the very bottom of the outer tub, a lot of the hair is being missed and can be seen floating along the upper rim of the inner tub.

The Maytag's filtering is completely different and more of a passive approach. On higher water levels the agitator post filtering system is VERY effective with hair removal. I literally have to clean the filter twice (once after the wash and again after rinsing) because it is completely full of dog hair. This most definitely has to be due to the filtering of the water from the center of the wash action, the agitator.

Having said all of this I have to say the Filter Flo is great with lint removal and some pet hair, but if it's really pet hair that is a concern the Maytag central agitator filter wins in my books.

Just my observation though...

Jon


Post# 410810 , Reply# 14   1/30/2010 at 03:03 (1,675 days old) by alr2903 (Tennessee)        

Ditto that Jons1077, the lint filter in the barrel type Tag filter, is a pet hair magnet. alr2903

Post# 410814 , Reply# 15   1/30/2010 at 03:31 (1,675 days old) by qsd-dan (Pleasanton Ca (Bay Area)        
Ditto that Jons1077, the lint filter in the barrel type Tag

qsd-dan's profile picture
X2

During the beginning of summer when all 4 animals are massively shedding, the couch covers get covered hair and the 712 filters that stuff out like nobody's business. I actually have to stand over the machine and pull the filter out every 3 minutes to peel off the pet hair that wraps around it. This is one of the major reasons I'll NEVER own a front loader!


Post# 410817 , Reply# 16   1/30/2010 at 03:53 (1,675 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)        
Have any...

ronhic's profile picture
...of you tried vacuuming the hair off before washing?

My sister uses a 'turbo' brush on her couch covers and gets the vast majority off before it goes in the machine....


Post# 410841 , Reply# 17   1/30/2010 at 07:03 (1,675 days old) by toggleswitch2 ()        

Toggles,
you can't make a statement that applies to every fabric.


Carlos:
Sure I can. (can means "to be able to").
It just may not be accurate :-)


saluti!


Post# 410907 , Reply# 18   1/30/2010 at 12:54 (1,675 days old) by joelippard (Hickory, NC)        
Here's my opinion on the subject

joelippard's profile picture
Back in the late 80's early 90's Mom had a Filter Flo, we had 2 cats in the house and it really caught alot of lint in the pan, you could see the cat hair in it.

I have a Black Labrador Retriever who sleeps with me. I vacuum the sheets off every day, but on wash day I just pitch them in the Frigidaire. The Solid Tub Rollermatic is great at floating that stuff off the top of the water, when the sheets come from the dryer the filter has between 5 and 10 hairs on it. It's not quite as good in the 1-18 but the filter in it does catch a great deal. I can't imagine trying to get rid of hair without alot of water and a filter to aid the process.


Post# 410911 , Reply# 19   1/30/2010 at 13:08 (1,675 days old) by combo52 (Beltsville,Md)        
Best lint & pet hair removing washers

combo52's profile picture
Belt drive WP&KM washers with self cleaning back wash filters.I would often demonstrate the effectiveness of this type of filter by holding a dryers lint filter under the drain hose as it went into drain you would instantly see 10 times the lint that a FF or MT would catch in thier entire cycle. WP washers have much larger wholes in there tubs than MT and many more wholes than the tubs of GE washers. The FF lint filter sifts most of the lint back through the filter because the pan is moving with the agitator. You can put some dryer lint in the FF pan @ the start of the cycle and you will end up with less lint by the end of the load. The MT filters were so ineffective that about one half of owners never even bothered to clean them @ all. How many of us found old MTs where the filer was stuck in the agitater? owners soon stopped cleaning after seeing almost no lint on them load after load. I sold and serviced MT through the1970s.

Post# 411802 , Reply# 20   2/1/2010 at 18:09 (1,672 days old) by surgilator_68 (Maryland)        
A filter flo?

surgilator_68's profile picture
Why? Just because it has a great big pan and you get balls of lint? Ever look at that lint? It's all the large stuff that can't make it thru the holes. Put a stocking on the end of the hose or the lint filter from the dryer under the drain hose and see how much is actually sifted thru that filter returning to the water in the washer. It's like sifting flour with a strainer. Shake the strainer enough and you are left with the clumps.

Post# 411839 , Reply# 21   2/1/2010 at 20:02 (1,672 days old) by scrubflex (bronx, new york)        

Have you actually done this? If so, what did you do?

Post# 411892 , Reply# 22   2/2/2010 at 02:49 (1,672 days old) by lordkenmore (WA)        

lordkenmore's profile picture
From from modern, but I really liked the one belt drive Kenmore user-cleaned filter I used. I moved into a place that had a machine like this. My around the house clothes were covered with enough fur to knit a couple of dogs. (My roommate at my previous residence had several dogs and 3 cats!) One trip through the washer, and that fur was GONE. I was really amazed...I figured the washer would work better than what I'd used before (WCI Frigidaire), but it did much, much better.

That design probably didn't catch everything, but my clothes (which are mostly air dried) had almost no visible lint or fur. Which is more than good enough for me.





Forum Index:       Other Forums:                      



Comes to the Rescue!

The Discuss-o-Mat has stopped, buzzer is sounding!!!
If you would like to reply to this thread please log-in...

Discuss-O-MAT Log-In

User Name:   Password:      

New Members
Click Here To Sign Up.



                     


automaticwasher.org home
Discuss-o-Mat Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Fun Vintage Washer Ephemera
See It Wash!
Video Downloads
Audio Downloads
Picture of the Day
Patent of the Day
Photos of our Collections
The Old Aberdeen Farm
Vintage Service Manuals
Vintage washer/dryer/dishwasher to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy