User Name:   
Password:   



Thread Number: 38459
Is it me or are top load washing machines really bad a washing?
[Down to Last]

automaticwasher.org's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 570331   1/21/2012 at 17:22 (1,036 days old) by spinspeed (Sydney Australia (originally London UK))        

spinspeed's profile picture
I love TL washers and have 6 of varying ages and makes. Besides my Fisher & Paykel intuitive and smart drive, the others just don't wash or rinse well. Stuff comes out with soap scum marks, lint and not that clean. My Zanussi IZ front load washer which is getting on for 15 years old produces perfect results every time, granted a hot cotton wash takes over 2 hours but the results are perfect. I make sure I don't over load the top loaders and avoid mixing fabric types but still, the results are most of the time not satisfactory. the worst offender is my Maytag Atlantis washer. Love the dryer though.

Just my thoughts and comments on this Sunday.

Simon





Post# 570337 , Reply# 1   1/21/2012 at 17:58 (1,036 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        
Still Saturday Here But..

launderess's profile picture
All automatic and even semi-automatic washing machines work on variations of hand washing. The two main choices are using brute mechanical force (beating/rubbing if one will) against a stationary and often hard object (wash board, rock, plank, beater, agitator, etc), or flexing the laundry through water in such a away that the chemicals contained therein will work to separate soil and stains from fabrics.
The former is much harder on textiles and usually requires less time, whilst the latter while often taking longer is more gentle.

Using top loading washing machines often requires one continue with steps used from days when washing was done via hand. Stains should be pre-treated, very badly soiled laundry pre-soaked or pre-washed, then followed by a main wash with one, two or more rinses depending upon how much and what sort of cleansers were used.

Top loading washers also share a history with "hand laundry" in that for the things to give good results one needs *lots* of water. Low water to textile ratios often mean laundry will be beaten to death by the agitator, but also removed soils and muck will not suspend properly and or drain away. Many older machines had "over flow" rinses which helped push soap scum and muck over the top of the tub to drain away. This was their take on the fact when was was done by hand in tubs or even with semi-automatic washers textiles were lifted *out* of the wash water to be wrung and placed into rinse baths leaving the muck filled water behind. Obviously in an automatic washer that isn't possible.

For very badly soiled and or dirty laundry one never uses the Whirlpool TL, but my Miele instead. On the rare occasions one does use either the WP or Hoover TT for that matter to tackle such things they are pre-soaked or pre-washed first in warm water, then laundered.


Post# 570340 , Reply# 2   1/21/2012 at 18:29 (1,036 days old) by mayfan69 (Brisbane Queensland Australia)        
TL's Vs FL's

mayfan69's profile picture
The debate for TL's Vs FL's could go on forever....and i'm not going to get into it, but i like my TL's but i do also see the real benefits of FL's as well

Simon...the Maytag Atlantis was never renowned for good lint removal, you only have to check out various forums in Australia about the many, many complaints people had about this machine.

I even once had a Maytag service engineer ask if i had issues with linting with the 'Performa' i once had (the Atlantis are just souped up Performa's with more solid state controls and the stainless bowl) and yeah...that machine was horrible with linting.

When i asked should i re-furb an older Maytag A512 or buy a new Atlantis, he replied....'refurb the 512'

Cheers
Leon



Post# 570345 , Reply# 3   1/21/2012 at 19:09 (1,035 days old) by DirectDriveDave (Long Island, NY)        

I'm thinking that maybe if you're getting soap scum marks, is it possible that too much is being added?


Also (this is just a guess) maybe the rinse water is too cold?


Post# 570346 , Reply# 4   1/21/2012 at 19:22 (1,035 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada)        
my advice

pierreandreply4's profile picture
well here is my advice here if you have a washer that has a true warm rinse i would advise that you do your wash and first spin in your atlantis washer but for the rinse portion of the cycle switch to your washer that has a true warm rinse for the rinse to remove all the suds from your clothes i know because my 1993 dd inglis superb 2 (whirlpool) washer when it was doing a poor rinse in cold water to remove suds i had to put it after it did its first rinse to the main wash cycle to have it preform a warm rinse witch remove the suds fully.

Post# 570348 , Reply# 5   1/21/2012 at 19:39 (1,035 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
Hi Spinspeed,

Apart from your F&P and Maytag washers, what other top loaders do you currently own?

You may not be aware that top loaders can be very sensitive, but they are not as stingy, temperamental and precious as front loaders. It could well be that your top loaders are picking up vibes from your Zanussi washer and from you. As a result your top loaders may have self-confidence issues that translate to poor performance. They could also be allergic to your clothes, your attitude or there could be detergent issues or all of the above. If it is all of the above I would revert to hand washing clothes as the only workable alternative.

Fisher and Paykel top loaders are known for their self-confidence and superior abilities, but many other brands are not so lucky and they need to be treated with special consideration to coax out the best in them. You probably are already aware that there is an ancient rivalry going on between top and front loaders. This has been demonstrated on this website on numerous occasions.

European front loaders are also known for their attitude and it isn't advisable to place them together with non-European vertical axis washers. That is why Australian appliance retailers are very careful to separate the two on the shop floor. They are never placed next to each other, ever.

You need to understand that there is a conflict in your laundry right now. If you don't do something immediately this conflict will escalate and the consequences are too terrible to contemplate.

Australian laundries are being infiltrated by European and Asian washing machines as I type this. These machines arrive here by boat (often illegally) and flood the market. Our own government is complicit and uses tax payers' money to surreptitiously fund this activity, which has already led to the demise of Australian made washing machines and the abandonment of the Australian gold standard for clean, well-rinsed and sweet-smelling laundry.

My advice to you is to go into your laundry right now, disconnect the front loader and send it to the tip. Ideally, if you live off the ground floor just throw it out the window - that's even more effective. You do this and I promise that, soon, you will notice superior laundry results from your other top loaders as their self-confidence improves and they will feel valued once more.


Post# 570360 , Reply# 6   1/21/2012 at 21:23 (1,035 days old) by norgeway (mocksville n c )        
Top Load!

The main thing about top loaders is! get a good one, if you are using anything new , especially those things which are so called energy efficient, then NO they dont wash well, if you use a old Maytag and fill it over 3/4 full NO it wont wash worth a darn, Get a Whirlpool or Kenmore belt drive, a Norge,or a Kelvinator...and of course if you have ever used a Philco or Frigidaire....well, that speaks for itself, I have not seen a front loader yet that will get the soap out of the clothes as well as a top loader...except for slant front Westinghouses and old Bendixes!

Post# 570378 , Reply# 7   1/21/2012 at 23:30 (1,035 days old) by spinspeed (Sydney Australia (originally London UK))        

spinspeed's profile picture
Thanks guys, yes, a very interesting debate, horizontal V vertical axis. I like both options and I like to have both front and top load machines, they both have their advantages and disadvantages. An interesting concept that there maybe some psychological issues going on in my laundry room and perhaps some unhealthy rivalry. Perhaps some unresolved issues from the past. I treat all my washers with love and respect but I have to be honest, the Zanussi does get a little more attention, mostly because it does such a fantastic job. Stuff comes out spotless, no lint or soap scum and at 1600 spin speed, very dry if not a tad creased.

So, I have a large Simpson TL, a Wastinghouse Laundromat and an old GE Filter Flo plus the F&P intuitive and smart drive, both great machines. The Westinghouse and the F&Ps are in the garage, once laundry room has been renovated I will have room to hook them all up.

The Maytag can do a warm rinse but never really thought of using warm water for rinsing. I sometimes set it to do a second deep rinse, not sure it makes much difference. It has a really short spray rinse too. The F&Ps both have superb spray rinses, you can even do away with the deep rinse and have an extended spray rinse, this is a water saving feature.

I also note that the Maytag is really noisy, always has been during agitate and spin.Just the motor running and the transmission. No banging or knocking just loud. My old GE Filter Flo is much quieter. I have a short video of my laundry room. We are currently renovating our house, the laundry will get done once the rest of the house has been fixed up.


CLICK HERE TO GO TO spinspeed's LINK


Post# 570390 , Reply# 8   1/22/2012 at 01:00 (1,035 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea))        

After half a lifetime with FLs and half with TLs, TLs wash fine but they don't rinse for squat. And the new ones that use a teacup of water, whaddya expect?

Post# 570402 , Reply# 9   1/22/2012 at 02:51 (1,035 days old) by qualin (Calgary, Alberta, Canada)        

qualin's profile picture
I converted from using a GE toploader to a Huebsch frontloader. We do notice that our clothing is cleaner. Some of my shirts had soap streaks on them. They went away once we started using a front loader.

The one thing that really bugged me about our GE is that if I washed jeans, they would just float up to the top of the tub and stay there, just moving back and forth, rather than being pulled down by the auger.

Worse yet, if I was washing things like sheets, I'd have to open up the lid and use a wooden dowel to push them back down into the water because they'd billow up. Not exactly a problem with front loaders.

I think that top loaders are good at washing certain kinds of loads, but front loaders are good at washing all kinds of loads.

The biggest thing though is this.. If you overload a top loader, you can actually damage the machine, especially if there isn't enough water. If you overload a front loader, the clothes just spin around.

In my humble opinion, I believe that front loaders do a better job. This is from my own experiences. Conventional Top loaders do an adequate job. Washplate-style top loaders suck and "Reduced water" centrepost agitator top loaders suck even harder.


Post# 570420 , Reply# 10   1/22/2012 at 05:11 (1,035 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
"If you overload a front loader"

If you really overload a front loader it just stops. There is no spinning or tumbling, because the machine is overloaded and spinning or tumbling will burn out the motor. The overload protector is triggered and that's it. I've had this happen to me once or twice and it can get very messy. If you overload a top loader you just take out a couple of items and the problem is fixed.

In the humble opinion of our Australian CR test lab there isn't much difference between the cleaning results of many top and front loaders. Most score in the 80 percentile range and all clean below 90% effectiveness. Though, most high efficiency front loaders, that are ambitiously designed to wash and rinse large loads in less than 50 liters of water, have been found lacking in the rinsing department. CR here consistently rates rinse performance for top loaders higher than those front loaders that are rated most water efficient.


Post# 570421 , Reply# 11   1/22/2012 at 05:30 (1,035 days old) by foraloysius (Groningen, the Netherlands)        

foraloysius's profile picture
"If you really overload a front loader it just stops. There is no spinning or tumbling, because the machine is overloaded and spinning or tumbling will burn out the motor."

Now that is nonsense! If a frontloader is overloaded the motor isn't overstressed. The motor doesn't have to work harder. As a matter of fact a frontloader loaded with a few heavy items but not overloaded has to work harder than a fully loaded machine.

I have stuffed my frontloaders (and H-axis toploaders) with towels quite a few times just to see how they work. These machines just finished their job.

My SIL had an H-axis toploader. I have seen her stuff that machine. Nor room for a clenched fist. I said something about it and she responded she always did that. That machine was (ab)used every day for 12 years. Then the timer got bad. No signs of too much stress on the motor.


Post# 570431 , Reply# 12   1/22/2012 at 06:37 (1,035 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
Hi Louis

So you are saying that front loaders do not need overload protection and that overloading is never an issue and, in fact, impossible. Are you really sure about that?



Post# 570432 , Reply# 13   1/22/2012 at 07:06 (1,035 days old) by foraloysius (Groningen, the Netherlands)        

foraloysius's profile picture
Well never say never, but any decent frontloader will have more problems with one heavy bathrobe than with a fully stuffed drum.

A video of an overloaded frontloader





Post# 570434 , Reply# 14   1/22/2012 at 07:39 (1,035 days old) by nrones (Belgrade, Serbia)        
On new FL's deffinatley no

nrones's profile picture
Rapunzel,
I just followed what label said. I have a 7kg machine, and once (only once) I tried to fill it up with 7kg. It all fit inside, but I almost broke my arm pressing laundry in it.

So, unless you are some kind of a SuperMan I think overloading is really impossible xD

It is amazing how stuff came cleaner then i thought they would (but it's not close to cleaness of normally loaded wash).


Post# 570436 , Reply# 15   1/22/2012 at 07:41 (1,035 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)        

Any machine with an electric motor needs overload protection, but most overloaded machines will struggle to comlete the cycle, however imperfect the results might be. Jeff was called to service a WP machine in a house rented to students. The machine was pulled away from the wall at an angle. Trying to figure out what had happened, he restarted the washer. What he discovered was that the machine was packed with three baskets of laundry and with each stroke of the agitator, the whole machine jerked from side to side on the floor because there was no other way to diffuse the motion of the agitator. He showed the property manager that, even wet, the load filled three laundry baskets. It was not even a coin-op machine, but some lazy kid who must not have had any experience in taking care of himself, who could not even do laundry. Once emptied, the machine still worked. The landlord said the service call would be charged to the oaf responsible.

I have seen front loaders packed so full that no tumble action can be observed, but they complete the cycle without going out on overload.

Contrary to Spinspeed's assertion, this is not a debate about TL vs FL machine performance. The poster posed a real question about soap and scum residue left on clothes and that is more a problem of what the machine has to cope with regarding water conditions, load size and additive dosing. If the machine is properly loaded, the water properly softened and at the right temperature and the proper amount of detergent is used, added properly and allowed to dissolve, any top loader I have used produced laundry that was very well washed and rinsed so that no residue was left on the clothes. It is true than a front loader, where the detergent is added through a dispenser and is injected into the outer drum, is less likely to leave bits of undissolved detergent on the laundry than an overloaded top loader where the detergent is dumped on the dry laundry before starting the machine, but in either one, if the water is too cold to dissolve the detergent or too hard or too cold to properly rinse away the detergent, you are going to have problems on many counts causing poor laundering.


Post# 570437 , Reply# 16   1/22/2012 at 08:05 (1,035 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada)        
when i used a top load washer from 1993 to 2004

pierreandreply4's profile picture
me i had a topload washer from 1993 to 2004 since i now have a whirlpool duet washer the way i proceded was i had the machine start filling then i added the detergent waited until i saw the suds then i added the clothes and i always found my self with clothes perfectly clean and with no soap residu on the clothes and the type of detergent i use is mostly liquid detergents not powder type detergent as most powder do not deslove well unless you have the machine agitate with out the clothes in the case of a top load to desolve the powder detergent.

Post# 570441 , Reply# 17   1/22/2012 at 08:27 (1,035 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        

I agree that it is difficult to overload a front loader with a regular mixed load of clothes and towels. The issue isn't so much about volume rather than weight and distribution. Weight in a top loader isn't as much of an issue as volume, so long as the load can roll over, distributes relatively evenly for the spin and doesn't interfere with the agitator. With either type of machine an overload protector will shut down the washer to prevent overheating and damage to the motor. The main difference being that in such situations top loaders are easier to manage.

Post# 570445 , Reply# 18   1/22/2012 at 08:43 (1,035 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        

I've overloaded a front loader once with a woolen blanket that got so heavy, it caused the drum to tilt down, strain the motor and eventually shut off the machine. Had this happened using a top loader I would simply have advance the timer to drain and spin. No door lock mechanism to override and no wet floor issues to deal with.

Mid-cycle mishaps, whether through operator error or mechanical/electronic failure, are less messy to resolve with top loaders.


Post# 570448 , Reply# 19   1/22/2012 at 08:54 (1,035 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)        

How would there be distribution problems in a front loading machine with no room for tumbling to allow an unblanced load? Actually the situation is almost impossible to achieve. I have seen commercial Milnors packed with dry laundry, but when the washer fills with water, the load volume decreases to allow room for tumbling. And what about if the packing, I mean overloading, restricts the movement of the agitator in a top loader? That would be the analogous situation to a front loader so packed that little or no tumbling takes place. That places strain on the clutch & transmission parts. At the very least, it could cause belts to slip and eventually break in machines where the belt serves as the clutch. The reason most washers go out on thermal overload is oversudsing and the resulting sudslock when it tries to spin, not overloading. Tripping the motor's thermal overload is not the same as overloading the machine, nor is it fatal. The thermal overload switch is designed to protect the motor. If tripping it killed the motor, what would be the point in having a thermal overload device to protect the motor?

Post# 570457 , Reply# 20   1/22/2012 at 10:09 (1,035 days old) by mrx (Inactive profile.)        

I've experienced both front loaders and US-type top loaders and I have generally found front loading machines tend to produce better results more reliably.

The problem I've noticed with US front loading machines is that they are actually too big. This is a marketing issues more than a technical one.

I've used typical US top loading machines (an old Whirlpool in Boston and a 230V SpeedQueen in Ireland) and they really didn't take amazingly huge loads compared to a modern 8-9kg European machines. You can pack a European machine quite tightly and it will still wash the load very well. Where as if you pack a top loading agitator machine too tightly it just doesn't work as there it needs much more space to move the clothes through the water.

Also, as top loaders are trying to achieve less and less water usage, they simply don't work effectively. A TL machine cannot wash if there's a very low water level. The same is not true for a front loader. It will just take a lot longer to wash with less water, but it will still achieve a good result.

I also found that TL machines produced problems with lint which I have never ever experienced with a Euro FL machine. Shirts occasionally came out coated dark lint. I think this is simply due to the high levels of mechanical action vs the slow tumbling action. FL machines just don't cause lint to come off the clothes in the first place.

I also think that a lot of US front loaders are impractically big. If you have a tightly filled drum, it will wash and not go out of balance. If you have a huge drum that has a load of towels in it, the machine will end up having trouble balancing and I have noticed that seems to happen a lot on typical over-sized US FL machines.

There's an optimum size and it's bigger than a typical Euro traditional 5kg machine but it's smaller than some of the crazy sized machines that certain US manufacturers are pushing too.

The 8kg-10kg large Euro models seem to kinda fit the bill perfectly in my experience.



Post# 570467 , Reply# 21   1/22/2012 at 12:45 (1,035 days old) by PassatDoc (Orange County, California)        

I had a GE TL before my current Frigidaire FL (2140). I had read that TLs didn't really rinse the soap out of clothes very well. As a result, the first load I ran in the new TL was a load of clean shirts and trousers from the closet, which I ran without detergent. Lo and behold, there were suds in the water. Then I did a soap-less load of clean towels and even more suds,almost as if I'd used close to a full dose of detergent. So while the old washer got stuff clean (in terms of soil/stain removal), it was not rinsing out the detergent in a thorough manner.

Post# 570507 , Reply# 22   1/22/2012 at 18:58 (1,034 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
Okay, I admit it, it's my fault. I let myself get sucked

I am wrong and you are right. I have no idea about washing machines, I just like them for their buttons, lights, noises and splashing. Front loaders rule and top loaders just shouldn't be.

Post# 570553 , Reply# 23   1/22/2012 at 20:26 (1,034 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        
H-Axis Washers

launderess's profile picture
Historically *always* have out performed top loaders with central "beaters" in both cleaning results and gentleness on fabrics. This is proven in that for much of the history of commercial laundries (excluding laundromats) the former were most always used going right back to steam driven "washers" and "extractors".

As for overloading a front loader with one heavy item such as thich and thirsty bathrobe; been there, done that and won't do it again. Every owner's manual for front loading washers one has ever seen advises one to make mixed loads. This makes sense especially for purely "timer" driven washers with crude to nil weight distribution systems which will spin after a series of pre-programmed attempts (or not). Of course bolted down and or otherwise robust suspension system commercial front loaders *will* spin regardless often of weight distribution. Have seen washers at local laundromat go into spin with very off balanced loads banging and shaking so badly one could feel the vibrations thought he floor several feet away.


Post# 570609 , Reply# 24   1/22/2012 at 23:22 (1,034 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea))        

I've felt a solid concrete slab vibrate standing next to boltdown institutional washers (~35# Unimac, not even a "big" one).

Show me an institutional/industrial washer with an agitator and I'll buy you an order of onion rings at Sonic drive in. Shoot, I'll buy you a footlong chili-cheese coney besides.

I do believe--with evidence--that toploaders scrub better on small mixed loads. Also with evidence, that they don't rinse worth squat and that they don't do ANYthing worth squat when loaded to "capacity".

I mean really! If a 35# industrial washer shakes a concrete slab, what can an 18# TL household washer possibly accomplish at full load with one rinse fill? Roughly comparable to eating a whole pizza in one bite.


Post# 570631 , Reply# 25   1/23/2012 at 01:44 (1,034 days old) by spinspeed (Sydney Australia (originally London UK))        

spinspeed's profile picture
So I seem to have started a big old debate here. All contributions very valid and interesting. I think TL washers are more interesting than FL washers from a design point of view. I do think the way TL washers are going with using less and less water will be the demise of the TL washer. A TL washer will never be as economical to run as a FL washer. I think another advantage of FL washers is the fact they heat water up usually from cold which is great if using biological washing powders (that is if such a thing still exists? Not heard much mention of biological detergents, perhaps they are a thing of the past?). I do think you get better results with laundry washed in water that is heated up during the wash cycle rather than hot water straight from domestic supply. Also detergent much more concentrated in a small amount of water compared to a big tub of water in a TL machine.

One of the many great things about living in Australia is that we have choice. Whre as in the Uk these days go in to a department store and there will be a sea of FL washers all looking pretty much the same.

From an overload point of view, I am much more conscious of overloading one of my TL washers compared to the Zanussi which does cope very well when packed to the hilt and still delivers a very clean load.

Really good to read all your thoughts and comments.

Cheers

Simon



Post# 570640 , Reply# 26   1/23/2012 at 05:17 (1,034 days old) by qualin (Calgary, Alberta, Canada)        

qualin's profile picture
That's the thing that always kind of worried me about TL vs FL,

With the FL washer, the motor overheats and shuts off. As opposed to the TL washer which has a transmission. So not only can the motor overheat, but one could also damage the transmission as well. Considering that GE washers have transmissions with plastic gears, that's a little nervewracking.

To Arbilab, I've seen the White Westinghouse FL machines (Hard mount) shake so hard I swore they were going to break their mounts. It's freaky feeling the floor move!

To Launderess: You bring up a very valid point, about the one heavy item in the machine. I don't think any machine should self-destruct if you put clothing in them. Now, if you put in hockey pucks or tennis balls, that's a whole different story.. :)

To Rapunzel: Your response made me LOL.. You are right, it's easy not to "Know It All" .. I also enjoy the splashing, the buttons and knobs and so forth. I'll be the first to admit that I enjoy the washing action both a top loader and a front loader. It's like eating apples or oranges, two different fruits but the end result is pretty much the same.

To MRX: Your response surprises me. The instruction manual for my washer says to "Loosely place" the items into the tub and not to pack them. It's my impression that a FL is loaded correctly by how high the clothing gets in the tub after all of the clothing gets wet. As in, the clothing should never reach more than 2/3 up the top of the tub, but ideally should be about 1/2 way up. For my Top Loader, I knew if I loaded it correctly by how the clothes turned in the tub during agitation.


Post# 570642 , Reply# 27   1/23/2012 at 05:26 (1,034 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
"You are right, it's easy not to "Know It All

Hey, waddaya mean?! I do know it all and who are you calling a fruit around here?

Post# 570646 , Reply# 28   1/23/2012 at 06:15 (1,034 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        
Self Destruct Washing Machine

launderess's profile picture
@Qualin:

Our local laundromat has a 50lb SQ front loader that has been taken out of service at least twice because of major customer caused damage.

Both recent times the same person packed the washer so full of clothing that when it went into spin it literally bashed the bearings and other parts to bits. IIRC after the second time the owner or the attendant (not sure which) personally banned the woman from ever setting foot in the place again.

Now mind you in any commercial setting and that includes laundromats employees paying attention can stop a washer before it damages itself. For coin-op washers choices range from popping the top and shutting the washer down, or probably much faster shutting off power via the circut breaker.


Post# 570649 , Reply# 29   1/23/2012 at 06:25 (1,034 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        
Rinsing

launderess's profile picture
Again, automatic top loaders cause many to skip steps as required when washing was done manually or semi-automatically.

In the old days proper laundry technique required rinsing until the water was *clear*. This often took two, three or more rinses with the first being hot or warm if pure soaps were used in the wash. Many modern automatic top loaders have one rinse as part of the standard normal cycles. Some early machines did offer timer controlled second rinse options,but they soon went away during the "Energy Crisis" of the 1970's IIRC. This meant for Madame Average Housewive to get a second rinse she had to reset the washer manually. Using a second rinse also tied up the washer and could hold up the convoy of other loads waiting their turn, so many skipped this step.

Being as all this may one obtains great rinsing in the vintage Whirlpool portable using Tide "HE" liquid. One also always resets the washer for a second deep rinse, which along with three before and after spray rinses seems to do the job. One knows this because laundry bunged into the extractor/spin dryer gives off clear water.


Post# 570690 , Reply# 30   1/23/2012 at 10:03 (1,034 days old) by logixx (Germany)        

logixx's profile picture
Last time I used a TL, I also managed to overload it - though I followed the instructions (even loaded things strategically, rather than dumpin' it all in). It was a commercial Maytag with the black agi. Loaded it with a mixed load of darks and put it on Colors Super Wash. Strangely enough, the loaded rolled over during the main wash but hardly during the two rinses. Strange, as the water level seemed the same for wash and rinse.

My Duet manages full loads just fine. It, however, doesn't like my regular dark loads of jeans, pullovers and smalls like socks etc. Two weeks ago, I came into the laundry room and found most bottles on the floor in front of the machine - it spun so hard even the full 52-loads-bottle of Tide fell off!

The "Towels" videos show what I consider a full load:


CLICK HERE TO GO TO logixx's LINK


Post# 570808 , Reply# 31   1/23/2012 at 20:05 (1,033 days old) by PassatDoc (Orange County, California)        

@Launderess: I remember seeing Second Rinse selectors on higher-end TLs as late as the mid-1990s. Some friends of mine bought FLs a few years ago to replace ten year old TL and it too had Second Rinse. It was usually a higher priced feature that I wasn't willing to pay for. Had I understand how poorly both of my former TLs rinsed, it might have been worth the extra cost.

Post# 570872 , Reply# 32   1/24/2012 at 01:50 (1,033 days old) by qualin (Calgary, Alberta, Canada)        
To Logixx

qualin's profile picture
Logixx,

I don't see how your towels can get clean by packing the washer that tight.

There's barely any room for anything to tumble at all. There is a little bit of tumbling, but not much.

What is the tub volume of that machine BTW? I probably would have split that into at least two loads.


Post# 570888 , Reply# 33   1/24/2012 at 04:22 (1,033 days old) by dj-gabriele (Bologna (ITALY))        
@Qualin

Cit. "I don't see how your towels can get clean by packing the washer that tight."

See the attached link for a load "at capacity" for a standard 5kg washing machine. The load in the machine is a weighted 5kg cottons load.
And mind that Whirpool is the most lower end manchine you can buy in Italy!
Everything comes clean all the time, so indeed in a front loader you can use all the available space to have clean clothing.
Try for youself and consider that every 9 litres of drum volume you can stuff 1 kg of cotton clothing. Your speed queen would be rated around 10/11 kg around here.

Also, the machine in Logixx video is rated at 10 kg if first generation or 11 kg if second generation so it's not overloaded at all!


CLICK HERE TO GO TO dj-gabriele's LINK


Post# 570910 , Reply# 34   1/24/2012 at 07:40 (1,033 days old) by MatthewZA (Cape Town, South Africa)        
South Africa front loaders

well...her in SA people like to stuff as much as possible in their machines. and all the people that i know that have had front loaders (including my mom and I) you stuff a front loader untill you cant get anymore in. forget this "only load untill you can stil put your hand in the drum" nonsense! once the load is wet, it does drop down and washes perfectly fine, especially towels. we used the wool and delicate cycles mostly when we stil had our Defy Automaid because the wash action is the same as normal just used more water and we got perfect results. just over 2 yrs ago we bought a 13kg Samsung top load (pulsator) (with 5 people in the house even washing 3 times a week the 5kg Defy wasnt cutting it anymore) and it does a good wash because i can choose to let it weigh the load or i can set the water level and if i fill it i just set it to maximum water and use the blanket programm because its stronger on full and heavy loads. and we have switched from warm rinses to cold and i havent had soap issues. we use 90mls of Skip regular per load. and I set the samsung to only do 1 rinse. the LG 8.2kg does 2 rinses (i cant change it) and i still get good results even with 120mls Skip perfect white in the whites

Post# 570915 , Reply# 35   1/24/2012 at 08:06 (1,033 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada)        
i do not think its recomended to overload a washer and that

pierreandreply4's profile picture
i have a whirlpool duet front loader and when i wash i am always careful not to overload my duet washer to avoided the motor to burn my old top load washer the motor was burn because of over loading it did its cycle normaly but when i went to put the clothes in the dryer the washer did not drain or spin (my old inglis top load) from 1993 to 2004 and that was around 1996 so me when i wash even do my duet is a large capacaty i think its a 3.8 super capacety i do not remember i always make sure not to overload because i do not wish for the washer motor to burn again.

Post# 570924 , Reply# 36   1/24/2012 at 09:44 (1,033 days old) by logixx (Germany)        

logixx's profile picture
The volume is 92 liters or 3.25 cubic feet. Remember that European front loaders have longer cycles than US machines. My Duet takes 1:55 hrs for a warm (104F) wash and ten minutes more for a hot (140F) wash - with cold fill and a full load. Of course, there are also longer cycles that promise A+++ energy efficiency. However, I usually don't think towels need a four hour cycle.

Alex


Post# 570938 , Reply# 37   1/24/2012 at 10:19 (1,033 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
The more I read these responses...

...the more convinced I am that there is some weird psychology going on.

If you guys have convinced yourselves that you can regularly stuff your front loaders beyond capacity and achieve better than mediocre results, as well as not cause any issues with your washers' bearings and electronics, you have to be kidding yourselves; not me.

You can argue your opinions till the cows come home, convince and slap each other on the bum swearing on someone's grave that you know what you are talking about, but understand this - I wouldn't let you anywhere near my laundry.

Do front loaders rinse better than regular top loaders? That depends. If you are talking about front loaders of yore the answer could be 'maybe'. If you are talking about 'high efficiency, low water use' front loaders the answer is definitively 'No' and that is not moot, it's a fact.

Now arbilab, you may just have to buy me onion rings at the Sonic drive in. There are plenty of commercial establishments that use top loaders. They are called laundromats. Many residential care facilities still use them too and they work better than those anemic, water-saving commercial front loaders when it comes to washing out fecal matter, blood and vomit first time around.

Now why don't they use top loaders in big, industrial laundries? Because it would neither be technically appropriate nor affordable, practical nor ergonomic to design and build top loading washers of such large proportions. To compare domestic front loaders with industrial ones makes little sense. It's like comparing a Chevy pick-up with a Caterpillar Mining Truck. I am sure that it is possible to design a 200 lbs capacity top loader or an agitator tunnel washer, but who would even want to try?

As far as clean outcomes from such large industrial establishments are concerned, they are neither consistent nor impressive. I managed a residential care facility and had to change laundry services thrice in one year, only to discover that they all work to the same standards; which means haphazard to none. Fortunately we laundered residents' personal things on premise, but all facility linen and towels were sent out to a large industrial place. Apart from consistently losing our stock (all of which was marked), towels and sheets would regularly come back with bleach burns, frayed edges and stains. I asked one of the managers if they were washing our linen in Parramatta river using rocks. Sometimes there were boot marks and wheel imprints from their laundry trolleys. So, no, I am not impressed with industrial laundry services, nor how much they charged for their inconsistent work.


Post# 570942 , Reply# 38   1/24/2012 at 10:34 (1,033 days old) by foraloysius (Groningen, the Netherlands)        

foraloysius's profile picture
I don't think frontloaders should be overloaded, after all you want a decent wash result. But North Americans have the habit of underloading their frontloaders, I thought we had established that already in another thread.

As for Qualin's Huebsch frontloader, I think filling half full is really underloading. The machine uses more water than most other frontloaders. I think that machine should easily wash around 8kg of laundry. Due to short wash times it may be wise not to fill it up totally, but leave some space.

As for European frontloaders, the rule for loading was always to leave some space at the top, about the width of a clenched fist. American frontloaders, especially the ones with tilted drums, might need a bit more space at the top.


Post# 570950 , Reply# 39   1/24/2012 at 11:48 (1,033 days old) by dj-gabriele (Bologna (ITALY))        
you can regularly stuff your front loaders beyond capacity

That's indeed just silly :)

I was just trying to show that a front loader can be stuffed to rated capacity vs. underloading it and it will perform in a fantastic manner


Post# 570951 , Reply# 40   1/24/2012 at 11:50 (1,033 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)        

Louis, SQ changed the wash times and now the Normal cycle washes for around 20-25 minutes.

Post# 570955 , Reply# 41   1/24/2012 at 12:35 (1,033 days old) by foraloysius (Groningen, the Netherlands)        

foraloysius's profile picture
Thank you Tom, I hadn't kept up with the lated Speed Queen/Huebsch changes.

Post# 570957 , Reply# 42   1/24/2012 at 12:57 (1,033 days old) by kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC)        
Is it me or are top load washing machines really bad a washi

kenmoreguy64's profile picture
No, it's probably you.

Post# 570962 , Reply# 43   1/24/2012 at 13:32 (1,033 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)        

unimatic1140's profile picture
Stuff comes out with soap scum marks, lint and not that clean.

I have 26 top loaders currently hooked up in our basement that I use. Can someone explain to me why none of the above stated issues happens to me normally? Of course on rare occasion a tissue gets left in a pocket and even then most of my solid tub machines rinse most of that right over the top of the tub.

I had a Whirlpool Duet for a couple of years and I felt it washed just as well as a top loader, I never felt it rinsed as well as most of my solid-tub top loaders. You could always detect detergent scent in the clothes no matter how little I used in the Duet. Normally I use very little detergent, 1/4 cup of Tide or Tide with bleach + 1/8 cup phosphate in my standard capacity machines. 1/2 Cup detergent and 1/4 cup phosphate in my large capacity to loaders. Very rarely does something come out not clean and detergent scent free.

Also I don't buy the fact that long slow stroke agitation in vintage top loaders are particular rough on fabrics. My 15 years of using these machines weekly has shown otherwise.


Post# 570966 , Reply# 44   1/24/2012 at 14:06 (1,033 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada)        
Tip to avoid detergent smells in a front load

pierreandreply4's profile picture
well here is my tip to avoid detergent smell if you do not went your clothes smelling like detergent perfumes after washing in fl washer you can eather a) switch to a non perfume detergent b)use the extra rinses option of your fl washer i myself before i had my duet washer use a topload washer from 1993 to 2004 year i switch to my duet washer and since 2004 and using my duet i am avoiding strong smell detergents and if i see on the detergent label lots of flowers i know that for me this means strong perfume sent so i have to use brands that the detergent smell is mild so far the one thats mild engough is the detergent brand la parissienne he original that i can use purex detegent brand arm and hammer with oxy clean for both he or non he machine or sunlight all machine detergent that have mild detergent smell

Post# 570970 , Reply# 45   1/24/2012 at 14:20 (1,033 days old) by kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC)        

This post has been removed by the member who posted it.



Post# 570971 , Reply# 46   1/24/2012 at 14:25 (1,033 days old) by kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC)        
To further what Robert said...

kenmoreguy64's profile picture
I am stunned by the folks who try to assert that top load washers have marked limitations in washability, and especially the notion that they overall don't wash well. Back in 1980, I remember the census said we had 200 million people in the United States. Since most all Americans were washing in top loaders outside of those relative few with old Bendix machines and the like, or new westinghouse machines, I guess we were all filthy....

I have used long-stroke, and now "old fashioned" American top loading washers for my entire life, outside of 18 months when I used a short stroke top loader as one of two washers I was using (before finding AW.org). If I were to start using a front loader today, I no doubt would have an adjustment period in learning to use the machine to its best ability. Perhaps that is true too of front load users who use top loaders on occasion?

I have certainly not been walking around for 47 years with dirty clothes, or even clothes that would be noticeably cleaner if washed in something else. My clothes, have not be beaten up, worn out, or otherwise expired early either. Most go to charity looking new or just 'broken in'.

It's time to get our feet back on the ground.

Gordon


Post# 570999 , Reply# 47   1/24/2012 at 16:50 (1,033 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA)        
TL degraded performance

mrb627's profile picture
I would say that over the past 30+ years, TL performance has degraded a bit. With the dumbing down of water temps combined with the corkscrew agitator that was marketed as giving the housewife the ability to stuff as much laundry in the machine as she could because she might want to just get through the laundry rather than sort and do it right. And finally, with the reduction of water allowed per unit of laundry, performance circles the drain...

Malcolm


Post# 571023 , Reply# 48   1/24/2012 at 18:58 (1,032 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)        
Detergent smell

I have noticed that European detergents/softeners leave a stronger residual scent in clothes compared to Australian and American products. When relatives come to visit from Germany, it doesn't matter how often I wash their clothes here, they will still smell of their laundry products.

I use regular Tide, Cold Power, Bosistos Eucalyptus detergent, Softly, Ivory Snow and, occasionally, I do add a little Cuddly softener or a Bounce dryer sheet for good measure. The only detergent that has ever left a lingering scent in my clothes was Tide Mountain Spring. Even out of the dryer clothes would still smell strongly of that. Though, with any of the other products, once the laundry is dry there is virtually no residual scent left. Clothes just smell fresh and clean.

Front loader performance should not be excluded from your statement Malcolm. The trend is such that all appliances are now designed primarily to satisfy efficiency and globalized manufacturing standards. Performance has become a moot point in an environment where everything is disposable. Washing machines and other appliances are now a political issue and a lot of money changes hands to push specific products for all kinds of reasons, but not necessarily the right ones.


Post# 571052 , Reply# 49   1/24/2012 at 20:40 (1,032 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)        
I've resisted....

ronhic's profile picture
..until now.

Personally, I've found that front loaders filled to capacity will generally provide better results than a top loader similarly filled.

There, I've said it.

What I think people are missing is 'What is capacity?' In the US/North America, it is measured in CU FT, which is very hard for the consumer to replicate. How many single bed sheets is 2 CU FT? Everywhere else, it's in kilograms. I can weigh a sheet/jeans/underwear and load accordingly if I so wish....

So here we go. Speed Queen sell their front and top load machines's in Oz and we get told that the 3.3 CU FT capacity equates to 8.2kg - that's 5.5 lb to the CU FT.

So what I think someone should do to put these claims of washing and rinsing to the test is actually do it. We all know what capacity our machines are meant to be in either lb, kg or CU FT.

A cotton single bed sheet weighs about lb/500gm....a queens size one probably close to double...

So, lets have someone go and dirty up a sample sheet with some general dirt from the garden and load their machine with sheets...

As an example, my 6.5kg machine should be able to take:

4 QS sheets
5 Single sheets

...and wash and rinse them perfectly.

Now, the question is:

'Will a modern Speed Queen top load or front load machine, which doesn't qualify for energy rebates in the US and only has a 3 star water rating here, wash and rinse a capacity load (16 single bed sheets in this instance) to a better, the same or worse standard as a vintage toploader/front loader or modern HE machine?'

No bleach and no softener allowed!





Post# 571063 , Reply# 50   1/24/2012 at 21:26 (1,032 days old) by redcarpetdrew (Concord, CA (Im in CA but my heart will always be in Nevada)        

redcarpetdrew's profile picture
I have used both styles and have found that I have almost never had an issue with clothes coming out clean and fresh smelling when using a older top load washer. That being said, my daily driver is a Maytag Neptune front load (a MAH7500 to be exact). I have had ZERO issues with this one as well as the MAH4000 before her. I use common sense loading with it. Load it loosely up to the top of the drum. If you have to use your hand to shove it in, you've overloaded it. And it is very easy to damage a frontloader by massive overloading. Maybe not the motor at first (but it will eventually happen) but you can do some serious damage to the machine in general and the load as well. I've seen enough DOA's in my line of work from doing exactly that.

Olav, your appliance psychology had me laughing so hard, I almost brought out a lung! It makes total sense, tho. Anytime I go into a customer's home to repair a troubled appliance, all I have to do is look around. Somewhere, there's a Frigidaire appliance in the home sending out negative waves. All I do is drag it out to the curb and all is well in the house! (Ducks and runs!)

RCD


Post# 571123 , Reply# 51   1/25/2012 at 01:52 (1,032 days old) by qualin (Calgary, Alberta, Canada)        
To Ronhic

qualin's profile picture
Oh fantastic.. Man, what a great thread.

I have wondered what the official "Capacity" of my Huebsch was. 8 KG works out to about 17.6 lbs, which is pretty close to my old GE Top Loader, which I believe was an 18 lb machine.

7 pairs of 40x30 demin jeans is about 12 lbs, they stuffed into the washer nicely, I could have probably put another pair or two in before the machine was completely stuffed. My GE Top loader could handle about six pairs with half decent turnover, anything more and everything just floats.

I think I should make a video to demonstrate demin jean loading..

To Logixx: The capacity on your machine is pretty close to what mine is. Although, the video makes it look like a 6 cu.ft machine. :)

I think a test is in order here.. I should gather up all of the towels in the house and see how many of them I can pack into the washer, to compare with Logixx's video.

There used to be a time, living as a bachelor, I would go to the laundromat with about 3 months worth of laundry, find the largest front loader I could find, which was usually a Wascomat Triple Loader... and then pack in as many clothes as it would fit. Almost to the point where I could swear the middle was still dry...

I stopped doing that because I found that my clothes weren't coming out as clean as I liked them to be and I also found that using a few double loaders instead did cost more but yielded better results. (My own personal opinion.)

My opinion always has been that whatever the professionals use, I want to use. Mainly because the professionals always want the best results, right?


Post# 571126 , Reply# 52   1/25/2012 at 02:51 (1,032 days old) by cehalstead (Charleston, WV)        

I have no personal experience with FL washers, but I will say this.....all of the people I know who bought FL washers either complain constantly about performance or have replaced them with TL machines. Personally, I'll keep my new SQ (with adjusted water level and lid switch bypass) as long as I can. Have never had clothes washed in anything but a Maytag or now my Speed Queen and have some shirts that are over 10 years old and still look new, so the wear factor must not be that great. I don't overload and I sort like my mom did..and use hot water when needed. I also use real bleach when it's called for. I do wish I could do like our parent's generation did....sort, load, toss in the phosphated detergent, turn the knob, close the lid and come back later for clean clothes....I NEVER remember my mom having to pretreat or soak anything...she just washed it in the machine and we had "June Cleaver" clean clothes...

Post# 571145 , Reply# 53   1/25/2012 at 06:52 (1,032 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)        
7 pairs of 40x30 demin jeans is about 12 lbs

ronhic's profile picture

...then add another 3 pairs and you'll 'almost' be at stated capacity.....

 

Then do the same capacity test in a European machine with lower water usage, but longer cycle.....and again in a top load machine using the 5.5lb : CU FT and see how we go....

 

I'll bet my 'you know what's' that the front load machines will clean better at stated capacity than a top load machine will....especially a European machine with their long cycles.


Post# 571158 , Reply# 54   1/25/2012 at 08:05 (1,032 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)        

Robert & Gordon, I agree with you. We usually double rinsed with a top loader, but stuff was clean and well rinsed. Then again, our water was very hot, hotter than most people can use today, so that probably made a difference and for many years non-perma press laundry was rinsed in warm water also. People who decry the rinsing ability of top loaders today are probably also rinsing in cold water and using a non-phosphated detergent. Whether I use one of my toploaders or my Mieles or the Creda, the washing results are great, but I use a phosphate booster with the detergent which also improves rinsing.

And, on the other side of the coin, in the 50s and 60s, I knew a lot of people who used front loaders who always had clean clothing. My family was among them for some years.


Post# 571348 , Reply# 55   1/25/2012 at 23:10 (1,031 days old) by RevvinKevin (Between Mickey Mouse & the Queen Mary (So. Cal.)        

revvinkevin's profile picture



I think ALL manufacturers do everything they can to push the "capacity" boundaries to make their product as appealing as possible to the public. As such the public is of the mindset that “Bigger is Better”.

I have this 1988 Montgomery Wards, Norge built washer (below) which claims it can handle a 20 lb load.   Boy I’d like to know who dreamed up that number!   I washed a load in it a couple weeks ago (shot video too) and weighed the laundry on my postal scale before putting it in the washer.   Total weight = 12 lbs.  Deduct the basket (2 lbs) the laundry was 10 lbs.   It consisted of a weeks worth of socks, undies, t-shirts, some long sleeve dress shirts, a pair of slacks plus 2 twin sheets and a pillow case.   With the burpalator burpin away, and at the highest water level, it managed the 10 lb load pretty well.   But I kept watching how everything was moving and saying to myself “There is no way in hell this thing could handle a 20 lb load!!"   Makes me wonder where these manufacturers came up with these capacity numbers.  


Also, I feel the whole "cubic feet" capacity rating is useless.  It's funny too, I bought a 2009 TOL Kenmore Elite steam FL washer.  When I was looking at them, there was a blue one and the red one next to it, except for the color the machines looked identical.   Until I started looking closer that is.  The RED one was assembled in Germany, rated at 4.0 cu. ft. and had a top spin speed of I believe 1300 rpm.   The BLUE I ended up buying (the red one was sold, dammit) was assembled in Mexico, rated at 4.4 cu. ft. and has a top spin speed of 1100 rpm.   I went back and forth looking at the differences of the wash basket, I even measured the internal dimensions, which was EXACTLY the same on both.   The difference.... was the paddles, or baffles.   The RED washer with 4.0 rating had LARGER paddles/baffles then the BLUE washer rated @ 4.4 cu. ft.   I found it hard to believe only those smaller paddles could make up the difference of 0.4 cu. ft.

 

The link below is the M. Wards video for those interested.

 

Kevin 

 



CLICK HERE TO GO TO RevvinKevin's LINK

Post# 571393 , Reply# 56   1/26/2012 at 06:40 (1,031 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)        

I have found that the 5 kg Miele handles, with ease, a larger load than my standard tub Maytag so I don't think Miele inflates their capacity.

The other day, I wanted some of the 180F wash water so I moved the drain hose of the W1918 to a bucket. When the wash drained, there was less than three gallons of water over and above what was in the saturated clothes because after that amount drained, water stopped coming out and the pump stopped for the first rinse to begin. This is mighty economical water usage. It does fill to a higher level for rinsing, but the small amount of water for each fill shows why FLs need very good water extraction between water changes to rinse well. This machine uses the older cycle technology and gives 5 rinses with increasingly stronger spins after each one. The last rinse is as clear as can be before the 1600 rpm final spin.


Post# 572143 , Reply# 57   1/29/2012 at 13:03 (1,028 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        
One Can Get Excellent Results With A Toploading Washing Mach

launderess's profile picture
However much will depend upon the design of the unit and you'll be using quite allot more water for most loads especially whites.

To do the same white cottons wash I'd do in the Miele (incoming water around 95F heated to 120F or 140F) in my vintage Whirlpool toploader:

Pre-wash or pre-soak in lukewarm water for 8mins to 10mins (maybe longer) depending upon stain/soil level.

Main wash in *HOT* water (tap water atm is around 130F because the boilers are on for heating, but may have to add a kettle or two of water boiled on the range), for 14 minutes.

In both the pre-wash and main cycles thankfully have a stash of various vintage phosphate detergents can use along with "Biz" (also NOS) bleach and La France bluing. May even try washing a load of towels in vintage Ivory Snow with some STPP added.

Rinses would be two or more until the water drains clear, wash is bunged into the extractor to wring out more water, then to the dryer.

Am not sure how much water the Whirlpool portable takes but it's much more than the five gallons or so my Miele uses for the main wash, and the ten for each of the five rinses.

So on balance whilst the toploading Whirlpool *may* be faster it holds less than the Miele, uses more water and requires more energy in terms of several warm or hot water changes.

Being as all this may given my vast stash of vintage detergents for top loading washers may have to use the "Whirlpool" method to whittle down the stock.


Post# 572146 , Reply# 58   1/29/2012 at 13:12 (1,028 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        
"Detergent Smell" Of European Products

launderess's profile picture
Ever since the *dark ages* of laundry there has been a tradition of scenting freshly washed linens especially in France, Germany etc. Suppose if persons weren't going to bathe that often bed and body linens (outer garments were often not washed because the materials and or construction couldn't withstand the process), as well as one's person were heavily perfumed to mask the whiff.

Usually items were placed into chests or drawers with sachets of dried herbs, flowers or other perfumes and allowed to remain until they were well scented.

In modern laundry habits detergents and fabric softeners have replaced this method and am here to tell you it can be quite an experience. Many American expats living in France for instance are bowled over by the heavy scented laundry products even those for use on baby's things. And yes the scents often linger days or months after being laundered and don't wash away easily.

Apparently the term "unscented" hasn't really caught on for many places on the other side of the pond. Henkel Persil used to have a scent free version (Sensitive) but some darned fool decided that too should be perfumed.

Even the much loved "Savon de Marsielle" scent found in French and many other European detergents isn't the clean scent of the true soap. Rather a strong concoction of chemicals that some bright blub thinks smells like the stuff.

Not that American products are often any better; oh no. P&G in particular has versions of Tide and Downy that reek of a cross between a cheap knocking shop and a mutton dressed as lamb such as one might find working in such a place.

Happily P&G along with a others offer some unscented and lightly scented products for the North American market.

Being as all this may one still pines for the scents of detergents of old. Most has a fresh clean scent that simply can only be described as "fresh laundry".




This post was last edited 01/29/2012 at 18:45
Post# 572152 , Reply# 59   1/29/2012 at 13:33 (1,028 days old) by foraloysius (Groningen, the Netherlands)        

foraloysius's profile picture
Overhere in the Netherlands perfumes never have been as bad as the French detergents. Usually I find the German detergents also less perfumed than the French ones.

But for people who have an allergy for certain chemicals used for scents or people who are very senstive to scents there is a detergent on the market called Neutral. Apparently it has no scent at all. I have never used it, but I have used their fabric softener, also without a scent.

Besides laundry products they also have a whole line of body care products.



Post# 572153 , Reply# 60   1/29/2012 at 13:33 (1,028 days old) by dj-gabriele (Bologna (ITALY))        
"Detergent Smell" Of European Products

That's tremendous isn't it?
I had my father send me some powdered fabric softer that is totally unscented to use on my clothes as I can't stand the majority of the "normal" softeners you find in shops!


Post# 572219 , Reply# 61   1/29/2012 at 18:27 (1,028 days old) by Rolls_rapide (Scotland, UK)        

rolls_rapide's profile picture
I agree. The smell of modern detergents is so overpowering that it clashes with one's own deodorant and fragrance products. That can't be good.

Also, those long-lasting fabric conditioners (Lenor and Comfort): the stench seems to get impregnated into the plastic of the dispenser drawer, eventually leaving a sour, mildewy smell, that is very difficult to remove. Not nice at all.

I recently tried one of the pink Lenor products, not the Ruby one - my local Tesco got rid of that; this was a newer one. It smelled fine in the bottle, but on the clothes it was vile, a cheap floral fragrance. I couldn't stand it, so the bottle was tipped down the drain. I once did that to a bottle of Comfort blue conditioner too.


Post# 572866 , Reply# 62   2/1/2012 at 12:20 (1,025 days old) by Kenmoreguy89 (.)        

kenmoreguy89's profile picture
It does depend what you mean for TL'S.....machines with wash plate and weird like stuff, rollers etc are top loaders too but can't provide a good wash as Agitator type does.
Even some agitator type of new ones does not get clothes clean and does not work....clothes must be agitated and flushed in water to get clean, looks like for some modern manufacterers clothes must be just soaked to be clean, infact their washer do everyything but moving and flushing clothes properly.
I know aussie TL's especially simpsons, I know newer does have indexing tubs and long strokes, well, personally I find this thing a huge idiocy as with an indexing tub you just get your clothes spinning and not flushed and agitated properly, agitator back and forth action is vanished, with an indexing tub there's not water recirculation in the tub that you have with a normal one also, clothes are just moved ahead along with tub and then pushed again to agitator ramps..... and there's not even the amount of water recirculation going up.
Said this I think all depends from machines, you have maytag so it's very strange you're getting scum marks as they have a good rinse, scum marks happends with some crappy detergents reacting with liquid softener especially detergents with soap flakes or soap bars type of soap in, also some type of surfactans, this mostly happends where water pressure is so bad to reduce a good and effective spray rinse ,happened to me once using an italian detergent with soap flakes and liquid softener (I use it at times when I go out of dryer sheets), inlet screen got full as they fixed pipes around here, with the left out suds the softener reacts and during drain and or spin it deposits on clothes a thing that with FL's does not happend as clothes are not sink in "full" contact with water and most of times in many machines also constantly moved during drain till kicking into spin.
Living in Italy I've seen and I see many FL's, no one ever provided a good wash result as TL's does! Infact alot of italians who never knew agitator washers till last years are amazed from wash results you get with them and who can get one, are very expensive here, and are getting really famous even because are alot more energy efficient using hot water instead of a heater.
I've read a lot of trifles before, for example one is that washing with a Tl's you have to pretreat stuff! What? Never had any need to pretreat something with Tl's, a thing that rather with for FL's is the rule, as for prewashing heavy soiled stuff, I let you imagine what you'd get loading muddy stuff in a FL that use less water than a TL,if someone claim you need to prewash with TL I can't imagine with a FL!
At my seaside house we have a FL and I have not only to pretreat but prewash and soak night long stained laundry by hand, infact I can tell you that is a "normal" and a "everyday" practice at least for the people I know here in Italy to pretreat and prewash by hand heavy soiled and stained stuff, before washing everyone I know who use FL's do a meticolous search even just for that pasta sauce stain there could be somewhere and pretreat it.
Things that for me are absolutely unusual and not normal!
Another thing:
TL's are "hard" on fabrics not at all, is actually the same thing of a hand washing!
I agree anyway with the fact Fl's have a genteler "action",no that being washed with an harder action like agitators matters something anyway in terms of wearing clothes as someone claim also, but of course FL's are gentler! They does not even move clothes! Just tumble wrapped, packed laundry and balls of laundry down splashing into few inches water, and this would be washing? At least older ones used more water, now just few inches!

The only thing that goes near a wash for me is when you load them with very few items, clothes at least in this occasion drop and are flushed just a little bit in water, but most part of them drop in water vertically and are not even flushed.
I think the most effective wash action of FL's I've seen (just on video though) is the Westinghouse Laundromat washer and the English Hoover (maybe Keymatic?), because of water amount used and oblique drum, but anyway I think are not even nearly comparable to TL agitator ones!
But as someone already said, we could go ahead forever with this topic.......
The only thing that leaves me a little upset is that often people who talks, I bet my nuts, have not even ever seen and or tried a FL or a TL one! You can understand this from the speeches they does!
But anyway:
About scum marks just try not using liquid softener or a different kind of detergent.



Post# 572879 , Reply# 63   2/1/2012 at 13:22 (1,025 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada)        
Sometime depending on the type of washer fabric softner and

pierreandreply4's profile picture
well my toughts on this is that sometime detergent and fabric softner do not mix well take for a exemple a topload washer with an agitator that as a fabric softner on top of the agitator they sometime dump the liquid fabric softner while the washer is still in its first spin so that do not leave much fabric softner when the washer starts to fill for the rinse compared to frontload washers where the fabric softner is dump in the rinse at the right time and do not forget that older 1970 and earlier washer had auto dispensers like for exemple the inglis royal washer that was posted as pod and certain kenmore washers had auto dispensers and they did not have mounted fabric softner on top of there agitators.

Post# 573038 , Reply# 64   2/2/2012 at 04:13 (1,024 days old) by qualin (Calgary, Alberta, Canada)        

qualin's profile picture
Pierre,

Just as an FYI,

Laundry Detergent and Bleach neutralize each other. A lot of top loaders have a bleach cup which dumps the bleach into the outer tub so that it doesn't get directly ontop of the clothing.

Unfortunately, while I have found it to be effective at bleaching clothing, it isn't as great at washing them, so I usually have to select a second rinse and put the bleach in on the first rinse manually or I just have to run another wash.

It's really nice to have a seperate dispenser I can just dump everything in, then just start the machine and walk away.


Post# 573043 , Reply# 65   2/2/2012 at 04:58 (1,024 days old) by Launderess (La Pomme Grande)        

launderess's profile picture

First of all, there shouldn't be any detergent residue for fabric softener to mix with if the was was rinsed properly before the addtion of the product.

 

The "scum" persons are reporting on laundry when using fabric softener is likely the same as it was back in the days when soap was mainly used for laundry; a mixture of unremoved soils/oils/ detergent residue combining with the fats and oils used in the fabric softener. 

 

Another problem could very well be the fabric softener was not properly diluted and or used in water so cold it never would.

 

In the old days when soap was the main "detergent" housewives/laundresses would see "streaks" of soap residue on laundry as it came out of the wringers.  Again this was from the things being improperly rinsed and the "scum" in the wash tubs was still clinging to the fabric.

 

When using top loading and or the Hoover TT washing machine one never stops rinsing until the surface of the water is *clean*. If a visable film of whatever is on top of the rinse water then the wash still has some sort of residue (detergent and or incomplete soil removal) and either requires another wash or rinse.

 





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