Super Capacity BD Whirlpool water level question

All -

The water level in Jamie's machine is just about right. There are some videos on YouTube from other contributors here of similar era machines which also have the fins above water.

This agitator was designed in the mid to later 1970s for the original large capacity tub. This machine is NOT the original size tub.

Starting in the second half of 1981, the large capacity belt-drive was re-designed to use less water. This was a physical redesign that affected the baseplate, suspension rods, outer tub, and inner basket. At the same time a common baseplate assembly was devised that could be used for both capacity models. Previously, different baseplates were used for standard and large capacity models. The new tubs are .75 of one inch shallower, or less deep as compared to the 1967-early 1981 units.

As a result, the far top fins, which had been just barely submerged in the early 1981 and older machines, never see water in the newer machines as the agitator rises .75 of an inch higher in the center due to the shallower tub.

The shortening of the centerpost (done in January 1978) had nothing to do with the water level depth and did not affect any dimensions of the machine except for the centerpost and spin tube.

Gordon


Forum Topics & Rules Manuals & Literature	New users Click-here to sign-up

Post# 606843 6/28/2012 at 11:23 (4,312 days old) by Pulsator (Saint Joseph, MI)
Checkrate/Likes How high is the highest water level supposed to be on the super capacity Whirlpools with the winged Surgilator? Mine seems a bit low, but that just might be because I'm used to my Maytag and Speed Queen machines which have very little agitator showing on the highest water level...

Post# 606850 , Reply# 1 6/28/2012 at 11:53 (4,312 days old) by DADoES (TX,�U.S. of A.)
Checkrate/Likes � Maybe is a little low.� Our 1976 Supreme 80 (which was prior to the short centerpost and related redesign) filled to the bottom of the cap as indicated by an bit of editing on your pic, although I don't think your machine is intended to be quite that high.

Post# 606855 , Reply# 2 6/28/2012 at 12:08 (4,312 days old) by appliguy (Oakton Va.)
Checkrate/Likes *Jamie...I believe your water level is a little low* My mom had a 1983 Whirlpool Supreme for many years and the water level when set to high would just cover the little bumps on the top wings of the agitator but not as high as Glenn has marked in the picture in his post....PAT COFFEY

Post# 606862 , Reply# 3 6/28/2012 at 12:54 (4,312 days old) by nmassman44 (Brooksville Florida)
Checkrate/Likes That water level looks about right to me. The belt drive Whirlpool I had with this agitator filled exactly to that level.

Post# 606878 , Reply# 4 6/28/2012 at 14:47 (4,312 days old) by KenmoreGuy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes All - The water level in Jamie's machine is just about right. There are some videos on YouTube from other contributors here of similar era machines which also have the fins above water. This agitator was designed in the mid to later 1970s for the original large capacity tub. This machine is NOT the original size tub. Starting in the second half of 1981, the large capacity belt-drive was re-designed to use less water. This was a physical redesign that affected the baseplate, suspension rods, outer tub, and inner basket. At the same time a common baseplate assembly was devised that could be used for both capacity models. Previously, different baseplates were used for standard and large capacity models. The new tubs are .75 of one inch shallower, or less deep as compared to the 1967-early 1981 units. As a result, the far top fins, which had been just barely submerged in the early 1981 and older machines, never see water in the newer machines as the agitator rises .75 of an inch higher in the center due to the shallower tub. The shortening of the centerpost (done in January 1978) had nothing to do with the water level depth and did not affect any dimensions of the machine except for the centerpost and spin tube. Gordon

Post# 606892 , Reply# 5 6/28/2012 at 15:42 (4,312 days old) by KenmoreGuy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes Here is a link to RedCarpetDrew's electronic but otherwise similar machine. CLICK HERE TO GO TO KenmoreGuy64's LINK

Post# 606893 , Reply# 6 6/28/2012 at 15:43 (4,312 days old) by KenmoreGuy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes And here's one from Mr.Oddhobbies CLICK HERE TO GO TO KenmoreGuy64's LINK

Post# 606895 , Reply# 7 6/28/2012 at 15:45 (4,312 days old) by KenmoreGuy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes Jamie - Your machine might be a half-inch off in level (they all vary a little, especially with age) but it's not far off. It's better to be a little low vs. a little high anyway. Too high on these can cast socks and other small items over the tub rim, AND can make flooding the bearings in weak seal machines even more likely, as the higher the water level, the more pressure on the centerpost seals. Gordon