|
Thread Number: 54175
Are the Perminant Press & Enzime cycles of the 60's & 70's Obsolete? |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 765681 6/24/2014 at 20:05 (3,592 days old) by scoots (Chattanooga TN) | ||
First, pardon my ignorance about garments and laundry. I grew up in a working class household where "nice clothes" were something exotic, and I basically still dress like I was 18 (but without the zipper front shirts with the oversized pull rings).
We had a Kenmore with a perminent press cycle, but I NEVER remember my mom using it, nor did she ever discuss its use when I was shown how to do my own laundry at age 16. I came across an excellent post describing in detail the difference between the early "Wash and Wear", and the later "Perminent Press" and found it facinating. My question is, you don't hear much about fabric technology anymore - is Perminent Press now so ubiquitous and improved that there's no need for the elaborate cooling steps needed in a mid-century context? A similar question might also be, are the Enzime cycles now obsolete, or are there still detergents on the market that require that particular wash cycle? | ||
|
Post# 765688 , Reply# 2 6/24/2014 at 20:35 (3,592 days old) by Launderess  (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
Permanent Press Is Still Very Much Around
Though today you'll find it often called "no-iron" or "easy care" and so forth.
My Oko-Lavamat has cycles for "no iron" which basically uses cooler temperatures for the wash with no spins between rinses and a fast but short final spin. It is meant for dress shirts and such that will emerge from the cycle needing little if any ironing. OTOH the "easy care" is part of the main cycle and uses computer programmed technology to vary the cycle according to what is required. | ||
|
Post# 765705 , Reply# 3 6/24/2014 at 21:41 (3,592 days old) by wayupnorth (On a lake between Bangor and Bar Harbor, Maine) |
||
 | ||
| Post# 765709 , Reply# 4 6/24/2014 at 21:58 (3,592 days old) by danemodsandy (The Bramford, Apt. 7-E) | ||
Permanent Press Is Still Here - But Changed
Today's Permanent Press is a light finish designed to keep clothes from looking too wrinkled if properly washed and dried.
Old-school Permanent Press was a heavy resin finish designed to make clothes look like they had been ironed, complete with set-in permanent creases in shirt sleeves, pants legs, etc. The old-school finish had to be treated with some finesse if it was not to pick up creases from washing and drying, hence the special cycles. I'm sure the Permanent Press cycles on vintage machines do today's version no harm at all, and probably would do some good. BTW, be glad the old Permanent Press is gone. The heavy resin finish meant that it had very poor breathability and absorption; on hot days, it was something like being dressed in Saran Wrap. The only thing worse was nylon shirts and boxers - I think the purpose of those was to teach you to fear Hell. | ||
|
Post# 765774 , Reply# 6 6/25/2014 at 08:01 (3,591 days old) by jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers) |
||
Todays enzymes are much developed over the enzymes of the 1970's. They can take hotter and cooler water temps, work on a rainbow of stains and soils not just proteins and they do it all to the maximum in 20 minutes. Then they fade off.
I think those 70's cycles would be fine for todays enzymes. But Tom is right a good dryer negates a lot of their use. Wash Spin Rinse Spin works just fine if it all goes into a WP dryer - IMHO ofcourse .
| ||
|
Post# 765784 , Reply# 7 6/25/2014 at 08:46 (3,591 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI) |
||
P-P Cycles are water wasters! Some garments don't really need 'em...
And as for Enzyme Soak Cycles, I'm sure something that just says "Soak" or even "Soaking" w/ your machine by pausing it during a cycle, will do the trick (though w/o detergents "enzymes"), so that's my opinion on this one... -- Dave | ||
| Post# 766289 , Reply# 8 6/27/2014 at 02:22 (3,590 days old) by toploadloyalist (San Luis Obispo, CA) | ||
|
For Kenmore washers, Enzyme Soak cycle was renamed Pre-Soak in 1971. They were originally up to 30 minutes until 1974 when they reduced them to 22 minutes. As for Permanent Press of today, the top-loaders mostly just have high agitation and low spin speeds without any cool-down, as that is left exclusively for the dryers. | ||
|
Post# 766300 , Reply# 9 6/27/2014 at 05:59 (3,589 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
To Soak Or Not To Soak, That Is The Question
Original purpose of soaking especially for whites, colourfast and or badly stained/soiled laundry was to start the washing process. This was when laundry mainly done by hand or even early machines including wringers. However the main thing was that soap was going to be used for laundry. Since soap will set certain stains and brings a host of other problems it was best to let thing soak with perhaps a bit of washing soda or another alkali to "break" soil from laundry.
As detergent was replaced by soaps pre-soaking became less necessary as a routine unless again laundry was badly soiled. However machine or manual there was always the question of what happens to soils if things are simply left in a tub of water with no mechanical action. If left alone soap and most powdered detergents or alkalis will soon settle out of water taking any soils along with them. All this would end up settling down onto laundry especially anything at the bottom of the tub. To get around this when manually soaking either the load should be stirred/shifted now and then, and or some how the water must move. Old European method was to pour the water down onto laundry and it filtered down to the bottom of the tub. There a spigot or some other type of opening would catch and drain the water directing it into some sort of container. Thus would begin a cycle of pouring, catching, pouring..as a soak cycle. The "soaking" taking place as water slowly made its way to the bottom of the tub. If one was not going to do any of the above it was advised when a manual soak was done that laundry be lifted *OUT* of the tub and not disturb the water as much as possible. That of if the tub had a drain to let the water flow out. In any event what you wanted to do was avoid stirring up all that particulate which by now has settled to the bottom of the wash tub. I also stood to reason such soaking water was not to be used again for washing. Automatic washing machines with soak cycles ranged from two versions. Some would alternate periods of agitation with soaking. Others just did just that; soaked the was after an initial period of agitation. It should be understood that even going back to the early 1900's it was understood that long soaking periods were not only not necessary but could do more harm than good. Mainly because of the above. Allowing released soils to settle down back onto fabrics. However many housewives did day before soaking as a way to get a jump on washday Monday. Actively doing laundry say on a Sunday would mean working on the Sabbath for Christian households which usually was a no-no. | ||
| Post# 766305 , Reply# 11 6/27/2014 at 06:22 (3,589 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA) | ||
P-Press Overused | ||
|
Post# 766310 , Reply# 12 6/27/2014 at 07:07 (3,589 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Think using PP cycle for denim is to prevent
Those white streaks that can happen when denim (especially new and or very darkly died) is extracted at too high spin speeds and or while rather warm.
Miele among other modern washing machine offerings has a special cycle just for denim which IIRC rather is like some PP cycles of old. Warm to cold water temps, low or no spins between rinses and a low speed final spin or perhaps series of pulse spins to prevent hard creasing. | ||
| Post# 766350 , Reply# 14 6/27/2014 at 13:29 (3,589 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA) | ||
|
Creases | ||
|
Post# 766361 , Reply# 15 6/27/2014 at 14:36 (3,589 days old) by bajaespuma (Connecticut) |
||
Never cottoned to the stuff I used the PP cycle on my old Maytag orbital because it was the only way I could get adequate rinsing; the rinse agitation on the regular cycle barely lasted 2 minutes and the spray rinse only lasted 20 seconds. It was a bad change from the helical-drive Maytags. I also liked the fact that Maytag, contrary to the herd as always, thought that a short, fast spin was a better choice for PP than a long slow one.
My Family did the Permanent Press thing for a few years in the late sixties, but we all agreed that the textures of the clothing and the bed linens were so inferior to cotton and linen that we abandoned the stuff quickly. My sister and I found some old PP bed linens, that my Mother must have put away in the Seventies (for posterity?), when we were cleaning out her house; they were very easy to throw away.
IMO Permanent Press cycles are for people who are troubled by wrinkles or for people who have fine and/or delicate clothing that's not quite worth the expense of dry-cleaning. I've almost never understood the value of a slow spin or a truly cold rinse. Now that I have a Programmed washer with a choice of 5 settings, that first button is almost always the choice. | ||
|
Post# 770329 , Reply# 16 7/12/2014 at 20:15 (3,574 days old) by electronicontrl (Grand Rapids, MI) |
||
Perm't Press | ||
| Post# 770520 , Reply# 17 7/13/2014 at 09:40 (3,573 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
Those where the days
Those where the days what i wish i had a washer with a good old fashion perm press cycle for washing T-shirts for me and my mom and a model like this with mtaching dryer of course i do not know if its just me but seems today perm press cycle on modern washers is not what it used to be
| ||
| Post# 770604 , Reply# 18 7/13/2014 at 18:17 (3,573 days old) by aladude () | ||
|
Perm press... for t-shirts... seriously? | ||
| Post# 770606 , Reply# 19 7/13/2014 at 18:23 (3,573 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
my old direct drive washer | ||
|
Post# 770607 , Reply# 20 7/13/2014 at 18:25 (3,573 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Yes, the man is serious.
If one is speaking of T-shirts worn as out garments and not just under shirts or blouses, then yes a good "no iron" wash cycle can make a huge difference.
Today most T-shirts are either of knits and or contain small amounts of Lycra (elastic). Either way a proper washing and drying can make the difference between a nice smooth result that looks as if it has been pressed, or a crumpled creased mess. | ||
|
Post# 770616 , Reply# 21 7/13/2014 at 19:10 (3,573 days old) by appnut (TX) |
||
 In the "old days"--from the time Permanent Press came out in 1964/1965 until the time when all man-made synthetics and double knits became the predominant laundry "stack", all outer garments, regardless of whether they were no-iron or not, were all treated as if they were permanent press. All items, even if my dad had a 100% cotton dress shirt, were all washed on permanent press (or durable press as the case of he Norge15) and dried on the Norge's wash'n'wear cycle. If it wasn't towels, underwear or sheets, it was washed on permanent press. Then when double knits, quiana, and such came along, all that got washed on knit/delicate. There were no jeans in our house--I didn't start wearing jeans until early to mid 1980s. If parents' friends didn't have a Kenmore or WP, I was "frustrated". Friends had a WI59 and I enjoyed the independent wash & spin speed knobs. Maytags caused me fits. No cool down what so ever. (this was when their timers had 45 second increments). When it started the post-wash spin, I'd wait for the water level switch to "reset" with that little noise, then I'd move the timer dial to the spin-spray rinse. I learned if I positioned it just so, I could end up with a cold spin spray rinse for 2 timer increments and they'd get a nice cool down. These days, I don't worry about washer cool down. Everything I wear gets dried in the dryer and thus "ironed" by the dryer. | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}