Thread Number: 54556
Speed Queen in Consumer Reports reliability rankings
[Down to Last]

automaticwasher.org's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items --- [As an eBay Partner, eBay may compensate automaticwasher.org if you make a purchase using any link to eBay on this page]
Post# 769501   7/9/2014 at 18:16 (3,549 days old) by rll70sman (Hastings, Minnesota)        

The August issue of Consumer Reports just arrived today. Interestingly, enough subscribers reported on Speed Queen's top-load washer reliability that it made the rankings at 6 percent failure rate. However, no test results were shown for the brand in the ratings for top-load washers.... What a bias organization! I just do not understand what is so polictically incorrect with testing a machine that washes clothes with a center agitator in enough water at the temperature a user actually selects and not some dumbed-down temperature!

Rob





Post# 769538 , Reply# 1   7/9/2014 at 20:32 (3,549 days old) by murando531 (Augusta, Georgia - US)        

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



Post# 769547 , Reply# 2   7/9/2014 at 20:52 (3,549 days old) by washerdude (Canada )        

I agree they should especially re-score this unit. Its a little sad cause the dishwasher i bought was rated a 43 out 100 and i think it should be a higher rating then that. And they listed that it didnt clean or dry and was noisy which is the complete opposite of what we had experienced. To be honest when they claim "Nobody tests like us," i find it biased because realistically nobody would do what they do.

Post# 769552 , Reply# 3   7/9/2014 at 21:05 (3,549 days old) by JeffG ()        

""Nobody tests like us"

Other half: "Finally an explanation for your ratings."


Post# 769565 , Reply# 4   7/9/2014 at 21:20 (3,549 days old) by washman (o)        
They're also wrong on 2 more things

1. No such thing as auto temp control on the AWN 542
2. SQ does not endorse regular or HE detergent.

Since they cannot even get the basic facts on this machine right, why trust the ratings.

Oh I know, it does not fit their eco-logic agenda so therefore its junk and should probably be taken off the market.


Post# 769569 , Reply# 5   7/9/2014 at 21:28 (3,549 days old) by JeffG ()        

I noticed the same apparent mistake. Maybe the SQ's modified water inlet valve (that reduces flow rate on the hot side) qualifies as ATC to them?

Post# 769575 , Reply# 6   7/9/2014 at 21:39 (3,549 days old) by washman (o)        
I doubt CR

could even explain ATC. Other than it's necessary for some stupid reason.

I guess back in the day people really were smarter because we all managed to use laundromats and home machines w/o ATC and I don't recall a plethora of ruined clothes because of it.

Still, I'd have to see their sample rate before I go ga-ga over their 6% repair rate on the SQ. While I would like to believe it, I need to see more evidence to support this along with what exactly the problems are/were that got reported. If any!



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



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