|
Thread Number: 59811
/ Tag: Vintage Automatic Washers
POD 5-22-15 The Apotheosis of the Bendix |
[Down to Last] |  |
|
| Post# 824630 , Reply# 1 5/22/2015 at 14:30 (3,253 days old) by askomiele (Belgium Ghent) | ||
|
I don't want to bring up the endless discussion of TL vs FL, but I never understood why FL didn't really caught on. If u see the features of the Bendix washer, it was a good competitor against all other washers. Was it more expensive? Or maybe slighty to "big" for space reasons? | ||
| Post# 824633 , Reply# 2 5/22/2015 at 15:18 (3,253 days old) by norgeway (mocksville n c ) | ||
|
I still think! A slant front Westinghouse or a Bendix will outwash any toploader, there is no way to get as much action in more concentrated soapy water in a top loader. | ||
Post# 824654 , Reply# 4 5/22/2015 at 17:15 (3,253 days old) by Launderess  (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
Since Bendix held the patents for early front loading washing machine design other makers either had to pay royalties or find ways to work around. When you consider all front loaders require suspension systems and or bolting down it is easier to go with a top loader than compete.
The early requirement of bolting down was a big turn off to many housewives since you needed to locate the washer in a basement or somewhere that was possible. As mentioned above pure soap and then later detergents created too much froth for use in front loaders (never mind commercial laundries had been using soap in their machines since invention), so cleaning was compromised. Do not think any of the American front loaders offered reverse tumbling patterns, my grandmother's Westinghouse back in the 1970's certainly didn't; hence the machines gained a reputation as "rope makers". That is one's wash emerged as a tangled mess that had to be sorted before drying. For the American market top loading automatics were a logical progression from wringer/semi-automatic washing machines. It was what housewives were familiar with and how many based their laundry routines. Top loaders do not require stooping and or bending, special detergents (well they do but that is another matter), you can soak, stop or start the machine/have full control, don't require door seals and the rest of the arguments you have heard against front loaders for years. If the American market had been larger for domestic H-Axis washers methinks more development would have gone into them, just as with Europe. However by the 1960's or so top loading washers were basically a mature technology. This meant they were cheap to build and all makers had to do was add a few new features every other model year to freshen things up a bit. | ||
|
Post# 824666 , Reply# 5 5/22/2015 at 18:35 (3,253 days old) by appnut (TX) |
||
2 things | ||
|
Post# 824667 , Reply# 6 5/22/2015 at 18:36 (3,253 days old) by appnut (TX) |
||
|
This POD | ||
|
Post# 824703 , Reply# 8 5/22/2015 at 22:22 (3,253 days old) by warmsecondrinse (Fort Lee, NJ) |
||
|
So top loaders are like ridiculously large 4x4's...... a kind of compensation, then? (ducks and runs) | ||
| Post# 824715 , Reply# 11 5/22/2015 at 23:48 (3,253 days old) by washingpowder (NYC) | ||
|
Well Seems like we share very similar attitude Rapunzel. Wish I was a member with a history long enough to speak my mind as bold *LOL*. Thank you. | ||
| Post# 824753 , Reply# 12 5/23/2015 at 09:21 (3,252 days old) by golittlesport (California) | ||
LOL | ||
|
Post# 824800 , Reply# 14 5/23/2015 at 20:21 (3,252 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Rinsing is a process of dilution.
While yes in theory laundry should be extracted after the wash and before each successive rinse there is room for variation. Equally depending upon several factors be it H-Axis, top loading, hand or whatever method all produce good results.
My vintage Miele does not spin until between second and third rinse (out of total of five), and even then that is a short pulse (30 second) extraction. The main and only full extraction takes place before the fourth and final rinse. Interestingly on the AEG on "Normal" cottons/linens the machine will extract after the wash and each of the successive rinses. However if one chooses "Sensitive" not only is an extra rinse added but the sequence changes. Here the cycles mimic that front loaders of old; that is two deep rinses, short pulse/distribution extraction (low rpms), another deep rinse *then* a full speed extraction which will follow each of the successive rinses. Clearly the method behind the madness is to dilute out detergent/soil by saturating the wash with clean water. The first spin/extraction would then force out what all that water taking with it large amounts of detergent/soil. We have discussed rinsing methods of early front loaders before in the group. One rationale given for not spinning directly after the main wash and perhaps a few subsequent rinses focused upon wash that still could be very warm to hot (from a very hot to boil wash). Other reason was to avoid suds lock caused by throwing excessively frothy water out of the wash in excess of what the pump could handle. Modern front loaders with electronically controlled (multi-speed) motors and sensors are less bothered by suds locking. But older mechanical machines like my Miele simply begin spinning. If there is too much froth the machine will slow (to protect itself) but if the cycle times out before the froth can be cleared, tant pis... When the AEG detects excessive frothing it will not only slow or stop spinning but hold spin cycle until the pump can clear. Once that happens it will try again.... We also know from the group rather than the tiring process of moving wash between the tub and spinner on Hoover and some other twin tub machines for rinsing, persons move laundry to a basin or sink (with or without spinning first) and rinse there, then put the lot back into the spinner for final extraction. As for top loading washing machines being superior to front in terms of rinsing; oh I don't know... Every single load I took from my Whirlpool compact after a finished cycle and rinsed in the Miele produced detergent residue. This was even when the rinse water in the Whirlpool was "clear". | ||
| Post# 824836 , Reply# 15 5/24/2015 at 05:23 (3,251 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea)) | ||
Tom: "Both have inherent flaws"
They do, don't they? I've been laundering 60 years and as I find machinery entertaining, I watch closely. Almost evenly distributed, I've used FLs, TLs and TTs.
Wash: TLs scrub better. They also wear out clothes better. Well, you have to throw them away eventually anyway. FLs are gentle but REAL DIRT-- as distinct from office dirt-- can elude them. Ideal TT would be agitator (spiralator). Next would be 70s Panasonic offset washplate; great turnover and didn't make a tornado tangle of everything bigger than socks. Last would be what I have now and what passes for many TLs today, flat washplate. Tangles everything from t-shirts up, ate holes in my jeans the first time they were washed. That was before/how I learned to use it as a soak tub with very short duty cycle... what would you call it? Not exactly agitation. Stirring? Swashing? Plating? Motoring? Osterizing? Rinse: I'm a rinsaholic. Drinking tumblers, 4 times in running hot water. Repeat rinse cycles in dishwashers (when I had/used one). I was relatively satisfied with vintage KM/WP, MT, WH rinsing. If I wasn't I repeated. In the TT, the detergent is extremely concentrated. But since I'm standing there anyway I can control spin/rinsing until it's clear THEN agitate rinse and do that sequentially for ever how many loads there are. A bigger BUT is, how many people are OCD enough to stand there and supervise? Ideal world, the machine would do the necessary work without supervision. The '98 FL sudslocked briefly on towels. Their answer to that was split the first 2 spins in half with a pause between for the suds to settle. The WH mostly didn't care. Perhaps more clearance between tub and drum than allowed today. Can't say I ever saw KM/WP or MT suds lock. But then I never dumped a half box of powder in and walked away. Spin: 3 elements; ability (not locked or unbalanced), speed (rpm), duration (min). Judge for yourself. Sorry for writing an encyclopedia of machine laundry that's all but irrelevant today. The vintage machines you probably already know. The small TTs are not practical for anyone with any volume of wash or any shortage of spare time. The computerized ones, I don't know and that's the way I like it. Could have been worse, by twice. I'm just brimming with irrelevant data. I coulda just said "read what everybody else said" cuz it sums pretty well. | ||
|
Post# 824892 , Reply# 16 5/24/2015 at 13:22 (3,251 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD) |
||
|
Launderess, that is why top loaders needed to give two rinses to rinse well. Machines with only one deep rinse in the cycle did not rinse completely. | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
