Thread Number: 66933
/ Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Modern washing machine energy usage claims: propoganda, or real? |
[Down to Last] |
|
Post# 896299 , Reply# 1   8/29/2016 at 20:37 (2,795 days old) by DADoES (TX, U.S. of A.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
The various machines are tested using the designated Normal cycle at the default settings on the premise that is how the typical consumer will largely use the machine. Said cycle and settings are typically the most restricted in energy and water usage. If getting toploaders to clean better and/or equivalent to frontloaders requires soaking and other changes to the cycle ... then that reasonably indicates frontloaders clean better at the default cycle settings. The differences in energy use are minimal in impact to the individual consumer point-of-view. Hundreds of thousands / millions of the machines in use has a sum-effect on a larger scale. Marketing propaganda is in everything. :-) |
Post# 896305 , Reply# 3   8/29/2016 at 20:47 (2,795 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
Welcome Nicolas, I hope you end up finding something useful here. This will be a BUSY thread with lots of of personal preference bias.
View Full Size
|
Post# 896345 , Reply# 5   8/30/2016 at 00:12 (2,795 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
7    
|
Post# 896362 , Reply# 8   8/30/2016 at 06:43 (2,795 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Energy schmenergy. Consumers conschmumers. As you already spotted, the energy differences are almost entirely irrelevant. And unlike a couple decades ago, so is Consumers. When I cancelled them, the only valuable report was used-car repair records.
Hasten to add, eco schmeco. Yes, CAL and AUS have real water shortages. Don't know why water is so expensive in EU, probably has to do with infrastructure financing. US water development is heavily if not entirely subsidized (meaning, your kids will pay for it). Bottom line, none of these highfalutin nanny agencies account for the environmental impact of landfilling 3-5yo appliances so shoddily designed and built they cannot practically be repaired. So the whole save-the-planet ballyhoo is a sham.
Agipellers can be shown to work, a half load at a time @ 90min each, if you're willing to spend 4 days doing a week's wash that used to take 1. Agitators are almost extinct, and lots rougher on fabric than tumblers.
Raised on a W tumbler, got back to FL when my 25yo Maytag quit in 98. But even FLs have been eco-nazied, gizmodized, and cost reduced (NOT price though, despite the efficiency of making many more of them with common parts among many brands) to the point I wouldn't want a new one of what's on sale today.
So back to whether your quandary is justified, I'd say yes.
|
Post# 896371 , Reply# 12   8/30/2016 at 07:47 (2,794 days old) by vacerator (Macomb, Michigan)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I said, maybe not for front loaders. Also factor in the cost of a Miele front loader with the 20 year bearing stateside price of about $3,000.00. A bearing job on a Whirlpool Duet is about $800.00 and the initial price of about $1,500.00 Almost apples to oranges? |
Post# 896421 , Reply# 13   8/30/2016 at 15:03 (2,794 days old) by johnb300m (Chicago)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I'll try to make this brief.
All I see are non-data-backed claims and "feelings" and nothing of any empirical study or testing. I get that the testing results of machines by CR and Reviewed.com might not jive with folks' preconceived and tightly held notions. Lord knows I have my qualms about them. But they test their products in very standard and repeatable, scientific procedures in controlled environments to the best of their abilities. If I were to test all these different machines, I would do my best also, to use the same water, same laboratory-grade additives with laboratory-grade garments and measuring devices. And then I'd run all the machines on their DEFAULT settings. These are the settings chosen as defaults by the manufacturers, and should be taken as face value for what they choose to be a "normal wash load." What better way than to discover differences in machines and manufacturers? The second you add in ANY modifications to the machines' programming, you are introducing variables to an already variable-laden condition. Again, are the reviews absolutely perfect? No. But they are the best guides the market has, and at a decent cost of what the test labs are willing to spend for repeatable, and trustworthy test results. If your 'heart of hearts' cannot accept the results and numbers, well, sorry, science doesn't care about your feelings.
View Full Size
|
Post# 896432 , Reply# 14   8/30/2016 at 15:47 (2,794 days old) by vACERATOR (Macomb, Michigan)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
That is from "Used People" I think. So with all due respect, with age comes wisdom. Overhead catenary are better and safer than a third rail. As we say out in the real world test field, that is better than any testing lab. |
Post# 896438 , Reply# 15   8/30/2016 at 16:16 (2,794 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
|
Post# 896475 , Reply# 16   8/30/2016 at 20:25 (2,794 days old) by vacerator (Macomb, Michigan)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Is there no bias among testing labs.? Marketing is marketing. Do test labs do it for free? Who pays them to? Manufacturers. Good review, good bonus, poor review, poor bonus. Read between the lines. It happens still today in code enforcement inspections also. |
Post# 896481 , Reply# 17   8/30/2016 at 21:07 (2,794 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
6    
Mike, Relax a little! I didn't say there was no bias.
But using scientific methods and attempting to do everything they can to normalize variables makes a testing lab FAR FAR more unbiased then someone that just says a TL machine is always better. Heck I know a lot of people that will offer the 'sound advice' that a TL machine is always better and they have never even owned a FL machine, that isn't bias right? We are all entitled to like what we like, but facts are facts and opinions are opinions. And last I checked CR buys all their machines they test so they are beholding to nobody. You may not agree with their testing, especially if they don't agree with your opinion, but they are the best empirical data we have at this point. |
Post# 896490 , Reply# 18   8/30/2016 at 21:58 (2,794 days old) by murando531 (Augusta, Georgia - US)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
It tickles me that the stubbornness here is so beyond reality that you could line the machines up in a room, lock the person in there with you, and run the tests and they'd see the results with their own two eyes and STILL have something to gripe about. Sounds like our current political situations in this country. *sigh*
Consumer Reports is adamant about one thing, and that is their vow to not allow manufacturers to bribe them for greater scores. I have my own beefs with CR just as others do, but they do have a very logical testing procedure that I feel gets the job done. CR's job is to say whether or not a product does its job, and how efficiently and quietly it does it. If you put badly stained cloth swatches into a standard TL, a FL, and an HE TL, set them to their Normal cycle, and the HE TL and FL removed more of the stain than the standard, how is there any bias other than the test proving exactly what it was supposed to? There are good and bad in all three categories of machine, and the good ones do their job, regardless of if you don't believe they do just because they don't work according to preconceived notions of how one thinks a washing machine should do its job. |
Post# 896519 , Reply# 19   8/31/2016 at 04:20 (2,794 days old) by chestermikeuk (Rainhill *Home of the RailwayTrials* Merseyside,UK)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I was researching with a leading detergent manufacturer years ago at their technical centre, I happen to ask why they didnt invite us (as in appliance groups etc) to test new detergents with all our different washers - the reply stunned me at the time "Because with you guys we wouldnt get the results we require" !! "scuse me" ? "well you guys would take a machine, sort the laundry, select a programme and work out the correct dosage of detergent" - so skewing our results because you probably know more than we do"....
Then the penny dropped ha ha, he continued, "We need the lowest common denominator, we need to know our detergent will work across all eventualities, wrong programme selection, mixed fabric washes and people who DONT understand how their washer works"...so there you have it !! |
Post# 896537 , Reply# 21   8/31/2016 at 07:47 (2,793 days old) by mayken4now (Panama City, Florida)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
|
Post# 896562 , Reply# 23   8/31/2016 at 11:01 (2,793 days old) by vacerator (Macomb, Michigan)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
an Advance Laundry System (speed queen) product knowing as I do now. |
Post# 896599 , Reply# 24   8/31/2016 at 13:13 (2,793 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
You may claim that Norgechef never read the OP but it is obvious that you never read past his first sentence where he, in quite an amount of depth, explained what to do about the leaking transmission. His first sentence wasn't objectionable either because he was complementary of the machine in question and had no intention of causing a stir in anyone.
In fact you misquoted his first sentence as well, here is a direct copy/paste of it. "If you want a reliable top loader (more reliable than anything on the market today), that still fills the full way up and cleans the clothes, and your up for the repair then go for it." This is clearly a complement to the Maytag Atlantis in question and not a call for debate on behalf of Norgechef. At least finish reading the post before berating the author. |
Post# 896610 , Reply# 25   8/31/2016 at 14:22 (2,793 days old) by johnb300m (Chicago)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 896614 , Reply# 26   8/31/2016 at 14:44 (2,793 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 896615 , Reply# 27   8/31/2016 at 14:45 (2,793 days old) by murando531 (Augusta, Georgia - US)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
@Henrik - While I do COMPLETELY agree with what you're saying about the certain group of antiHEers here, I honestly don't believe norgetag meant any insult at all in his comments. There are two users that I can name right off the bat that are horribly guilty of knee-jerk "everything new is crap I'm selling my stocks also I bought groceries today since that's relevant in this sentence" remarks (and I'm sure we all know who they are), but norgetag has never fallen into that group from what I've seen. I greatly appreciate your support and coming to my defense, but I think there may have just been a misunderstanding in how the comments came across. Lord knows I've been guilty of reading a post too quickly and mistaking its meaning before having to catch myself and read it again slowly and realize it was entirely different.
I took norgetag's comments as supportive advice, and in his statement "If you want a reliable top loader that fills the full way up..." I interpreted it as a nod towards the high-quality, minimal trouble build that the Atlantis has, which I completely agree with. If the Atlantis were still available as a new machine on the market today, a Speed Queen would be as irrelevant as a horse and carriage in the age of automobiles today. I say that solely in regard to traditional top-loaders, however. I could never use the Atlantis as a daily driver because the Bravos XL out performs it in every possible category. For its time the Atlantis and Neptune were the Rolls Royce of the laundry world, in my opinion, despite what people might say about their longevity. This particular Atlantis has been running non stop since 2002, and still runs strong despite losing oil. I'd say that speaks volumes for its design. TL;DR: I love you both and greatly enjoy your posts and support. Let's hug and make up, because there are users here that actually *do* intend insult for no reason other than to be salty and drab. <3 |
Post# 896618 , Reply# 28   8/31/2016 at 15:14 (2,793 days old) by washman (o)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
hi Frig! |
Post# 896633 , Reply# 29   8/31/2016 at 16:29 (2,793 days old) by joe_in_philly (Philadelphia, PA, USA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
13    
My suggestion is to get the machine that will make you happy. People have different preferences and priorities, and thus make different choices.
I will share my experience switching from a traditional TL washer to a HE FL washer. I had a GE Filter-Flo TL washer that I enjoyed using. My clothes were clean, and I liked the washing machine. When it needed to be replaced, I got a FL washer. Despite reading about how little water FL washers used, I was immediately worried during the machine's maiden wash because I could not believe so little water could wash and rinse the clothes effectively. But the results have been great, so I have learned that you don't need a tub full of water and an agitator to get clothes clean. Benefits of the having a FL washer for me were that I could eliminate my ritual of pretreating stains and soaking heavily soiled items. I can just use the appropriate cycle on my FL machine and a decent detergent and everything comes out stain free and clean. I like that I can sanitize and clean very heavy soiled clothes in 156F water without having to fuss with my house water heater; the washer heats just the water in the drum! Different stains can be cleaned in the same load, since it can start the wash cycle at a cooler temp, and then heat it up so there is no worry of setting a stain that requires cooler water. I went from an average of 7-6Ccf of water use per month to an average of 3-4Ccf. I used less detergent, bleach, and softener. The longer wash time also comes with shorter dry times since items come out less damp. There is much less lint in the dryer lint filter, no lint on clothing, and clothes look new longer since the tumbling is more gentle on fibers than the agitator in a full tub of water. You can tell when someone has washed a cheap sweatshirt in an over-packed TL washer - it is covered with little pills. I can pack my FL washer's drum full, and everything comes out clean. I didn't overfill my TL machine, but it still was rougher on clothes than a FL washer. I like that my FL washer will adjust each cycle based on the properties of the load. Small loads finish faster than larger loads with all else being equal. Absorbent items like towels get a different final spin routine than a load of lightweight clothes. A decent sized load takes 45-50 minutes, so it is not like it takes a super long time for a normal load. I can also run it through shorter/longer cycles if I would like. I have had my FL washer for over 13 years. I replaced the belt and drain pump myself, each taking just a couple of minutes - it took more time to remove and replace the appropriate panel of the washer than to actually replace the parts. I should mention I am NOT mechanically inclined, and have never even attempted any type of appliance repair. The original drain pump was a known bad design on my machine, but the redesigned pump has not been a problem. In summary, when it comes time to replace my machine, I will again go with a HE FL washer. I love how well it cleans, the savings and flexibility it offers. If you could try some FL washers at friend's or family's houses, you could then better judge if you would like them and what brand you prefered. When my friend stayed with me and had her stained kids clothes to clean, I told her to not pretreat the stains and just use the stain treat option and see what happens. She was so impressed, soon after she returned home she replaced her TL washer with a FL washer. |
Post# 896654 , Reply# 30   8/31/2016 at 18:18 (2,793 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
8    
Either method of doing laundry will get you there; H-axis or top loader with central beater; however the former will do so with less bother, energy and chemical use along with other benefits over the latter.
Automatic top loading washers are really just one level up from using wringer washer. That in turn took over from washboards, dolly pegs and other methods of doing washing by hand. However the underlying principles remain the same. Heavily to even moderately soiled wash should be pre-washed/soaked, never start with hot water, never wash in dirty water, stains should be attended to before going into the wash. With front loaders that self heat water you can dispense with some pre-treating because cycles start in cool or cold water then gradually reach hot or warm. This shifts certain stains that would be set by hot water ( starches, protein, albumen). All methods of doing laundry arise from the same five main principles: time, water temperature, chemical action, mechanical action, and amount of water. Any decrease in one normally requires an increase in the others and vice-versa. Top loading washers use far more water than H-axis washers but also a more powerful central beater (mechanical) action. The detergents and other chemicals used are highly diluted (all that water) but that is made up by the above mechanical action. H-axis washers use principles more in line with doing laundry by hand. Soapy/detergent water is pushed through textiles while they tumble back and forth. This action also causes fibers to flex and open releasing soils. The action of hitting sides of wash tub (lifting and dropping if you want) replicate the same actions of hand washing. Because you are pushing water through laundry rather than moving it through water you can use less of that substance and still obtain good results. Add a forced pump system that recirculates water through the wash and water use can be lessened further still. |
Post# 896701 , Reply# 33   9/1/2016 at 06:54 (2,792 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Long after fully automatics came along. Again to each his or her own.
It is worth noting on both sides of the Atlantic commercial laundries going back to the late 1800's onwards went with H-axis washing machines and have never looked back. Some places may have had a one or two top loaders for small odd loads, but never would they used for routine wash. Now all this being said again if you need to plow through tons of laundry quickly a top loader is up your street. However again how much time are you saving if the thing is done properly for badly soiled/stained washing. By the time you pre-wash/soak, pre-treat, main wash and perhaps a few rinses you've hit thirty minutes or more. The fastest commercial based washers from SQ can knock out a load in about the same time. Speaking on that subject one reason have considered getting a wringer washer (besides it being one step up from doing things in a tub...*LOL*) and that yes, can get through tons of wash quickly compared to the Miele or AEG, and with better results than the laundryette's SQ washers. The cycles on my local laundromat machines are too fast (about 30 min or less) and water often not hot enough (very short prewash with cold water, no spin after draining and filling with water for the wash, uses tap hot water), to get things really clean. Am noticing persons who routinely do wash at this place have plenty of tattle-tale grey. Now wouldn't want to do my entire wash each week with a wringer, but for the odd large load of sheets it may just do. |