Thread Number: 71472  /  Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Whirlpool commercial washer
[Down to Last]'s exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 945767   6/28/2017 at 19:27 by chetlaham (United States)        

For those that know, when Whirlpool commercial washers are filling, do they agitate, pulse spin or just fill when filling with water? Reason I ask are that the new domestic Whirlpool washers make agitation strokes when filling. Also for those who know, does anyone have any idea of the cycle time? Or the fill rate?

Post# 945781 , Reply# 1   6/28/2017 at 20:43 by cuffs054 (GA)        

So, if I'm reading the info correctly I can take my laundry to a LMAT and get a deep water wash and deep water rinse. BUT my friggin overpriced MT can't do the same? If I've got to save the planet then LMATs should to. I'm just saying.


I've finally started using nothing but the "bulky" setting on the Tags. It seems to give the most water. That and using both rinse options is getting the soap out.

Post# 945799 , Reply# 2   6/29/2017 at 00:16 by chetlaham (United States)        
Deep vs spray rinse

I am not sure if this model actually does a deep rinse (chances are it will if it has a fabric softener dispenser as indicated by the hopefully correct manual), however I know for a fact earlier models had the ability to remove or add jumpers in the control console which gave varying temps and fills. No mention of jumpers on this washer.

Post# 945805 , Reply# 3   6/29/2017 at 00:48 by henene4 (Germany)        

All cycles but the Normal Eco one use deep rinses...

However, at this price, you might be better of with just spending the few bucks more on a SQ. While they have proofen to not be immune to issues, they will most likely still survive longer then anything thet WP corp (even WP Prof equipment) puts out.

Has anyone ever seen any commercial setup that uses those? Already surprised you can buy them through such store chains...
Would be interesting to know what exactly is different to the non-commercial versions... And how different...

Post# 945844 , Reply# 4   6/29/2017 at 08:00 by Yogitunes (New Jersey)        

yogitunes's profile picture
you need to go to a current would be shocked at the amount of water one of those Fler machines use, versus what a home machine does.....

but I agree....why aren't they under strict government guidelines?

Post# 945903 , Reply# 5   6/29/2017 at 17:04 by chetlaham (United States)        
Front load water usuage

Thanks for the info! Glad to hear these default to a deep rinse. And hopefully fill to the top. I think these also have a DD agitator, an added plus.

I've noticed that to, laundromat front loads fill with far more water. Not sure why that is, but I remember an member saying the first front loads used as much water as a topload. At least those in Europe did decades ago. One theory I have is that with so much usage the drains can gum up without enough fresh water running over them as about the only water running down the pipes in laundromats is from the washers.

Post# 945904 , Reply# 6   6/29/2017 at 17:09 by chetlaham (United States)        
DD Agitator

Yes it does! :D Or at least a redesigned version, but thats good enough for me.

Post# 945984 , Reply# 7   6/30/2017 at 08:53 by suburbanmd (Maryland, USA)        

My guess is that laundromat FL's use more water so the load gets saturated within the short wash cycle time.

Post# 946000 , Reply# 8   6/30/2017 at 10:40 by golittlesport (California)        
older front loaders use as much water as top loaders?

Although older front loaders used more water to clean a smaller load of clothes than modern front loaders, I don't think there was ever a time when any front loader used the same amount of water as a top loader did to do a comparable amount of laundry.

Post# 946014 , Reply# 9   6/30/2017 at 12:35 by mrboilwash (Munich,Germany)        

mrboilwash's profile picture
Older FLs in the EU (1950s -1970s) used approximately the same amount of water as TLs did in the US for a comparable amount of clothes.
A low water level prewash followed by another low level mainwash and up to 5 half way up the door rinses makes about 180 liters of water. Same amount as a vintage center dial Maytag IIRC.

Many FLs of that timeframe did not spin at all between rinses and if they did they didn`t have any sudslock control, so they still had to use a similar amount of water.
But despite of all that prewashing and boilwashing and so on they were still way more energy efficient than a toploader.

Post# 946105 , Reply# 10   6/30/2017 at 19:49 by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        

launderess's profile picture
When commercial laundries moved from using the washer and separate extractor system to machines that could wash and spin dry, it was found they could reduce the number of rinses by one or maybe two.

Have mentioned that while my old Miele W1070 essentially only has one full spin of four (or five) rinses, and uses about ten gallons per; the AEG OKO-Lavamat actually rinses better with fewer rinse cycles and or using less water.

The AEG when on Normal/Cottons does some pretty impressive strong spins between the rinses. This help reduce the carry over of detergent/dirt between the rinse cycles.

Post# 946152 , Reply# 11   7/1/2017 at 00:03 by henene4 (Germany)        

That improvement of rinsing is however only possible if you prevent the production of aditional suds during the spin.

Thus, interim spins usually have verry delicate graduations, starting out verry slow and working their way up.
Further, the recirculation system of the AEG does have a mayor effect. It allows for way greater water throughput through the laundry.

Post# 946457 , Reply# 12   7/3/2017 at 01:35 by askolover (South of Nash Vegas, TN)        

askolover's profile picture

My Asko has 4 rinses but only burst spins between until the final.  The Miele has 3 rinses with full spins between, but I can't tell any difference between it and the Asko as far as results.

Post# 946476 , Reply# 13   7/3/2017 at 06:03 by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        
One reason love Persil and other EU powdered detergents

launderess's profile picture
Is the total absence of froth both during wash and spins. The Miele especially loves ramping up to speed without having to deal with issues caused by heavy froth.

Post# 946577 , Reply# 14   7/3/2017 at 18:04 by askolover (South of Nash Vegas, TN)        

askolover's profile picture

I've had issues with German Persil pearls...maybe the soft water. 

Post# 946593 , Reply# 15   7/3/2017 at 20:35 by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        

launderess's profile picture
Haven't used mega-perls in some time, but do have a supply in my stash. Am working through boxes of powdered Persil first.

Post# 955704 , Reply# 16   9/2/2017 at 07:59 by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        

launderess's profile picture
Batch/tunnel washing machines, which seem to be taking over the industrial/commercial laundry business do not extract between cycles. They cannot due to the nature of machine design. Thus the process is pretty much the same as the old separate washers then extractors of old. Wash is put through successive chemical baths, maybe even "boiled", then a few rinse baths, and finally extracted.

So the entire process is more about dilution during rinsing than also forcing/squeezing out water between each bath.

Post# 955705 , Reply# 17   9/2/2017 at 08:03 by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)        

launderess's profile picture
You can get an idea of historical water use for Laundromat washers here:


As for modern (made within the past five years or so), generally laundromat washers (front loading) use about 1.0 to 1.2 gallons of water per pound of wash.

Older front loaders (those made > five years ago) can range from 1.5 to 2.0 gallons of water per.

These numbers can vary by a few gallons, but generally from what one has read seem to be the general range.

SQ "commercial" top loaders used (or still use) 22.8 gallons of water per cycle. Maytag OTOH used (or uses) 31.5 gallons per cycle.

The SQ also spins faster than the Maytag (710 vs. 615 rpms respectively) which means not only does the Speed Queen use less water, but because it extracts more of same it is more energy efficient since it leaves laundry with less moisture. That is less water for a dryer to remove.

Post# 955713 , Reply# 18   9/2/2017 at 09:06 by henene4 (Germany)        
Tunnel machines

Most use a neutralisation step. A household washer tries to get to a neutral pH level through dilution, a batch machine uses a chemical process instead.

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.

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