Thread Number: 72768
/ Tag: Vintage Automatic Washers
CR Downrating Front Loaders |
[Down to Last] |
|
Post# 961436 , Reply# 1   10/9/2017 at 04:44 (2,363 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
1) CR tests washers using the designated 'Normal' cycle at the longest wash time (or soil level setting) for that cycle. Today the test is conducted in 'cool' water (around 80 degrees) with their highest-rated detergent.
2) The longest wash time on a 1950s-1980s front-loader (many of which were made by Westinghouse / White Westinghouse and rebadged for various brands) was 12-15 minutes. Today, the wash tumble time on the Normal cycle at the heaviest soil setting is 30-60+ minutes. The detergent solution is also significantly more concentrated than it was in vintage front-loaders because today's machines use less water per fill. All of this explains why the cleaning scores of today's front-loaders is so much higher than those of yesteryear. 3) The final spin on today's front-loaders is more than double the speed and three times the length of vintage machines. This increases their energy-saving scores because clothes spend less time in the dryer. The spin speed of my 1987 Frigidaire front-loader (again, a rebadged White-Westinghouse) was probably 450-500 rpm lasting about 5 minutes. My last front-loader, a Maytag 8100 (circa late 2015) had a top spin speed of 1400 rpm lasting 11 minutes. NOTE: The machine did not spin at 1400 the entire 11 minutes. You'd hear it gradually ramp up from around 1100 rpm during the last few minutes. These improvements helped boost the overall scores of front-loaders to the point where they now surpass most top-loaders (HE or otherwise). 4) There was a period of a few years, roughly 1990-1993, when no front-loaders were being produced for the US market. Electrolux had purchased White-Westinghouse, shut down production of front-loaders, and designed the first generation of Electrolux-based machines. Maytag was also busy designing the first Neptune front-loaders. These were a great improvement over the White-Westinghouse washers, but not as good as today's machines. |
Post# 961448 , Reply# 3   10/9/2017 at 06:04 (2,362 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
Was actually very highly rated by CR in 1987 according to my copy of buying guide.
Machine scored tops across the board for water efficiency, unbalanced load handling, and linting. Only negatives were for extraction and brand repair frequency. CR goes on to note that the machine required a special low sudsing detergent, but we know that already. They also had some niggles about the permanent press cycle being shorter than most, and that machine didn't offer more than one speed for washing(most front loaders then or now still don't), but did have a second lower spin speed. For some odd reason CR claims the two tested front loaders (Westhinghouse and a cousin sold under the Gibson brand name) had less capacity than standard top loaders tested. But since they used less water it all balanced out in the end. Overall don't see any down grading by CR of front loaders. In fact those ratings were streets ahead of early Bendix and other front loaders that CR nearly universally panned IIRC. Truth to tell CR gets a hair across their behinds about this or that until it proves popular or something, then you hear a different story. For years CR really didn't like front loading washing machines (going by their reviews). Then as various forces intervened and changed the market place, now H-Axis washers can do no wrong, and it is top loaders with central beaters on their hit list apparently. |
Post# 961450 , Reply# 4   10/9/2017 at 06:34 (2,362 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 961455 , Reply# 5   10/9/2017 at 06:55 (2,362 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
As a great cleaning machine, they also were generally very pleased with most of the dozen different combos they tested in 1960 in terms of cleaning ability.
Westinghouse built their 3 belt FL washer from 1959 through the end of 1988. In June of 1989 a redesigned version of this machine reappeared in both free standing and stack-able models.
This new machine was rated as the best performing AW washer by CRs, but in a year or so when all the repair problems appeared CR only recommended them with caution.
John L. |
Post# 961466 , Reply# 6   10/9/2017 at 08:19 (2,362 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
CR....unbiased my @SS!!!.....
I know people who read this and obey it like it was the Bible.....that magazine isn't worth buying, you run into the store, flip through the pages, take note of anything worth reading, take that advice like a grain of salt, and toss it.... for all of their history, there is not one thing they stay dedicated to and on track with....today something is bad, tomorrow, the same item is the best ever...what the heck is all this flipping back and forth...... I gather the idea of new millennials taking over as time goes on, but if you work for places like this, and if the subject of washing machines comes up, they should go back and re-read what they posted from past issues....that might change their minds on what their reporting....the job of any good journalist is research... people in general can't form an honest opinion.....thats human nature.....if a person is set on a GM product, you wont convince them that a Mopar item is superior....and so goes the people who write these articles... |
Post# 961471 , Reply# 8   10/9/2017 at 08:50 (2,362 days old) by chetlaham (United States)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
6    
Yogi- my honest opinion is that its deeper than that. CR is manufacturer propaganda masquerading as independent unaffiliated opinion. I see a lot of down playing and over playing to level the field, then a little boost on one side to seal a person's opinion. It creates this perception that there is true neutrality, with a mental take-away that makes the consumer feel like they made up their own mind with raw facts. Nothing is further from the truth, everything is baked in a manner where you like what they want you to like and dislike what they want you to dislike. The illusion of free will and free opinion.
|
Post# 961477 , Reply# 9   10/9/2017 at 09:12 (2,362 days old) by panthera (Rocky Mountains)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I have friends in Germany who are certain that Stiftung Warentest is really the marketing division of the major manufacturers, all housed in one building. ÖkoTest, until a major overhaul in the early 1990s, rated the packaging materials higher than the washing machine's performance - Seriously. I imagine it is not easy to set up fair tests that actually mean something to consumers, but my impression of CR beginning in the early 1980s was that they'd dumbed down so far as to basically be worthless.
|
Post# 961482 , Reply# 10   10/9/2017 at 09:35 (2,362 days old) by chetlaham (United States)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
|
Post# 961505 , Reply# 12   10/9/2017 at 12:48 (2,362 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 961514 , Reply# 14   10/9/2017 at 13:33 (2,362 days old) by Maytag85 (Sean A806)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I never really cared for Consumer Reports period. Whenever you watch their washing machine buying guide video on YouTube, they seem to overload their test machines (they use a couple of Kenmore 80/90 series washers) and you will notice that they will try to wash a large load on a small/medium water level. Clothes won't get clean in a top loader if you don't use the correct water level. In one of their "Best Ways to Stop Flushing Money Down the Drain" they say "if you are hanging on to a old washing machine because it still works, you may be wasting as much as 40 gallons of water per load" but not every top load washer uses 40 gallons of water (some top loaders use 40 gallons of water). I can't believe that they are basically saying "get rid of your old washing machine that still works", well if it still works and gets clothes clean, I have no reason to get rid of it!
|
Post# 961515 , Reply# 15   10/9/2017 at 13:37 (2,362 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I agree with you guys.....
I just laugh when someone mentions CR as any sort of guide to making a purchase... I have a brother-in-law who goes by every single word they type, as if this educated person can't make a simple decision on his own...and apparently he can't... there was criticism from them back in the 80's over a car I loved owning, the car may have not the best reviews, but their comments of the car was that it 'talked' to the owner, they felt it was childish and useless....fast forward to 2000's, and their over whelmed with the praise of cars today that 'talk' and have 'voice commands' from their owners..... an honest opinion for any car like this, it may not be your cup of tea, but offering feedback can show beneficial information for the drivers habits... but at the same time, my opinion of that car, it verbally alerted me to a few malfunctions I may not have caught at an early stage before damage to said vehicle.... your mileage may vary.... |
Post# 961543 , Reply# 17   10/9/2017 at 16:15 (2,362 days old) by Maytag85 (Sean A806)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
It seems like Consumer Reports reviews products that seem to have poor build quality, and products that seem to have a short life span. Only the gullibles will fall for whatever Consumer Reports says is the "Best Buy", and in reality it is the WORST buy! Reliability is the most important thing when buying something new.
|
Post# 961571 , Reply# 21   10/9/2017 at 18:09 (2,362 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
Not only about how skimpy CR's coverage in print magazine is now, but that even after paying for a subscription you are required to pony up *more* money for online access. Since large parts of the meat and potatoes of reviews are now online it is rather galling CR hits one up to pay for something many feel they should have gotten in the first place.
|
Post# 961582 , Reply# 22   10/9/2017 at 19:02 (2,362 days old) by ea56 (Cotati, Calif.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I gave up on CR at least 20 years ago. Like others have already stated there was a time many years ago, probably you have to do back at least 40 years ago, when CR really seemed to go in depth product evaluations that were more aimed towards people that were senislble and hoping to get good value. Now they seem to direct their skimpy, product biased reviews to the more affluent, not the more practical.
My sensible maiden aunt, code for Lesbian school teacher used to subscribe to CR, and reading them at her home in the late 50's and early 60's was my first exposure to CR. The reports and reviews were no nonsense and gave lots of info that was based on testing that they explained. I believe that the consumer had a better opportunity to make an informed decison on a prospective large purchase based upon CR reviews. Then by the early 80's the quality and depth of CR reviews declined steadily. And their recommendations began to not make a lot of sense sometimes. Now, with the access to multiple reviews and manufacture websites there isn't much need for CR, and their biased opinions. I'll do the research myself, and if I make a poor decision on a purchase, its on me. Eddie This post was last edited 10/09/2017 at 19:30 |
Post# 961595 , Reply# 23   10/9/2017 at 20:31 (2,362 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I lost faith in Consumer Reports probably about 1990 when they compared two stereo receivers--a plain Sony, and a Sony ES (upscale Sony line)--and concluded the ES model wasn't worth it--or worse--because the measurements were the same. I felt that the comparison was hugely unfair because none of the geniuses at Consumer Reports apparently bothered giving a fair listening test.
|
Post# 961657 , Reply# 24   10/10/2017 at 06:01 (2,361 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
6    
CR is one source of information available to us when making purchases. I maintain that their testing methods for appliances and cars have improved and become more, not less accurate, than even ten years ago. Name another US-based source that tests as many brands and models using standardized criteria.
I am one of the people who almost always checks in on CRs ratings when making purchases. So far, their track record for predicting the performance of products I've purchased has been remarkably accurate. The GE double oven I bought brings water to a boil very quickly, has a superior self-cleaning cycle, and doesn't bake quite as evenly as the Frigidaire it replaced. My Speed Queen washer uses a lot of water, is very good (but not excellent, as was the Maytag 8100 front-loader it replaced) at cleaning, has a shorter cycle time than most HE washers, and doesn't extract as much water as most HE machines (especially front-loaders). The 2014 Ford Fusion I purchased handles well on the highway, has a fairly quiet interior, and is a bit tight for floor space in the driver's compartment. It shifts smoothly and has a rather old-school 2.5 liter 4-cylinder engine that sounds raucous in pedal-to-the-metal situations. The voice-activated features ("Read text message"; "Call Steve") are frustratingly hit-or-miss. Some of the purchases I've made (the Maytag 8100 pair, for instance) were at or near the top of CR's ratings. Although a recently-acquired top-loading SQ washer was in the middle of the pack (the dryer further down the list, a rating I absolutely agree with) the set of criteria I had for this purchase did not emphasize water/energy consumption. I don't care for impeller / agipeller-based top-loaders, so SQ was the obvious choice for me. Everyone here knows I prefer HE front-loaders, but circumstances involving installation on an upstairs wooden floor where laundry room noise intrudes on the other three upper level apartments led me to a top-loader this time. Naturally, my purchases also involve checking out the opinions of AW members. While opinions vary widely about particular brands even here, I certainly put more stock in the user reviews at this site than, say, the ones at Lowe's or Home Depot. On top of that, several people here actually service appliances for a living, so we are privy to insight/information not available to the average consumer. Anyway, no one should expect CR to be the be-all and end-all of information about products. It's simply one of any number of resources you can consult when making purchases. Having said all that, will I be washing all my loads in cold water? No. No I won't. |
Post# 961672 , Reply# 25   10/10/2017 at 07:38 (2,361 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Too much narrowness in CR's mission is related to the ever-declining quality in today's product...
And the fact, that everyday goods are mainly 'cell phone-this' and 'computer-that', meaning that that along w/ cars and appliances, those are where laws of perfection greatly apply... So while Consumer Reports wants to maintain themselves as a credible source, although quite a fall from being THE Credible Source, you have to realize there are a lot of other tools for researching and determining quality of an item you are planning to purchase by just going to sources on the Web... A few consumer guide type places have turned up online, which are more reliable, tested by an actual public and in most cases, Free... Word of mouth goes farther than it used to, even some brick-and-mortar retailers that if there's knowledgable help even know, usually by the commerce of selling their product and making determinations on returns, repairs and customer complaints, while based on how much of that item sells... -- Dave |
Post# 961696 , Reply# 27   10/10/2017 at 09:52 (2,361 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
the best source for any machine, auto, or product....the 'Mechanic'....
the guy who works on these will give the best opinion, as he can tell you which has the most issues, which he sees less of, which are built better than the others....which will perform better than another.... even a Pharmacist will give you better input, and for the most part, more trusted information, than most doctors ever will..... I always found it funny, ask any Maytag Repairman, he is anything but bored and lonely!... |
Post# 961697 , Reply# 28   10/10/2017 at 09:57 (2,361 days old) by dermacie (my forever home (Glenshaw, PA))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 961734 , Reply# 30   10/10/2017 at 12:32 (2,361 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
But Martin, even then, mechanics and service people can harbor biases for products that let them overlook faults that would drive someone else to distraction. |
Post# 961738 , Reply# 31   10/10/2017 at 12:41 (2,361 days old) by petek (Ontari ari ari O )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I highly doubt that they are being "bought". Just imagine legal nightmare that would ensue. Say cars for example.. how could any of the big manufacturers "buy" a good rating? Look at the years and years Suzuki had them in court because of a bad rating which they eventually lost..CR was able to prove repeatedly to the court that their test was not biased by running the exact test over and over and getting the same result. And with all of these company's owning each or part of each other off and on over the years,, they'd know. Remember they're not for profit. they make a lot of money from donations and subscriptions . Lastly,,, you would think after what 80 years.. and the hundreds or thousands of people they've employed in that time that some of them were shall we say "disgruntled" as there are in every workplace.. If shenanigans had or were going on you can be damn well assured that it would come out, be leaked, by one of them.. And it hasn't. |
Post# 961752 , Reply# 32   10/10/2017 at 14:15 (2,361 days old) by DaveAMKrayoGuy (Oak Park, MI)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Okay, Suzuki & Rollovers, there's also the Ford Explorer and Firestone... Lawsuits ensuing there just as badly, and people needing help as numbers of injuries and deaths rose from each event...
Consumer ("You know who/what") Reports just as much got caught in the crossfires of--along the lines of 'reporters of the Clark Kent/Jimmy Olsen/Lois Lane-breed', only no Superman could save them, there... -- Dave |
Post# 961778 , Reply# 35   10/10/2017 at 15:38 (2,361 days old) by ea56 (Cotati, Calif.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
I couldn't agree with you more! I too was a supervisor for the last 16 years I worked for the Human Service Dept. People always want to call and complain, but they will seldom give a commendation for good service. I have made it a point all my life to give credit where credit is due. When someone does a good job for me I always call the appropriate party and make sure that the worker gets recognition for a job well done. Having worked with the public all my working life I know how meaningful it is to hear something good about an employee or to be an employee commended for a job well done.
And as a supervisor I never let an opportunity go by to give praise. Its human nature to live up to recognition for good work, and conversely, to sink in performance if one believes that no one cares that they are doing a good job. People live up or down to how they are preceived. For this reason I believe its always a good idea to take some negative reviews with a grain of salt. Eddie This post was last edited 10/10/2017 at 15:56 |
Post# 961834 , Reply# 36   10/10/2017 at 20:36 (2,361 days old) by Gyrafoam (Wytheville, VA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
If all I had to choose from was a 1953 Bendix Combo I would be just fine. Just need some Dash detergent or All.No problem. |
Post# 961860 , Reply# 37   10/10/2017 at 23:08 (2,361 days old) by Losangeles (Muscle Shoals, AL 35661)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
When I retired from the Naval Submarine Service I upgraded from a Lg capacity WP with the Super Surgilator agitator. I bought a 2006 WP Duet pair. Rather invested. It was the most expensive appliances in the house. It has been and continues to be a great machine. It has washed its way through two kids in college, loads and loads of nursing uniforms, miles of sheets, towels, quilts jeans and even my grimy garden clothes and even the sheerest curtains and has not given me so much as a sneeze of trouble. I have had one water valve replacement but it was still under warranty. It is now 11 years old and still going strong. If I could have changed anything in the washer it would have been the tilted tub. Washing a load of jeans or towels is a tangling nightmare. I frequently have to pause before the final spin to detangle so the machine will balance and go into the final high speed spin. And the 1200 RPM final spin. WOW, What a finale! My mother-in-law had a Westinghouse slant front that was the same with tangling as my WP. You would think that WP would have learned that tilted tubs were a mistake. BTW what was the thinking behind the tilted tub. Anyway, I did not consult CR before buying. I relied mostly on word of mouth. Again, is there a reliable source of information/ratings for washer coming on the market in 2018? Thanks for listening. |