|
Thread Number: 74548
/ Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Kirk's Speed Queen tr7 video |
[Down to Last] |  |
|
| Post# 983450 , Reply# 1 2/19/2018 at 17:59 (2,247 days old) by wishwash (Indiana) | ||
|
I think the smaller load makes it look better than it is. I never thought I'd say that my Kenmore VMW could out wash a Speed Queen, but alas... | ||
| Post# 983453 , Reply# 2 2/19/2018 at 18:08 (2,247 days old) by IowaBear (Cedar Rapids, IA) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 983506 , Reply# 3 2/19/2018 at 21:33 (2,247 days old) by Infusor (Usa) | ||
|
Way better that a whirlpool cabrio. | ||
| Post# 983517 , Reply# 4 2/19/2018 at 23:09 (2,247 days old) by twintubdexter (Palm Springs) | ||
 I think the type of clothes being washed has something to do with it too. A load of Levis seems to have issues. A tub full sheer items like ladies' slips (do they still wear those?) or panties would probably be fine. Since I'm a rugged kind of guy, the only stuff that goes in my washer are rugged, he-man clothes made from fabrics like denim, heavy flannel or ballastic nylon . I wash all my dainty lingerie and underthings in the sink.
View Full Size
| ||
| Post# 983521 , Reply# 5 2/19/2018 at 23:55 (2,247 days old) by Johnb300m (Chicago) | ||
I honestly did not notice a difference in wash action between the Lorain machine and Kirk's machine.
They look the same. In fact, you could argue that the wash action was better with the hand towels because they're more pliable and flow better than a pile of heavy jeans. If those jeans were just "normal" dirty from usual daily wear, I'm sure the '18 machine adequately washed them. But that white towel test that Eugene did, also looked like a pretty valid test. And it was visually obvious, there was more orange stain left on the '18 model, than the '17 model towels. All in all, it's pretty mediocre. But I think speed queen could fix it if they get off their butts, think outside the box, and revise their agitator design. Put some fins on the bottom. NOT on the axis of the pole. | ||
Post# 983539 , Reply# 6 2/20/2018 at 06:15 (2,247 days old) by henene4  (Heidenheim a.d. Brenz (Germany)) |
||
|
In the end, they shot themselfes into their own feet. SQ was SQ because their machines were old school. Ypu'd only buy a SQ if you wanted and old school TL. Now they don't sell those anymore and thus lost 90% of the appeal of their products. | ||
|
Post# 983543 , Reply# 7 2/20/2018 at 06:31 (2,247 days old) by tolivac (greenville nc) |
||
|
Lets not blame this all on SQ-the new Fed regulations could be more to blame--SQ is just building a washer to meet these somewhat ridiculous regs!They are just doing what they have to do-bet they don't like the regs either.Yes,time to repeal them. | ||
| Post# 983547 , Reply# 8 2/20/2018 at 06:48 (2,247 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit) | ||
The old washer could have still complied with the new regulations, and even kept the mechanical timer. The old washer was only slightly too high for electricity usage. If they turned Normal/Eco into a semi-agitated cycle where there was short bursts of agitation and shortened the final spin, it would have complied. Water usage was apparently just fine, or only needed a very slight adjustment.
| ||
| Post# 983551 , Reply# 9 2/20/2018 at 07:46 (2,247 days old) by joeypete (Concord, NH) | ||
It's hard to say if Kirk's was a "better" machine. The notion that his machine had a different option, than Eugene's leads me to believe they updated them in some way, but....like others have said, I think this machine will do ok for marginally dirty items. Dirty stuff, forget it. Eugene's towel test proved that.
All the other manufacturers have gotten their machines to work with new regulations without much modification to them, so I don't fall for that idea. SQ could have made their old design work. But for some reason they decided to change it. Considering their commercial top load machines still use the old platform...seems like having a whole different one for "residential" use, would not be cost effective. But good news is you can still buy their old platform in a commercial machine. They sell them without coin slots. Granted they don't have as many wash options, but they are comparable to the new Maytag commercial. | ||
|
Post# 983553 , Reply# 10 2/20/2018 at 07:53 (2,247 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey) |
||
I would like to see it through a few more loads....
but at this point, it seems to have taken care of a number of issues from the earlier models..... the rinsing, even from the first one, looked awful clear to me...especially after a sudsy wash... and that's all part of good extraction during the first spin..... and speaking of spin, 800rpms...and it seems to take all the power from the motor and direct it to the tub, no belt slippage there.... probably the only thing I would ask for is an extended final spin... some mentioned of no brake....well, maybe no actual brake package...but seems to use inertia from the motor to slow things down to a stop.... now if you want to see a SQ without a brake....take a solid tub version....now that takes close to 2 minutes to coast down to a stop... all in all, its still going to be the last machine you will most likely ever buy.....welcome to the new 'Dependable Care' machine for 2018 | ||
|
Post# 983554 , Reply# 11 2/20/2018 at 08:00 (2,247 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
Washing 5 pairs of jeans in the new 18 SQ TLW Not impressed at all, first the silly loading, if you have to load that carefully forget it.
None of the jeans were dirty to start with.
Liquid detergent should never be added first to TLWs with electric drain pumps as it can stratify in the hose leading to the drain pump and stay there for the entire wash cycle.
The fabric softener was all lost in the first rinse, useless
This was a ridiculous amount of water used to just basically rinse and freshen just 5 pairs of jeans.
John | ||
|
Post# 983558 , Reply# 12 2/20/2018 at 08:37 (2,247 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers) |
||
Well...... | ||
| Post# 983579 , Reply# 13 2/20/2018 at 11:23 (2,246 days old) by johnb300m (Chicago) | ||
|
I think that's a great point, John.
Many are saying that this had to be done by SQ to meet the new EPA reqs. But...these still seem to use a LOT of water, and do a "less than" job. Whereas, arguably, (leaving durability out of this!) other brands of HE machines can do far better with less water. Heck. SQ could've just ripped off GE's current platform with more durable parts, and been well on their way to success. | ||
|
Post# 983678 , Reply# 15 2/21/2018 at 06:20 (2,246 days old) by tolivac (greenville nc) |
||
|
Wonder if it would help to add "nubulator" "nubs on the walls of the tub?This agi-drum doesn't impress me one bit! | ||
| Post# 983686 , Reply# 16 2/21/2018 at 07:27 (2,246 days old) by scrubflex (bronx, new york) | ||
|
Good idea and diddo | ||
|
Post# 983690 , Reply# 17 2/21/2018 at 08:19 (2,246 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA) |
||
|
product launch I remember Kirk being involved in the product launch. I have to say, the wash action seems to be improved on his machine. I hope he continues to test it some more. I hope he does more real life scenario loads. Here's the product launch video. CLICK HERE TO GO TO GELaundry4ever's LINK | ||
|
Post# 983691 , Reply# 18 2/21/2018 at 09:16 (2,246 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
New SQ TL Washers
No amount of agitator redesign and tub ripples etc will ever make this design work really well, as I said originally, IF IT WAS THIS EASY TO MAKE A WASHER WASH CLOTHING, Manufactures certainly wasted billions of dollars designing washers over the last 75 to a hundred years, there has been no basic breakthrough that would make this wash well, and other manufacturer could have done this many years ago and I am sure many tried and rejected this approach.
Speed Queen should have put this washer out for their dealers to test and approve before launching it. I predict they will bring back their FL washers, and maybe a transmission TL machine and they will redesign these TL washers but that may take a few years. John L. | ||
|
Post# 983703 , Reply# 19 2/21/2018 at 11:42 (2,245 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey) |
||
|
| ||
| Post# 983721 , Reply# 20 2/21/2018 at 14:52 (2,245 days old) by johnb300m (Chicago) | ||
|
| ||
|
Post# 983744 , Reply# 21 2/21/2018 at 17:36 (2,245 days old) by Combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md) |
||
|
| ||
|
Post# 984449 , Reply# 23 2/26/2018 at 15:44 (2,240 days old) by dylanmitchell (Southern California) |
||
They're about to get some real-world tests and the machines with either work well, work passably for most people, or not work well for anybody. SQ buyers are usually savvy well-informed shoppers and the dealers aren't dummies so the machines will have to meet those expectations. Hopefully, SQ will work to get future machines into the work well category (assuming they don't work great on the first roll out). Despite Dept of Energy regs it seems a washer that still cleans can be built but we're pretty close to the story of dishwashers that don't clean well (long story about energy, water and phosphorous) but are the best we can get unless we go with vintage machines. I'd like to see a product that meets the needs of sophisticated users with dirty work clothes available in the new market but we may end up having to shop the used market and rely on craiglist finds and shops like Lorainfurniture to refurb and resell the good old machines.
| ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
