Thread Number: 17034
1950s-1960s era Speed Queen or Maytag ?
[Down to Last]

automaticwasher.org's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items --- [As an eBay Partner, eBay may compensate automaticwasher.org if you make a purchase using any link to eBay on this page]
Post# 280583   5/17/2008 at 23:59 (5,794 days old) by mrcleanjeans (milwaukee wi)        

Which is better and why in your opinion? And which is purtier?




Post# 280587 , Reply# 1   5/18/2008 at 00:27 (5,794 days old) by tuthill ()        
The Maytags IMO

Built like a tank, they seem to last forever. However, I believe they were a bit lacking in the feature department. There was a recent thread showing a top of the line 60's Speed Queen, and it was loaded with features. I love the looks of the older Maytags... simple elegance that can never be matched.

Post# 280593 , Reply# 2   5/18/2008 at 01:09 (5,794 days old) by danemodsandy (The Bramford, Apt. 7-E)        
Hmm...

danemodsandy's profile picture
"Built like a tank, they seem to last forever. However, I believe they were a bit lacking in the feature department."

That may have been true in the '50s and the early '60s, but by the time of the New Generation models of the mid-'60s, they had much better features. The TOL 906s were so chock-full of features and so pre-programmed, the only machines I know of that could match them were contemporary Lady Kenmores (it must be said that the LKs offered more flexibility; 906s were set up so that you couldn't modify any of their preset cycles).

Later, in the '70s, Maytag extended features even deeper into the line. I have an LA108 from the latter half of the decade; it's a one-speed model that was nearly the bottom of the line. Yet- courtesy of Maytag's almost unbelievably simple engineering- it has three cycles (Regular, Permanent Press, and Delicate), four water temp selections (Cold/Cold, Warm/Cold, Hot/Cold, and Warm/Warm), as well as three water level selections (Small, Medium and Large). In addition, it has a bleach dispenser and a softener dispenser. This is a one-speed machine, so the Delicate cycle is Fabric-Matic, meaning that the machine agitates a bit, stops a while, then agitates a bit more, then stops, etc.

All of this is done with some of the simplest, most elegant technology I've ever seen. It is absolutely all the washer I need. Other brands produced in the same time frame didn't have this many features, because their engineering was too elaborate. For instance, softener dispensers were often solenoid-controlled on other makes, instead of the Maytag's simple reliance on centrifugal force. That meant that such dispensers were too expensive to put on every model. Maytag could afford to give one of theirs with most every machine.

In their time, Speed Queens were supposed to be exceptionally robust machines; they were promoted as such and people who bought them believed that to be true. But from what I can see (and I am willing to be corrected on this point), the survival rate on vintage 'Tags is higher than that for SQ's from the same time frame.

Can you tell I loves me some Maytags? ;-)


Post# 280594 , Reply# 3   5/18/2008 at 01:18 (5,794 days old) by danemodsandy (The Bramford, Apt. 7-E)        
And Oh, Yeah...

danemodsandy's profile picture
...You asked about purtier.

My vote would be for Maytag there, too. Maytag styling was highly professional, very sleek and beautifully done. For my money, SQ styling always had that "alternative product" look, with styling that was a little stodgy and a little out-of-date. I don't mind that, actually; my 1980's TriStar vacuum cleaner has styling derived from the Compact vacuum cleaner of 1940, updated only in small details. "Niche" manufacturers offering a product that was supposedly better than the big brands often had outdated or slightly clunky styling (think American Motors vs. General Motors). In cases where the product really was terrific (like my TriStar), "alternative" styling can actually be somewhat endearing.

I think that SQs were good machines, don't get me wrong. I just happen to like Maytags a lot.


Post# 280595 , Reply# 4   5/18/2008 at 01:21 (5,794 days old) by danemodsandy (The Bramford, Apt. 7-E)        
Correction:

danemodsandy's profile picture
My LA108's water temp selections are:

Cold/Cold, Warm/Cold, Hot/Cold, and HOT/Warm


Post# 280599 , Reply# 5   5/18/2008 at 02:05 (5,794 days old) by chaskelljr2 (Washington, D. C.)        
Which One???

Actually, to me, it would be hard to choose either one if I have to take either one on face value alone.

But if I have to put some thought into it, which one would I choose for that era (1950's-60's)???

For Features???? I would say Speed Queen (in fact, earlier this decade, "eddy" (from Canada) did luck up and snap up a beautiful 1960 Speed Queen Dryer with a lighted panel, didn't he)).

For Performance, Elegance and Durability??? Then I would have to say Maytag hands down (their all push-button models from that era are some of the most beautiful machines ever designed...... I also liked the understated quietness they exhibited when they were in operation..... and as everyone else has said here on this forum many many times...... their durability and longevity were unmatched (Speed Queen claimed to have very robust machines, but it was proven time and time again that Maytag had eaten Speed Queens for lunch when it came to durability and longevity), and sorry to say..... my being a Kenmore fan, I think that Whirlpool/Sears Kenmore could take a page or two out Maytag's book when it came to longevity as well).

So to me, it would have to be Maytag by an unaminous decision.

But when it comes to pure love of the machines, I'll still take a Lady Kenmore any day though.

--Charles--


Post# 280605 , Reply# 6   5/18/2008 at 06:37 (5,794 days old) by gyrafoam (Wytheville, VA)        

The 1950's SQ's had the styling all wrapped-up. The mid-fifties pairs were works of art.By the early 1960's Maytag had begun to look very nice, especially in turquoise!

Performance wise, the Maytag had an edge with the pressure-fill that would allow precise water-level and full rinses regardless of the pressure.
Other than that I really cant think of much else different as far as washing ability between the two----except-----for people who do get their garments greasy------then the SQ has the edge with the over-flow rinses.

Both machines have VERY aggressive straight-vane agitators. And both have decent spin-speeds.

I regularly use the trio of a late sixties SQ, early (1964) Highlander and a 1954 Unimatic. The three power-houses get all my wash done perfectly.


Post# 280618 , Reply# 7   5/18/2008 at 10:16 (5,794 days old) by hilovane (Columbus OH)        

As top-loaders go, I've been especially partial to Maytag; while I was never keen on their full-time lid switch, and the fact that if their rinse cycle were any shorter (as in "you blink, you miss it!")I always felt they set the standard by which others were judged. When they introduced the Power-Fin agitator, it was practically "game over." The rollover, regardless of speed or water level, was IMO, unsurpassed. The 606 was the penultimate MOL washing machine.

Post# 280620 , Reply# 8   5/18/2008 at 11:31 (5,793 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        

gansky1's profile picture
Get one of each and put the dryer(s) in the garage ;-)



Post# 280621 , Reply# 9   5/18/2008 at 11:34 (5,793 days old) by rickr (.)        
.

rickr's profile picture
I like the1950's and early 1960's Speed Queens styling, and the fact that they had the stainless solid tub and stainless dryer drum.
I also like the simplicity of the mechanical design of the Maytag, plus the quality of workmanship, right down to the superb metal prep and rust proofing job that was done on the cabinets. The first design centre dial Maytags are in a class all their own. Very pleasing styling, right down the base model Highliner. While I do not want a basement full of Maytags, I think that no collection should be without at least one.
That being said, I would LOVE to find a 1950's to early 1960's Speed Queen for my collection also. <:


Post# 280624 , Reply# 10   5/18/2008 at 13:49 (5,793 days old) by danemodsandy (The Bramford, Apt. 7-E)        
One Other Thing:

danemodsandy's profile picture
That I always admired about Maytags of the centre-dial era was that most washers and dryers in the lineup could be paired, and appear to match. The all-pushbutton 906s were an exception, of course, and lighted console models didn't appear to be a dead match with lower-series models that didn't have that feature. But by and large, you could put together exactly the models you wanted, and they'd match. Other manufacturers' machines didn't come anywhere close to matching from series to series, so if you bought a TOL washer and skimped on the dryer (as many people did), your attempt at thrift really stuck out like a sore thumb. Sears was particularly devious in this regard; while most of their machines had a "family" resemblance, a Lady Kenmore and a MOL or BOL machine didn't look right together.

So, that's one more reason I like 'Tags. My own Maytag pair is an LA108 that is nearly a BOL machine (not that I need anything more). But my dryer is an MOL, electronic sensor LDE608- a more upscale machine than the washer. They match perfectly. It just adds more value, y'know?


Post# 280626 , Reply# 11   5/18/2008 at 14:24 (5,793 days old) by mrcleanjeans (milwaukee wi)        

Speed Queens IMHO rinse better with the overflow
rinse,don't have a messy lint screen to clean
(though one model had one)and are more interesting
and ornate.The stainless steel tub is another plus.
Although SQs are exceptionally well built,I will say that
those old Maytags beat out EVERYONE EVER in the longivity
dept.


Post# 280647 , Reply# 12   5/18/2008 at 18:10 (5,793 days old) by frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)        

frigilux's profile picture
I've had limited personal experience with both early Maytags and SQ's, but I've always thought Maytags were a little better at rollover with large loads.

What are your thoughts on the subject?




Post# 280651 , Reply# 13   5/18/2008 at 18:32 (5,793 days old) by chaskelljr2 (Washington, D. C.)        
Rickr.....

I agree......

In fact, I think I am going to go on my list in my profile and put at least a Maytag or two on the list.

And this is a wish list that includes the likes of a Speed Queen, a couple of Philcos, a Westinghouse or two, a few Frigidaires and a whole list of Kenmores (Most of them either Lady Kenmores of different eras, a couple of Kenmore Elites and a #2 and a #3 Kenmore). Now, I must say that this wish list/collection has to have a couple of Maytags in it too.

--Charles--


Post# 280656 , Reply# 14   5/18/2008 at 18:46 (5,793 days old) by stainfighter (Columbia, SC)        
getta' load of this turnover...SQ on youtube -

stainfighter's profile picture
this is Mark (Lighted Control's) Speed Queen - it has some turnover! But I think Maytag was a purtier design

CLICK HERE TO GO TO stainfighter's LINK


Post# 280657 , Reply# 15   5/18/2008 at 18:58 (5,793 days old) by maytagbear (N.E. Ohio)        
The Maytag, by

a wide margin!


I admit to bias, the only Speed Queen machines I used from '68-'80 were coin-ops, and no one I knew had one.


However, Maytags, real Maytags, were quiet, solid, got the job done without any fuss. One of the happiest days of my life was when the A208 was delivered in 1978. (Until then, we had a Whirlpool Imperial).


I am so glad that I got one of the last real Maytags when I got my Dependable Care set.


Lawrence/Maytagbear


Post# 280664 , Reply# 16   5/18/2008 at 21:08 (5,793 days old) by jons1077 (Vancouver, Washington, USA)        
Stainfighter,

jons1077's profile picture
Notice on Mark's machine, however, that the agitator in that video is from an Easy ringer machine. That explains the rather brisk action and fast turnover. Although the original agitator would have done about the same I'd imagine. Maybe just less of the spinning the clothes around.

Jon


Post# 280679 , Reply# 17   5/18/2008 at 23:04 (5,793 days old) by volvoguy87 (Cincinnati, OH)        
Maytag!

volvoguy87's profile picture
I have used the following top-loaders in my life regularly enough to remember:

1981 Wards (Norge)
1993 Kenmore 80 Series DD
1999ish Whirlpool DD
1978ish GE FF
2005 Speed Queen Coin-Ops
1999ish Maytag Coin-Ops
1st gen. Maytag Neptune Coin-Op (HATED IT!!!)
early 1990s Maytag
GE (Whirlpool) Portable DD
Kenmore (WCI) stacked top-loader with plastic indexing tub
2004 Amanatag (Hated it too)
1980 Maytag A208

The Maytag A208 wins hands down. It has the quietest operation, the least vibration, and the best results. The GE FF is better at lint removal, but the Maytag just PERFORMS! It always balances the load and spins up to 618 RPM without shaking the house. It is a low-end machine, but the best featured-regular capacity washer available of the era. I can't say enough good things about it.

Center Dials age gracefully and will still beat their contemporary competition.
Dave


Post# 280681 , Reply# 18   5/18/2008 at 23:37 (5,793 days old) by roto204 (Tucson, AZ)        
*giggle*

roto204's profile picture
Yes, Mark's machine is awesome with that agi, but my experience with the Speed Queens at Greg's was that they were a little lacking in the turnover department. Fun, dramatic, and gorgeous, but a standard capacity Maytag would knock the socks off of one.

Of course, the "scoop-and-squirt" lint filter on the SQ was pure entertainment...I have to give it that.


Post# 280686 , Reply# 19   5/19/2008 at 00:06 (5,793 days old) by eddy1210 (Burnaby BC Canada)        
solid tubs rule

eddy1210's profile picture
OK you know where I would stand here. But, if Maytag had an S/S solid tub model with an overflow rinse it would be in my collection. And I've got 4 Maytags now so I have the bug.

Post# 280697 , Reply# 20   5/19/2008 at 08:22 (5,793 days old) by toggleswitch (New York City, NY)        

toggleswitch's profile picture
~The Maytags IMO. Built like a tank, they seem to last forever.

Agreed

Saw mid-60's Maytags with the turquioise back-panel still alive and well in the (for sale) home of some older women The women became old and infirm; the Maytags did not.


Post# 280703 , Reply# 21   5/19/2008 at 09:02 (5,793 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        

gansky1's profile picture
Nate is right - a standard capacity Maytag next to a Speed Queen would be a rather unfair "fight". The Speed Queen machines ranked near or at the very bottom of the ratings for years - until they went to a perforated tub design in 1980 and even then, their ratings didn't improve much. Some of the constants were poor extraction, average or less-than-average washing ability and especially in the case of the 70's reversing motor machines, rather poor reliability ratings. It was curious that SQ continued to use the reliable solenoid design in it's commercial line, but changed to the reversing motor and helical shifting mechanism in the domestic line which were regarded as mostly garbage when they were first introduced in 1970.

Not that I don't love the SQ's - I've had quite a few of them but my favorites were the solenoid machines by far.

Maytag never fared much better in CR ratings for washability, scoring mostly average ratings but their reliability reputation made them an obvious winner in that area. CR consistently rated them at or near the top - not because they were so much better than any other make, but because they had fewer disadvantages and fewer lower scores than other makes.



Post# 280710 , Reply# 22   5/19/2008 at 10:06 (5,793 days old) by peterh770 (Marietta, GA)        

peterh770's profile picture
Speed Queen, all the way, hands down. Nothing could escape the agitation, and the overflow rinse gave sparkling results.

Post# 280733 , Reply# 23   5/19/2008 at 12:56 (5,792 days old) by mulls ()        
Laundromats

PeterH770,
Many of us were "born late"as far as our tastes go-I bet you would have been in heaven if you had been a mat owner 40 years ago with 30 SQs all running in unison!
Tom


Post# 280734 , Reply# 24   5/19/2008 at 13:48 (5,792 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii)        
Horrible sand disposal

laundromat's profile picture
The Speed Queens had a solid tub that was horrible when it came to doing anything from the beach.They not only left sand in their solid tub but it also got into the fabrics of the wah done in that load.The Maytag's perferated tubs were much more practicle as well as larger in capacity.The Maytag's Power Finn Agitators were also much better.Being flexible instead of solid and molded into the actual frame of the agitator,made the Maytags have a much more assured turn over of the clothes.For example,some agitator washers would cause air to build up in pieces like bedsheets and dress shirts.The Maytag's turn over ,more or less,did away with that problem by the vacuum build up in the wash and rinse water created by the flexible finns.That was one of the first positive features I saw in the older Maytags as aposed to the Whirlpools and GE's. I noticed too the difference the spinning with the water in the tub caused.I already miss the original machines they made to last.I need to get one for keeps.

Post# 280750 , Reply# 25   5/19/2008 at 15:03 (5,792 days old) by mulls ()        
Entertainment value

To me,the Maytag wins the dependability contest hands down,along with the crown for easy repairs when needed.Styling is up to personal taste,so ruling that out,one thing us washer nuts look for is entertainment value-overflow rinses,cool lint filter systems,odd agitation styles,etc.The Maytags were competent in all respects,but devoid of excitement.As was posted earlier in this thread,I have little use for timed fills.I imagine it was even more of a problem when these machines were new,as water pressures probably varied more then.Years ago,we had to get rid of Grandma's almost new Speed Queen because the water pressure was not adequate for it.KM and WP I always liked for the great washing action,but never could live with the neutral drain drawing the dirty water thru the clothes,complicated by the fact that all the clothes being packed in the bottom of the tub made the spray rinses ineffective.All this being said,my choice between Maytag and SQ is neither(although I love them both).I think if it was 1965,to pick a year at random,I would go with a GE.Decent dependability,good action,good filtering,good spray rinse....
Tom


Post# 280755 , Reply# 26   5/19/2008 at 15:30 (5,792 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii)        

laundromat's profile picture
I wasn't that fond of the GE's.The water coming out through the Filter Flo spray nozel was always dirty and sudsy.I liked the clear rinses I had with the Laundromat,Maytag and 1-18 FRIGIDAIRE models.I am not saying I didn't like Speed Queens.They are great and I liked the old Fluid Drive transies as well as their overflow rinse.But the capacity as well as the solid tub design just didn't cut it for me.I know that FRIGIDAIRE"s tubs were also solid but the up and down agitation as well as the Rapidry Spin made up for that.

Post# 280763 , Reply# 27   5/19/2008 at 15:50 (5,792 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        
1965 GE Washer

gansky1's profile picture
Funny you said GE for the first pick - Consumer Reports rated washers in 1966 and the GE Filter-Flo with Mini-Basket was the top rated washer!


Post# 280766 , Reply# 28   5/19/2008 at 15:59 (5,792 days old) by djmjlcst (Bloomington, Illinois)        
Tough Question - I love them both!

Got to tell ya, I love both the SQ's and the Maytags! I guess it's a matter of functions, features, styling, etc. Mom had a 1964 SQ with a lighted control panel. My earliest memories of it was when occasionally it would get out of balance during the spin cycle. Also the lint filter would pop off the agitator once or twice during a wash cycle and it was a bit annoying. But the cool factor was watching this lint filter bring up the wash water and splash it on the center post as it went back and forth. Kinda cool! Also the way that loud solenoid kicked in from wash to spin! The timer used to make the click/snap sound when it advanced. The overflow rinse was something to behold! All that fresh water coming in. It would really make a suds cake from the wash cycle just before spinning. Then the overflow rinse when the washer filled and started agitating then turn off for a few minutes and giving another two minute overflow rinse before the final spin! The laundry water was always clean and clear! Mom said she went through three pumps on that machine. Mom and Dad sold the house we lived in and that SQ and the Hamilton dryer stayed there for the new owners. We went washerless for the next few years until we moved again. Then we had a used Wizard machine - it had the overflow rinse but it was prone to "skate across the basement floor" when spinning. When we finally moved for the third time a set of avocado green Maytags were sold with the house. I can't remember the model number but we moved into that house in August 1975. They were maybe one or two years old at that time. The Maytag washer was very quiet when running. The only time you could hear it run was when the timer advanced. Other than that you had to go down half the flight of stairs to hear what it was doing - either washing or spinning. It didn't have a lighted control panel. The washer had the trip control to stop spinning when it got unbalanced. I hated the lid switch on the back - you couldn't see the washer run with the lid up. But, as the years went by it somehow became stuck in the closed position. Much to my surprise the washer would run when the lid was raised regardless of what cycle it was in. Mom used to do throw rugs and this caused it to stop on occasion. No overflow rinse on the Maytag, but it did have a one or two minute spin rinse between wash and rinse cycles. It only had regular and permanent press cycles on the dial; small, medium, large water settings, regular or gentle action, and hot, warm, or cold water temperature settings. Had to love the spin drain, just like the SQ. I retired that washer after it went through two floods, and it started making louder noises after the 2nd flood. But Dad always took the front cover off the washer and dried the motor out with a fan for a few days before attempting to do a load of wash. Finally about 7 years ago I replaced those Maytags with a pair of the Atlantis models after Mom passed away. So far they'be been OK BUT Dad said the timer stops midway during the cycle on the washer. I'll have to investigate this further.

My own set of daily drivers are the Speed Queens from 1983 and 2007 respectively and I love both of them!

Hope this wasn't too long of post but I just had to tell the story.

Mike


Post# 280779 , Reply# 29   5/19/2008 at 16:38 (5,792 days old) by mulls ()        
Interesting

Gansky,I did not know that-I assumed by that time Maytag was winning every award!Any way you could post that article for all to enjoy?
Mike,your story was NOT too long-I enjoyed it!
Laundromat,I too never liked the big burp of sudsy water the GEs spit out into the pan at the beginning of the rinse,but overall I will stick with my pick,especially after Gansky enlightened me!
Tom


Post# 280789 , Reply# 30   5/19/2008 at 18:18 (5,792 days old) by peterh770 (Marietta, GA)        

peterh770's profile picture
Tom,

40 years ago I would have had a 'mat with 30 Fridigaires!!!


Post# 280806 , Reply# 31   5/19/2008 at 20:14 (5,792 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        
As far as pretty goes....

gansky1's profile picture
Example #1:



Post# 280807 , Reply# 32   5/19/2008 at 20:15 (5,792 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        

gansky1's profile picture
And example #2:

Which is prettier?




Post# 280810 , Reply# 33   5/19/2008 at 20:26 (5,792 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)        

gansky1's profile picture
OK, maybe that wasn't quite fair...

This is one of Eddy's machines - a model A78. Beautiful!!


Post# 280813 , Reply# 34   5/19/2008 at 20:32 (5,792 days old) by mulls ()        
Laundromat

PeterH770,
I thought you were more of a SQ nut than a Frigidaire nut!I am looking at buying my first mat-Speed Queens of all sizes!
Tom


Post# 280823 , Reply# 35   5/19/2008 at 20:53 (5,792 days old) by mulls ()        
New Picture

Oh Gansky-that was a stacked deck!Now hows about a TOL GE pic-anyone?
Tom


Post# 280824 , Reply# 36   5/19/2008 at 20:59 (5,792 days old) by stainfighter (Columbia, SC)        
40 years ago...a 'Mat with Frigidaires!!!

stainfighter's profile picture
1968 - when we were vacationing at West Beach Haven, NJ we went to a 'mat, it was filled with only Frigidaires - the sounds coming out of that place, the smells - the hot sudsy water, bleach - ahh... I remember how there were several units that had the angry red light glowing 'unbalanced'. I wanted to rebalance them but Mom said to leave 'em that way. I was only 7 years old. What a place!!!

Post# 280891 , Reply# 37   5/20/2008 at 09:05 (5,792 days old) by peterh770 (Marietta, GA)        

peterh770's profile picture
Tom: Shoot me an email about your 'mat! Congrats!

SQ solid tub nut, yes! But the commercial realm is a horse of a different color!


Post# 280901 , Reply# 38   5/20/2008 at 10:23 (5,792 days old) by unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)        
Give me a solid tub anyday

unimatic1140's profile picture
As for beauty, IMO Speed Queen was always MUCH prettier than Maytag. But beauty is subjective...

Post# 280947 , Reply# 39   5/20/2008 at 18:40 (5,791 days old) by gyrafoam (Wytheville, VA)        
WELL!!!!!!!!!

"Example #1" now resides in my laundry room. Cleaned and waxed she is a damned sight prettier than she was without make-up during that photo-shoot! How unfair!

Oh, and as for the cleaning ability of the old solid-tub SQ's, I have both the old smaller tub and the large tub ("example #1") machines. I've washed a lot of trashed-from-working-in-the-garden clothes in my old late-60's small-tub SQ and never had a problem getting things clean -----Hot water and Viva! IMO they clean just as well or better than many of their contemporaries (except Maytag) irregardless of what CU has to say. Roll-over is not everything and as many of you already know----- just because CU said it, doesn't make it so!




Post# 280962 , Reply# 40   5/20/2008 at 19:21 (5,791 days old) by polkanut (Wausau, WI )        

polkanut's profile picture
I must agree with Robert, the "Queen" reigns in the beauty department. I know I'm biased, what with Speed Queen's coming from Ripon, WI.

Post# 280969 , Reply# 41   5/20/2008 at 20:09 (5,791 days old) by alr2903 (TN)        

I wonder how much larger the large solid tub SQ is compared to the small one? Thanks. alr2903

Post# 280970 , Reply# 42   5/20/2008 at 20:11 (5,791 days old) by hydralique (Los Angeles)        

Robert, that Speed Queen with the goldtone panel just ROCKS . . . thanks for posting!

Post# 280988 , Reply# 43   5/21/2008 at 01:01 (5,791 days old) by 70series ( Connecticut.)        
Djmjlcst:

The Maytag you described sounds like it may have been either an A206 (the one I grew up with), or an A207. The differences are strictly cosmetic. The 206 had a black Powerfin, and brushed chrome framing around the console. The 207 had the turquoise Powerfin, and shiny chrome framing. Both were standard capacity, and had grayish tubs. Above when you explained the load sizes you said they were Small, Medium and Large. I am guessing you meant Normal. There were large capacity Helical Drive models from the mid to late 60s tha had only three load settings, the third being Large, however from the other features you specified, I believe you are describing the A206, or A207. Which one was yours?

Have a good one,
James


Post# 281167 , Reply# 44   5/21/2008 at 22:36 (5,790 days old) by djmjlcst (Bloomington, Illinois)        
Maytag A206

Thanks James, for pointing out the model differences! Ours was indeed an A206 because it did have brushed chrome framing around the console. It did have the "Normal" setting (I forgot about that since its been gone for some time now) and it had the black power fin with a turquoise lint filter/fabric softener dispenser. I remember hauling them out of my Dad's basement when the new Atlantis models were installed - how heavy they were as opposed the Atlantis models! The washer especially felt like it weighed a ton and we had a heck of a time lifting it up to the tailgate of the GMC 1500 pickup truck! I knew these were quality machines but wow - the weight made up that quality! And you guessed right - I installed those new Atlantis models for Dad. Got to love Dad though, since Mom did all the washing and drying (while she was living) he had to write down the instructions on how to use the washer and dryer on index cards. Never mind about the manual, he would never read that! He had to have me interpret the directions so he could run the machines AND sort the laundry! For being 88 years old, I'd say he's doing alright. He says that doing the laundry is an all day job. He believes in line drying the laundry on spring/summer/fall days and leaves the dryer for winter use only! That's the WWII mentality for ya! Conserving the resources! Good for him - he's helping the environment. Me - on the other hand can't live without my three SQ dryers!

Mike


Post# 281184 , Reply# 45   5/22/2008 at 01:45 (5,790 days old) by 70series ( Connecticut.)        

My pleasure Mike.

Boy you said a mouthful about the weight of those Tags. The lid switch on ours also became stuck when it got older, and because of this, it would walk when a load was unbalanced. Pushing that machine back into place was a b**tch. In 1999, my parents replaced it with a Kenmore, which must have been about 100 pounds lighter. When the delivery men hauled the Tag out to the curb, they could not believe how heavy it was. Originally I thought these guys must be new on the job, but then again, how often do delivery men actually get to haul a Maytag out of a house? To my knowledge, our family was the first in our neighborhood to replace one. Clearly those guys must have brought a few new Tags to peoples' homes, but I assume that newer Tags were a bit lighter by 1999, and probably had been for a few years.

As far as the Maytag/Speed Queen question: If you combined a Maytag console with the Speed Queen agitator, that would be one beautiful washer.

I always thought the Speed Queens washed more vigorously. There was a lot more thrashing due to the protruding fins on the agitator shaft. However the Maytags seemed to have more rollover, and greater water wave currents perhaps due to the flexible fins. This was especially true on the Medium setting. I remember when my mother washed a small bathroom rug, the waves that resulted made the introduction to Gilligan's Island look like nothing.

Have a good one,
James



Post# 281664 , Reply# 46   5/25/2008 at 13:27 (5,786 days old) by mrcleanjeans (milwaukee wi)        

The ol' SQs have to be VERY reliable,wouldn't
you say since hundreds of 'mats used them
with great success.The home version IIRC
was built the same.



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.



                     


automaticwasher.org home
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