|
Thread Number: 21792
Bigger capacity: Maytag or Whirlpool from the late 70's |
[Down to Last] |  |
|
| Post# 342726 , Reply# 1 4/16/2009 at 13:02 (5,478 days old) by lebron (Minnesota) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 342759 , Reply# 4 4/16/2009 at 15:06 (5,478 days old) by maytagwc401 () | ||
|
Does anybody know how many cubic foot for the Halo of heat Maytag dryers? | ||
| Post# 342786 , Reply# 5 4/16/2009 at 15:47 (5,478 days old) by qsd-dan (West) | ||
When it comes to even drying performance, the Maytag comes out on top. I have grew up with and still use an 81 Kenmore series 70 dryer as a daily driver and the way Whirlpool designed the intake and exhaust ports at the back is kind of a bad design. With large loads such as bulky blankets or comforters, the heat will enter, scorch the the rear section of the load, bounce off and exit through the exhaust without air movement through the front. On a Maytag, the incoming air enters the front and exits out the rear. I have gone as far as a Mayag vs Maytag (806 vs 810) performance test by testing a halo vs the post 75 big load dryers. Even with the small drum of the halo and the fact the there should have been virtually no air movement from being completly stuffed, the Halo STILL dried a large comforter faster and more even than a post 75 big load Maytag dryer. The Halo dryers are still an engineering marvel in my opinion. | ||
Post# 342813 , Reply# 6 4/16/2009 at 18:09 (5,478 days old) by kenmoreguy64  (Charlotte, NC) |
||
Scrubflex - You quote some correct figures, but they're out of balance a bit. The largest tub Whirlpool/Kenmores, which were built from the later 1960s until 1981, were quoted by a 1979 Kenmore's feature checklist to have as much as 2.96 cu. ft. I have seen this checklist quote as low at 2.68 cu. ft. on a 1976 model of the same basket size. I don't know if the measurement standards changed, but the baskets themselves were the same. In later years the useable space seemed dependent on the agitator, so a straight-vane machine may be quoted on a DD as 3.0 cu ft. but a Dual Action machine was quoted with the same basket at 3.2 cu ft. The 2.8 cu. ft. belt drive machines you mentioned debuted in later 1981 and were quoted at this size with Penta-Vane or Dual Action agitators. This is the basket size that closed-out belt-drive production for consumer Kenmores from 1982 to the end in 1986. This basket is noticeably smaller than the previous jumbo machines, and to prove that to myself, I have tried to put a 1980 large basket into a 1983 machine - it sat atop the outer tub rim with 1/2-inch in overhang, way too large to even force in. In some other odd figures, I have seen early to mid 70s Standard Kenmores and Whirlpools quoted to have 1.98 cut. ft. capacity. The same basket size was later quoted on a 1979 500 series Kenmore I have to have 2.36 cu. ft. + - 3%. Gordon | ||
|
Post# 342992 , Reply# 9 4/17/2009 at 08:35 (5,477 days old) by kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC) |
||
|
There is approximately a 1.5-inch gap between the inner and outer tubs in a GE, IIRC. Others please correct me It's been a while since I looked at one closely. In a Kenmore/Whirlpool however, the gap is about 1/3 inch, or less. The standard tub machines require 18 gallons to fill. I'll have to look at those features checklists to see what they say for the larger tub machines in terms of water use. Sears advertising quoted the original big tubs to be from 25% to 37% larger (again, measurement standards must have changed), so that translates to 22.5 to 24.7 gallons. I have one 2.8 cu. ft. machine in storage that still has it's 'features at a glance' sticker on it. I'll try to get at it soon and see what it says. To the original post though, I think Whirlpool's large tub was a bit larger than Maytag's, but WP's standard was smaller than Maytag's, just like the post said. Gordon | ||
| Post# 343019 , Reply# 10 4/17/2009 at 10:38 (5,477 days old) by maytagwc401 () | ||
|
and the HOH Maytag dryer would be smaller than the Whirlpool dryer. correct? | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
