|
Thread Number: 24364
EVERYBODY should read this! |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 378124 9/11/2009 at 15:54 (5,340 days old) by toploader1984 () | ||
|
go to this website www.allbrandservicenaperville.com... | ||
|
Post# 378125 , Reply# 1 9/11/2009 at 16:28 (5,340 days old) by dadoes  (TX, U.S. of A.) |
||
 | ||
| Post# 378129 , Reply# 3 9/11/2009 at 17:03 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
ALL FL's are unreliable? | ||
| Post# 378130 , Reply# 4 9/11/2009 at 17:05 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 378132 , Reply# 5 9/11/2009 at 17:06 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 378133 , Reply# 6 9/11/2009 at 17:07 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 378134 , Reply# 7 9/11/2009 at 17:10 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 378137 , Reply# 9 9/11/2009 at 17:26 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
and my Pièce de résistance..... a line of perfectly white laundry washed in a low water level front loading machine that was achieved without the use of chlorine bleach, tons of water or chemicals other than a regular washing powder. No additives, no extras no nothing. My usual weekly wash courtesy of a FL. 
| ||
| Post# 378138 , Reply# 10 9/11/2009 at 17:44 (5,340 days old) by nmassman44 (Brooksville Florida) | ||
I found what the guy had to say was kinda interesting and alot of it was false. Just because someone puts it in print doesnt mean that its a fact. Like his point on 29 inch Whirlpool dryers with the EquaFlow drying system. He says that they have had few problems...not so since this dryer design had been recalled once for a safety issue with catching on fire. Sure its been the standard of the industry and it doesnt look like Whirlpool is going to kill the design anytime soon. The other thing that frosted my cookies was on how he said not to buy a Miele, Bosch, Asko dishwasher. He said that it would be too expensive to install over an American dishwasher...not so its cost is about the same and these dishwashers can be hard wired if one had to. Plus the water inlet connection has an adapter. Mine happened to be under the sink area and was relatively easy to install. Plus I have a plug outlet there as well. | ||
| Post# 378140 , Reply# 11 9/11/2009 at 17:46 (5,340 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii) | ||
human error
I dissagree with those who believe that front loaders have a shorter life span than top loaders.Most top load owners overload them,use way too much detergent,bleach and fabric softners,do not whipe them off after use and do not leave the lid open for it to air out and let the humidity inside evaprate causing oxidation on the top and sharp edges on the lip.They(most of them) have transmisions with plastic parts that wear out and they agitate so vigorously they tare clothes to shreds. My L.G.,my GE(made by Electrolux),my Frigidaire,my Askos,my KitchenAids and my old Westinghouse washers were in grerat shape after I had used them a few years and sold them out to those who needed them. The only ones I had issues with were a Kenmore(Electrolux) top of the line front loader that went and took a shit by the berring seals going bad within 1 year and Sears wouldn't cover it.It got as far as 6 court hearings and about $1400.I swore I would never buy another Sears product.The others worked perfectly. The only issue I had was a friend who,while I was in England,decided to try and wash a bamboo rug in it. It got the rug clean but the door latch broke and it was out of commision for 5 weeks.When I returned,I asked her to leave.I always used the right amount of detergent,never overloaded,always selected the correct cycle,ran it through with straight chlorine bleach and hot,hot water once a month,Windexed it once a day,put 1 coat of "NuFinish" on it once every three months to help keep the shine and eliminate the chance of oxydation(rust),and last but most important,I LEAVE THE DOOR ON THE WASHER OPEN AFTER USE TO KEEP ANY FORM OF MOLD OR MILDEW GROWING!!! I would say that at least 75% of the problems folks have withfront loaders is ther own doing,not the fault of the manufacturers.If you want one made in USA,I'd recomend either the Frigidaire or the Electrolux.The factory in Agusta Georgia makes them as well as the Wascomat comercial laundry products.Because of that,The domestic Frigidaires have to pass the comercial standards the Wascomats pass.The GE's are made in China,The L.G.s are made in South Korea,the Whirlpool,Maytag,and Kenmore front loading HE washers are made in Germany by Bauhneckt. The Speed Queens stand alone.They have both inner and outer stainless steel tubs,Perferated wash arms that are molded on to the actual wash tub.They are covered by a 3 year in home parts and labor warranty.Made in Racine Wisconson. | ||
| Post# 378141 , Reply# 12 9/11/2009 at 18:02 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
Kelly I can appreciate what you say and yes perhaps we should discuss the merits pros and cons for american FL's but it seems to me that most have some resemblence to those available in Europe like the Frigidaire's. I dont think the capacity issue is a relevant topic to use for FL's unrelaibility just yet as they are reasonably new to the domestic market, a longer period of time will tell if these machines can be made for the right price and to a good standard for domestic use. Manufacturers are tweaking designs as we speak I imagine. As for the water argument I stand by my picture and can hand on heart say that the whites picture I posted above was washed in a machine that uses 15 litres of water on 5kg of cottons without bleaches additives or stain removers. Just good old regular powder. The problem lies is that American FL machines do have rediculously short cycle times to work properly and I believe your detergents are quite different to ours so its only a matter of time before our way of washing catches on. While the machine is doing its thing we can all be getting along with something else. Its worked over here for sure. I will say that my exeriences with SQ TL's have been rather dismal, i remember in the early 90's my mother using one on a campsite in Cornwall to wash our towels on holiday. She definately selected Hot and the water was piping with steam rising from the lid, she used Ariel powder ( for toploaders twin tubs which is like your Tide) and still the results were no way near as good as the FL could achieve at even lower temps. I have used SQ's since and found the results leaving far to be desired. I know other members have had difficulties with American TL's too yet I can get great results with our UK Hotpoint TL which has a heater and long wash and soak times. I was quite amused at something posted a while back to do with SQ agitators or softener dispensers snagging clothes and the member having several problems with IIRC finding a new FS dispenser that didnt have sharp edges to fit his brand new machine. I did think at the time that if SQ cant source or produce a soft edged piece of plastic that woudlnt damage clothes then they didnt have much of a quality control system. So much for the being gentle on clothes, kinda throws that argument out the window IMHO. This could turn out to be a rather good thread for us all to interact with experiences. R | ||
| Post# 378146 , Reply# 14 9/11/2009 at 18:47 (5,340 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
I'm not in a position to argue for or against American built or designed machines when it comes to issues of reliability and longevity and I would hazard a guess that there are people here that have their favourites that this person has said are rubbish etc.... Is part of the problem capacity disillusionment? I have to say that I am a firm believer that the way capacity is measured is one of the reasons that people become dissatisfied with their machines. Bare with me.... What is or constitutes a cubic foot of laundry? I've read on here somewhere that there was a change in the way capacity was stated partly because manufacturers were making outrageous claims and the poundage/kilo system was becoming a joke. But at least the consumer knows and understands what a pound/kilo is and uses the measurement daily. Additionally, it isn't too hard, if you want to, to find out how much clothing, manchester etc constitutes a pound/kilo (laundry basket, yourself, clothes and bathroom scales do it roughly). Then to the next problem - capacity and loading. Australians, Canadians and Americans all understand how to load (Ok, there are some idiots out there) a top load machine so that it will wash and give good results without destroying your clothes. Basically, it comes down to 'drop loading' i.e. drop clothes etc into the basket, don't push them down in, and choosing the appropriate water level compared to how high up the agitator the clothes come.... Front load machines are different and when people move from one to the other for the first time they need to be educated how to load. You shouldn't just shove items in. Sheets and towels washed together can do horrible things to balance and a full load is generally better than a small load especially with HUGE capacity machines. To give you an idea of what 'Joe public' does and doesn't know, this happened at a laundromat near Russell Square station in London in 1997 and is true.... I had come back from a trip to Europe and was doing the washing when a lady walked in with 2 HUGE suitcases of washing to do. She looked at the row of machines (I have no idea what they were) and started to put washing in one next to me. After putting a couple of pairs of jeans and a few t-shirts in she went to close the door and start on the next machine..... ....so I mentioned that 'you can put more in than that'... ....'oh really?' was the reply. (American accent) So she started to put a couple more things in...the machine was less than 1/3 full and she went to close the door again. ....'keep going, it'll take much more' said I. ....'Are you sure?' was the reply So a little more goes in and the machine is STILL less than 1/2 full..... On my last attempt.... ....'you can put much more in there and it will save you using 4 machines' ....'will it wash ok?' ....'you can fill that machine until it is at least to the top of the door and it will wash fine - millions of European mothers and grandmothers can't be wrong!' Finally, she 2/3 filled it.....and sat and watched the entire cycle like a hawk The most recent example was a couple of Canadian friends. Both girls and about 33yrs. Came to stay here with us and needed to do washing....so I introduced them to the Hoover I had. To say that both were amazed at how much 'can fit into such a tiny machine...I wouldn't put all of that in my appartment complex's machines at home'....it was only 4kg/9lb machine.... I suppose that what I am getting at is that when people learnt how to do their laundry in an automatic in Oz, Canada and the US, it was generally in a top load automatic. Mum or Grandma showed us what to do and how to do it...and more often explained why.... Roll forward 20/30/40/50 years....and many many more people are switching to front load machines.... .....but WHO IS SHOWING THEM HOW TO USE THEM PROPERLY?????? So we have a couple of problems.... Overly large capacity front load machines.....that need to be loaded properly AND A huge group of people who now have these machines but have no idea how to get the best out of them...... ...which leads to problems with reliability (unbalanced loads, overloading [though this is more difficult with a front loader], over dosing with detergent, wrong detergetn, closing doors between loads...the list goes on). If we address these issues it is likely that people will be happy with the performance of their machines AND they will be more reliable... | ||
| Post# 378150 , Reply# 17 9/11/2009 at 18:54 (5,340 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 378151 , Reply# 18 9/11/2009 at 18:54 (5,340 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
No certainly not, just because im British does not mean that I automatically like FL's. There are a couple of guys here from the UK who love TL's. Each to their own and my posts were certainly not bashing other machines in any way rather they were making clear facts and findings based upon my own experiences and what has been posted upon this site by other members. This is a discussion forum where sensible conversations about experiences are what bring us together, I didnt see any mention that this thread was limited to just American participants only and that nobody else shall contribute if they have soemthing to share. Perhaps a little input from the Europeans who do know about FL'ers would help you guys across the pond to use your machines to maximum efficiency. We can all have something sensible and worthwhile to add to this thread. R | ||
| Post# 378155 , Reply# 19 9/11/2009 at 19:10 (5,340 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
In reply to the timer/reliability/repair issue
Miele has been making electronic programmers for well over 20yrs now and Asko/ASEA for a similar length of time... Some of the cheaper Euro/British brands, such as Hoover and Servis also had electronic programmer machines in the mid/late 1980's such as the Servis Starlight pictured.... Granted, when they first started coming out, there were undoubtedly timer issues and they can be expensive to replace simply because service agents and manufacturers don't intend them to be serviced as such....but then look at the hourly rate you're paying to have your machine looked at and ask yourself do you want to pay the man for, possibly several hours of, labour to fix it or just replace it and pay the same amount.... I have just had the suspension struts done on the Zanussi/westinghouse....only 3 1/2yrs old, but has done on average 14 loads a week...so I am not complaining...but here is the breakdown of the bill... Call out - $76.00 Struts - $87.10 Labour - $60.00...for 15minutes! and is fairly standard BTW Total -$223.10 Tax -$ 22.30 Total -$245.40 So that is about GBP122 and USD$211..... We may think that manufacturers are ripping us off with parts prices, and they may be sometimes, but give me replacement over repair anytime when the call fee and labour comes to more than 150% of the part price... | ||
| Post# 378168 , Reply# 21 9/11/2009 at 19:51 (5,340 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
"Here Here!' | ||
|
Post# 378179 , Reply# 23 9/11/2009 at 21:57 (5,340 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
 | ||
| Post# 378208 , Reply# 27 9/11/2009 at 23:28 (5,339 days old) by whirlcool (Just North Of Houston, Texas) | ||
|
Of course, here is a better link to the original article. CLICK HERE TO GO TO whirlcool's LINK | ||
| Post# 378214 , Reply# 28 9/12/2009 at 00:26 (5,339 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
Jeff
This article started life about reliability, not speed of cycle.... BUT, seeing as you have a valid point...... My machine, in fact most European machines come to think of it, now have a 'refresh' cycle. 30min, 1/2 load (say 5-7lb), 30c...my machine only spins at 700rpm on that cycle so I tend to 'rinse/hold' and give it a hard spin @ 1200rpm...total of 35min... ....so if something is worn 'once' you can run it through in a quick time ...New Bosch have a 15min cycle for small loads, so your scenario holds no water compared to, say, 10yrs ago. | ||
|
Post# 378217 , Reply# 29 9/12/2009 at 00:44 (5,339 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
If one allows for the fact the man is speaking of things in his own manor, then one finds many of the comments rather true. Until recently Miele washing machines sold in the United States did have a rather small capacity, but then again so did the rest of the European front loaders. This mania of large and super large capacity did not hit Miele, and the rest until they decided to actually design washers for the way Americans do laundry. Furthermore, yes Miele parts ARE hard to get (only available from Miele), and they like the appliances themselves are rather dear. OTHO one can get parts for all and sundry Miele appliances right off the shelf in many UK/European appliance parts stores. Much as Americans do with brands such as GE or Whirlpool. From what one has read, historically yes, top loading washing machines (at least those built in the USA for the USA market), did last longer than say the average front loader, which until recently was really only Westinghouse's front loader. Why? Simple design differences between the two. Take 10 pounds of wet laundry and it becomes more like 50lbs or more. Suspend in a basket mounted only on one bearing, and work from there. Mind you if the machine was taken care of, then front loaders could and did last long, a look at the many vintage Westinghouse units that pop up is proof to that. Obviously the man hasn't tested or seen many other front loading units from Europe (where the quality was worked out years ago), and bases his recommendations on things such as the Maytag Neptune. Even the smallest commercial front loader costs several thousands. Such units are designed properly and made to last the duration. Amercians by and large aren't fully onboard with front loading washers, and if weren't for the federal government pushing the idea, one thinks they wouldn't sell much at all. However costly such uber front loaders say by Samsung, or Maytag, or GE are, they are machines designed to come in at a certian price point. | ||
| Post# 378226 , Reply# 33 9/12/2009 at 04:05 (5,339 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
Which is what.... | ||
| Post# 378230 , Reply# 34 9/12/2009 at 05:55 (5,339 days old) by twinniefan (Sydney Australia) | ||
Top load vs front load
I tend to agree with posters who say this is just a never ending and no win argument, each style of machine has it's own particular benefits and drawbacks it is just a matter of doing some homework and deciding which would best suit your particular needs. Personally, after my dreadful experience with the Bosch F.L., I am kind of turned off them,but that does not mean at some time in the future I would not consider owning another one,it just would not be a Bosch,at the moment I am really happy with my L.G. T.L.it does everything I expect and has not let me down. Ronhic ,you make an excellent point about people learning how to use their machines properly to get the best out of them,however,I think most people just go by the theory of chuck the washing in the machine turn a knob or push a key and hey presto all done and they end up disappointed when the wash isn't up to the standard they expect when the real cause of the problem is their own inability to use the thing correctly or by incorrect loading. The old stuff it all in for one single,quick load still holds sway I believe, indeed my neighbourhood friends don't believe that we don't stick 2-3 days worth of total washing in even though my machine has an 8.5kg capacity we still prefer to wash slightly smaller loads. the water isn't really a problem because the machine senses the weight of the load and adjusts the water level required automatically and if needed I can override by using the keyboard manually. If I may digress a little I also looked at the tech's article on fridges just to see what he says about G.E.and I am a bit surprised that his views basically mirror the view that Peter,the service tech who fixed my G.E. S.B.S. twice earlier this year in as much as the cost of replacement parts are horrendously expensive and there are regular reliability issues with G.E.i.e.frequent service calls etc, although the tech in the article seems to be anti L.G. and Samsung, yet if one looks at Choice magazine,(our local consumer magazine.)L.G. and Samsung have very high approval ratings by those surveyed around the mid 90% the same as the local Westinghouse/Kelvinator. Indeed Peter my tech actually went as far as to advise me when the time comes to discard the G.E.(hopefully not for quite a while though.)I should give serious consideration to purchasing a new L.G. fridge as performance wise they match it with any and they actually do keep quite a lot of spare parts for repairs and the spare parts are relatively inexpensive. I think there is aslo a view in the community that because something is made in an Asian country that it is automatically inferior and will last 2 minutes,well speaking only from personal experience and use, they are not as bad as made out,for example Chinese made Haier T.T. is now 4 years old and going well,Korean made T.V.,7 years old and perfect,Korean made vacuum cleaner 9 years old and still working great,Korean made microwave oven,6 years old going great, but has now been given to a cousin who did not have one and been replaced by another Korean made model,working well,Korean made washing machine, only 18 months old but going quite well. No offence intended ,but American made fridge/freezer serviced 3 times in one year and before that local Australian made fridge serviced 5 times in 1 year. | ||
|
Post# 378235 , Reply# 37 9/12/2009 at 06:45 (5,339 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Repair Prone Front Loaders
This does not have to always be the case. Miele and other European/UK H-Axis washing machines, especially vintage and or TOL models such as V-Zug are quite rugged machines, and often give years of service before repair is required, if ever. Again, rubbish in equals rubbish out. Nothing is wrong switching from electro-mechanical timers or even electronic timers to computer controlled machines, long as the parts are up to the job. However often is the case there are more than one weak links, and when the machine fails costs of repair are dear. Long cycle times with front loaders, at least modern ones are caused by several factors, one of which is the movement away from timers to totally computer controlled machines. On my vintage Miele can make cycles long or short as one wishes, skip rinses and so forth, all by moving the timer. Today's modern detergents clean quite well with short cycle times in front loaders, and the best rinse cleanly without four or five rinses. Even better in vintage front loaders like mine that use enough water per cycle to get the job done. Will agree there isn't a "best" machine, just a washer that suits one's purposes. However will say the American man who firs saw Wascomat washing machines on a Swedish ship realised at once they would do for commercial/laundromat applications in the United States. Top loading machines weren't really suited to the hard use of such conditions (or so the man's theory went", and the rest as they say is history. One rarely finds top loading washing machines in commercial laundries. Most laundromats have either totally switched over to front loading washers, or they make up a majority of washing machines. There has to be a reason for this. | ||
| Post# 378246 , Reply# 39 9/12/2009 at 08:11 (5,339 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
mmmmmm...... | ||
| Post# 378262 , Reply# 43 9/12/2009 at 09:06 (5,339 days old) by toggleswitch2 () | ||
|
Believed not beloved, although not such a bad typo.. :-) | ||
| Post# 378267 , Reply# 46 9/12/2009 at 09:31 (5,339 days old) by toggleswitch2 () | ||
|
Toploader1984 Why ao angry / argumentative? Believe anything you want, just realize others do to! :-) | ||
| Post# 378294 , Reply# 52 9/12/2009 at 12:15 (5,339 days old) by aquacycle (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
^Matt, thats very well said. In response to the comment about frontloaders not lasting as long, well my grandparent's Hotpoint 18361 and matching dryer are about 27 years old now and have survived my 5 aunts and uncles washing plus my Dads and my grandma and grandads. My aunt and my 2 younger cousins now live with my grandma and that washer and dryer is in use almost every other day and they STILL run like new. The washer had it's first repair last year and the dryer has never had a repair. I think Matt hit the nail on the head - front loaders take up less space and houses over here are much smaller. I personally don't like that I can't see whats going on inside a toploader and the agitator thing doesn't really convince me. The idea of my clothes being tumbled around in water seems cleaner than having them floating around in a tank of water. The upside for me is that they hold HUGE amounts of washing. We had a Whirlpool American style toploader in my last job that held LOADS but I never thought it washed particularly well. It was replaced shortly before I left with a Miele professional which was much better imo.
| ||
| Post# 378308 , Reply# 57 9/12/2009 at 14:34 (5,339 days old) by aquacycle (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
^Matt, I agree about the mould. Washing at 30 does that to any machine, especially over a period of time. I've never had a problem with mould and every so often, i'll run the machine at 95 on an empty drum with a tiny splash of bleach in it to keep it clean. And FYI, mixfinder - I find washing clothes in stupid amounts of water which are clearly draining the natural resources AND washing for a stupidly small length of time in mediocre detergent disgusting. You might as well just wash your clothes in a bath with some soap and a wooden spoon. What you said clearly means that you think the clothes I'm wearing are disgusting - I'm quite proud of my clean home and personal hygiene, so thanks VERY much for that.
| ||
| Post# 378309 , Reply# 58 9/12/2009 at 14:37 (5,339 days old) by aquacycle (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 378312 , Reply# 59 9/12/2009 at 14:50 (5,339 days old) by toploader1984 () | ||
|
an hour isnt long enough? who has time to wait over 2 hours for ONE load of clothes to get done, certainly not the fast paced american people. | ||
| Post# 378331 , Reply# 63 9/12/2009 at 16:17 (5,339 days old) by aquacycle (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
"i noticed that ALL the front loaders in the pictures above have MECHANICAL knobs rather than electronic controlls, that could possibly be the problem with all the machines today." - toploader1984 I agree with you here. I have to say, I've found a lot of todays machines with computer control's to be horrid and unreliable. However, my Miele has electronic control's and is fine, as does my Mum's Bendix. But you can't beat that old clicky dial. However, unlike you, as much as I prefer a front loader, I have nothing against people who prefer Top loading machines. They clearly have their reasons for preferring them, which is fine. But for gods sake, don't you dare come on her going "Toploaders are better, FACT!!" because the fact that both sell well in various parts of the world proves otherwise. I don't like bagless vacuums, but millions of people own them and if it works for them, thats great. If they like it, and can back it up with valid reasons why, then great. But all you've done is exactley what you said you didn't like us doing - you've come on and gone "FRONT LOADERS ARE SHIT!!! END OF" but not in so many words. And then you said "this is for americans" so surely a more appropriate title for this thread would be "ALL AMERICANS SHOULD READ THIS" and not "EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS". I think we're included in the "everyone" unless you think everyone in the world is, or should be, American? | ||
| Post# 378336 , Reply# 64 9/12/2009 at 16:56 (5,339 days old) by jeffg () | ||
|
I agree on that last point, and I always try to be careful to qualify my own statements (e.g. "here in America", "as it exists here in the U.S" etc). I'm not accusing anyone of intentionally wearing dirty clothes. | ||
| Post# 378337 , Reply# 65 9/12/2009 at 17:04 (5,339 days old) by aquacycle (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
"I'm not accusing anyone of intentionally wearing dirty clothes" no, but you are saying you think they're dirty. And they're not. I had a baked bean stain on my white t-shirt. Guess what? It wasn't there when it came out of the washing machine. SHOCK HORROR IT'S CLEAN!! And that is in a front loader. I would never turn around and indirectly say "I think your clothes are dirty because you use a top loader". That's just plain rude. So thank you VERY much for that. | ||
| Post# 378339 , Reply# 67 9/12/2009 at 17:16 (5,339 days old) by aquacycle (West Yorkshire, UK) | ||
|
"They were (and are) relevant to what's being sold in the U.S" Yes, but US front loaders use the same water consumption as most front loaders. A US Miele front loader uses the same amount of water as a UK or European Miele front loader. Your statement clearly implies that you think washing clothes in a front loader machine still leaves them dirty and therefore meaning I am walking around wearing dirty clothes. I've made effort to buy an efficient machine and chose a detergent (through trial and error) that does a good job and what you've said clearly means you think I have chosen an inferior product and that is not the case. "Personally the whole FL technology, at least as it currently exists here in the U.S., disgusts me." A front loader is still a front loader anywhere else in the world. So the millions of front loader uses across the globe disgust you, huh? Oh geee...thanks! We're flattered. | ||
| Post# 378341 , Reply# 69 9/12/2009 at 17:29 (5,339 days old) by jeffg () | ||
|
> US front loaders use the same water consumption as most front loaders. < It's not just water levels. E.g. most FL's sold here don't have internal heaters, and many have reduced cycle times compared to their European cousins. Etc. | ||
|
Post# 378347 , Reply# 72 9/12/2009 at 17:54 (5,339 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Hey, Don't Blame Lack of Phosphates
On detergent makers, that bit comes via various regulations and laws. Only thing detergent makers could be considered guilty of is no longer wishing to make several variations of product for different markets, such as phosphate verus non-phosphate versions as of old. As for "Tide Basic", well Tide has always been TOL detergent from P&G. It is the first place every new chemical or advance in that company's laundry product lands. As a result the price of Tide has always been rather high, sadly in these economic times even high end shoppers are looking to save money so something had to give. L. | ||
|
Post# 378349 , Reply# 74 9/12/2009 at 18:11 (5,339 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
On Board Hot Water Heaters
This thing that all front loaders must have onboard hot water heaters is not entirely spun of whole cloth. Back when one used to go on THS, this same arguement raged on so one decided to conduct an experiment using our old Malber front loader. Using tap hot water (130F), tested going in, and measured the water coming out of drain doing a 11 pound wash load for 12 minutes. Drain water temperature was about 125F, IIRC. Certianly wasn't below 120F, and not 100F either. On board heaters for front loaders do make a difference if the unit is located far from the source of hot water, and or one wishes wash temps above set hot water temp. Of course in Europe things are different since by and large it has long ago been designed that all appliances requiring hot water heat it themselves, rather than rely on hot water from a central heater (if there was one). What American front loading washing machines mainly have is a water "booster", and even then they will take ages to bring water up to temperature. I mean there is only a certian amount of heating power available from 115v/120v 15amp power service. Even less when one considers the machine must divert some of the power to the motor and electronics. Less than even that once one factors in NEC codes that require no more than 80% of a circut should be drawn. Miele and other European washers had the right idea using 220v power, but Americans by and large did not wish to install such lines where they did not exsist in numbers to make sales viable. Perhaps if front loaders went back to the design where tumbling was slower during the heating phase, thus allowing more power to be drawn via the heaters, but as motors use about only 100 watts or less, even then there wouldn't be a huge difference. L. | ||
| Post# 378353 , Reply# 75 9/12/2009 at 19:00 (5,339 days old) by golittlesport (California) | ||
blah blah blah
...to each their own. There are benefits and disadvantages to both types of machines. In the 50's our mothers and grandmothers were debating automatics vs. wringers. Automatics took too long, didn't clean as well, used too much water, were not dependable and broke down too often. Wringers were not safe, were too time consuming and too much work. So some folks stayed with wringers and others bought automatics. IMHO vintage top loaders are cool and fun to watch but the current offering of top loaders does nothing for me. I personally have had excellent results from Electrolux-built (in the USA) front loaders. One still in the extended family is ten years old, going strong, no repairs and no moldly smells...and it is the bomb in the cleaning dept. I am also lucky enough to own a 55 Frigidaire Unimatic top loader. So I live in the best of both laundry worlds as far as I'm concerned. :-) Some folks can't stand seeing a machine go through a rinse cycle and not see waves of water, and the next can't stand listening to a washer filling, and filling, and filling, and filling. So everyone enjoy the type of washer that works best for their needs and just keep your little secret that your kind is really the best. No need to try to convert the world to your religion. I saw Wanda Sykes once and she said "I don't see what all this debate is over gay marriage. If you don't believe in gay marriage then don't marry someone of the same sex." Same goes for this TL/FL debate. | ||
| Post# 378354 , Reply# 76 9/12/2009 at 19:04 (5,339 days old) by qsd-dan (West) | ||
Several reasons why a front loader won't work for me: 1. I soak and submerge whites in oxygen based bleach for 12 hours (hot, 140F water, of course). Can't do that in a front loader. 2. I soak and submerge greasy/oily clothes in Tide with Clorox 2 color safe bleach overnight for at least 12 hours. Can't do that in a front loader. 3. I have 2 dogs and 2 cats and need a machine that will effectively filter out and remove hair. Front loaders do a poor job in that area. 4. I need a machine that doesn't wake up the household, or for that matter, the entire neighborhood when it goes into spin if I decide to a load of laundry at 2AM (which I do often). All front loaders I have played with have VERY noisy spin cycles. 5. I need a machine that will thoroughly do a good job in 40 min or less, especially for those monthly routines where I strip couch covers, bed sheets, dog beds, and several loads of regular laundry. That total comes to at least 9-11 loads for one days worth of laundry. I don't have 18-22+ hours of spare time get this accomplished!! 6. I need a reliable machine! The old Maytag has been routinely abused for 24 years with only a belt replacement at 21 years of age. I don't think ANY front loader (or top loader, for that matter) made in the last 10-15 years can even begin to come close to those reliability figures! | ||
| Post# 378366 , Reply# 77 9/12/2009 at 19:32 (5,339 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
It seems that everybody does agree (from previous posts and topics) that we would all prefer to have our machines the way they were 15-20yrs or so ago. By that I mean with higher water levels in the wash and (especially) the rinse phases. It appears that toploaders on the US market, with the exception of Speed Queen and maybe a few others, have done what they can to comply with the US Fed and reduced water consumption etc whilst trying to innovate. Some have had success, others less so. Some Fisher and Paykel machines use a raised 'plate' or 'low rise agitator' (you choose) and low water levels. Consumer tests here have shown them to clean and rinse well and not use HUGE amounts of water. However, they are shown in tests as not being particularly gentle on fabric AND leave detergent deposits/lint. Electrolux via SImpson and the Electrolux brands have taken a different approach. They have retained the same basic design of central agitator and changed the number and design of holes in the drum which, when used in conjunction with a pump means they can retain 'full tub' water levels yet reduce consumption by restricting how much water flows from the inner to the outer tub and quickly pumping this back to the inner tub, you keep a high water level, yet are not 'wasting' the water between the 2 tubs. You can manually over ride the auto select and choose your own water level too... ....Unfortunately, they don't do well in CAPACITY tests, but loaded the way most of us wash, they probably would. ON THE OTHER HAND.... Front loaders have gone a different route. Launderess has many times told us of the need for certain things to occur for washing to be clean: Change the variables too far one way or the other and the results will suffer. With top load machines, short cycle times, lots of water and lots of chemicals (detergent AND bleach) leads to clean clothes. Older Australian machines are NO different here, though our detergents may have been as we tended not to use bleach heavily....my mother never. Front load machines used to be the same to some degree. Still had longer cycle times for a couple of reasons. - traditionally 3-5 rinses - often heating water from cold BUT, they used up to DOUBLE the water then compared to now. What has changed? Well they rarely rinse more than 3 times on a standard cycle (though with ASKO/Miele/VZug and certain Electrolux/Zanussi machines you can alter this) and they have reduced the standard amount of water in each component of the cycle....and wash cycles have increased accordingly. Launderess is correct in refering to a lack of 220-250v power being one of the major issues. Short cycle times are fine with a reasonable amount of water that comes in warm/hot...I know, my oft refered to Hoover was hot/cold connect with NO HEATER yet cleans beautifully at capacity...but then it used about 80litres of water for 4kg compared to the 75litres for 6.5kg my current machine uses...and had short times 21min MAX wash component total cycle at max wash time was 55min including 3 rinses and intermittant spins (it still used less than 2/3 of the water of the equiv. top loader available when new). So something has to give in the US front load market..... People have to build a bridge and basically 'get over' the time issue as it is quite evident that the cycle times need to be increased, probably by as much as 50% to be truely effective with low water levels. Or at least give people the option of a long cyle by introducing a system similar to Electrolux/Zanussi's 'Time manager' where you tell the machine how dirty it is and it increases or decreases the time. Ideally - Option of longer cycles for large/capacity loads on a 'user chooser basis. i.e. - you decide. - Option of additional rinses - Heater - Educate people how to use them - reduce the capacity....they'll last longer (particularly bearings) the last one is a little controversial I know in a 'Big is better' society ...BUT... most people never capacity load a top load machine and generally speaking a front load machine one size smaller in capacity will swallow and wash well (with space to spare) what we would normally put in a top load machine one size larger where the user thinks it is 'full'.... ...Statistics in both the UK and Australia confirm that we tend to wash, on average, 4-4.5kg (9-10lb) at a time... CLICK HERE TO GO TO ronhic's LINK 
| ||
| Post# 378371 , Reply# 78 9/12/2009 at 20:21 (5,339 days old) by toploader1984 () | ||
|
people act like its so bad to use a little extra water to wash clothes, nobody says anything about the new cfl light bulbs with mercury getting into our landfills and polluting the ground and water. | ||
|
Post# 378378 , Reply# 80 9/12/2009 at 20:41 (5,339 days old) by suburbanmd (Maryland, USA) |
||
|
Launderess' temperature drop experiment Can we assume that the old Malber uses a lot of water, compared to current front-loaders? Less incoming hot water means a larger temperature drop. | ||
|
Post# 378382 , Reply# 81 9/12/2009 at 20:49 (5,339 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Yeabut
One of the benefits of oxygen bleaching is that it can be controlled via water temperature. Persons for instance engaged in textile conservation and or restoration like using oxygen bleach (sodium perborate, sodium percarbonate or hydrogen peroxide liquid), in cooler water temps and long soaking because it is much less aggressive. Sure one could shift stains and yellowing by boiling or using hot to very hot water, which certianly would speed up the bleaching process, but it also very well would damage fragile textiles. Of the oxygen bleaches, sodium percarbonate will bleach even in cool or cold water on it's own. Sodium perborate really needs temps >130F to get going, with >140F better still. Hence all those European washing machines with temperatures settings up to 200F. OTHO when one uses a bleaching activator, both the disenfection, whitening and stain removal properties of perborate bleach happen at lower temps. Indeed the sweet spot is between 120F to 140F, however activity still occurs at 100F or lower. European commercial laundries have access to detergents with activated oxygen bleach certified to provide full disenfection at 140F with minimum of ten minutes contact time. Such detergents are mainly used by hospitals, nursing homes, and so forth or commercial laundry services for the same. L. | ||
| Post# 378467 , Reply# 83 9/13/2009 at 02:59 (5,338 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii) | ||
|
Fact:The first automatic washer was a front loader. Fact:Proctor and Gamble "brainwashed" customers that the more suds you see,the cleaner your clothes/dishes/floors will get. Fact:Suds do not get your clothes clean.It's the softness of the wash water along with anionic and nonionic serfactants which trap and hold stains and dirt out of the fabrics. Fact:Oversudsing retards(slows down) the washing action in both agitator type and horizontal axis type washers.It also,when excessive can cause overflowing onto the floor and posibly oxydation of metal washer parts and cabinitry. Fact:Agitator type,especialy oscilating ones,ware out and damage fabrics.You want proof? wash a load in a top loading washer and another in a front loading washer.Be sure the dryer lint screan is clean before you dry each load.After the cycle ends,check and see how much less lint there is in the load washed in the front loader. fact:Front loaders,within 5 years,save you enough money on water,detergent,bleach,fabric softner,energy use,dry cleaning bills and clothing replacement to pay for themselves.Two years to make up the difference in price as aposed to buying a top loader Fact:Front loaders have absolutely no transmission. Some actualy have no pullies or belts (L.G.). Fact:Front loaders are much,much quieter than top loaders. Fact:Most issues regarding service calls are caused by customer ignorance. For Example,the mold/mildew found to be an issue nationwide is because the owners refuse to leave the door of the front loaders ajar after finished doing laundry.Answer me this,Would you leave a refrigerator/freezer door closed if you turned it off for a few days????Why not? you leave your washer door closed right after you stop washing a few days. Not one of my front load washer customers who followed my advice ever called me complaining about mildew forming in their washer.Those who ndid not follow my simple advice were the ones who had constant issues.I have seen many with the shipping tape covering the electronic control panels stiil there.I had one customer bitch at me because the washer she got had a blue control panel on it and the one she saw and bought had white!!!!---Don't go there.I am embaressed to tell you what I did. Fact:All front loaders have a "Quick cycle" available as well as an extra rinse option.If you don't want an hour to two hour long cycle,just select the quick cycle option.I used it frequently on my L.G.and it had a wadsh with two deep rinses and a final 1200 rpm spin.It took only 28 minutes from start to finish and did an outstanding job.my Askos also had that option and took only 35 minutes from a wash and 4 rinses followed by a 1600 rpm final spin. I do not hate top loaders.The Speed Queens are great.Before the take over,I liked the Maytags.There durability was great and the porcelain on zink steel tubs rarely rusted.I had some issues with Whirlpool(belt drives spin too slow and dds tore up my clothes) and hated the GE Filter Flo method.Seeing dirty/sudsy backwash coming through a slit with lint hanging out of it just doesn't seam to be that clean to me.However,the mini baskets made great plant pots!!The Frigidaires would be almost as good as the SQs if they'd get that damned indexing tub system redesigned.However,it's a bit too late for that because I think that top loading agitator washers are going to be heading the same direction as wringer washers,obsolete. I always wonder how things would have been had P&G not promoted suds as a major importance in laundry washing.I remember many of the Bendix (washers and washer dryer combos),Westinghouse and GEs that neighbors had that did a great job and many of the owners Realy did a fantastic job in upkeep using the correct detergent OR using less than the Tide,Oxydol,Cheer,Wisk,Vim boxes recomended for their washer.The Bairs had a 1954 Westinghouse DeLuxe laundromat and Alice liked Vim.She bought and used it the first time and had lots of oversudsing.She read her Laundrofile and changed her formula by breaking the tabs in half.Not only did the suds become almost non existant but the wash got real clean.After they stopped production(Lever Brothers),she switched to Salvo and used twice as much.She went back to Dash after that.She (God rest her soul)and I both miss Vim and Salvo.The Tide and Wisk tabs weren't anywhere near them in aroma and performance.O.k. I'm off my soap box. LOL | ||
|
Post# 378475 , Reply# 85 9/13/2009 at 04:15 (5,338 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
Minor Correction Regarding Tide Suds
P&G at first created Tide that did not make much froth, but housewives conditioned by years of equating froth with cleaning power (which is true when one is using pure soap for laundry), stayed away in numbers. Once "detergents" made as much froth as soap, the final holdouts were converted. Remember when Tide was introduced it's main competition was not other petrol based detergents, but soap. Even today many housewives and other laundry consumers do not believe laundry detergents without froth are cleaning well. Go into any laundromat and one will find machines so full of froth that the final rinse looks the same as the pre-wash! *LOL* L. | ||
| Post# 378478 , Reply# 86 9/13/2009 at 04:40 (5,338 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
imagine their laundry habits are similar to in the US but a
There are a couple of main differences.... - Our machines don't have bleach dispensers (ok, the majority) - Our detergents advise AGAINST using LCB...another reason for few machines having dispensers - The MAJORITY of Australians do the MAJORITY of their washing in cold water - Almost ALL our detergents are capable of washing well in cold water and some are specifically designed for it (front loader users may buck this...not sure) ....and the only Australians who 'smell' only do so because they don't wash either themselves or their clothes....not because of the water temperature... | ||
| Post# 378504 , Reply# 88 9/13/2009 at 08:58 (5,338 days old) by andrewinorlando () | ||
|
Very, very well put Steve!! | ||
| Post# 378636 , Reply# 92 9/13/2009 at 17:00 (5,338 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
I think.... | ||
| Post# 378643 , Reply# 96 9/13/2009 at 17:54 (5,338 days old) by hoover1100 (U.K.) | ||
|
I cannot accept that a top loader is more gentle on clothes I meant to say "sorry, but I cannot accept that a top loader is more gentle than a front loader" Matt | ||
| Post# 378646 , Reply# 97 9/13/2009 at 17:58 (5,338 days old) by aquarius1984 (Planet earth) | ||
|
why that answer is easy,
The one that will last the longest is the one built with better quality materials. It makes no odds to cycle times whatsoever the longevity of a machine. Nor can one generalise so much, Thats like saying bicicles will travel you for a greater distance than a pair of rollerskates. Whats to say the rollerskates in question were TOL proffessional ones and you were comparing it to riding a plastic childs tricycle. There are plenty of plastic TL's that would seemingly not be able to do more than a couple of washes a week for 1 year yet Asko machines etc do 2 or three loads a week for 20 to 30 years. | ||
| Post# 378683 , Reply# 98 9/13/2009 at 20:31 (5,338 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
I'll weigh in on this
I've used both top and front load machines...my mother has owned both... Firstly, Generally speaking a top load machine 'lightly loaded' and using a high water level will wash gently without EXCESSIVE pilling, linting or wear. However..... Generally speaking, a front load machine will wash at capacity with much less water, more gently, negligible pilling and next to no linting or wear on clothing... The 22yr old (yep...22!) pair of chinos, 14yr old sheridan towels (which are now getting thin having been tumble dried so much, but have no pulls) and several rugby tops that are also over 12yrs are testament to this. On the work shirt issue, I wear the same 5 shirts to work every week and replace maybe 1-2 a year....this year I threw out a pale blue one where the collar had started to go with wear....it was 5yrs old and only cost me about $15....not bad for a cheap 'made in china ' shirt that has been washed and ironed well over 200 times. Time and time again, our consumer magazine has shown that front load machines cause less wear and tear on clothes despite the fact that 'normal' cycles can, depending on the machine, run for up to 2:30 | ||
| Post# 378701 , Reply# 100 9/13/2009 at 21:33 (5,338 days old) by qsd-dan (West) | ||
|
"Having seen how a modern Maytag toploader left my friend's cottons tshirts and jumpers bobbled, stretched and with small holes in them, despite being loaded correctly (if anything underloaded) and a lot of them being washed in wash bags. This is after about 3 months usage." Not sure what brand Maytag (perhaps the Orbitals?) but I have towels that were passed down 3 generations of use to the early 60's that were washed in my great grandmother E2L wringer, my grandmothers HA806, and my A712. They ALL show minimal wear, especially since they saw repeat use from day 1 up until I permanently retired them to the closet last year. I still wear clothes from 1993 when I was a freshmen in highschool (yeah, they still fit). The only wear is from use, especailly since I have retired them to working on cars and vintage washer/dryers, as well as garden work since 1999/2000. Also, keep in mind, until I became a member of this site in 2006, the Maytag was severally overloaded......every load......and yet wear was still minimal, if any at all. | ||
| Post# 379052 , Reply# 104 9/14/2009 at 22:27 (5,337 days old) by golittlesport (California) | ||
|
2 hours???
Fridgiman, Not sure where u get the two hour cycle for FL's. I have a Frigidaire FL and the normal cycle is 45 minutes. That is not much longer than a top loader cycle. Glad you like TL's and that you have one. But I doubt I will ever go back to a "modern" TL. I've used both types and get better results from a FL. To each their own. | ||
| Post# 379096 , Reply# 105 9/15/2009 at 02:31 (5,336 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
You cannot wash a washable dress shirt, slacks or dress on f
Maybe not in a Top Loader... ...but I sit here in the knowledge that I wash 95% of our washing on the Normal cycle of my front loader... A fairly normal load would be 10 x business/dress shirts 5 x undershirts 10 x t-shirts plus a couple of other smaller things... This is not a capacity load, more 'comfortably full' or about 2/3 and gets done on the 'Normal 40c' cycle which even when 'quick' is pressed is still 68min.... Fridgiman, I really don't need to think as such as to which cycle I use for the vast majority of my clothes. Cottons and synthetics all tend to get washed on the normal cotton cycle all mixed together in a warm wash at no less that 2/3 - full capacity. Wool tends to be the only thing that I ensure that I use the appropriate cycle for. And that is why us 'front load users' tend to bang on about wash action and gentleness...provided we aren't doing a 'Hot' wash, we really don't need to pay anywhere near as much attention to the overall contents of the machine. We KNOW that we can fill it and the materials won't suffer. A 'normal' tumble wash in a front load machine is much more gentle then the 'normal' agitation speed of a top loader and as a result, less consideration needs to be given when loading. | ||
|
Post# 379228 , Reply# 108 9/15/2009 at 16:34 (5,336 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!) |
||
The overly-presumptive table in the link is just silly. All machines have their good and bad points - that's why there are so many to choose from. Choice in laundry chores is truly a blessing! There are machines for every laundry task in my basement - towels go in a Unimatic Frigidaire, ground-in soils get a long wash in the WP Duet front-loader, on and on. What would I do if I could have only one washer? Perish the thought! Vacfanatic - the new LG looks good but where will we put that Maytag A700 now?? Well, I just leave it in your driveway anyway ;-) | ||
|
Post# 380111 , Reply# 115 9/19/2009 at 21:45 (5,332 days old) by swestoyz (Cedar Falls, IA) |
||
Well, I guess someone had to do it...
may as well! 11 years old with TONS of service receipts to boot ;-) And gasp - a Neptune next to a Unimatic? To think of the 10's of thousands of who bought these machines, still to this day, have no idea if the machine does anything due to not having a window to look through! I'm with Greg on this one. I'm quite happy to have a choice, are you? Ben 
| ||
| Post# 380355 , Reply# 116 9/21/2009 at 09:26 (5,330 days old) by iheartmaytag (Wichita, Kansas) | ||
It must cost a fortune to buy chlorine bleach  | ||
| Post# 380458 , Reply# 119 9/21/2009 at 16:44 (5,330 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
I can't stand... | ||
|
Post# 380515 , Reply# 123 9/21/2009 at 22:32 (5,330 days old) by abcomatic (Bradford, Illinois) |
||
|
Here, here Norfolk. Thanks, Gary | ||
| Post# 380545 , Reply# 124 9/22/2009 at 05:22 (5,329 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
it makes sense in some particular situations. | ||
| Post# 380566 , Reply# 125 9/22/2009 at 07:34 (5,329 days old) by iheartmaytag (Wichita, Kansas) | ||
|
it makes sense in some particular situations. Like if you are a germ-o-phobe. I take no prisoners, I bleach the hell out of everything, countertops and floors included. I have even been known to put a little bleach to wash my vegies; just in case some migrant farm worker decided to take a whizz on my lettuce. | ||
| Post# 380568 , Reply# 126 9/22/2009 at 07:45 (5,329 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
?????????? | ||
| Post# 381373 , Reply# 128 9/25/2009 at 10:13 (5,326 days old) by electradeluxe (Blackpool, Lancs) | ||
|
a lot of the Front loaders on the market do have a super rinse option!!! i had to use it all the time to cope with the suds from the Ariel excel gel,i don't need to use it now as i've switched back to powder | ||
|
Post# 386178 , Reply# 130 10/18/2009 at 17:06 (5,303 days old) by launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
|
For What It's Worth
Will add my voice to others in saying there really isn't one proper washing machine for all purposes. This coming from one who owns both a older Miele front loader, and Hoover Twin Tub. There are times one just wants to get on with things, and not spend endless hours doing the wash, and for that a top loading or even twin tub does the job quite well, thank you very much. For instance certian items like very crisp bed linens require a very high water level as they do not compact down, in short should be totally immersed water. Now for the Miele the obvious answer is to launder fewer items per load, but that means taking ages to wash. OTHO any good top loading washer or twin tub can have the things whished about, done and dusted long before the Miele. As for cleaning ability and or "swishing things around in dirty water", there are items one really wants washed in a top loader or twin tub because of the muck, dust, lint and such. Just did a load of socks we wear around the house instead of bare feet, and they were spotless with one wash cycle in the Hoover, and all muck was in the wash water, and down the drain. Moreover since one juiced up the wash formula with STPP, dirt stayed away from fabrics and goes down the drain. Really should have taken some before and after photos to show the difference. As water and or energy restrictions turn front loaders into washers that launder via the wet wipe system, top loading washing machines (at least the vintage or very good modern designs), look very attractive. I mean everyone goes on about how gentle front loaders are towards fabrics, however recent Consumer Reports tests show many USA machines rank rather harsh on textiles. This is mainly due to ever longer cycles using so little water that laundry is being constantly rubbed against itself. All the various features and frills added onto modern front front loaders are window dressing that serves as one more complex system to break down, and cover for the piss poor washing results from using too little water. One does not need steam and the like if there is enough water in the tub to do the job to begin with. L. | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
