|
Thread Number: 33269
this was my set from 1993 to 2004 when i switch to frontloads |
[Down to Last] |  |
| Post# 500789 3/2/2011 at 22:08 (5,028 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
 | ||
|
| Post# 500790 , Reply# 1 3/2/2011 at 22:11 (5,028 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
my set today | ||
| Post# 500809 , Reply# 2 3/3/2011 at 00:55 (5,028 days old) by dj-gabriele () | ||
|
Why going back to a top loader? Aren't you satisfied of something? What's happened? | ||
| Post# 500857 , Reply# 4 3/3/2011 at 07:54 (5,027 days old) by KenmoreBD (Mass, usa ) | ||
|
Almost the same as the first set my mum had. Yours are just a few years younger. Did something happen to the washer? Ours was leaking oil when mum got rid of it 04. -Andrew | ||
| Post# 500858 , Reply# 5 3/3/2011 at 08:03 (5,027 days old) by KenmoreBD (Mass, usa ) | ||
|
Actualy on a second look, did you get the set in 93 or are they 93? | ||
| Post# 500869 , Reply# 6 3/3/2011 at 08:30 (5,027 days old) by 3beltwesty () | ||
|
I think you mean your "first set of daily driver from 93 to 2004" was a Top Loader and Todays stuff ( from 2004 to 2011/today) is your front loader and you are going back to Top Loaders? | ||
| Post# 500873 , Reply# 7 3/3/2011 at 08:37 (5,027 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
no the washer did not leak but the agi was not following the top part and the washer had 2 repairs on it 1 the motor and 2 the timer so after 10 years it did its time and the reason i would go back to a top loader is because of my size i have to sit down to load the washer and i for 1 always wash in cold water most of the time or warm water
| ||
| Post# 500925 , Reply# 10 3/3/2011 at 12:14 (5,027 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii) | ||
Pierre,
The Duets I had allowed you to adjust the water level using a screw driver on the pressure valve located under the top of the machine. It also had a quick cycle with a wash and two rinses and was only 33 minutes long.I only had one issue where part of my room mate,Orma's,bra had a metal strap that came out and was stuck in between the inner and outer tubs making a loud scraping noise as the drum tumbled or spun.It took about an hour but I was able to eventually get the piece to break up and removed it from the pump assembly.Other than that, the set was great as well as the results. Every direct drive top loading washer I have had was way too fast in agitation and tour up numerous pieces of clothes I had.From dress shirts to bath towels.If you wash a load in each machine and compare the lint that accumulates in the dryer screen, You'll see how much damage is done to clothes in the top loaders by the fact that there is a lot more lint. | ||
| Post# 500938 , Reply# 11 3/3/2011 at 12:41 (5,027 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
thank you for the info laundromat but the duet set i have is among the first that where made so there is no quick wash on the model i have and 1 of the main reason i would go back to a top loader is 1 if i have to start it and have to leave the house i would be able to stop the washer while i run my errands and 2 is because the fact that there is more water in the tub would remove the detergent smell on the clothe and 3 its because i a have to sit down when loading the washer while loading from the top i can stay up
| ||
| Post# 500951 , Reply# 12 3/3/2011 at 13:53 (5,027 days old) by laundromat (Hilo, Hawaii) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 500981 , Reply# 13 3/3/2011 at 14:44 (5,027 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
Long cycle times for full loads... short cycle for half load
I understand you want to go back to top loaders because in your case it would be more of an ergonomic choice... although I'd personally find it more disruptive because of the way I'm organised to do my laundry... but let's not go into that.
If that was the only reason for your claim, then, well… I guess… I can only zip it... but claims about wash times and other unfounded claims made by some repressed automatic users are just unacceptable. If your particular model of front loader lacks some facilities commonly found in most other front loading x-axis washing machines... then I'd say... trash that machine and get another FL. FL are all about the art of washing... every single component... or rather every single inch of its entrails is designed to serve a specific purpose for pampering your laundry delivering unparalleled cleaning and the best treatment for your most precious items, the least impact on your pocket as well as the environment and to top it all off it even adds a touch of style to your living space (although the latter might be less important). There are quite a few processes going on in you FL every time you press the start button: the superior and comprehensive dynamics involved in the cleaning process are more than meets the eye: the drum motion provide tumble action which gently allows all fibres in your textiles to expand and contract during the lifting/falling operations; the back of the drum is designed in a such way to provide an additional cleaning action by extreme gentle scouring enabled by the falling of the clothes past it, and even the deemed insignificant glass bowl wards off the load while simulating a very gently scrubbing action. The tumble action would be replaced in the case of a 'full to the brim' load by a gentle time enabled filtration (hence long cycle times). All of the properties I described above will have different effects in combination with the size of the load. If you have a particularly grubby batch of garments then you will have to allow all these actions to be combined by reducing the size of the load to 3/4 or less. If you pack your front loader full with clothes (up to its max capacity or more) then you will have to lower your expectations in regards to washing a heavily soiled load as some of the cleaning actions I was describing above will not occur, still, you'll be able to benefit of some kind of filtration achieved by the water and the detergent contained in the tub which will go through the clothes as the drum rotates as well as the gentle scrubbing properties of the drum front/back: these agents in combination with long cycle times are capable to wash a normally/lightly soiled load without damaging it (should this scenario be allowed in a TL V-axis washer shredding/tearing would most definitely occur). Contrary to what some folks have suggested... you can safely choose the longest available cycle with a full load of clothes in a FL and rest assured that wear and tear will not happen (just think of a dishwasher spraying water over static items for hours... when clothes are packed they are nearly-static in respect to the drum action which is likely to yield results relative only to the existing water being circulated through the items by means of the g force given by rotating/lifting/falling). Should damage occur in this situation (rare) it can only be attributed to the fact that some items might not be fully contained by the drum during the spin cycle (with an over-stuffed drum) resulting in continuous beating against design protuberances within the rubber bellows (like the clothes retainer you mostly find in the upper part of the seal). The cycles lengths are all there... why should these be regarded as a minus... most models offers a wide range of cycle lengths (short, medium, long), it's up to the user (hopefully with a minimum of commonsense and know how) to choose the most suitable for their laundry needs... granting that front loaders’ short cycles are still longer than top loaders cycles by a few minutes... or even a quarter of an hour... I’d say: what difference does it make if you have to spend 3 times as much for drying poorly spun clothes? I know... I know... there are TL machines out there today which spin up to 1200rpm... but only the top ranking ones. Yet… if you don’t like long wash cycles… or you can’t set your washer on a timer or time delay (guess what… you can have you clean laundry first thing in the morning) just don’t bother with them… do your laundry on short cycles and fill the drum ¾ max (same old problem… your washer hasn’t got short cycles… well, it sucks… but just like anything else, within a given range of products there is always a stock of different options available/unavailable across the range: in other words not all FL washers suck... like... I guess I could say the same for TLs). My 1 penny (energy efficient) worth! | ||
| Post# 500989 , Reply# 14 3/3/2011 at 15:13 (5,027 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
Long wash cycles.... ....does not equate to wear on clothes.
I feel like a penny-pinching meanie when I tell people that I'm still wearing clothes that I bought in 1988...but I am.
I bought a pair of very pale chinos from a now defunct department store in 1988 that get regular wear and have, with only a couple of exceptions, been washed in a front load machine. I'm not known for underloading and I don't take any special precautions, just separate and go....yet all the wear they show is less than 1/4 inch of fraying on the bottom of one leg caused by shoes!
The same for a set of sheridan towels. I bought them when I moved out of home in 1994. They've only ever been washing in a front loader and, from 1995, tumble dried. Between the 4 towels and other items, I can count on my hands the number of thread pulls....though they are starting to get a little 'light'
I've used a variety of machines over the years from a Keymatic (sigh!), British Hoover 'square doors', Australian Hoover Electra 550 (another sigh!), ASEA Cylinda 12000, Blomberg 1301A and Italian made Electrolux and Westinghouse badged Zanussi....and never have I ever given a thought to clothes wear...or cycle time.
Some of those machines are similar to the 1976 Westy that is oft' referred to in that I could get a full capacity cotton cycle down between 40 and 55 minutes depending on soiling and it would wash beautifully....others have had longer times for quick loads. Especially the Blomberg at 1hr 20 minutes for a 'Quick' wash....
...but you work with the machine and find something else to do.
I don't give it a second thought in most cases. Washing goes in and I do something else:
- watch TV - cook - read - vacuum - head out for coffee...
Washing machines were created to free people up to do other things. Waiting for them so you can bung the next load in is the complete reverse of one of their key functions - Giving you time to do other things.....so why the hang up with cycle times?
...and after 7yrs of living with machines, I'd have to draw the conclusion that you're actually pretty happy with them or you'd have found a way to get rid of them earlier....money or not. | ||
| Post# 500991 , Reply# 15 3/3/2011 at 15:26 (5,027 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
An example of a reduced load cos' of heavy soil.
Below a I included a link to a load of fastcolour laundry on a 60 degree cycle. This load was heavily stained so to get the most of the cleaning ability of the washer I reduced the load to approx half the washer's max capacity. This type of cycle with these settings would have a main wash of approx 35 minutes when the time saver option has been selected selected.
CLICK HERE TO GO TO Haxisfan's LINK | ||
| Post# 501013 , Reply# 16 3/3/2011 at 17:34 (5,027 days old) by mark_wpduet (Lexington KY) | ||
 | ||
Post# 501039 , Reply# 18 3/3/2011 at 18:56 (5,027 days old) by appnut  (TX) |
||
Every direct drive top loading washer I have had was way too Sing it Chuck!! Amen!! My 1986 Lady Shredmore is testament of what he talks about. My clothes are cleaner from my front loaders. I constantly had to use gentle agitation so that all my stuff wouldn't get beat to death. And they're lasting longer. Lint is different in the dryer now too. I hope I don't have to go back to a top loader that will destroy my clothes. Plus, my water and sewar bills are much less too!! | ||
| Post# 501057 , Reply# 20 3/3/2011 at 19:58 (5,027 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
Well perceptions and reality.... ...are different all over the world.
We went from a 1968 Simpson Fluid Drive (think Speed Queen) top loader to a 1989 ASEA (think ASKO) front loader...and cycle times went up....but so did what we could wash in it. The capacity differnce was technically only 1 lb, but the ASEA would happily take 4 queen sheets without an issue and the water sensors sorted out how much for the 'load'
...the same is the case for modern machines. Any half decent machine doesn't need any manual control for water level....and you, the consumer, should be able to rely on it to deliver results without interfering with it.
...as for pilling on shirts, well, I can only say that I've had minimal if any regardless of which machines I've owned at the time...
As for the 'weigh to save', I would hardly refer to it as 'technology' - they are a guide only being very dependant as to where on teh door you place the washing - too far front or back and you will get a different result....and I would bet a box of OMO MATIC that you could fill the machine up, set to MEDIUM level and a 15 minute wash time and get the same results as if you'd chosen the 'FULL' option for water.... | ||
| Post# 501088 , Reply# 23 3/3/2011 at 22:03 (5,027 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
hum i'don't know but base on what you posted my grand mother has a topload whirpool washer thats she bought in 2009 and just in fall last year she bought the matching dryer to replace her 40 year old vintage dryer and on her washer she has the option set to cool water for her wash and i remeber the last 2 washer she had and old vintage inglis liberator that was a push to start model and then around 1988 that she replace with a kenmore washer she always would use the warm wash water setting with the cold water rinse so i think that in order to have a real warm wash water we would have to try and find a good old fashion vintage machine?
| ||
|
Post# 501089 , Reply# 24 3/3/2011 at 22:03 (5,027 days old) by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA) |
||
 | ||
| Post# 501096 , Reply# 25 3/3/2011 at 22:06 (5,027 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
glimpse of my grandmother 's washer today | ||
| Post# 501182 , Reply# 28 3/4/2011 at 08:24 (5,026 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
@ househelper
Hi there... with a nickname like yours I guess you need all the help you can get... well... 3 loads of laundry in 1 go... ouch… I believe it'd be a stressful combination regardless of what type washer you're using... you still have to accomplish drying somehow... unless you own 2 or 3 dryers… let alone folding and putting away… that’s scary! When I have lots of laundry to get out of the way, I let it pile up and do only 1 load each day no stop as opposed to the typical 4-5 loads per week (so it’d work out 7 a week).
I always believed that US temperature system was not about not having temperature choice but rather the implementation of names like (cold, cool, warm, hand hot, hot, very hot, boiling) as opposed to our degree Celsius system. You mentioned the sanitary cycle in the LG being carried out at a temperature of 74C (165F), still, it seems more than reasonable for fulfilling its purpose. Over here these kinds of cycles have always been present and always had a similar cycle length around the 2 hour mark... which would even be longer if used in conjunction with a pre-wash cycle. However that didn't mean that the washer would keep heating the water throughout the whole cycle, but only in certain stages at pre-programmed intervals, reaching the top temperature only during the last stage of the main wash. Having said that, in most cases, such cycles are not necessary and cleanliness can be achieved with much lower temperatures (or cold with specific products). Pricing for these 2 most contended types of washers (FL vs TL) is rather different over here but this phenomenon is often dictated by the market according to its own trend rather than reflecting the quality of the materials or processed involved in the production: I'm sure the US would see much cheaper FLs in the near future if Americans kept buying these machines over TL models. I admit that I love the idea of having a flexibility in temperature choice, but that is recently been taken down a notch or two... in fact most current but top of the range models (not just Hoover) no longer offer middling temperatures like 50, 70 or 80 degrees... well, I guess one just gets used to it as long as there are other available options that let you tweak the wash cycle in terms of duration. In my opinion it’s most appropriate for the user to be able to choose the cycle lengths in a given washer and learn the potential shortcomings of short wash cycles by their own trial n' error… but most importantly the user is able to compare its own experiences within the same appliance rather than relying on someone else terms of comparison or opinion of the type ‘my short wash gave me brilliant results’ and ‘my long wash gave me poor results’. Oh dear… too much rambling perhaps… see ya ;-) | ||
| Post# 501451 , Reply# 32 3/5/2011 at 03:55 (5,026 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
Cool... warm... hot...
3belt, thanks for the info. In my comment above I was thinking more on the lines of post heater American appliances in the last decade or so... such as your own LG front loader. Perhaps I was exaggerating a bit but I've seen at least 4 settings (cold, cool, warm, hot) in older models where as you suggested the centralized hot water was mixed with cold water in such a way to result in said temperature variations, with a marginal degree of accuracy of course... but what about those washing machines with an integrated heater? They still have names instead of degrees.
I remember seeing a recent 'Splendide' American front loader which has the exact same design as our European Indesit, however the various iconic elements, names of cycles, colours and temperature id on the control panel is completely different... the latter relying on names rather than on a degree scale. One last curiosity... is 120 volts fatal for humans? | ||
| Post# 501612 , Reply# 34 3/5/2011 at 18:34 (5,025 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
...an awful picture, but my PC crashed recently, so this is from the web...
Anyway, it is rated at 230-250V, 2050w @ 50Hz....
A 'hot' 60c quick cottons is 75minutes
A 'warm' 40c quick cottons cycle is 68minutes...though I can get a 40c quick synthetics cycle to about 50 minutes.
A 'tepid' 30c quick cottons cycle is 61minutes
A 'cold' quick cottons is 55minutes
I tend to wash everything on the hot or warm cycles except gym gear which gets synthetics 30c quick at 45minutes and wool....
There is a 30c, 30minute refresh cycle too....which I very rarely use as it spins at 700rpm...though I tend to engage 'rinse hold' which reduces the time to 25min and then flick around to the separate 'spin' at 1200rpm for 10minutes...
All 'quick' cycles have 2 deep rinses - to where the door glass goes vertical (approx 1/5 - 1/4 up the glass) and interim spins with a final at either 1200rpm or 900rpm...and whilst some would say you should reduce the load for a quick wash, I fill this to the top if nothing is heavily soiled and do the same but add a pre-wash if there is heavy (think ground in garden dirt) soiling.
Normal cycles have 3 rinses, though at a lower water level....
| ||
| Post# 501723 , Reply# 36 3/6/2011 at 02:29 (5,025 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia) | ||
|
Just water heating... ...is the difference...
...and I also have a 95c option too....which is pretty much boiling.
Australian power points deliver a nominal 230V @ a maximum of 10amps...though appliances should have a range from 230-250V and there are 15amp points too which have a larger 'earth' pin (which is the one on the bottom).
Appliances rated at 230-250V with 10amp plugs are not allowed to draw more than 2400watts...so ALL domestic, movable appliances are traditionally rated from 230-250V 50Hz 10amp. The exceptions are normally American style tumble dryers. CLICK HERE TO GO TO ronhic's LINK | ||
| Post# 501725 , Reply# 37 3/6/2011 at 03:32 (5,025 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
Wattages...
The Hoover you've seen in the vids has a 2150w heater, 230v at 50hz... I guess most European washers have a similar wattage heaters in them. My rapid boil kettle has got a 3000w heater... but the ordinary non rapid are rated around 2000w or less.
As for time... starting from 20C (68F) the heater requires 5 to 8 minutes (depending on the ambience temperature and the size of the load) to heat the water by 10 degrees... there are some cycles where their duration is entirely dependant on the temperature when used with a specific option called 'time saver' (this function cuts off the wash time so the washer ends the main wash 1 minute or so after the temperature has been reached) e.g. if I use a 40C cycle on a programme where the the 'time saver' function can be enabled the main wash is likely to last 25 minutes or so... the first 10' without heat + 7' (up to 30C) + 7' (up to 40C) + 1' (few final tumbles before drain) = 25'. To finish the cycle the machine needs another half an hour or so for rinsing (20' on easy care cycle) and approx 10 minutes (3' on easy care) for the final spin... all in all a similar cycle would need just over an 1 to complete (longer if there are delays due to unbalanced loads, the equivalent easy care cycle would be done in approx 45'). I don't think longer cycles in general are longer because washers need longer time to heat the water... it's just a specific profile associated with a particular wash cycle. As in my example above, you could see that the first 10' or so of the cycle don't even engage the heater, however, there are other fix duration cycles in which the heater will be engaged almost straight away (say 2-3 minutes after pressing the start button). You'll find a similar scenario on all the other machines across other manufacturers... the duration of a their programmes is specific to that particular cycle profile. | ||
| Post# 501728 , Reply# 38 3/6/2011 at 04:26 (5,025 days old) by Haxisfan (Europe - UK / Italy) | ||
|
Correction... | ||
| Post# 501771 , Reply# 40 3/6/2011 at 11:40 (5,024 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 501777 , Reply# 41 3/6/2011 at 12:05 (5,024 days old) by pierreandreply4 (St-Bruno de montarville (province of quebec) canada) | ||
|
Explanation of color code for water temp | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
