The Interesting Thing About Today's Daily Doctrine...

Robert -

Here's what I can tell you about the Whirlpool line during and after the 1982 machines were offered:

First, the 82's were the first machines designed for the revised baseplate and new basket/tub sizes. The previous 1980/81 models were easily revised to have the new baseplate and other parts, and consumers probably only rarely even noticed. BUT, the '82s had new console graphics, which were used on most all machines, TOL to barely MOL. The 1982 machines were LA....XK models.

Oddly, models were developed for 1984 which look absolutely identical to most or their counterpart 1982 machines. I have a WP LA7680XK right next to an LA7680XM (XM is the '84) and it beats me if there is any difference. I've stood there looking for something as minor as a print font or wording change...nothing. The '84s looked just like the '82s.

The 1985 models, addressing a point you made above, were a little bit different, most of them anyway. These were LA....XP models, and many of the XPs have single sloped consoles, new knobs, a woodgrain stripe toward the top of the console, and no secondary little "lip" on the top of the panel. Oddly, before I bought my '86 Kenmores I had ordered in late June 1986 a Whirlpool LA5580XP - but it retained the older console of the 82 and 84 models. It was a Circuit City model, and often they had models custom made for them so their absolute price guarantee could never actually be used since nobody else had the exact model. I believe that most full-line WP machines for places other than Circuit City had the new console.

This didn't change the machines much though other than the minor appearance change. Some of the older models seem to have remainined in production for a while, and the XPs were basically the same feature-wise as the XMs. The last major change Whirlpool made to the belt-drives was in moving to the basket mounted lint filters (and thus removing a lot of hoses and parts) which was done in summer 1982. After that, the machines coasted until the DDs came in.

The BDs went out with a bang so to speak though, as 1984-1986 was a HUGE production period for them, and for appliances in general as the US economy recovered from the late 1980-1983 recession, and the assembly plants in Clyde and St. Joe were on overtime many days to keep up with backlogs. Today, it is very common, and much more likely, to find a LA....XM or XP machine vs. an XK, not because they are a tad newer, but because the XMs and XPs sold in so drastically higher numbers.

Cool stuff Robert, thanks!

Gordon


Forum Topics & Rules Manuals & Literature	New users Click-here to sign-up

Post# 589897 4/16/2012 at 08:54 (4,382 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)
Checkrate/Likes Is these machines are still relatively easy to find. We seem them on Craigslist and at estate sales all the time. Today's Whirlpool automatic washer doctrine is a bit newer than we've done previously, from 1982. This brochure covers many belt-drive models that Whirlpool produced in the 1980s up to the change-over to the direct drive washers. I don't believe there were a lot of design changes on the belt-drive machines after this? Maybe other know more about it than I do. Beautiful brochure, love the pictures and hand drawn graphics, I wrote away and received this brochure when I was about 19. CLICK HERE TO GO TO Unimatic1140's LINK

Post# 589899 , Reply# 1 4/16/2012 at 09:07 (4,382 days old) by peteski50 (New York)
Checkrate/Likes *Daily Doctrine!* Thanks Robert - this is a great brochure. My sister bought the LA7800XK set in 1984 and it lasted for 17 years with only a few minor repairs that my brother in law fixed. And they did tons of laundry with 2 kids. They got rid of it still working in 2001. I remember this time 1982 when their was still quality built appliances. At the time as most of us know whirlpool and maytag had picked up most of the gm frigidaire business because of wci stupidity. I still wish they made the whirlpool belt drive designs - I miss the wooo wooo sound! Peter

Post# 589907 , Reply# 2 4/16/2012 at 09:56 (4,382 days old) by Kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes Robert - Here's what I can tell you about the Whirlpool line during and after the 1982 machines were offered: First, the 82's were the first machines designed for the revised baseplate and new basket/tub sizes. The previous 1980/81 models were easily revised to have the new baseplate and other parts, and consumers probably only rarely even noticed. BUT, the '82s had new console graphics, which were used on most all machines, TOL to barely MOL. The 1982 machines were LA....XK models. Oddly, models were developed for 1984 which look absolutely identical to most or their counterpart 1982 machines. I have a WP LA7680XK right next to an LA7680XM (XM is the '84) and it beats me if there is any difference. I've stood there looking for something as minor as a print font or wording change...nothing. The '84s looked just like the '82s. The 1985 models, addressing a point you made above, were a little bit different, most of them anyway. These were LA....XP models, and many of the XPs have single sloped consoles, new knobs, a woodgrain stripe toward the top of the console, and no secondary little "lip" on the top of the panel. Oddly, before I bought my '86 Kenmores I had ordered in late June 1986 a Whirlpool LA5580XP - but it retained the older console of the 82 and 84 models. It was a Circuit City model, and often they had models custom made for them so their absolute price guarantee could never actually be used since nobody else had the exact model. I believe that most full-line WP machines for places other than Circuit City had the new console. This didn't change the machines much though other than the minor appearance change. Some of the older models seem to have remainined in production for a while, and the XPs were basically the same feature-wise as the XMs. The last major change Whirlpool made to the belt-drives was in moving to the basket mounted lint filters (and thus removing a lot of hoses and parts) which was done in summer 1982. After that, the machines coasted until the DDs came in. The BDs went out with a bang so to speak though, as 1984-1986 was a HUGE production period for them, and for appliances in general as the US economy recovered from the late 1980-1983 recession, and the assembly plants in Clyde and St. Joe were on overtime many days to keep up with backlogs. Today, it is very common, and much more likely, to find a LA....XM or XP machine vs. an XK, not because they are a tad newer, but because the XMs and XPs sold in so drastically higher numbers. Cool stuff Robert, thanks! Gordon

Post# 589919 , Reply# 3 4/16/2012 at 10:22 (4,382 days old) by applianceguy47 ()
Checkrate/Likes 2 THANK-YOU ROBERT. Such a healthy selection of Avocado and Harvest Gold. It brings tears to my eyes.

Post# 589956 , Reply# 4 4/16/2012 at 13:19 (4,382 days old) by Kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes Here is a picture of the panel that was used on the LA5580XP that I had selected in 1986. The LA7800 (which Ben got recently in Platinum) and the LA7680s that I have share this style panel but they were replaced by 1985 versions with the slightly revised panel.

Post# 589968 , Reply# 5 4/16/2012 at 14:48 (4,382 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)
Checkrate/Likes Thanks Gordon, great info! I find it interesting that the title of this brochure is "Never before has so little water worked so hard so you don't have to!". What could have possibly changed between the water consumption of earlier WP/KN large capacity washers and these machines?

Post# 589971 , Reply# 6 4/16/2012 at 15:16 (4,382 days old) by Kenmoreguy64 (Charlotte, NC)
Checkrate/Likes *What could have changed?* Robert - Some things didn't change at all, including timers. But, a number of physical things happened with the baseplate redesign of later 1981. For the first time, baseplates from standard and large capacity machines became interchangeable - the only difference between the two capacities was the length of the suspension rods and the overall height of the outer tubs. In previous machines, there was a sizeable difference between the diameter of the outer tubs for large capacity machines vs. standard - so much so that large capacity tubs required cabinet half-moon shaped cut-outs in the inner lip areas which are not visible with the tops are snapped down. Without these, the large cap. outer tubs don't fit easily into the cabinet. Thus, the baseplates were quite different as well, including the diameter of the drain hole on the large machines. To eliminate this manufacturing complexity and variation, the new machines got common sized outer tubs, which vary only in height between the two capacities, as mentioned. The new large capacity tub was shrunk to accomodate this a little bit, and the suspension rods are about 5/8 to 3/4 of an inch shorter, making the agitators rise a little higher in the lid well than they once did. Water capacity in these machines dropped from 24.5 to 25 gallons to 22. Using the Dual-Action agitators or a Double-Duty winged Surgilator allowed the machines to hold nearly the same size load, but I don't want to swear to that. I can try that easily and find out sometime. BUT, saving 2.5 to 3 gallons of water PER FILL, meaning up to 6 gallons per load, is a lot of water in a machine's lifetime, and that's what I think WP is referring to. Very odd, but I was just thinking about this yesterday. With the advent of the tub mounted filter (which was a decent filter but we love to hate it here on AW) which happened less than a year after this new baseplate configuration debuted, most of the machines built after that were essentially identical underneath the top. Some had bleach hoses and some didn't, and some had a manual filter hose, but other than that, they hardly differed other than the absolute TOL Kenmores with the triple dispensers and the pump and plumbing changes it required. Gordon

Post# 590169 , Reply# 7 4/17/2012 at 07:02 (4,381 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *Early 1980s WP built Belt Drive Washers* Great information Gordon about these final BD WP machines. The other reason that the tub capacity was reduced on the Super Capacity machines was that that WP had an uncompetitive rating on their yellow Energy Guide labels and during this time period as now potential buyers were comparing these numbers. Maytag had the advantage going into the 1980s as they had the lowest water capacity of all the large capacity TL washers and WP KM were trying to be more competitive. The other reason for the downsizing of the super capacity machines was WP was experiencing quite a few complaints about walking and vibration on their super capacity machines from the 1970s and they had reduced the spin speed on the extra large machines already to just 515 RPMs. But all in all WP built and sold a huge number of BD washers in the first 6 years of the 1980s which ramped up as the Reagan rescission started to ease by 1894 or so. And other than the poor quality of the outer tubs on these machines they would have been the most durable automatic washers that ever left WP factories. Even now the majority of the 1980s BD washers that we are hauling out of customers homes have issues with outer tub leaks.

Post# 590413 , Reply# 8 4/17/2012 at 20:41 (4,381 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes *Roto-Flex Agitator* I think that myself or someone said that it had 5 vanes it actually has 6. I would say that this agitator was by far my favorite KM standard capacity BD washer agitator, my favorite WP agitator was the standard Surgalator.