Thread Number: 59352
/ Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
SQ vs. other companies |
[Down to Last] |
|
Post# 819433 , Reply# 1   4/15/2015 at 18:46 (3,270 days old) by Gusherb (Chicago/NWI)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
My assumption is that a company like Whirlpool doesn't want anything to do with what they'd consider an old outdated design, plus you can damn well bet that the belt drive top loaders are much cheaper to manufacture then a DD machine. |
Post# 819571 , Reply# 2   4/16/2015 at 18:07 (3,269 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
For one thing the SQ TL washers are not energy star machines, they are just squeaking by using a few sneaky technicalities [ WP and other companies also find ways to bend the rules a little also ], but I suspect that if SQ becomes too successful selling their TL washers they are likely to be banned in states like California pretty soon because of excessive water usage. |
Post# 819578 , Reply# 3   4/16/2015 at 18:49 (3,269 days old) by joeypete (Concord, NH)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 819579 , Reply# 4   4/16/2015 at 19:03 (3,269 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
My hunch is that the belt drive design washer is quite likely more expensive to build compared to a direct drive model, especially if they can use a multi-phase motor and electronics to replace the transmission. Simplicity is the key.
Hunch #2 is that the other manufacturers are no longer placing their eggs in the deep fill traditional top load basket because they know that it won't be around much longer... Water will become an increasingly scarce thing in the future (See also California). As for Speed Queen making a good top load HE machine, they were more clever and they flipped the axis 90 degrees. The only way to make HE really work is with a front loader. The Europeans have known this for years. If Peabody could set the Wayback machine 15 years ahead, I bet we would see the top load HE's will only be a blip in history. These are just my views from way up in the cheap seats, perhaps the people in the front row have a better view... |
Post# 819665 , Reply# 7   4/17/2015 at 07:38 (3,269 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
6    
"The only way to make HE really work is with a front-loader."
Damn straight! Front-loaders are custom-made for HE. It's been an exceptionally dry spring in southwestern Minnesota, where we've been in severe drought conditions the past few summers. The pattern the past couple of years has been this: Plenty of rain through the second week in June, at which time the tap shuts off completely for the remainder of the summer. And now no rain even in April? Yikes. |
Post# 819720 , Reply# 11   4/17/2015 at 11:54 (3,268 days old) by henene4 (Heidenheim a.d. Brenz (Germany))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
(My previous post was not read by my self again before posting, so please excuse bad grammar, typos and wrong punctuation!) |
Post# 819731 , Reply# 12   4/17/2015 at 12:56 (3,268 days old) by joeypete (Concord, NH)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
6    
You make some excellent points Henrik. It's very clear that depending on what part of the world you are in, opinions on new/old washing machines can vary greatly.
Americans, generally speaking, don't like change. I mean how many times growing up did any of us hear "They don't make them like they used to" or "Back in MY day", etc, etc. Pertaining to lots of things, not just washing machines, lol. My parents bought my Grandmother both a microwave and a food processor. The microwave sat unused in her kitchen for years and I now have the food processor (she gave it back to us shortly after we gave it to her!). Just as we have lots of people complaining about HE machines, I'm sure back in 1960 there were plenty of people complaining about "modern" automatic washing machines. Who needs an AUTOMATIC machine?!? Go to the wash sink and scrub your clothes on a wash board. How lazy!!! ;-) I was just at Lowe's last night looking at machines. The sales person was busy with a guy who I'm guessing was 65-70 years old. I lost count of how many times I heard him say "Those environmentalists!!!" By the facial expressions I noticed on the salesman's face, it must have been a bit of struggle trying to find this guy a machine he liked. Oddly, he picked a Samsung HE top loader. LOL. Funny. He was an in person example of those awful reviews you read on shopping sites about washing machines. I remember when I bought my GE HydroWave last fall, some people LOVED it and some people HATED it. "It sounds like it's broken"; the manual explains that it will sound different than older machines, in fact GE has many YouTube videos that actually reproduce them so you know what to expect. Obviously they don't read the manual. "The agitation is so slow and gentle, it doesn't clean!!!" Again, no idea how the machine works with the 360 degree wash arc. The only thing that mine hasn't been able to clean is my white socks, but then they didn't come clean in the LG front loader I used for 2 years either. White socks are difficult to get clean! Everything else has been perfect. It's mind numbing! Personally I like top load machines, but again, because that's what I'm familiar with. I grew up with them. I remember countless times standing on a chair in the laundry room with a butter knife stuck in the latch hole and broom stick to push all the clothes down (because I overloaded it). Awesome memories, but things change. I've used front load machines many times and as boring as they were to me (in terms of a spectator), every time I did my laundry, my clothes came out just as clean as they did in our Kenmore DD machines growing up. Perception and laundry skills have a huge effect on what is actually reality with modern washing machines. I remember reading an article that talked about how a good chunk of people's clothes, don't REALLY get that dirty. Of course you have exceptions…the kids that get covered in dirt, ketchup, chocolate ice cream….the husband (or whoever) that's a mechanic and comes home covered in diesel exhaust and grease…landscaper who looks like they planted themselves in the dirt! And so on…. But generally speaking for most, you throw your clothes in any current washer, and they will come out "clean". I mean all these kids, and mechanics, and dirty landscape or construction workers were around in 1960 when most Americans had never even seen a front load machine, unless you happen to be tortured by going to a laundromat. Even them they were considered more of a commercial device. Using good quality laundry detergent and effective stain treatment (just like Grandma used to do), makes a HUGE difference. Believe me, I spent years buying the big bottle of Xtra detergent for $5 only to find a bottle of Tide on clearance. Night and day….I couldn't believe how much better my clothes (whites in particular) came out. Lots of thoughts in my post and hopefully I get my point across. I respect everyone here and the varied opinions we all share with each other. That's what makes this forum fun, we get to interact and learn new ideas and points of view. I personally care about the Earth we live in and our environment. Water shortage in the United States varies. I can see areas like southern CA and the desert, where water needs to be pumped in from hundreds of miles away, should be concerned with how much water they use to wash clothes. Here in the northeast, not so much. Granted we have droughts from time to time, but generally speaking, water shortage is not a big issue. But if you look at places like China where you literally get sick from just being outside, as a whole, we need to be responsible with our natural resources and chemicals we pump back into it. Can't we all just get along? ;-) Happy Washing! |
Post# 819740 , Reply# 13   4/17/2015 at 13:45 (3,268 days old) by ea56 (Cotati, Calif.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
Both Henrik and Joeypete have made some very good points in their posts. We absolutely have to realize that our natural resources can be limited, depending upon where you live. Personally, I used to really prefer a front loader, before they got screwed around with all the unnecessary computer controls. I had a White Westinghouse front loader that we bought new in 1987 and we sold it with the house in 1994. It was still working excellently, with no repair calls after 7 years. It used less water than a toploader, but more than the current breed of front loaders. It was simple in design, yet had controls that met all my washing needs. I could wash a king size down comforter or 2 king size plillows with no problems. It didn't "hunt"around for a sweet spot to begin to spin, when the timer landed on spin, thats what it did. It completed a load in 40 to 45 mins, no ATC, hot water was hot water. And the laundry always came out clean. It never got moldy or smelled. Basically, it was great. Now, if manufactures offered this kind of front load washer again, I'd buy one in a hot second. In the meantime, I'll stick with my GE and be VERY careful about washing with as little water as possible, at least until we are out of the drought here in No. Calif.
|
Post# 819758 , Reply# 15   4/17/2015 at 15:32 (3,268 days old) by joeypete (Concord, NH)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I totally get that washman! I actually ordered a new Kenmore HE set (made by LG). Really good price and I chickened out at the last minute because all that electronics and sub sconic spin speeds scares me. Granted LG has a good reliability rating but I've had a couple friends spend hundreds of dollars replacing circuit boards. So my quest continues. I'm drawn to the Speed Queen stackable front load set, but the $2800 price tag scares me a bit…. lol
|
Post# 819770 , Reply# 16   4/17/2015 at 17:39 (3,268 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
>Just as we have lots of people complaining about HE machines, I'm sure back in 1960 there were plenty of people complaining about "modern" automatic washing machines. Who needs an AUTOMATIC machine?!? Go to the wash sink and scrub your clothes on a wash board. How lazy!!! ;-)
There probably were many complaining about automatics. Indeed, my mother told me of women of her mother's generation who were somewhat anti-automatic for some time, preferring Ye Olde Faithful Wringer machine. And they'd swear that the old machines washed better. (Sound familiar? LOL) |
Post# 819790 , Reply# 17   4/17/2015 at 20:18 (3,268 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
7    
Exactly John. Those new fangled machines with their mechanical timers are so much less reliable then this rock in the stream ;)
Resistance to change is a big part of the problem. When the conventional wringer machines went away people didn't like altering their laundry habits to suit the new automatic machines. Same is true with a front loader. If the front load machines were so all fired horrible how does that explain all the people that happen to love theirs? Are they just stupid? Or are they just able to make the adjustments to suit the new technology, to make it work. People only get get stinky washers if they don't make the needed adjustments in their habits. Indeed a large part of modern design is aimed at reducing machine costs, and this of course can result in reliability problems. But in many cases newer design is better or simpler or uses better products like plastics (god forbid), which can end up being more reliable. To make a blanket statement that older is always better is flat wrong, just as assuming anything new is automatically better. Of course one can choose to like vintage things, to some degree ALL of us are here because of that love. I can see the value and appreciate an old washer, or car, or tube hifi amp but I really don't want any of them as a daily driver. I don't believe that they are superior overall. I'm a pragmatic Luddite... I personally don't think that the government should mandate energy conservation. But this is only because I think that they shouldn't HAVE to! We should all just do whatever we can do to just use less before a mandate is required. Sure there will be those that say laundry uses only a tiny amount of the water or energy that humans consume, but that isn't a valid justification to allow to simply use more. |
Post# 819797 , Reply# 18   4/17/2015 at 20:49 (3,268 days old) by murando531 (Augusta, Georgia - US)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
I see a lot of points made here that I completely agree with, from all contributors.
Six months ago, I hated the idea of an HE machine. That opinion and mindset was grown from witnessing and experiencing so-called machines, and not liking what I saw. Now fast-forward, and I have had an HE WP Fusion Oasis in my laundry room for almost five months (technically two of them, but that was simply an isolated issue.) Since having the Bravos XL, my view of HE washing machines has done a complete 180. As hard as it has been to wrap my head around, this machine DOES do a much better job using the low water level that it does. Adding water hinders its performance drastically. Along with that, I've found that it's taking forever to get through a box of detergent because of how little it actually requires to produce fresh clean laundry. I've yet to have a need to pretreat anything, whether it's underarm stains, or food spots, and whatever mishaps have become on my clothes. I've also yet to have a load that wasn't completely saturated in detergent mixture before the wash action even started, nor a load that didn't properly "bloom" and rollover as it should. It took a little while to adjust and to keep an open mind, but now I have absolutely no doubt that when I put clothes into the machine, they're going to come out clean, smelling fresh, well rinsed, and almost spun dry to the point that it takes no time at all for the dryer to be done. That last point, in and of itself, makes me love the machine, and makes a HUGE difference in energy use because the dryer runs 1/3 of the time it would with a traditional washer, and that's with the heat set to low! That said, I can also see why some users would absolutely despise a top-loading washer that is labelled "HE". Of every high efficiency top loader on the market, the Whirlpool Oasis/Fusion Oasis design is the only one that I've been impressed with. I wouldn't take an LG/Samsung TL if it were given to me, I see Frigidaire's machine as nothing but a spinning ice cream bucket, and I wouldn't give the time of day to anything GE has built. There are countless videos, and even more declarations here on AW of the shortcomings of such designs. The main complaint being that A: the machine doesn't have a recirculation system (which in my opinion is a MUST for any top loading washer), and B: the load is simply swished back and forth, with little to no movement within the actual load itself. Neither has been the case with the Bravos. To say that most people are against drastic change is true, but it is also true that in the last decade or so, to the people like us that actually pay attention to and care about the subject, change conditioned us to perceive the word as: "what quality that we love and need has been taken away?". It makes it that much more difficult to actually embrace the changes in front of us. I think and hope that as the machines that clean our laundry and dishes evolve, there will always be choice. It's safe to say that with the variety of companies there are, despite growing fewer through time because of buyouts and mergers, there will at least always be a variety of designs to choose from. In the end it all boils down to what gets the job done properly, and what quirks and methods a person wants to choose to adjust to. |
Post# 819844 , Reply# 20   4/18/2015 at 06:26 (3,268 days old) by arbilab (Ft Worth TX (Ridglea))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Grandma was THRILLED to ditch her Thor wringer for the new Easy Spindry around 1953. Nothing 'automatic' about either, still had to stand there the whole time sticking your hands in suds. But the Easy was...... easier and ultimately did a better job.
Of course, THOSE machines didn't have the goobermint meddling with their gallons/litres or temperatures. They also weren't designed by lowest-cost engineering graduates. Any 'real' engineer will tell you, a graduate engineer plus a dollar will get you a free coffee refill at Denny's. Those machines ALSO weren't designed under the basis of "cut parts down to the last quarter-cent that makes them work then sell it" current corporate dictum. Not like any of this is an eyebrow raiser to anyone here. Most have witnessed it firsthand. Or like me, secondhand-- out of the market since 1998 but followed it nonetheless. What would I buy today? What I did, a year ago. An all-plastic $250 Chinese twintub. Sure ain't 'touch-N-go' walk away from it automatic. BUT! Goobermint has NOTHING to say about how much/what temp water I use. It's twice as fast as the jiggered automatics, uses less water overall, and takes half the dryer time. Now besides the fact I have to stand there the whole time with my hands in/out of suds, it uses LESS of EVERY resource and does exactly what needs to be done very well. But I have the low volume/spare time to make that practical; few do. No argument that the choices have gotten a LOT harder. |
Post# 819885 , Reply# 21   4/18/2015 at 14:21 (3,267 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
>When you're washing clothes, the focus isn't just on saving the water, its also about not spending money on the energy needed to heat it. If you're only heating 10-15L of water, that's less than 20% of the cost of heating the water for a Traditional TL machine.
And that is probably a major consideration, and one reason why there is government concern about water use. Certainly energy savings experts seem more worried about water heating costs. Here is one page that illustrates this, complete with the lecture about the "joys" of washing in tap-cold water. michaelbluejay.com/electricity/la... And frugality types also have been more worried about heating water costs. It seems to me I've heard some cheapskates saying that upgrading your top load to a front load doesn't make as much sense economically if one washes in only cold, which is, of course, their #1 choice. |
Post# 819889 , Reply# 22   4/18/2015 at 14:34 (3,267 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
>I personally don't think that the government should mandate energy conservation. But this is only because I think that they shouldn't HAVE to! We should all just do whatever we can do to just use less before a mandate is required. Sure there will be those that say laundry uses only a tiny amount of the water or energy that humans consume, but that isn't a valid justification to allow to simply use more.
Ideally, one could say yes... But that is not the world we live in. Although the one problem with this argument I see is the "[we] should all just do whatever we can" part. I am not arguing with the basic idea, mind you, but this does open the question of exactly how much one should do and how far one should go... I know, for example, I could be doing more to save electricity. But...the steps I'd have to take would have a huge financial price for me to deal with. For example, I'm posting this from a desktop computer. Should I replace it with a laptop, which uses less energy? Even though it would cost $$$$? One advantage of government standards--when done right--is that they can give a guideline of sorts. They also can force manufacturers to do things they might not be bothered with otherwise. Sometimes, of course, this may not be a good thing. But sometimes it probably is. For example, car safety is better than it once was, and if the decisions were left to Detroit, we'd still be lacking a long list of safety improvements. |
Post# 819894 , Reply# 24   4/18/2015 at 15:14 (3,267 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
Another thought: even if there were no energy or water saving mandates, there still could be plenty of washing machines out there that aren't capable of doing the job.
Having lived with an early 1990s Frigidaire top load machine--twice [shudder]--I can attest that a washer can use full tubs of water, no apparent restrictions on hot water, and still be a lousy washing machine... |
Post# 819896 , Reply# 25   4/18/2015 at 15:24 (3,267 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
Another thought is that some older technologies might actually beat HE, at least for water heating costs. If one has a 1960s Kenmore washer, for example, it would be expected that it would use a lot more energy to do a given load than this week's Home Depot wonder. But...if that old Kenmore has suds saver, which is used regularly (and partnered with cold rinses), that equation might change.
Of course, this is coming from someone who has dreamed of having suds saver, because his grandma's washer had it, and it was the neatest thing ever... LOL |
Post# 819900 , Reply# 26   4/18/2015 at 15:59 (3,267 days old) by brisnat81 (Brisbane Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
I've used the calculator based on the costs we have here, and it gets easy to see when you're paying 30c per kwh and $13 per 1000 Gals how quickly the extra water and electricity usage mounts up.
View Full Size
|
Post# 819925 , Reply# 27   4/18/2015 at 18:46 (3,267 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
6    
I've just done a comparison of the three key costs - water, gas and electricity, Canberra to Chicago based on the costs that Jonathan used above.
Off our last bills:
Water -AUS$2.75 per Kl (about US$8.50 per 1000 USgallon) Electricity - AUD$0.17 Kwh (about US$0.13) Gas - AUD$0.028 per Mj (about US$2.25 per Therm)
That makes:
Water 200% more expensive Electricity 15% more expensive but the kicker is Gas at 800% more expensive.
You can understand why Australians prefer to hang their laundry out. Gas dryers are a rare beast here and would be particularly expensive to run. Electric dryers take longer, but in our case, are cheaper to run than gas.
Regarding the Top V's Front loader debate, I personally believe that the US has simply gotten it wrong in one key, dynamic way. If you want lasting, thoughtful and genuine change, you don't try and foist it on a reluctant public who are change averse by incentivizing the manufacturers and then hitting them with a big stick if they don't comply. The sensible way to do it is to pay the public when they choose the 'correct path'. So, rather than dish out huge sums to the likes of Whirlpool etc. to change their machines to sell to the public, give the public a rebate when they buy a machine that meets certain energy/water requirements. This then forces the manufacturer to provide what the public demands and enables the public to have choice without feeling that they've had their 'right to choose' removed from them.
It's worked a treat here, but then if you explain to an Australian or a European why something is being done, why it's good for them and the country, they'll generally go on the journey with you.
Much of what I read on here that's posted by non-Europeans and non-Australians amounts to 'It's my right and I'll do as I please - I pay for it' - a completely different reaction to everyone else.
|
Post# 819953 , Reply# 32   4/18/2015 at 21:52 (3,267 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
Hoover. - less than half the price - costs 1/3 the amount to run over 10 years - is more gentle on clothes despite the longer cycle - removes 23% more dirt - uses less than 40% of the water - and extracts more during spin
I'll concede that it doesn't rinse quite as well, but I can introduce another rinse @ 15L if it was required.
Given the prime reason is to 'clean clothes', even if every other variable was the same, that 23% better dirt removal score is the kicker.
I only paid $600 for my Beko (with 12kg OMO...that's basically $60). My mothers F&P badged Beko is now 7yrs old and hasn't had an issue. If in 10 years I have to replace it, I'll have saved more than double the replacement cost in comparison anyway along with having cleaner clothes that have lasted longer. This post was last edited 04/18/2015 at 22:36 |
Post# 819957 , Reply# 33   4/18/2015 at 23:06 (3,267 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
> If you want lasting, thoughtful and genuine change, you don't try and foist it on a reluctant public who are change averse by incentivizing the manufacturers and then hitting them with a big stick if they don't comply. The sensible way to do it is to pay the public when they choose the 'correct path'. So, rather than dish out huge sums to the likes of Whirlpool etc. to change their machines to sell to the public, give the public a rebate when they buy a machine that meets certain energy/water requirements. This then forces the manufacturer to provide what the public demands and enables the public to have choice without feeling that they've had their 'right to choose' removed from them.
Yes, I have to agree that some approach that "rewards" ordinary buyers for choosing efficiency has a lot of merit. But my Inner Cynic says "Good luck" getting that to happen in the current political climate. I'm sure there are Republicans out there who, in fact, would take the opinion of "I don't care about peasants like LordKenmore, and I don't really care about environmental issues, but I sure do care about big corportations and my big, rich CEO friends of those corporations." |
Post# 819958 , Reply# 34   4/18/2015 at 23:18 (3,267 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 819959 , Reply# 35   4/18/2015 at 23:23 (3,267 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Perhaps one approach to get people to embrace HE washers in the US would be to turn to using subliminal messages on TV programming for the masses to absorb what they watch people make fools of themselves on reality TV or whatever. Perhaps this message: "You want a washer that uses three drops of water. You want this washer. You will go to Home Depot in the morning and buy it. You will..."
|
Post# 819960 , Reply# 36   4/18/2015 at 23:36 (3,267 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 820101 , Reply# 38   4/19/2015 at 22:23 (3,266 days old) by midcentnurse (Lake Charles, La)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I'll just say the rest dont make em like they used to.. This old Whirlpool got some of the nastiest work rags clean everytime we used it. A capful of unflavored ALL and the heaviest cycle it had, which as you can see is limited and really clean towels emerged.
It might be hard to see the washer was bought in 1999. They saved every receipt, (EVERY receipt!) I dont know what year the dryer is but works awesome, delicious natural gas ;) |
Post# 820102 , Reply# 39   4/19/2015 at 22:27 (3,266 days old) by midcentnurse (Lake Charles, La)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I took the center cap off to see why the upper part of the agitator seemed like it was slipping and not really turning the load, it's because it was slipping.. the cams inside were worn and not locking in the forward motion, easy fix probably but for someone else in the near future.
But I also have to say there really is something more comforting about these older top load washers compared to my new space age LG Front loader.. anyone else have thoughts, words on that?
View Full Size
|
Post# 820133 , Reply# 41   4/20/2015 at 08:36 (3,266 days old) by henene4 (Heidenheim a.d. Brenz (Germany))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
I would take a look at what I would say on the internet. Such expressions could be easily interpretated as some kind of racial discrimination. Just so you don't run into any problems... |
Post# 820147 , Reply# 43   4/20/2015 at 10:53 (3,265 days old) by henene4 (Heidenheim a.d. Brenz (Germany))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I call them the same, but in context of your post it is pretty easy to think it was a down-set on them. And I know the Chinese are a pretty damn proud kind of people as I got to know them -which by any means is not ment negative-; they are really easy to upset in such aspects... |
Post# 820150 , Reply# 44   4/20/2015 at 11:11 (3,265 days old) by rapunzel (Sydney)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
The Chinese are safe with me, but am I safe with the Chinese? |
Post# 820153 , Reply# 45   4/20/2015 at 11:56 (3,265 days old) by henene4 (Heidenheim a.d. Brenz (Germany))   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Most likely. Probably even safer. |
Post# 820188 , Reply# 46   4/20/2015 at 16:47 (3,265 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
4    
First. It was Choice magazine not CR. Get it right if you're going to launch a tirade aimed at my posts please.
Second. You claim that the taxpayer funded schemes to encourage the use of water saving appliances has failed. How about some proof to back your statement?
You specifically take aim at imported Front Load machines, yet most schemes were never specifically aimed at them. Every appliance that was appropriately rated was eligible. That includes Australian made machines of the time.
Third. You categorically fail to mention any other factors that could be at play regarding the whitegoods industry in this country. Namely three key points:
- It's a small industry. 23 million people is not a large market. - By 2004 it was completely owned by foreign companies. - A combination of free trade agreements and currency made it uneconomical to manufacture here.
With the reduction in trade tariffs and steady increase in the value of our currency over the past years, everything has become cheaper from underwear to Volkswagons. The reduction in trade tariffs in particular, have made any item that was purchased as little as 10 years ago not only cheaper in comparison dollar:dollar, but also in real terms thanks to wages growth with the occasional bonus of currency value.
As you would know, you can still go into ANY retailer in this country and purchase a washing machine that can use north of 15 L/kg to wash your clothes if you wish. They're still there. Still available....
....but they still don't wash as well as my, or for that matter 95% of, Front Load machines on the market in this country today.
Finally. As an Australian Commonwealth Public Servant, I find your statement copied below personally offensive.
'Australian politics and the people, who populate the upper echelons of our public service organizations, are inherently corrupt, inept and not that bright.'
No, not perfect. Yes, certainly fallible and with significant room for improvement. BUT, you have a choice. If you personally don't like it that much. If you really feel that this country is run by people who are 'inherently corrupt' and who are 'inept and not that bright', then please either run for politics yourself, assist in the election process of a party which is at least deserving of your vote or simply go and live in a country that meets/exceeds your high standards. |
Post# 820193 , Reply# 47   4/20/2015 at 17:10 (3,265 days old) by mayfan69 (Brisbane Queensland Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
Thanks you Chris for putting it so eloquently!
I couldn't agree more! Olav, I myself am a Commonwealth Public Servant and I too found your comments offensive. Having worked in the private sector and then into public service, I have never taken for granted the privelages that come with this position. Just like Chris has stated, if you don't like the way this country is run, then either run for politics yourself or go live somewhere else. I , for one, feel blessed for living in this beautiful country. I think I know who not to invite to any wash-ins i may hold. |
Post# 820275 , Reply# 49   4/21/2015 at 05:54 (3,265 days old) by twinniefan (Sydney Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Washer 111,
You may not have any luck with the dreaded yellowing underarm pit stains,some years ago in utter desperation contacted the stain removal expert? at Colgate Palmolive and sought her help. She told me that after washing the anti-perspirant deodorant actually sets in the fibres and is really difficult if not impossible to remove without damaging the garment. The only tip she could give me was to try putting a hot iron on the armpit hold it there until the heat steams the sweat out and dissolves the anti-perspirant deodorant, however in the time it takes this to work, the iron will most likely burn the garment, which I found was the case. In the end I just bought new shirts and only sprayed deodorant on sparingly. Ronhic, I was interested in your comment about your clothing lasting longer when washed in your F.L., I think this might becoming a little problem for me with the L.G. T.L., I bought several new polo shirts about 6 or so months ago and have noticed pilling starting to happen on them already, I wonder if the pulsating wash action may be becoming a little too abrasive for them, I have actually started on some washes to over-ride the auto water level selections in order to put a bit more water in to see if this helps out. |
Post# 820366 , Reply# 51   4/21/2015 at 19:14 (3,264 days old) by ronhic (Canberra, Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Steve,
Sometimes it can be down to the quality of the fabric, but I can honestly say that I have never experienced pilling of any sort on my clothes unless it's a high contact area due to wearing them such as socks in shoes.
Towels are another area that can be prone to issues in a top load machine. Sure, again it can be dependent on the quality of the fabric, but I've got them ranging from Woolies supermarket cheapies to Dickies to Sheraton and none of my towels have pulls on them. Some are well over 15 years old which is in complete contrast to my sister and several friends who are top load users (F&P/Simpson/Hoover). The bathsheets we were given as dog blankets by one fussy friend are so bad they look like they've been cat-shredded.
Whilst the effects of lower water levels in front loaders has undoubtedly reduced their gentleness a tad, their wash action of 'lift drop' is significantly less abrasive than a top loader. With the reduction in water levels in top loaders, this abrasive action is markedly increased as clothes scrub against each other without the lubricating effect of reasonable amounts of water. As a result, over-riding the auto water level should reduce the pilling (and linting), but negates one of the advertised benefits of 'just enough' water to do the job. |
Post# 820416 , Reply# 52   4/22/2015 at 05:24 (3,264 days old) by twinniefan (Sydney Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Thanks for the response Chris, you are probably right these shirts were made in Bangladesh or some such place and the fibre quality is somewhat suspect I guess. |
Post# 820419 , Reply# 53   4/22/2015 at 05:49 (3,264 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Out of curiosity, what are the washing instructions on the damaged shirt? I would wager a guess that gentle or hand wash cycle and dry with low heat is on the tag. I was shocked when I discovered that 75% of my clothes had similar washing instructions. Almost nothing said anything about a cycle that was non-gentle.
Malcolm |
Post# 820548 , Reply# 55   4/23/2015 at 06:32 (3,263 days old) by twinniefan (Sydney Australia)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 820663 , Reply# 57   4/23/2015 at 17:36 (3,262 days old) by norgeway (mocksville n c )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Well, I used to be able to spell!! |