|
Thread Number: 72107
/ Tag: Vintage Automatic Washers
POD 8/19/2017 |
[Down to Last] |  |
|
| Post# 953532 , Reply# 1 8/19/2017 at 09:50 (2,442 days old) by MrAlex (London, UK) | ||
 | ||
| Post# 953533 , Reply# 2 8/19/2017 at 10:04 (2,442 days old) by brucelucenta () | ||
|
It is just their way of saying suds saver. So it reuses the soapy water again for the next load if you choose to do so. | ||
| Post# 953536 , Reply# 3 8/19/2017 at 10:20 (2,442 days old) by mickeyd (Hamburg NY) | ||
What a truly beautiful and magnificent washing machine.
Bruce, this one may have actually popped that lid and buzzed at cycle's end. I know an earlier one did buzz and pop which my neighbor Tom had when I was a boy. Alex, "Sudsmiser "was the term Whirlpool coined for the hot sudsy wash water re-use/return protocol. Whirlpool was the first company to invent a suds return, and they delayed the production of their first line of washers until they perfected the system. Theirs was the best, least error prone, and fool-proof. They knew that people transitioning from wringers would expect to re-use still clean water. Dumping the wash water after one use was counter-intuitive and unheard of unless washing crappy nappies. Most other manufactures followed suit with their one version of the suds-return. Always got a kick out of the ever elegant Kevinator calling it the corny homey "Suds Back." What a wonderful way to start a Saturday. Thanks. | ||
| Post# 953537 , Reply# 4 8/19/2017 at 10:21 (2,442 days old) by mickeyd (Hamburg NY) | ||
|
OWN version | ||
| Post# 953538 , Reply# 5 8/19/2017 at 10:48 (2,442 days old) by MrAlex (London, UK) | ||
|
lol.. Please excuse my stupidity.. But.. Where did that water go if you were continuing to rinse and spin? Am I missing something!? Or did you take the laundry out after washing and continued with another load and then put them in separate rinses and spinns?
I shouldn't have had that second glass of wine.. I feel so confused lol
| ||
Post# 953541 , Reply# 7 8/19/2017 at 10:53 (2,442 days old) by swestoyz  (Cedar Falls, IA) |
||
I believe this is the '57 Imperial Whirlpool. In 1958 they had a similar timeline model like the '58 Lady Kenmore, badged as the Mark XII, with the '58 Imperial lacking certain feautures.
Ben | ||
|
Post# 953543 , Reply# 8 8/19/2017 at 11:04 (2,442 days old) by swestoyz (Cedar Falls, IA) |
||
|
Mechanical lid opening switch
Funny this was mentioned. The '57 service doesn't talk about this, but the '58 manual does. It looks like it was used on the Seventy, Imperial, and Mark lines. Very cool!
| ||
|
Post# 953555 , Reply# 10 8/19/2017 at 11:44 (2,442 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie) |
||
Mr. Alex-- In washers with a suds-saver/suds-miser, the wash water is pumped into a large sink or laundry tub. The rinse water is sent out a separate hose to the drain. When you're ready to wash the next load, the washer's pump sucks the water back out of the laundry tub and into the washer.
In this photo: The tub on the left, with the long hose reaching the bottom, is the suds-saving tub. The tub on the right has the shorter rinse water drain hose going to it. The rinse water drain hose would go to a traditional standpipe drain if the user had only a single tub/sink. 
| ||
| Post# 953559 , Reply# 11 8/19/2017 at 11:48 (2,442 days old) by MrAlex (London, UK) | ||
|
| ||
| Post# 953570 , Reply# 12 8/19/2017 at 12:30 (2,442 days old) by LordKenmore (The Laundry Room) | ||
 Yes, I have to agree that suds saver/suds miser type system would be nice. It's on my list of dream vintage washer features...although I'm not sure how common such machines were around where I live.
One of my grandmothers had suds saver on her Kenmore, and I thought it was the neatest idea.
On the other hand, I asked my mother once why she didn't get suds saver on her KM. She said there was no tub in the laundry room she had at the time of purchase. Then, she suggested that she thought saving wash water was a revolting idea. | ||
|
Post# 953595 , Reply# 14 8/19/2017 at 15:50 (2,442 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie) |
||
|
Lord K-- I grew up with a suds-saver so it is a completely normal idea to me. A few common sense rules do apply, of course. Since the saved water cools down, wash a hot load first, then one requiring medium or warm water. Don't reuse water that washed diapers. Ours was an HE laundry room decades before the term existed.
MrAlex-- As laundry equipment moved out of the basement and into kitchens or closets, large tubs/sinks to hold the saved wash water became scarce. Suds-savers were extinct, for all intents and purposes, by the middle of the 1980s. | ||
| Post# 953605 , Reply# 16 8/19/2017 at 16:33 (2,441 days old) by MrAlex (London, UK) | ||
|
| ||
|
Post# 953625 , Reply# 17 8/19/2017 at 18:15 (2,441 days old) by akronman (Akron/Cleveland Ohio) |
||
suds
I have a 1959 Whirlpool Suds-Miser, a 1975 Kenmore Suds-Miser, and a 1979 GE Filter-Flo suds model. I also have a 1916 basement with a big cement double-tub laundry sink.
Here in Ohio, it's very hit or miss as to newer homes with or without tubs, seems to depend upon the builder and successive owners. Almost all basement laundry installations have a tub, single or double. Upstairs, first floor laundry rooms just seems to depend on space. Smaller homes just allow for washer and dryer, larger homes are very frequently built with a big tub. Modern convenience of just setting a few buttons and walking away from the washroom seems to suggest that suds models are a thing of the past for sure. For the worst and greasiest dirty laundry, no I do NOT save suds. But for sheets, towels, shirts, pants, it works out well for me , 2 loads from one hot sudsy wash. | ||
|
Post# 953652 , Reply# 19 8/19/2017 at 23:03 (2,441 days old) by wayupnorth (On a lake between Bangor and Bar Harbor, Maine) |
||
 | ||
|
Post# 953712 , Reply# 22 8/20/2017 at 15:48 (2,441 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage) |
||
Suds Saving or Miser Washers
Were just an attempt to capture the market of housewives for various reasons of their own, still used wringer or other semi-automatic washing machines. Prominent of those reasons was the need (or wish) to save water for reuse.
Ever since fully automatic washing machines appeared on the scene and or semi-automatics with spin baskets, Consumer Reports and others did all they could to discourage the use of *dangerous* wringer washing machines. Yes, wringer washing machines could be dangerous; but many housewives had other issues to balance on laundry day. Top among them was hot water supply. Also by the 1950's and 1960's you still had a pretty good number of people who lived through or came up during the Great Depression. The thrifty habits that came out of that event died hard, and some simply saw "dumping" all that hot water and soap/detergent after just one wash (as in an automatic) as wasteful. Here is a link to a 1950's local newspaper laundry appliance supplement. In it Whirlpool mentions their 1956 model *suds miser* washing machines. Notice the best thing they could say was touting how hot soapy water could be saved and reused... Meanwhile nearly every other fully automatic washing machine was wooing Her Indoors (and His Nibbs who presumably had to pay for the thing) with all their "fully automatic" features. archives.chicagotribune.com/1955/... You also notice that not a wringer washer is to be found in that 1956 advertising piece. We know that Maytag and others still produced and sold conventional washing machines in late 1950's, but obviously there was a push to get Her Indoors to upgrade. If you wanted the water reusing/suds savings that a wringer washer offered, you were steered towards the suds saving washers offered by Maytag, Whirlpool and whoever else had. | ||
| Forum Index: |
| Other Forums: |
|
|
|
|
|
Comes to the Rescue!
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}