I'm a long stroke guy too, and while I don't feel the SQ is as good at rinsing, the tub is bigger, which could make the difference between washing a comforter at home or having to take it to a laundromat.   It's a tough decision, though, since Maytags were built like tanks and the orbital transmission is certainly reliable.

What dryer will the washer be paired with?  The Maytag?  If so, its capacity is geared for Maytag's somewhat smaller washer tub and full loads from the SQ could take longer to dry on those days when line drying isn't an option.

I can't speak to the GE dryer's capacity, as I'm not familiar with just how large the larger GE washer tubs were back then, but will hazard a guess that they weren't as big as your SQ's tub. 

For that reason, your Maytag seems to me like a safer bet for load sizes that are compatible with the GE dryer.  Additionally, there is no contest when comparing the Maytag's console and cabinet materials and finishes -- porcelain enameled top in particular -- to those of the SQ, so it will hold up and look good for a lot longer.  Actually, it already has, considering the age difference between the two machines.  Dave's daughter put a dent in our '97 "Commercial Quality" Amana washer's console in short order, and I doubt SQ consoles have become any more durable over the subsequent 23 years.

You can get used to the Maytag's short stroke.  It's still far more pleasant to listen to than a WP-based direct drive machine IMO, and you won't be changing belts every couple of years like you would with the SQ.  Ironic that the machine that rarely needs its belt changed has a much easier way to do it than the one that chews them up as a routine aspect of its operation.

I admit my feelings are a bit coloured by having worked on both and the Speed Queen just seemed determined to hurt me.

The SQ Hands down, it is newer and has a much longer life expediency.

It is larger in capacty

It rinses MUCH better than the MT, the 100 RPM faster spin wrings out more soapy wash water and leaves clothes drier for the dryer.

The SQ does not have a silly out-Of -Balance switch, the SQ will always finish the load without the possibility of TWO additional trips back to the washer to rearrange a load and restart it.

The SQ has self-leveling legs you will never have problems with it walking like the MT [ one of the most frequent service calls we still do on DC MTs is a complete re-leveling because they are driving their owners crazy walking all over the place ]

Hi Douglas, I will take up your bet any day, even an 80s WP DD washer will not outlast a 80s MT DC machine.

[ by the mid 1980s WP DD washers were having fewer problems than MT DC washers ]

The SQ washer in question will easily last another 20 years with probably no more than a new belt and maybe an inlet valve, There is no likely hood that a 25 YO MT DC will go to age 45 Years without an inlet valve, transmission, center seal kit, damper pads, internal hoses, possible rust-out of the outer-tub, yes the MT could make it to 45 years but with a lot of work and money.

As far as the best of these washers regarding linting there is not much difference, neither is considered a great choice if low listing is important, all spin drain top load washers can leave lint streaks if clothing is not sorted properly.

The lint filter in the MT washer does not catch 10% of the lint generated when you wash a load of clothing so the advantage of having it will not be discernible.

[ You can prove this by putting a nylon stocking over the drain hose and comparing the amount of lint particles trapped compared to what you find in the lint filter ]

 Please Have A Safe Thanksgiving Everyone

John L.

First - Speed Queens may be easy to work on for somebody of John's extraordinary skill, for the average lady around here, they're toothy pit-bulls in a bad mood. Maytag, say what one will about the decline in quality toward the end (and it was real) are easier to work on - and they seem to have been put together for people with sausage size fingers.

Second - it's unfair, but I find it hard to think of Speed Queen anything without the emotional impact of their appalling treatment of everyone who pointed out the enormous failings of their absolutely awful washers a few years back.

John has made some good points about why a the subject SQ would last longer than the older Maytag, but unless they've improved the problem with SQ machines eating up belts (a recent thread about a bad belt on a church lady machine seems to indicate otherwise), that remains a concern.  Even the tech that came out to fix our '97 Amana washer (because we wisely kept renewing our extended warranty on it) remarked about how involved it was to change the belt, the one component that reliably failed three times in nine years, and it was not the result of chronic overloading.

I see this as a trade-off.  Potential longevity with the SQ if you're willing to put up with annoying belt failures over the next 20 years, or the reliability of the Maytag but holding your breath that nothing major finally needs to be replaced.  I still vote for the Maytag.  If it has a catastrophic failure that you don't want to take on, then there will be plenty of pre-owned SQ machines out there to replace it with.  And again, I think the Maytag's capacity is more compatible with the GE dryer you want to use.

Douglas, I couldn't have said it better myself.  No automatic washer could match a genuine Maytag for build quality and durability then, and for sure nothing built today is even in the same league.  Porcelain enamel beats powder coated paint any day.

Eugene's work on refurbishing older Maytag and Whirlpool-sourced automatic washers speaks to their build quality compared to the best option for a conventional top-loader on the market today, which I would agree is the Speed Queen, but the SQ is flimsy in comparison.

You're preaching to the choir about the belt issues with SQ machines.  They seem to have intentionally designed things to make the belt the Achilles heel that saves more expensive components from failure (much like the plastic gearing on WP-produced KitchenAid stand mixers), but belts still shouldn't get chewed up so quickly on a machine that's properly operated.    Why can't Alliance come up with a fix for this chronic problem that so many here and elsewhere on line have reported?

I gave up on Consumer Reports after they top-rated the '97 Amana we bought.  It was on its third belt when we ditched it after nine years.  That had to have skewed the "frequency of repair" numbers badly for the Amana they top-rated, and I see no reason to think it wouldn't still be doing the same for Speed Queens.

Hi Ralph, The 1997 Amana you had has almost nothing to do with an Alliance Ripon Wi built washer. The Amanas and AmanaTag washers and dryers were full of problems.

Around a decade ago SQ did something to improve belt life, several techs have told me they can't believe that the belts just don't fail any longer. I only change 1 or 2 a year, our whole company maybe changes around 4-6 a year, We are responsible for backing the service on almost 10,000 SQ TL Washers in our service area.

Just last year SQ went back to an aluminum main drive pulley to further extend belt life, this keeps the belt cooler durning overload conditions.

The belt is easy to change, you only need a 5/16" nut driver to remove the front panel [ it is easier to remove than a Mts front panel ] Then you just remove three pump clips with your fingers and flip the belt in place, snap the pump back on and install the front panel, you are done in under 10 minutes, Yes it is easier to change the belts on a MT DC.

Hi Douglas, a 1980 MT DC will be very lucky to last another 5 years without repairs and likely major rebuilding, this makes a 10 YO SQ a much better bet, to say nothing about better performance and greater capacity, the SQ will likely last another 20 years with just minor repairs.

John L.