Speed Queen TR7 with a transmission!


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

Thread Number: 92925 / Tag: Modern Automatic Washers
Speed Queen TR7 with a transmission!

[Down to Last]

Post# 1174986 3/17/2023 at 12:45 (399 days old) by Aussiestayover (England)
Checkrate/Likes Hello, As a lover of top load washing machines I've been following the comments made on You Tube about the 'new' Speed Queen TR7. As an Australian living in London I had enquired about shipping over a washer and dryer of the old model with the silver console (AWNE92SN303AWO1) as its known down under but was too late and the TR7 came out to replace it. The TR7 is known down under as - AWN92 Black. I have only come to appreciate in the last weeks that the Australian model is fitted with a transmission and not the new 'Perfect Wash' system with the agitator bolted to the stainless steel wash tub. Have a look at the link posted... The only things I don't like on these Speed Queens are the 'Soak' program which pumps the water out after a time (My old 2002 Whirlpool direct drive Ultimate Care II doesn't do that, and the matching Speed Queen dryer which doesn't come with a hamper door or removable lint screen. Apart from that I might just buy the pair now I know it still as a transmission with a decent wash... Does anyone want to buy a kidney (only slightly used) to help me finance it? CLICK HERE TO GO TO Aussiestayover's LINK

Post# 1174995 , Reply# 1 3/17/2023 at 15:21 (399 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah)
Checkrate/Likes 1 I've heard a while ago that SQ was developing a TC7 and was waiting for approval from the pentagon, I don't know if we'll ever get it or not.

Post# 1174998 , Reply# 2 3/17/2023 at 15:31 (399 days old) by luxflairguy (Wilmington NC)
Checkrate/Likes 5 What would the Pentagon have to do with with approval? Please explain

Post# 1175007 , Reply# 3 3/17/2023 at 16:21 (399 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah)
Checkrate/Likes This was just a rumor that I've heard.

Post# 1175008 , Reply# 4 3/17/2023 at 16:29 (399 days old) by DADoES (TX,�U.S. of A.)
Checkrate/Likes � The TR design apparently isn't marketed in Aus as neither of the two topload models on the website are the Perfect Wash mechanism.

Post# 1175018 , Reply# 5 3/17/2023 at 18:00 (399 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay)
Checkrate/Likes 4 *Pentagon* Maybe Alliance wants to put a new style 5-vane agitator in the TC7, or maybe there's a Fox News version of this site that we don't know about.

Post# 1175019 , Reply# 6 3/17/2023 at 18:10 (399 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 3 *Washing Machine Wars* Sad state of affairs. Australia gets machines made in the US that Americans would love to have, so we have to get the Pentagon involved because the Australians aren't going to give the machines back willingly.

Post# 1175040 , Reply# 7 3/17/2023 at 21:22 (398 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 5 *The TR design apparently isn't marketed in Aus* People actually get dirty out there, the TR series machines wouldn't fly.

Post# 1175084 , Reply# 8 3/18/2023 at 09:52 (398 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *stupid of Speed Queen!* It was stupid of Speed Queen to come up with the perfect wash series. What were they thinking?

Post# 1175108 , Reply# 9 3/18/2023 at 15:00 (398 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 2 *Pentagon Washing Machine Contracts* It does strike me as possible that the Pentagon isn't satisfied with the choice and quality of washers available in the US today that they would make a deal with Speed Queen, a GSA contractor, to supply more of what they want for installation on military bases and such. The TC5 may be the washer that comes closest to be suitable for their purposes, but they want something with more configurable options as SQ may be phasing out the mechanical controls entirely. So I don't know what Alex may have heard, but it may not be all that implausible. speedqueencommercial.com/en-us/m...

Post# 1175161 , Reply# 10 3/19/2023 at 08:21 (397 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes 6 *US military laundry purchases* When there was a shortage of Speed Queen front load washers a few years ago it was because the US military ordered tens of thousands of them. I can�t imagine the US military would be stupid enough to buy top loading washers. They�re way too wasteful. They also buy lots of Speed Queen dryers. John

Post# 1175174 , Reply# 11 3/19/2023 at 11:00 (397 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 7 Yeah, we know John, anyone who buys a TL today is stupid, there's no purpose for them. FL are so wonderful! You make me think of a used car salesman trying to get me to trade in my truck on a Yugo with all the stats you come up with, then when challenged on them you run to another thread. Maybe they found that the physics-defying FLs didn't work as well for all their purposes as expected. Or maybe they have need of both. Maybe they have need to get a load done in less than an hour or two. Maybe space and time factors matter in some situations. Maybe today's military is stupid (and I say that as a vet) and maybe they're more concerned with mission over waste. Do you really believe waste is the first factor the military considers? But then, who knows about today's military? They probably really need FLs because the TLs are just so harsh on their pretty dainties.

Post# 1175179 , Reply# 12 3/19/2023 at 11:48 (397 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 2 I don't know, but I suspect there may be something to what "panasonicvac" heard. There is often a basis to rumors, and the only reason I can see the Pentagon being involved is for considering approval to purchase. But another thought is that I believe there are supposed to be costs analysis done when the government purchases equipment. Given that FLs cost significantly more than TLs, and they probably replace equipment based on an expected cost-effective life cycle before it fails or needs significant repairs, they could have determined that FLs, at least in certain uses, don't recoup their excessive costs in waste during their term of service. I don't know what the government pays, but I know the SQ FLs are significantly more expensive than TLs. Maybe they even consider the weight of the machines that may need to be transported to various areas. SQ FLs are also significantly heavier. John has argued that heavier machines are inherently more wasteful.

Post# 1175195 , Reply# 13 3/19/2023 at 15:48 (397 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes 5 *Speed, queen, commercial laundry* Hi Jeff , both of my front load speed queen washers the one that�s 18 years old and the one that�s three years old go through a quick cycle in 32 to 34 minutes even with an extra rinse selected. Anybody that knows anything about engineering can see why a front load washer has a potential to last much longer than a top load washer. It�s just a much simpler machine. Speed Queen engineers told us when we went through training about 12 years ago that they expect their front load washers to last 25,000 loads, we have seen them last almost 50,000 loads and heavy use situation�s. Speed Queen claims and they�re advertising for home use that their machines last 10,500 loads but again anybody that knows anything about mechanical things and engineering. It�s obvious that , we have seen them last almost 50,000 loads and heavy use situation�s. Speed Queen claims and their advertising for home use that their machines last 10,500 loads but again anybody that knows anything about mechanical things and engineering. It�s obvious that any dryer from just about any company will outlast two washing machines, yet they make the same claim for the dryers. Speed Queen does not want to over promise longevity, because people will hold them to it. There are just too many variables. Once machines get into consumer hands. I�m only presenting the facts. You can have top loading washers all you want as can anybody else we live in a free country, being in an army family I don�t appreciate these disparaging remarks you�re making about the military, the US military has hundreds of people who work very hard to keep costs down. John

Post# 1175196 , Reply# 14 3/19/2023 at 16:07 (397 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah)
Checkrate/Likes There's probably a very good chance that this rumor I've heard was just made up or misrepresented. I first found out on YouTube in a comment section and to be honest I forgot who it was that said there was a TC7 being developed. Even though it doesn't say much of where it came from, sometimes I find the comments to be true and sometimes I find them to be false. I could contact SQ to see if maybe they could shed me some light about the possibly of getting a TC7, I'm probably going to do so anyways because I also need to ask if their stainless steel FF7 and DF7 models have been discontinued or not. They're no longer listed on their website and I hope they're not gone for good.

Post# 1175201 , Reply# 15 3/19/2023 at 16:45 (397 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 1 As I pointed out, I also come from a military family and an a vet myself. You sure like to twist things. I was mocking what you said about the military being stupid, and by implication, anyone who uses a TL being stupid, as if there's no reason anyone ever would. I don't appreciate that. Maybe a FL, everything else being equal, will last longer than a TL, but again, is the military going to keep a machine for 50 years, assuming they would last that long? My points stand about the initial costs and everything else. I know while the military owns and maintains most of their equipment, I don't know if that includes washing machine maintenance or not. As far as I know they may have some kind of contract maintenance for that, the costs and duration of which may help determine which machines to get. When I was in the military I don't recall a career field that would cover that, but maybe there was. How well is a "quick load" going to work for what ever purposes the military may select their machines for? Maybe well, for the hundreds of people working to keep costs down, but not so well for those in the field or for the types of equipment they wash, would be my guess. I think if you'll consider what I said, mission should come above what many, including you, might consider waste in the military.

Post# 1175203 , Reply# 16 3/19/2023 at 17:15 (397 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes By the way, I wouldn't think that anyone who knows anything about mechanical things and engineering, and cares about longevity, would think machines are less wasteful based on their lighter weight.

Post# 1175218 , Reply# 17 3/19/2023 at 19:02 (397 days old) by brisnat81 (Brisbane Australia)
Checkrate/Likes 8 Jeff, you have to think about whole of life costs. Weight uses energy to ship and energy in materials to build. The bigger something is, the less you fit in a container and therefore the more trucking you need and the more fuel thats consumed. Its a fine balance between Weight, Material type, Longevity, Energy consumed during operation, Effectiveness at its designed purpose, location of manufacture, freight, recyclability etc etc. All of these things make up the total energy used by a product. Its not just how much it costs to run per load.

Post# 1175231 , Reply# 18 3/19/2023 at 21:01 (397 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 2 Thanks. But life costs are exactly what I was talking about, as explained on another thread, a washing machine that uses a lot of plastic parts that is designed to last 10 years, if you're lucky, isn't at all likely to be more resource friendly than a machine that last 20 years or more, even considering shipping costs and all. A washer is generally shipped to a home once, as least I'm not planning on moving ever again, and I've never moved with a washer. A 120 lb washer that has to replaced 2 or three times or more than a 150 lb washer isn't going to save resources used in transportation and such. So there is a lot more to it. Sometimes you have to use a little common sense. My whole point was that machines based on planned obsolescence save nothing, and the idea that they are 100% recyclable with no additional resources used is a myth. I believe washers used to be considered "durable" products, I, at least, now consider most of them disposable. As for size, aren't most of these cheap machines actually larger than the old ones, if anything? I thinks it's strange to live in a disposable society that pretends to care about conservation. I know SQ TLs weigh significantly more than the cheap Maytags, and I also expect the SQs to last significantly longer, and I suspect the SQ FLs also weigh more than most of the competition. I just find it funny that John thinks lighter machines are better as he seems to forget that front loaders tend to weigh significantly more. I'm also curious how long John has seen SQ TLs last, surely longer than the 10,400 or whatever cycles they claim, or is it just the FLs Speed Queen doesn't want to over claim longevity on? Frankly, he seems to be so biased for some reason that I'm not sure I can expect a candid answer. (I don't meant that to offend, but that's my observation.) Even if they only last 10,400 loads, at a couple loads a week, or even 3 loads a week, I still expect it to be my last machine (hopefully). As for being stupid for not getting a FL, along with all the other points I made on other threads, here's a math equation for you: if I average no more than about 2 loads a week. I use well water, my water is heated with electricity, and my total electric bill averages less than $40 a month including recurring monthly fees and everything, probably around $25 not including fees, I don't know what the share for laundry would be, a couple bucks, maybe? How long would it take me to recoup the $800 more for a SQ FL over a SQ TL in energy savings? Feel free to add in the detergent too. Then John has brought up one good point: the weight! The Maytag I had that lasted almost eight months, thanks to it's light weight engineering, I was pretty much able to toss that thing around, I moved it and installed it myself, and it was almost a pleasure to toss it out the door after Whirlpool gave me a full refund after failing to fix it or send the replacement machine they promised. The Speed Queen tried to fight me some up the steps and over the threshold, but was still manageable. I do appreciate that it is more maneuverable than a FL would be so I don't have to call other guys to help if I need to move it for some reason. Another point for TLs! Stupid and wasteful or not, I do like my old traditional (more or less, we in fact are not as free as we used to be in our selection) TL washer.

Post# 1175233 , Reply# 19 3/19/2023 at 21:30 (396 days old) by Adam-aussie-vac (Canberra ACT)
Checkrate/Likes 2 *Some people still use top loaders* One great example is my mom, she uses one because her back doesn�t really allow her to bend awkwardly, and she feels it�s much easier for her to use a Toploader Because she can easily grab things out from the bottom with a pair of tongs and she always finds it awkward When she has used a front loader, ask me how, plus it�s also a personal choice as well as people who have a Toploader generally want to stick to what they know

Post# 1175234 , Reply# 20 3/19/2023 at 21:51 (396 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 5 I thinks it's strange to live in a disposable society that pretends to care about conservation. I still laugh about that to this day. The people that used to give me crap about having and using the same old stuff/same old vehicles/same old clothes forever were the ones that always preached the green religion while constantly buying and trashing everything they owned because "New" and "Shiny" enticed them or they simply didn't take care of their stuff.....usually a combination of both. They were also the same ones that always complained about never having enough money or being in debt.

Post# 1175237 , Reply# 21 3/19/2023 at 22:31 (396 days old) by brisnat81 (Brisbane Australia)
Checkrate/Likes 5 Lighter build, doesnt have to mean lower quality. The traditional style TL machines ended production here for the most part by the mid 80's. Simpson, Westinghouse, FisherPaykel, Hoover all of which had traditionally designed machines, moved to top suspension, pressed steel cabinets with plastic or plastic and metal tops. These machines were good performers, lasted for 10-20 years and were easily repairable. Its not about weight, its about design and quality of components.

Post# 1175243 , Reply# 22 3/19/2023 at 23:05 (396 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes 2 *extra heavy washer* An extra heavy washer with a real motor and lots of water will get clothes clean properly. I'm sick and tired of the flimsy pieces of crap. They just spread dirt around as well as fall apart.

Post# 1175248 , Reply# 23 3/19/2023 at 23:22 (396 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
*This post has been removed by the webmaster.*

Post# 1175274 , Reply# 24 3/20/2023 at 01:29 (396 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 1 In my experience, weight far more often than not is an indication of the quality of the product and it's likely longevity, whether it's machines, power supplies, etc. I don't think it's an accident Speed Queen weighs around 50 lbs more than a Maytag, and is likely to last much longer. Manufacturers love light weight stuff. Plastic is cheap, but not at all likely to be more durable than heavier materials, like steel, in most applications. Yes, plastic tubs or such may last, but not so much for plastic actuators, splines, etc. Most companies will use cheaper, lighter, materials if possible. Yet if two similar machines weigh significantly different, you can almost bet on it that the heavier machine uses more quality parts. People today seem to have come to expect mediocre products, and accept planned obsolescence is normal. I guess maybe I've come from a time I expected more from products. I bought a cheap Hotpoint washer that lasted me for well over 20 years until the hub rotted. I thought I could just go to Home Depot or somewhere and buy another cheap machine that would last for decades. I found out that machines were very hard to get during the covid panic, and I ended up getting one of the first ones I could. I thought Maytag was a good brand. I found out things sure had changed, Maytag was far worse in quality than the cheap machines of a couple decades ago. Not only do I find that sad, I also find it sad that people think that's acceptable. They really don't make things like they used to. It may not be all the manufacturer's fault. Dan seems to have gotten my point, people like new and shiny things every few years whether their old ones are still completely adequate or not, so what incentive do the manufacturers have to make things that actually last? But then, I guess there are enough other people that think like me that companies like Speed Queen should be doing well.

Post# 1175278 , Reply# 25 3/20/2023 at 02:48 (396 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *In my experience, weight far more often than not is an indic* Not always. I'm not sure how it is today, but about 20-ish years ago some manufactures (I think Whirlpool kicked it off) were building stupid heavy weighted washer lids, giving sort of a false reality that the machine was more solid built than it really was. The somewhat flimsy lids on Maytags has always worked just fine for me. The heavy duty part of those 225 pounds of goodness was in the cabinet, tubs, and driveline...where it really mattered.

Post# 1175283 , Reply# 26 3/20/2023 at 05:39 (396 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands)
Checkrate/Likes 14 *Sick and tired* And I�m getting sick and tired of the word eco-nazi Jerome. It�s very disrespectful towards the millions of victims of the German nazi regime in the second World War. Mind your language.

Post# 1175287 , Reply# 27 3/20/2023 at 07:40 (396 days old) by gizmo (Victoria, Australia)
Checkrate/Likes 8 Louis is right. The term is offensive. It is also offensive to people who actually give a damn if the planet is still inhabitable in 100 years - comparing us to Nazis is childish and ignorant. Plastic isn't the enemy and light weight isn't the enemy. Here is what I think is going on... People who have no experience of materials engineering seek a simple way to distinguish quality from junk. They bang a side panel and if it seems tinny they assume the whole machine is junk. They look at a tub and if it is plastic, they assume is is cheaply made. Weight becomes a fools guide to quality. Here in Australia and New Zealand, we have fairly high wages by world standards, and good working conditions. Labour is a high proportion of manufacturing costs. In the 1980s when Japanese washing machines were becoming popular, the local companies had to cut costs to keep selling machines. They basically produced an Aussie machine that was similar to the Japanese machines, saving weight where they could, cutting costs where they could, but still with a view to quality - materials engineers and metallurgists working out which metal or which grade of plastic would still be reliable for each component. This "new" generation of machines was very successful, buyers and repairers were skeptical but the machines have proven themselves over decades. They certainly wash better, spin faster and last longer than the heavily built machines they replaced. These models, with incremental changes over time, are more or less still in production, though unfortunately the Australian companies were bought out by international giants who moved production to Thailand to further cut costs, and closed the Aussie factories. Fisher and Paykel did a similar thing in New Zealand, replacing a heavily built UK design made under license with their own "clean sheet of paper design" which was very light weight, with tinny sides and light weight plastic top and lid, plastic outer tub, but superbly engineered. I still own a Fisher and Paykel top loader from about 1990 which has had only two repairs in all that time - a rubber drain hose and a water fill valve. These components are the exact same as those used on big heavy top loaders. It is not a museum piece - it is still used most days, it was used by my parents until they went to aged care, then it went to wash for friends of mine. It is proof that the right grade of plastic or nylon, and the appropriate use of light weight sheet steel, is every bit as durable as old fashioned washing machines that weigh more than twice as much. All those extra unnecessary grams/ounces have to be paid for, they force prices up. Plastic doesn't rust, too. Fisher and Paykel used to advertise the mechanical simplicity of their Smart Drive machines with the line "if a component isn't there, it can't fail." (No belts, no transmission, etc.) I would add "and it doesn't have to be paid for, either." I once bought a new box trailer to tow behind my car. It was heavily built and looked solid, but all mild steel, it rusted out in 4 years as it was poor quality steel and poorly painted. When I was replacing it, it was so badly rusted it was falling to pieces on its last trip to be traded in on a new one. I had to stop at a hardware store and buy some screws to hold it together for its final journey. I replaced it with a lightweight galvanized sheetmetal trailer, an Erde trailer from France, which has now had well over 20 years of hard use and is still exactly as good as new, no deterioration at all. It probably weighs half the old trailer, which makes it light and easy to tow, too. It is a prime example that clever design and appropriate choice of materials is better than dinosaur engineering. Unfortunately many modern machines are genuinely cheap rubbish, lightly built from inappropriate materials, cheapened up in companies where bean counters rule over engineers, or made in cheap-labour countries by manufacturers that copied a quality product without understanding the engineering behind each component, so it looks the same but works really poorly and fails quickly. But that is a product of poor engineering, not light weight and using plastics.

Post# 1175292 , Reply# 28 3/20/2023 at 10:31 (396 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes Yes, some components can be made lighter and cheaper. I've already said that. If you think that you can't tell the quality of a machine to some extent by inspecting it and looking at how it's made, well, call me a fool, but that's not my experience. Toyotas years ago were known for being exceptionally made vehicles. I have an '83 and an '87 Toyota Pickup. Small parts, like clips, on the '83 are metal, on the '87 they used plastic. No problems with the '83. On the '87 I've had door and tailgate latches break and had to take the door apart to wire it up, and had to replace the tailgate latch, the clip that holds the hood support on the '87 has long since broken, etc. I'm sure Toyota had engineers telling them that the plastic parts are just as good, and it's possible not many people would keep a truck long enough to know they're not before they trade it in and go buy another Toyota. They only ones who might know are fools like me who actually keep and repair things as long as practical.

Post# 1175297 , Reply# 29 3/20/2023 at 11:02 (396 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes BTW Jeremy, not to put words in your mouth, but I assume "fascist" is probably the word you were looking for. People tend to get the words confused and one of them I think is particularly offensive, but I trust that's not exactly the way you meant it.

Post# 1175298 , Reply# 30 3/20/2023 at 11:03 (396 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 2 On the '87 I've had door and tailgate latches break and had to take the door apart to wire it up, and had to replace the tailgate latch, the clip that holds the hood support on the '87 has long since broken, etc. The tailgate latch and hood support clip on my '84 broke about the same time in 2016. 32 years was a good run both of them and they're still available. Haven't needed a door latch, yet. By the way, the hood rod support clip is part# 53452-90351.

Post# 1175302 , Reply# 31 3/20/2023 at 12:21 (396 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes Thanks Dan. They must have switched to plastic between '83 and '84. I hadn't worried about the hood support too much because it seems to slip nicely between the side of the clip that's still there and the upper radiator support, or whatever's there, without rattling around or damaging anything, though I think the grommet that holds it on the other end is gone too, but it still works. But it reminds me, I think I'm missing or broke clips that hold the grill on too that I've wired up somehow. Eventually maybe I'll have to order a bunch of clips for various trim and such. Thanks for getting me started with the part number.

Post# 1175303 , Reply# 32 3/20/2023 at 12:35 (396 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 1 Toyota started using more plastic with the 84-88 generation trucks (84-89 4 Runners). They still hold up very well though. I have the factory microfiche slides for 84-95 Toyota trucks, let me know what you need. You can look most of it up here: www.megazip.net/zapchasti...

Post# 1175311 , Reply# 33 3/20/2023 at 13:59 (396 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay)
Checkrate/Likes 2 Two things. With all due respect to Adam's mom, after we bought our first FL set (2007 full size Duet HT), and even though they were on pedestals, a friend said he'd never own a FL washer because he didn't like having to bend over to load and unload. Then I asked him how he loads and unloads his dryer . . . As for weight equating to durability, remember when everybody had to rent their (landline) phones instead of owning them outright? The phones were heavy and built like tanks to take abuse and misuse and still last for decades, and the monthly rental charge was nominal. If the sets did develop problems, The Phone Company came out and either repaired or replaced them for free, and nine times out of ten, the phone they took back was inspected, repaired, cleaned and redeployed. It wasn't until subscribers were allowed to purchase their own phones from a wide range of alternative manufacturers that standards were lowered and the sets became flimsy. I wonder how many people would opt for this same rental and free maintenance system with exceptionally sturdy, durable washers and dryers if it were available. I'm not suggesting that such a business model would ever pencil out, because of all major home appliances, nothing works itself to death quite like a clothes washer. But the phone example supports the argument that heavy, over-engineered, bullet-proof build quality and longevity tend to go hand in hand.

Post# 1175374 , Reply# 34 3/20/2023 at 21:38 (395 days old) by JohnBee (USA, NY)
Checkrate/Likes 9 *More Water? Better Results?* This is the reason I will never use a TL Washer. When I see all the water its draining.. It makes me upset. Thinking the natural resources and the planet we live in, it goes against my beliefs to use a TL. Also I don't know if the Short TL cycles actually clean and Rinse. Look at this new trend of "Laundry Stripping". People finally realize that their clothes has a huge buildup of stains oils and detergent from the short cycles of Cold water. I grew up with the mentality that the machine needs its time to wash clothes properly. I've seen excellent results with heavily soiled clothes on my Miele and LG, without wasting all this water. Its like those people I see on Instagram Reels using 100 gallons of running water just to Wash 2 dishes.

Post# 1175387 , Reply# 35 3/21/2023 at 00:36 (395 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay)
Checkrate/Likes 2 Agreed JB! I cringe whenever I see someone walk away from a kitchen sink and leave water running with tap fully open. Additionally, the cleaning ability of my 2004 Neptune FL has never disappointed me. Quite the opposite.

Post# 1175393 , Reply# 36 3/21/2023 at 06:49 (395 days old) by John76 (USA)
Checkrate/Likes 3 *Water usage* My TR5 has an Auto Fill setting which uses technology to supply the best amount of water for maximum cleaning potential. I use that setting all the time now and I haven�t had a load that I haven�t been happy with the results. If it was left up to me to choose the water level, I�m convinced I�d be using significantly more water!

Post# 1175401 , Reply# 37 3/21/2023 at 08:39 (395 days old) by kenwashesmonday (Carlstadt, NJ)
Checkrate/Likes 3 Unless you live where droughts are common, I don't see a problem with using water. Here in northern New Jersey, water actually falls from the sky on a regular basis.

Post# 1175402 , Reply# 38 3/21/2023 at 09:12 (395 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands)
Checkrate/Likes 3 You may think that water comes down is yours to use, but even when it falls on your own land it might be not yours to use. Especially in the USA water is being privatized. Even in New Jersey, so keep an eye on your local government. mywaterearth.com/who-are-the-glo...

Post# 1175407 , Reply# 39 3/21/2023 at 10:33 (395 days old) by Adam-aussie-vac (Canberra ACT)
Checkrate/Likes *Reply 27* I still own one of those Japanese machines, and it�s only had two repairs, the first one was the clutch mechanism, the second one was the drain pump that�s it and it works fine, it�s actually the second one that I�ve owned because the first one kept putting out rust flakes from somewhere, Reply 34, with me I�ve grown up with the mentality of short cycles cold water basic basic basic, with me I�ve grown to love hot long cycles with a mixture of detergent, if a machine offers a hot wash, I will absolutely make use of it and please note I don�t mean hot washes with vigourous agitation, that sort of stuff can be left two machines with a 15 minute timer on them, and hell my daily driver at my mum�s house is a machine that I normally do 60� washes on frequently, (60�C) And as well the machine does a DOUBLE wash first with a pre-wash style detergent and then Costco powder for the main wash, so technically my laundry in the wash twice in two different solutions with no rinsing I�m honestly not a fan of how �everything has to be done today, the dishwasher can only run for 45 minutes overnight and you shouldn�t washing hot water it shrinks everything� This post was last edited 03/21/2023 at 14:01

Post# 1175453 , Reply# 40 3/21/2023 at 16:29 (395 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
*This post has been removed by the webmaster.*

Post# 1175455 , Reply# 41 3/21/2023 at 16:32 (395 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *wind rivers* I completely agree with you. I am so sick and tired of these puny motors being overworked just like their puny transmissions. I want extra heavy steel and a real motor, pump and transmission behind it, and lots of water if I want and the proper hot, warm or cold whenever I want.

Post# 1175456 , Reply# 42 3/21/2023 at 16:42 (395 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *today's crappy washers* If you don't believe me, look at today's crappy machines. You cannot wash a full load of clothes in just a bucket of water. The machines will fly apart at high speed spin settings and these are made in China. Speed Queen should be the only brand that says American pride as there is proof in the build quality. I've seen the top hung suspension bash the cabinet like it was gonna break. So yes it is a piece of crap. I blame the EPA and Energy Star for the problems. Puny motors, puny pumps, puny transmissions, tubs that break, and on and on.

Post# 1175472 , Reply# 43 3/21/2023 at 18:20 (395 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)
Checkrate/Likes 15 No more with that word "nazi" Jerome please, it clearly is offensive to many here and I don't want it used on the public forums of this website. Thank you.

Post# 1175570 , Reply# 44 3/22/2023 at 12:17 (394 days old) by Adam-aussie-vac (Canberra ACT)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *I think probably a better term instead of �Eco nasal�* And yes I am censoring it here after what unimac said, probably a better term is �eco-justice warrior�, And i�m not exactly one for saving the planet, but were using gray water and stuff like that is something For saving the planet, I�m for it, and probably washing in an old washer is doing a lot better job than Electric cars and using less plastic, because water is always naturally recycled and I mean recycled loosely, at least it�s not floating off into space Plus would the energy and resources needed to build a washing machine wouldn�t that outweigh the energy and environmental savings that washing machine uses throughout its lifetime Plus what about disposal? Is it better to keep an older machine running with very few pot changes instead of changing the machine every five years because it�s had some sort of irreparable issue Sorry for hijacking the thread And ranting, as it�s 1:18 AM for me, let�s get back on topic

Post# 1175576 , Reply# 45 3/22/2023 at 14:14 (394 days old) by maytaga806 (Howell, Michigan)
Checkrate/Likes This is AWESOME!! Love the new design! Looks fresh

Post# 1175578 , Reply# 46 3/22/2023 at 14:27 (394 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah)
Checkrate/Likes I just got a hold of Speed Queen. I asked about the TC7 and they told me they're releasing some new models out very shortly but all the details are not yet released. So I guess the rumor I've heard might be true. But unfortunately I also asked about the stainless steel FF7/DF7 and it's since been discontinued:( That sucks for me because I think that set is so gorgeous. If I would've bought a new front loader, it'd be that one. I'm honestly not a fan of the looks of the white FF7/DF7, in fact I'm not a fan of the white color on all appliances including vehicles. Even though my favorite washing machine is white. But luckily LG still sells the same grey front loader that my parents have and that would be my next choice to get for a front loader since I really do love the looks of it.

Post# 1175582 , Reply# 47 3/22/2023 at 14:37 (394 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *White Vehicles* I don't mind white appliances, but I consider white vehicles to be red flags. They usually signify one of two things, and sometimes both: the car is a rental and the driver is unfamiliar with the area, or they have a notoriously oblivious sort of driver behind the wheel.

Post# 1175586 , Reply# 48 3/22/2023 at 14:48 (394 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *regulators and washer efficiency* I don't like where this is going, especially when it seems that regulators are forcing manufacturers to lower water levels and use smaller pumps and motors in large appliances. Sorry about the language I used. I was very agitated with the way things are going. I am used to powerful agitation and lots of water - especially in top loaders.

Post# 1175608 , Reply# 49 3/22/2023 at 16:00 (394 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 5 *but I consider white vehicles to be red flags.* but I consider white vehicles to be red flags. My early 70's Chrysler was black with cream vinyl interior and I got first degree burns climbing into the seat on 100F+ days a few times with shorts on. Also, no A/C. My next car was white with cloth interior. Having the interior much cooler is what I preferred. Also, look around at white cars that have a couple of decades on them, they still look great. Easy to cover up/rub out scratches and easy to match up paint for if major damage occurs. When I was looking for a 1995 Lincoln Towncar, I was looking for white with gray interior buy couldn't find one with low miles that spent its time in a garage from day 1. Found a light gold one with tan interior that met the criteria and settled for it, but even that thing gets way too hot for me when outside temps are above 67F. It does have nice working A/C though.

Post# 1175630 , Reply# 50 3/22/2023 at 17:10 (394 days old) by Maytag85 (Sean A806)
Checkrate/Likes 2 White vehicles are too boring for my taste, given a choice it�ll be blue, preferably blue with a white top like this 1966 Ford LTD 4 door hardtop. View Full Size

Post# 1175640 , Reply# 51 3/22/2023 at 17:32 (394 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes For a non daily driver vehicle that hides in a garage, any color will do. But for daily drivers.....white.

Post# 1175654 , Reply# 52 3/22/2023 at 19:05 (394 days old) by DADoES (TX,�U.S. of A.)
Checkrate/Likes 3 � My cars (only two) since 2001 have been white.� I'm not understanding the objection to the color.

Post# 1175656 , Reply# 53 3/22/2023 at 19:13 (394 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes *I'm not understanding the objection to the color.* Most think it's boring color. It's a logical color and most kind of rebel against logic or the world be would full of vintage Maytags and white colored Toyota's.

Post# 1175670 , Reply# 54 3/22/2023 at 20:24 (394 days old) by Maytag85 (Sean A806)
Checkrate/Likes 2 To each their own, but a white colored car is too soulless for my taste and isn�t practical sanity wise. White, black, silver, and beige are hands down the WORST colors to EVER be on cars, I mean just look at today�s cars since that�s literally all you see.

Post# 1175672 , Reply# 55 3/22/2023 at 20:49 (394 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes There's some interesting blue colors out there now, I like Toyota's light blue they came out with a few years ago. As far as red, black, and pretty much all dark colors, I don't have patience to keep them looking their best anymore. I remember spending an entire weekend washing and waxing my Chrysler only to have a dirty hazy appear with water streaks running all over the next day from the morning dew. F-that. Then the furnace interior on summer days. Glad I got that crap out of my system when I was young, along with speed demon driving. There are moments I'd love to go back in time bitch slap the hell out of myself.

Post# 1175680 , Reply# 56 3/22/2023 at 22:33 (393 days old) by RP2813 (Sannazay)
Checkrate/Likes Maybe I should have said late model white cars. I have no issue with white cars in general; just a lot of the people driving them, and they're usually in mini vans, or midsize and smaller models. Maybe it's just Bay Area demographics that have contributed to my sentiments, along with the fact that white is a very popular color in rental car fleets.

Post# 1175690 , Reply# 57 3/22/2023 at 23:52 (393 days old) by DADoES (TX,�U.S. of A.)
Checkrate/Likes 5 � This thread has veered all over the landscape away from Speed Queen TR7s with transmissions (which I suppose would more correctly be a TC7) ... kinda like a white car gone rogue.� ;-)

Post# 1175778 , Reply# 58 3/23/2023 at 19:28 (393 days old) by Frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)
Checkrate/Likes 4 I�m interested to see if the new TC7 will be similar to my 2017 9-series, with selectable water levels and soil levels. By the way, my washer needed its first repair at 5.5 years of age: A new inlet valve. Mine had started to drip into the tub. I always shut off the water faucets after the final load, so there was no fear of a flood. Still, decided to have it replaced. I�ve grown to enjoy this old school machine.

Post# 1175896 , Reply# 59 3/24/2023 at 21:30 (391 days old) by maytaga806 (Howell, Michigan)
Checkrate/Likes 1 That got off topic real quick

Post# 1175898 , Reply# 60 3/24/2023 at 21:36 (391 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 2 *That got off topic real quick* It was a fun ride, just sit back and enjoy it.

Post# 1175969 , Reply# 61 3/25/2023 at 06:46 (391 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *Talked To Our SQ Rep Yesterday* There is no though of building a TC7000 series TL washer, they are struggling to keep the TC5000 series in production with increased Energy Regulations as it is. I would look for a commercial version of the TR TL machines one of these years and the old transmission machines will go away completely, they are simply too costly to build and use too much electricity and are not as reliable or long lived as the TR machines. John L.

Post# 1175998 , Reply# 62 3/25/2023 at 10:28 (391 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 3 I know some are pretty smug about how the regulations are making it difficult to get decent TL machines. Yet somehow I guess you think the regulations won't come after your physics-defying FLs. People pushing the regulations and their "green" agenda aren't going to stop. You can bet they eventually they'll start decreasing the amounts of water even a FL can use during a cycle, limit the number of rinses to one, force them to use weaker motors, limit the cycle times, and make them lighter weight (and I think it's a fool who thinks you can't tell something about the quality of a machine by studying its construction), etc. That is, if we even have electricity to run them, thanks to the energy policies. It's not so free a country after all. John, given your view of front loading machines being nearly perfect, why would you think commercial establishments would want a TR? I've never even been clear on exactly how much water and energy they're suppose to save anyway. Are you going to claim they clean better also? How do you know the TR are so much longer lived? They require greater force and a more powerful motor to sling tubs full of water around. Wouldn't that put more stress on the bearings and such? Have they been out long enough for you to state it as a fact that they live longer. I guess it's like your statement that the FLs will last twice as long. Dan, thanks for the link for the Toyota parts. I'm not going to tell the color of my vehicles. Too much personal information, and I don't discriminate based on color.

Post# 1176000 , Reply# 63 3/25/2023 at 10:45 (391 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes 3 *Reply number 62* Sorry Jeff you have to get your facts right the TR has a much smaller motor in it uses much less electricity does not put as much load on the motor as it drains before it spins the machine is much simpler, and therefore much longer lived. I am not gonna debate ridiculous points about front loaders, and top loaders that you don�t understand, and there is still a market for top loaders in certain commercial installations, mostly very tight, laundry rooms in apartment, buildings condos, etc. John

Post# 1176002 , Reply# 64 3/25/2023 at 11:02 (391 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 3 What a cop-out of an answer, "you're just too stupid to understand". Though I still find it interesting that you don't seem to think that idiots like me have any business buying and using TLs, yet you see uses for commercial applications. So just keep up with your hyperbole, facts you can't back up, and insults.

Post# 1176004 , Reply# 65 3/25/2023 at 11:07 (391 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *just wait* Just wait until Speed Queen is forced to make HE top load washers with wash plates in them.

Post# 1176007 , Reply# 66 3/25/2023 at 11:23 (391 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes BTW, when the TC drains, the belt slips until the tub is up to speed, so it's not like it puts an extreme load on the motor as our physics expert and mechanical engineer would have you believe. The TC motor turns an agitator through the water, so I believe the main force would be water resistance, while the TR slings an over 100 lb tub full of water around. So there is wear and tear on the belt on a TC. So if a belt last 5 years, and a TR lasts 10 years before a part needs to be replaces, I'm sure John will say the TR lasts twice as long.

Post# 1176019 , Reply# 67 3/25/2023 at 13:01 (391 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *"TR has a much smaller motor"* So, as I recall, the TR series uses a 1 hp motor, the TC series uses a 1/2 hp motor. But what really matters is the load on the motor. So I guess I'm still incapable of understanding John's reasoning as to why the TR uses a more powerful motor, and how it uses so much less electricity at the same time. If a transmission model consumes so much more power, than why does it have a motor that's half the size?

Post# 1176020 , Reply# 68 3/25/2023 at 13:06 (391 days old) by qsd-dan (West)
Checkrate/Likes 1 TR has a much smaller motor TR 1HP Motor TC 1/2 HP motor

Post# 1176021 , Reply# 69 3/25/2023 at 13:10 (391 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *classic clean versus perfect wash* The classic clean will outclean the perfect wash by miles. I bet the perfect wash will just spread dirt around even on heavy duty.

Post# 1176022 , Reply# 70 3/25/2023 at 13:16 (391 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)
Checkrate/Likes 2 *Speed Queen top load washers* Jeff, I�m talking about the weight of the motor. The motor is twice as heavy in the TC washer as the TR washers. The motor in the TR washers use 1/4 of the power of the TC washers and barely even get warm in operation, where is the motor in a regular machine gets too hot to touch. The motor in the TR washers will probably last 5 to 10 times as long as a plain old induction motor Induction motors just have cheap sleeve bearings in them and are known for failures plane induction motors used in standard washing machines and dryers are one of the major items that cause these machines to be thrown away because of failures of the bearings, etc. Front loading washers with high speed motors are similar to the motor and the TR washer. I have almost never seen one fail. The belt in the TR washer likewise should last 5 to 10 times as long as the belt in the TC washer , that�s long been a trouble spot in top loading speed, queen washers. I did not use the term stupid, but if it fits use it. John

Post# 1176025 , Reply# 71 3/25/2023 at 13:40 (391 days old) by panasonicvac (Northern Utah)
Checkrate/Likes 3 As much as I love the TR7 when I tried it out, I'm not fully sold into it. Just because they're quieter and uses less electricity doesn't mean they clean better or last longer. There's already proof on YouTube that the classic Speed Queen top loaders definitely outperforms the TR models. And according to consumeraffairs.com, there's already people having technical problems with the TR series especially the bearings, even under the warranty. I've heard only one or maybe two issues with the TC5 so far. The whole reason why the TC5 was introduced in the first place is because of the negative feedback of the TR series, the same thing would happen all over again if SQ did discontinue their classic top loaders again but it'd be much worse if they also discontinued the commercial models as well.

Post# 1176028 , Reply# 72 3/25/2023 at 14:31 (391 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes 2 Yes, according to the "energy guide", for what that's worth, a TR uses approx. 10% less. Big deal if it cleans even as much as 80% as effectively as a TC. I'm just using the 80% figure as an example, it may well not be that much, I don't have any more basis for it than John seems to have for most of his figures. When called out on certain statements he makes, he just runs and comes up with more questionable statements. Even if on a classic model I have to replace the belt occasionally, or even a motor, which I believe is unlikely, I'd much sooner do that than have to replace a bearing or something on a TR. To me it's worth it. Besides, I enjoy the spin drain. It doesn't take much to entertain a mindless clod like me. BTW, if you look at reply #10, John did indeed use the word "stupid", and implies it otherwise. I won't get into the psychology of why John thinks smaller is better.

Post# 1176051 , Reply# 73 3/25/2023 at 17:42 (391 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *to combo52* I'd love to see a video side by side of the perfect wash and classic clean on heavy duty cycles with a full load of laundry and get back to me. I bet the classic clean will clean laundry better than perfect wash without damaging clothes.

Post# 1176056 , Reply# 74 3/25/2023 at 20:00 (391 days old) by WindRivers (Wind River Range, WY)
Checkrate/Likes Reply #70: "The motor in the TR washers use 1/4 of the power of the TC washers..." Where do these figures come from? Do the TC motors have a power factor of around 20% or less, or do the TR models have a power factor of well over 100%. Do the TRs also defy physics? According to the serial plate on the machines, the TC is rated at 9.8 amps, and the TR at 7.7 amps. So, yes, that may be a significant difference to energy conscious people or organizations who use their machines significantly more than me, or have many machines, or otherwise value energy savings above all. But assuming that the amperage rating is an indication of the ratio of power used throughout the cycle for a TC compared to a TR (I assume those are the maximum amps and not necessarily those used throughout the cycle, but then, as John says, I may lack understanding) then the TC uses approx 1/4 more energy than the TR, or the TRs use about 80% of the energy of the TCs, not 25% as John seems to claim. At least I would think that most of the power used goes to the motor. If John's figures are correct, than I guess the majority of electricity used must be going to the control boards, in which case they should go back mechanical controls to meet energy requirements and have machines that would be rated at something more like 2 or 3 amps. I'd be all for that. Or maybe the neutral pump in the TRs use 7.7 amps, and the motor only uses a fraction of that. Whatever. Again, even the "Energy Guide" doesn't even back up a savings of 20%, much less the claims made here.

Post# 1176059 , Reply# 75 3/25/2023 at 20:38 (391 days old) by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)
Checkrate/Likes *water efficiency* They need to leave water levels alone. I'm so sick and tired of being gentle on clothes. It especially doesn't work in low water situations.

Forum Index:

Other Forums:

Comes to the Rescue!

The Discuss-o-Mat has stopped, buzzer is sounding!!!
If you would like to reply to this thread please log-in...
Discuss-O-MAT Log-In

New Members Click Here To Sign Up.

automaticwasher.org home
Discuss-o-Mat Forums
Vintage Brochures, Service and Owners Manuals
Fun Vintage Washer Ephemera
See It Wash!
Video Downloads
Audio Downloads
Picture of the Day
Patent of the Day
Photos of our Collections
The Old Aberdeen Farm
Vintage Service Manuals Vintage washer/dryer/dishwasher to sell?
Technical/service questions?
Looking for Parts?
Website related questions?
Digital Millennium Copyright Act Policy
Our Privacy Policy