Well this is a bit of a blast from my past. My grandfather had a washer just like this when I was a young child except with a dual action agitator. Whenever he did laundry while I was over there, I would always stand up on a stool to peek through the lid as it ran through its cycle. I remember it made a very distinct chugging sound, similar to a Whirlpool built DD but far more pronounced.

It developed a very loud howling noise when spinning. My grandfather, who is very mechanically inclined, either couldn't figure out how to fix it or decided it wasn't worth it, and replaced it with a brand new Whirlpool DD with a light blue control panel.

Seeing that smooth plastic tub with the large spaced out holes brings back so many memories. I haven't seen one of these machines since then, and honestly I kinda forgot they even existed. I would like to learn more about these machines if anyone knows anything about them. The one pictured below is for sale for $200 in the next town over. I'm half tempted to get it despite it obviously being a low end model.

Personally, I let those go to scrap, if they don't work properly. Which is most of them that I get in.

I've done some reading and according to various people, these machines were replaced by the Hydrowave in either 2006, 2007, or 2009. I've gathered that those are pretty terrible, but I do like that washboard style plastic inner tub they had.

From what I remember about my grandfather's machine, it had an all white control panel with grey lettering, slightly yellowed control knobs (maybe they were just dirty), and a big red triangle as the timer position indicator. That sounds very late 90's to me, maybe 98 or 99, but I know nothing about this washer platform.

I thought it was interesting how the tub always indexed like an inch or two almost by design. I thought that coupled with the chugging noise gave it almost a harmonious quality. I also remember being blown away by how quickly it spun up to full speed. Maybe by very young brain was exaggerating the spin acceleration, I don't know.

How was the performance on these things compared to other washers at the time like the DD, Maytag DC, Performa, and Atlantis? Were they easy to service? Were they reliable and long lasting?

These are unequivocally, and by far, the worst washers ever put into existence. I absolutely despise model T washers for everything they are and all that they lack. There is soooooooo much wrong in them. To the point I feel they are a presumptuous insult to basic human decency. If everyone was like me when these washers were first released the streets would quickly resemble the Nahel Merzouk protests in France, but on a much more expansive scale with over 200 million and growing participating. GE would have quickly discontinued the model T with the filter flos put back into production. Any washer that follows would rival Speed Queen or a Maytag dependable care. Given the engineering, tools, knowledge, physics, computing power and unlimited data available to GE they could easily produce a washer that could beat the Maytag Dependable Care or a Whirlpool DD if they really wanted to.

In an ironic twist it actually the model T which radicalized me, changed my world view, and caused me to never take anything for granted. I not only had the misfortune of using one of these washers in the early to mid 2000s, but when I for the first time saw the front cover off a model T side by side with the back fiber board removed on an 80s GE FF I was absolutely gobsmacked that two machines could ever had been produced by the same company or have taken such a complete turn. The difference so stark it is my default image whenever I hear "things aren't built like they were used to"       

From what I remember about my grandfather's machine, it had an all white control panel with grey lettering, slightly yellowed control knobs (maybe they were just dirty), and a big red triangle as the timer position indicator. That sounds very late 90's to me, maybe 98 or 99, but I know nothing about this washer platform.

Late 90s early 2000s would be correct. My first model from 98 had the red triangle on the timer indicator.

I thought it was interesting how the tub always indexed like an inch or two almost by design. I thought that coupled with the chugging noise gave it almost a harmonious quality. I also remember being blown away by how quickly it spun up to full speed. Maybe by very young brain was exaggerating the spin acceleration, I don't know.

You're brain has not deceived you. Model Ts, especially clutch models, accelerated way to fast. This caused slightly off balance loads that would otherwise not be a problem once most of the water was removed to violently bang the the top of the outer tub into the cabinet for the first few seconds of spin. This was not the result of broken tub straps as common with these machines but rather a severally under-damped suspension, rapid acceleration and sucky balance ring. DDs and other washers accelerate much more slowly, heir clutches have far more slip, as they should. 

The inner tub is not whats indexing, but the entire inner, outer tub, motor, and suspension. Stupid, as that would often cause the tub straps to break resulting in the outter tub knocking into the cabinet during an average spin. Also, the violent back and forth during agitation would cause the suspension rods to growl in their sockets while the whole frame would just squeal. Late 90s models were far less audible, but early and mid 2000s models were many times worse. I remember on the HD sales floor if you just slightly moved the tub the washer would emit unpleasant, unfriendly sounds.

How was the performance on these things compared to other washers at the time like the DD, Maytag DC, Performa, and Atlantis? Were they easy to service? Were they reliable and long lasting?

Believe it or not on the lowest water level setting these washers had good cleaning and excellent turn over. But I remember on large loads the agitator would just shred the clothes in the middle while the rest of the garments would shake back and forth at the same rate as the inner and outter tub not moving up nor down. So cleaning over all was very poor in the so called power soaker. Lint was through the roof, just obscene. Clothing wear high, tears that I never have with my current Speed Queen were somehow a common occurance. Black gunk specs on clothes was also not unseen of due to the boxed reinforcements on the other side of the inner tub which held and trapped absolutely everything- lint, hair, water, softner, residue, ect. 

I have the ability to go on but I'll just say the apartment scrap pile was overflowing with these washers most only a few years old all of them with various failure mods like broken air bell drive blocks, locked bearings, noisey bearing, bad timers, bad pumps (the Italian ones seemed trouble prone), broken tub straps, seal leaks, bad transmissions, basically everything under the sun that could go wrong went wrong.

Maytag, Whirlpool ect performed on orders of magnitude better, Atlantis I dare say held up a bit better with DDs and Dependable Cares being light years ahead in longevity, durability and reliability. You simply can not compare a model T to any other washers. Model Ts were essentially GE's greedy vengeance for the success of the FFs.

My brother has a newer version of this washer with a matching dryer, probably mid to late 2000's if I were to guess. It has a stainless steel inner tub, requires magnets to bypass the lid switch (swiped a couple of his fridge magnets), and neutral drains with zero spray rinse during the first or final spin cycles🤢 Their clothes always reek of the detergent being used due to poor rinsing.

About the only positive thing I can say about the washer is that is has a big size tub. I think the dryer is a thermostatic auto dry model. I couldn't find a sensor anywhere in the drum and its accuracy was subpar at best. 

I must say, I am quite surprised your pfp is the timer of one of these "Model T" machines, considering all that you said about them. I have also never heard this platform referred to as a Model T.

I've done some more research on these models and I've learned they use suspension rods similar to modern VMW washers. That must be why they got off balanced so easily in your experience, suspension rods cannot absorb anywhere near as much force as a more typical suspension system. And as I recall, they used a water counterbalance ring, just like Whirlpool-built DDs. So I'm going to go out on a limb here and disagree with you that the counterbalance ring was bad and that the acceleration was too fast, it was just a bad suspension design.

Many people have also said that the Hydrowave (which was the sucessor to this platform) was by far GE's worst washer, not this one. These things wash very similarly to a Whirlpool-built DD and an orbital-driven Maytag DC (fast 90º strokes), so performance wise the only variable should be agitator design. GE's single piece agitator design, as pictured above, looks pretty basic and shouldn't be that much different performance wise than the early Maytag Shark-Fin agitators. And the dual action is... well, all dual actions are pretty much the same. A wide base with 4 large flexible fins on the bottom, no different than the Whirlpool dual action.

It is pretty obvious that this design was GE's way of cutting costs and cheaping out compared to the previous FF platform. But in my opinion, it is a bit of a stretch to say this is the worst GE washer ever made, let alone the worst washer in general ever made, considering the Hydrowave that succeeded it and the junk we have today. It was this washer that my grandfather had, plus my dad's Maytag DC and my grandmother's FF that got me interested in washers in the first place as a young child, so I suppose I will always have a bit of respect for this washer for sentiments reasons. And seeing that dial in your pfp, along with those rinse and spin symbols that I had completely forgotten about, really takes me back, as that's exactly what my grandfather's looked like.

Dan, I'm pretty certain the stainless inner tub and magnetic lid switch would make your brother's machine a Hydrowave. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty certain the Hydrowave was one of if not the first washers to use a DC brushless motor to control the wash action, rather than a standard AC induction motor driving a transmission. It's one of the major things that made the Hydrowave so terrible, it was GE's first attempt at making a high efficiency washer.

Could be, I'm completely ignorant on post Filter Flo models. Surprisingly, it hasn't had any issues since he bought the set used about 4.5 years ago.

I must say, I am quite surprised your pfp is the timer of one of these "Model T" machines, considering all that you said about them. I have also never heard this platform referred to as a Model T.  

I absolutely love GE's concept of 4 or more uniquely distinct cycles on the timer knob- in particular the extra clean cycle concept with 30 minutes of presoaking, 20+ minutes of agitation followed by two automatic extra rinses. A mini/quick cycle where everything is truly shortened down to less than 20 minutes total,  a poly knit/casual/easy care cycle with medium wash, rinse and spin time and a normal cycle with normal wash, rinse and spin time. There cycles are configured to actually match the fabric and stated goal, instead of having multiple cycles that are more or less equal copies of a normal cycle just labelled different things as with most competitors. 

This concept is from the GE filter flo days which carried over into the model Ts. I think GE had the best cycle timing, labeling and concepts going- true fabric care.

In any case I am guilty as charged. I do have a post FF knob in my profile pic. However I will simply state  "keep your friends close, but keep your enemies even closer"

I've done some more research on these models and I've learned they use suspension rods similar to modern VMW washers. That must be why they got off balanced so easily in your experience, suspension rods cannot absorb anywhere near as much force as a more typical suspension system. And as I recall, they used a water counterbalance ring, just like Whirlpool-built DDs. So I'm going to go out on a limb here and disagree with you that the counterbalance ring was bad and that the acceleration was too fast, it was just a bad suspension design.  

Well, you must consider not all balance rings are equal for the job. Also extra items on one side of the tub will present more weight when soaking wet vs nearly dry. Spin should be gradual as to lead to gradual water extraction.

Many people have also said that the Hydrowave (which was the sucessor to this platform) was by far GE's worst washer, not this one. These things wash very similarly to a Whirlpool-built DD and an orbital-driven Maytag DC (fast 90º strokes), so performance wise the only variable should be agitator design. GE's single piece agitator design, as pictured above, looks pretty basic and shouldn't be that much different performance wise than the early Maytag Shark-Fin agitators. And the dual action is... well, all dual actions are pretty much the same. A wide base with 4 large flexible fins on the bottom, no different than the Whirlpool dual action.

IMO they are not far off- everything about Hydrowave was still the same except the VFD motor and lack of transmission.

Agitators look similar but they are not, regardless of short vs long stroke transmissions.

Maytag used a long stroke concept and the agi forced water through the clothes. Despite that Maytag was known not to clean as well as a Whirlpool belt drive because of the very small fins. DDs are fast stroke yes, however nearly every Whirlpool/Kenmore agitator regardless of long stroke (like the old belt drives) or short stroke  (like the DDs) had fins which were brash pulling the fabric in and down. Clothes moved, and they got a beating to. One of the few WP made agis that weren't brash (at least in my book) were those brown Kenmore "crayon" style agitators.

GE's model Ts small, action opposing fins that cancelled each other out simply didn't grab the clothes. Vids do more juctice than words IMO- this over loaded Kenmore washer video succinctly recreates what I saw on my GE when washing a full load. 

The clothes in the middle jiggled around my agi, while everything else would literally sit on top for 10 minutes just like it did at the start of the cycle. 

Perhaps, maybe, being humble for a moment in my state of emotionally charged bias, I was overloading my model T relative to what GE engineers had in mind, however, I know that I can seriously overload my 2013 Speed Queen even by my own strict terminology (did it a few times at first) and the long fins + long stroke got everything turning over and over through out the cycle.  

Which takes me to DA's. My honest opinion is that WP DAs do a far better job than GE DAs on all load sizes. An improvement over that straight vanes, but still GE's chintzy imitation of WP's perfected timeless classic. 

It is pretty obvious that this design was GE's way of cutting costs and cheaping out compared to the previous FF platform. But in my opinion, it is a bit of a stretch to say this is the worst GE washer ever made, let alone the worst washer in general ever made, considering the Hydrowave that succeeded it and the junk we have today. It was this washer that my grandfather had, plus my dad's Maytag DC and my grandmother's FF that got me interested in washers in the first place as a young child, so I suppose I will always have a bit of respect for this washer for sentiments reasons. And seeing that dial in your pfp, along with those rinse and spin symbols that I had completely forgotten about, really takes me back, as that's exactly what my grandfather's looked like.

Sadly today's washers are not a far cry from the model Ts which is very painful to at least partially come to realization with. GE historically sold to landlords and builders, so GE catered to that market more than anyone else. The model Ts were simply doing that to a greedy extreme, one that ultimately cost their reputation and business. GE's appliances were at least known for reasonable longevity and landlords knew that. Landlords knew they could score a reasonably priced appliance and that it would last 15-30 years until the unit got renovated. Good return on investment- everyone was happy. That is until the late 90s and 2000s came along where GE's reputation for giving what landlords a reasonable return on inveestment evaporated when there newest line of appliances began dropping like flies. So much so rental properties in the late 2000s, actually began turning to Whirlpool and Frigidaire.

Which takes me to today. Modern washers are imitations of model Ts and Hydrowaves. But they at least have the washing performance bugs worked to a greater extent. For example, a $399 VMW Amana washer is much better on clothes and cleans much better than a model T or Hydrowave. VMWs are not known for exploding or becoming biological experiments when used properly.    

Chet, that video was extremely painful to watch... That poor Kenmore was crying out for mercy, being hopelessly overloaded like that.

I would still like to get one of these machines and see for myself how it stacks up to other washers. I don't remember the turnover being bad on my grandfathers machine. I recently ran a torture load on my Whirlpool LST6132 DD (It has the single piece agitator with the 5 fins on the base pictured below). 35 t-shirts, 4 pairs of shorts, and a hoodie. That thing still managed to turn the load over no problem without a dual action agitator. Watching that load actually convinced me that dual action agitators are overrated and a good single piece agitator is better. But I have still never seen anything, dual action or not, that beats the ramped Activator on the FFs and RFs.

The 12 vane agitator on my Maytag LAT4914 DC (I don't know what that agitator is called) really struggles when the washer is even slightly overloaded, but it does a pretty good job otherwise. I suspect that single piece GE spiral agitator in the original post will perform similarly, but I'll have to get one and see for myself. I'd really love to get a late 90s model just like what my grandfather had, and what you have in your pfp. 

I overloaded simply because I wanted to see how the washer would handle. Rest assured I do not do that on a regular basis. Interestingly though, the clothes all came out smelling fresh.

Reply 19-

Now that is so cool!!!!! <3 It would have been such a dream if GE took the dependable care design and added their own twists to it. Ramp agitator like you did, 4 cycle knob with mini quick and extra clean cycle, spin/spray cool down, 3 or 4 port pump with filter flo, 3/4 HP to compliment the 50Hz pulley. Now that would have been a washer.

Well said, I very much agree.

The primary reason why repair techs make the claim GE washers have fewer repairs is because when a part does fail the machine is typically condemned knowing its not worth the repair as another component will fail shortly after. Model Ts are rarely sold rebuilt/used. Another claim is that certain parts in model Ts rarely fail or last the life of the washer and while technically true that is again entirely due to the short and temporary life of a model T washer. 

GE seized on this however, I remember advertising literature on the sales floor in the early to mid 2000s bragging how out of all the washers on the market GE's had the fewest repairs. People not realizing that while 100% true, the information comes from a cause that is the exact opposite of what the consumer is supposed to believe.

IMO I think GE had plans to discontinue the FF design since the very late 80s. In the 90s machines began getting cheapened like the back panel went to potmetal and mixing of lids/control panels/ rim flos ect started taking place. I think GE at that point was gradually using up what was left in factory with no intent to evolve the FF design. Though you're still right, consumer reports certainly helped push the change along.

I still wonder how CR reached the conclusion GE was dated. Besides the smaller tub capacity nothing on the outside gives away that the existence of a moving inner tub and static outer tub based on a 1940s design.