Thread Number: 94338  /  Tag: Vintage Automatic Washers
Anyone know anything about post-FF GE washers?
[Down to Last]

automaticwasher.org's exclusive eBay Watch:
scroll >>> for more items
Post# 1190324   9/20/2023 at 15:03 by stuftrock1 (Kentucky)        

stuftrock1's profile picture

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.


  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 2         View Full Size



Post# 1190331 , Reply# 1   9/20/2023 at 17:41 by Repairguy (Danbury, Texas)        

repairguy's profile picture
For the most part they were decent machines. The original models from 1996 had problems with the bearings in the bottom of the transmission. After a while they got this worked out and they were very popular machines.

The one posted is probably a single speed machine with pulsed agitation on the casual cycle. This one was built around 2002.


Post# 1190339 , Reply# 2   9/20/2023 at 18:23 by goatfarmer (South Bend, home of Champions)        

goatfarmer's profile picture

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


Post# 1190341 , Reply# 3   9/20/2023 at 18:25 by Repairguy (Danbury, Texas)        

repairguy's profile picture
For some reason they discontinued these transmissions early so if it needs one youíre probably not going to find it unless there is a donor machine.

Post# 1190362 , Reply# 4   9/20/2023 at 21:31 by stuftrock1 (Kentucky)        

stuftrock1's profile picture

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?


Post# 1190363 , Reply# 5   9/20/2023 at 21:32 by sambootoo (Moody, AL)        

Mine lasted for 17 years without a single repair. It cleaned anything we put in it and had a decent spin speed. When it developed the spin howl, it was deemed too costly to justify repair.

Post# 1190365 , Reply# 6   9/20/2023 at 22:55 by 114jwh (Vancouver)        

We also had a set of these machines, maybe around 1999 they were bought brand new. Surprisingly, in the 15-16 years we had them before the house was sold they never had any repairs and we never had any problems with them. They were well used during that time too.

Post# 1190379 , Reply# 7   9/21/2023 at 06:45 by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)        
Post Filter Flow GE top load washers

combo52's profile picture
These machines were excellent performers a great improvement over the Filter Flow washers.

They Spond much more smoothly without vibration problems, they eliminated the sand and grit being re-deposited on the clothing problem.

They were a little weak on agitation they didnít have the robust turnover than a direct drive Whirlpool built machine head.

If you buy this one fit it with a dual action agitator, youíll like its performance much better

The tub actually did not index per se the entire inner and outer tub swung back-and-forth an inch or so during agitation.

The downfall of these machines were durability issues related to the main seal transmission, etc. GE extended the warranty on the transmissions, and we changed a lot of transmissions in them. We have saved one for the museum because it was such a neat performer.

John.


Post# 1190392 , Reply# 8   9/21/2023 at 10:16 by chetlaham (United States)        
Speaking my mind unfiltered...

chetlaham's profile picture

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.

 

 


Post# 1190395 , Reply# 9   9/21/2023 at 11:08 by rinso (Meridian Idaho)        

rinso's profile picture
My sister and her husband and my mom and dad bought sets with this washer. They never had any repairs, but the cycle modifier buttons wore through the plastic escutcheon very quickly. They were probably much cheaper to manufacture than the old filter-flo machines, but at least they weren't water guzzlers.

Post# 1190396 , Reply# 10   9/21/2023 at 11:43 by qsd-dan (West)        

qsd-dan's profile picture

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. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Post# 1190413 , Reply# 11   9/21/2023 at 15:36 by stuftrock1 (Kentucky)        
Reply 8

stuftrock1's profile picture

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.


Post# 1190414 , Reply# 12   9/21/2023 at 15:43 by stuftrock1 (Kentucky)        
Reply 10

stuftrock1's profile picture

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.


Post# 1190418 , Reply# 13   9/21/2023 at 17:18 by qsd-dan (West)        
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty certain the Hydrowave

qsd-dan's profile picture

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.


Post# 1190423 , Reply# 14   9/21/2023 at 18:23 by cfz2882 (Belle Fourche,SD)        
GE hydrowave

I have a lower end(fluted plastic basket) hydrowave from 2008 rotated into use right now-runs inverter driven 3-phase induction motor. i have had no trouble with the motor or powertrain,but pump is craptastic and noisy as hell and the mechanical timer developed a habit of jamming on heavy duty cycle.so started using the cottons cycle :)

Post# 1190449 , Reply# 15   9/22/2023 at 11:03 by chetlaham (United States)        

chetlaham's profile picture

 

 

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.    

 

 


Post# 1190471 , Reply# 16   9/22/2023 at 18:18 by stuftrock1 (Kentucky)        

stuftrock1's profile picture

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. 


  View Full Size
Post# 1190476 , Reply# 17   9/22/2023 at 18:52 by neptunebob (Pittsburgh, PA)        
Why are you overloading?

neptunebob's profile picture
Do you want all those clothes to smell?

As for the GE washers, there was a laundromat near me that had both FF and later GE washers and in about 1 or 2 years there were a lot of later GE washers in the back of the place that had broken and no Filter flos. The later GE washers in the building were usually out of order too.


Post# 1190478 , Reply# 18   9/22/2023 at 20:41 by stuftrock1 (Kentucky)        

stuftrock1's profile picture

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.


Post# 1190492 , Reply# 19   9/23/2023 at 08:36 by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)        
GE top load post Filter Flow washers

combo52's profile picture
Performance wise these machines were a huge improvement, they did have durability issues thereís no denying that.

But capacity with greater cleaning, much better water extraction, better much less lint no one balance loads whatsoever. Weíre all advantages of this new machine.

As far as dual action agitators, itís simple science that they work much better than a one piece agitator, Consumer Reports called the dual action agitator the greatest advance in top loading washing machines in like 40 years when they started testing them in the 80s. If you believe a one piece, agitator works better with big loads than a dual action agitator you can join the flat earth society. They are still taking memberships, but Iím generally not interested in discussing things with people who just simply have their own agenda and donít recognize science.

That said any agitator in virtually any washer does a sufficiently great job if itís loaded properly. But you can simply get a lot more in with a dual action agitator and get the clothing clean with less damage, because the clothing move around better with the dual action agitator.

If you want to see, fun, performance, and great turnover in an 806 Maytag try this modification , this has the GE ramp agitator with a 50 cycle motor, pulley and the Pitman transmission, unfortunately, I canít upload the video of it washing a load, but itís pretty amazing, the load sensor agitator will still turnover a bigger load in this machine, of course but this one is a fun agitator to watch.


John


  Photos...       <              >      Photo 1 of 2         View Full Size
Post# 1190501 , Reply# 20   9/23/2023 at 10:04 by chetlaham (United States)        

chetlaham's profile picture

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.

 

 


Post# 1191576 , Reply# 21   10/8/2023 at 21:00 by GELaundry4ever (Nacogdoches, TX, USA)        
GE post filter-flo

I remember when I got mine. I noticed the machine shook violently during normal agitation compared to my GE filter-flo I had prior.

Post# 1191635 , Reply# 22   10/9/2023 at 18:05 by angus (Fairfield, CT.)        

Sorry I can't agree that the post FF GEs were any improvement other than capacity. I had the first generation of the GE Profile and it was such a nightmare that GE actually bought it back from me after three repair filled years. I think the issue there was that the ideas on the redesign were good but I still think they rushed this machine to market to compete with WP/KM. The rush could have had something to do with the last review of the FF style (which were all "rim-flo" by then) by Consumer Reports that placed GE/Hotpoint at the bottom of the ratings citing "dated and not too functional design". Perhaps GE figured they needed to move fast or risk losing more market share very quickly since people still used CR as their buying bible at that time.

Post# 1191667 , Reply# 23   10/10/2023 at 04:20 by chetlaham (United States)        

chetlaham's profile picture

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.

 

 


Post# 1191686 , Reply# 24   10/10/2023 at 09:51 by jamiel (Detroit, Michigan)        

jamiel's profile picture
I worked for General Electric Capital from Sept 1989 through May 1992 in Kansas City. We worked on the Montgomery Ward credit card portfolio, and had about 1000 employees at a call center in suburban Kansas City. We had access to discounts on the full line of GE appliances...was a varied rebate that you got after purchase.

About mid-1991 they were recruiting families to test washing machines in-home. Remember nothing other than a memo that went around with a number to call. I believe they had as a requirement that you had outdoor access to the laundry area (for ease of installation/deinstallation).

I'd inherited about a 1969 portable Kenmore washer and a later KM dryer which I had in my apartment (it had been handed down over several peoples' college time) so I was set.



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