Thread Number: 9835
please help me guys |
[Down to Last] |
|
Post# 181660 , Reply# 1   1/8/2007 at 18:06 (6,289 days old) by frigilux (The Minnesota Prairie)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
If your machine is new (like my '06 Frigidaire), the machine actually fills to the third row down from the top, which is SO stupid because it decreases the washer's capacity. I opened the console to find a pressure dome which can't be adjusted. My water control is one of those 'infinitely variable' ones, so I rigged up a rubber band and a picture-hanging hook to hold the control a bit into the 'reset' setting. It now fills to the very top of the tub. If you have a 'click-to-select' control, hold it halfway between two of the settings and it should fill until you let go of the switch. Unfortunately, you have to return when the washer hits the rinse cycle and do it again. Or you just have to learn to fill the tub only to the third row of holes down from the top. |
Post# 181760 , Reply# 3   1/9/2007 at 00:06 (6,289 days old) by tolivac (greenville nc)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I think this idea of the water stingy washers is stupid--the USER should be able to control how or as much water as he needs for the job at hand.AGAIN-THROW OUT THESE SILLY ENERGY STANDARDS! |
Post# 181774 , Reply# 6   1/9/2007 at 01:30 (6,289 days old) by volvoguy87 (Cincinnati, OH)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I am in favor of energy guidelines, but I think the system we have now is measuring the wrong aspects. Rather than measure the energy required per cycle, I think the energy measured should be the amount of energy required to get X amount of laundry from an established level of dirtyness to an established level of cleanliness. A big washer that only partially fills with water, has a wimpy agitator, and a minimal spin cycle speed will use very little energy as it runs its cycle, but it also won't clean laundry very well. I think it's ok to use lots of energy, provided that it is the best way to accomplish a task. The high-efficiency solutions we are faced with often just don't work very well. Dave |
Post# 181831 , Reply# 10   1/9/2007 at 10:40 (6,288 days old) by danemodsandy (The Bramford, Apt. 7-E)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Governments never get it right when they try to meddle, do they? Oxy's right- if FL's are to be our future, then there should be some sort of gummint mandate to make TL's more expensive, not a standard that makes everything wash poorly. No one seems to have learnt a lesson from the water-saving regs on toilets: Yes, they flush on a gallon and a half. But they flush so poorly that they're commonly flushed two or three times to get rid of everything, completely negating the supposed water savings. I can see people double-washing clothes or bypassing these new temp controls just so they can have clean skivvies to wear. Or, as with toilets, vintage units made before all the nonsense may become very valuable and popular. There are a lot of new houses built where the cheapest possible water-saving toilets are put in to meet code, and the instant the inspector leaves, are replaced with rebuilt vintage units that actually flush. And those vintage units cost a pretty penny, due to demand. This misguided decision on wsahers is as bad as that new New York City ban on trans fats, which has been touted as being a huge step forward for public health. If those bozos REALLY cared about public health, they'd be working on universal health care coverage, not outlawing Crisco. They just want to exercise their two-for-a-nickel power, not actually help anyone. There is nothing stupider than a politician. Of any party, in any country, under any political system, in any era of history. |
Post# 181836 , Reply# 11   1/9/2007 at 11:10 (6,288 days old) by rp2813 (Sannazay)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
My 9 year old Amana washer filled to the top when it was new but quickly changed and has ever since stopped filling at about the 2nd row of holes. So now I do like Eugene/frigilux does if I have a full load of towels or whatever and I hold the infinite level control over to re-set until the water reaches the rim of the tub. If I'm really observant I can see the agitator's fabric softener dispenser being raised by the water level and then I know it's filled as high as is safe. This is another reason I want a front loader next. There is no water level issue or concern that some items may not be moved thoroughly through the wash water. I'm looking forward to the "set it and forget it" luxury of a front loader instead of having to monitor the fill levels as I'm doing now. Regarding water conservation, we've had a few droughts out here in California during my lifetime and have had rationing situations. While I'd let my lawn go brown and save wherever I could, I always felt guilty and apprehensive about filling up a top loader with so much water, especially when we were getting penalized for excessive consumption. I think a front loader is the responsible machine to own in my area. |
Post# 183565 , Reply# 18   1/16/2007 at 13:19 (6,281 days old) by rolltideroll ()   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
The EPA now makes washing machine transmissions contain no more than 3 ounces of oil. Go figure. |
Post# 183610 , Reply# 19   1/16/2007 at 17:26 (6,281 days old) by volvoguy87 (Cincinnati, OH)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Saving water is a good thing. Saving water with devices that are unreliable and/or function poorly is not a good thing. In order to achieve a thorough toilet flush with little water, many toilet manufacturers make toilets with vacuum pumps or compressors to give some more power to the water. I do not like these devices! They are loud, expensive, trouble-prone, and cannot be easily or cheaply repaired. I believe that the toilet is something that the average person should be able to make basic repairs to under the most desperate of circumstances. Toilets always seem to break at the most inopportune moments, especially if you only have one of them! As a historic preservationist I have asked myself if the problem of increasing flush power has ever been solved before. It has been, over a century ago! The toilet tank was raised several feet above the bowl, and the water from the tank would be accelerated by gravity while descending a pipe before it hit the bowl, resulting in a powerful flush. Gravity is free, it is very reliable, has no moving parts, and if gravity ever breaks, flushing the toilet will be the least of our concerns! Maybe we should try to come up with the simplest viable soultion possible so we don't have to deal with shoddy products and get back to what we do best (laundry!). Please don't skip the humor of the above. Humor mixed with facts is like using the expensive toilet paper; it makes a necessity a little more enjoyable and might even result in a better job in the end ;) Dave |
Post# 183614 , Reply# 20   1/16/2007 at 17:42 (6,281 days old) by goatfarmer (South Bend, home of Champions)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 183831 , Reply# 23   1/17/2007 at 20:21 (6,280 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 184005 , Reply# 25   1/18/2007 at 13:43 (6,279 days old) by rp2813 (Sannazay)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Partsman, some of my best ideas or solutions to problems tend to happen after 4:20 ;-) Oxyfan, Amanas are indeed junk. I own a pair and speak from bad experience. Gotta say with its 4th belt properly installed the washer seems to be behaving better than it has in a couple of years but there will be cause for celebration the day it is finally replaced with a large capacity FL machine. My old center dial Maytag had its orignal belt when I gave it away about 10 years ago. A real shame that this particular Maytag technology is history now. Don't even get me started on the sad inferior quality of my Amana dryer. Low flow toilets are bad news. Low water level in the bowl makes for constant cleaning issues and at times, associated unsavory odors. I defeated my low flow design by getting one of those retro-fit flapper assemblies that has a sticky ring to press into place over the existing opening, and has a cup on the back of the flapper. Now the flapper stays up until the cup empties and I get a complete flush every time. When it comes to a toilet doing its job right the first time, water usage doesn't concern me. If I ever have to replace a toilet again, I'll be heading over to the salvage yard for a full flow model. This is one area where I refuse to compromise! |
Post# 184140 , Reply# 26   1/18/2007 at 20:36 (6,279 days old) by stainfighter (Columbia, SC)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
still OT but here's some good info, the retrofit flapper we used in our old Eljer units was called 'Corky' which had a dial of sorts to allow you to get a more complete use of the tank water to clear out waste. It was a decent compromise until we upgraded last year to Toto units with the Sanagloss coating. These units are truly amazing - EVERYTHING goes down in one flush! They are worth the $279 each we paid through an e-seller. One caveat - absolutely no cleanser or other harsh chemicals or its bye-bye to the Sanagloss. Any residue that has needed cleaning (which isn't often and isn't much) is easily handled with a little foam type cleaner.
|