Improving Top Loader Washer Performance Via Intermediate Soaks

appnut

Not sure I agree. It seems to be a relatively hard option to find. It’s the reason why I bought the Kenmore over LG FL. AFAIK, GE TL, LG TL, and some Whirlpool FL and TL machines offer it.

Does anyone know if this washer pumped the water out between the 15 minute auto soak and extra heavy settings?

agiflow said:

Why doesn't somebody do a side by side comparison load of clothes in a top loader and one in the front loader with the parameters being set the same or as close to possible and let's see real world use..... Let's end this pointless debate once and for all about which actually does clean better.... I want to see it with my own eyes. The exact same load what the exact same stains and see which one actually does do better.

Click to expand...

It's hard to do an exact apples to apples comparison with parameters set exactly the same since FL and TL work differently. For example, nobody is going to set a traditional TL to agitate for hours as an FL would.

Keeping that in mind... Consumer Reports has done many tests over the years comparing FL and TL as closely as possible. Choice, the consumer magazine in Australia, another country with widespread use of both FL and TL, has done the same. The user Frigilux on this forum did a test a long time ago comparing the performance of his Speed Queen TL and Frigidaire FL washing heavily soiled whites.

The information is out there if you want to seek it.

I did have both types of washers for a little while and I used them back and forth and didn't find an appreciable difference in performance. My clothes don't get heavily soiled so may be not a true comparison. Have a few washers in rotation now because I don't have the setup to plumb them all. I would like to get another front loader though. I liked that Whirlpool WFW6620HW I had in 2019-2020. That was a good machine but balancing was a joke to spin oftentimes.

Have used both top loaders and H-axis washers in past. Have two top loading washers in my collection currently (Maytag WW and Haier portable with impeller). Am here to say quite honestly front loading washers on average blow top loaders out of water on many levels.

For lightly soiled wash such as bed linen top loaders seem fine. For anything else for better wash results while also being easy on fabrics H-axis washers win hands down.

Ever since first H-axis washer (Malber) onto the Miele and two AEG units there's something to be said for putting soiled wash into machine, loading products, starting things up and coming back to clean wash. Usually all without need for pre-treating, prolonged soaking and minimal use of products.

As have stated numerous times there are very solid reasons why commercial/industrial laundries went with h-axis washers out of the box, this even when things were driven by belts and pulleys. When dust settled in Europe post WWII it was front loaders that came to dominate market. This wasn't all about need to be built into fitted kitchens, in bathrooms or other tight spaces.

launderess said:

When dust settled in Europe post WWII it was front loaders that came to dominate market. This wasn't all about need to be built into fitted kitchens, in bathrooms or other tight spaces.

Click to expand...

If it wasn't mainly about fitting into tight spaces, why were the early FLs so much less successful in America?

So if front loading washing is superior, then why were such machines rated not able to clean as well as top loaders for decades in this country ? It seems front loaders today need high concentrations of detergent and heaters to get this "superior" performance because they didn't have it before.
I can see the thoroughness of tumble action washing, I get that, but a deep-fill top loader with an agitator is also thorough.

I've listened to both sides and I've heard people who came over from front load washing to top loaders thought the top loaders were better and vice versa....YMMV

First and foremost early domestic front loaders (think Bendix) required bolting down into flooring. That wasn't an option for many households so there was that.

Since Bendix got there first in USA they had tons of patents related to H-axis washers tied up. Anyone else with ideas in that direction either had to pay Bendix royalties or come up with their own designs.

By nature of design h-axis washers will always be more expensive to produce. Bits such as water tight seals about door, suspension systems, etc... Top loading washers obviously don't have those issues.

Other bits? Larger one was fact soap was queen of wash day until well after WWII. Soap creates froth and suds are public enemy #1 when it comes to h-axis washers.

If someone had invented a detergent or soap product that could work well in front loaders of old, then IMHO they would have taken off in sales for US domestic market.

Soap is tricky in h-axis washers not only because it creates froth, but also there is fact you need plenty of hot and soft water for it to work properly. Then you have to have one or more rinses in hot and also soft water.

Industrial/commercial laundries long sussed how to get around limitations of using soap. This usually involved using several changes of hot or near boiling water for wash and rinses, alkalis and other chemicals added to break down and hold in suspension fats, oils and other muck, then other chemicals to bring pH of final product down to skin comfort levels.

Across the pond in Europe Henkel, Lever Bros and others by late 1950's saw which way wind was blowing and began coming out with "automatic" detergents made for front loaders, and or what remained of wringer washers/semi automatics on market.

P&G with their market dominate leader Tide was all over the place. The stuff created tons of froth and wasn't easily rinsed even in top loaders, so forget about h-axis washers. Since Tide was the gold standard for many housewives anything that couldn't match it's results was off their list. P&G like Lever Bros and other detergent makers in USA did for a time have directions on packets for using detergent in wringer washers, front loaders and top loaders, but still.



As for domestic front loaders needing heaters and longer cycles, that is a modern incarnation largely brought about by ever stringent energy requirements.

Any front loader say at local laundromat or even commercial laundry largely doesn't bother with heating water from tap cold to whatever. Instead machines are piped to take "hot" water of 140-160 F from start. These machines also have substantial beater bars (about 2" deep) that provide excellent lifting and dropping action. That mechanical action coupled with proper water temps means such machines can complete a "normal/cottons" load in about 30-40 minutes.

Other thing is commercial/industrial laundries largely don't bother with enzymes but stick to using chemicals (alkalis and acids) as they always have done.

Listen to the lads!

Across the pond post WWII European appliance makers poured much R&D into h-axis washing machines refining and improving things in decades that followed.



OTOH besides Westinghouse, IIRC no one was making front loaders in USA by 1960's.

Very detailed response Laundress. It's no wonder front loaders started to take much longer to do a load because of "environmental concerns" which caused lower water use.

If any place on earth gets it's share of water that would be the British isles.

You see I just don't buy into it. It's just more control over what you can use ultimately, and it has been slowly happening here on this side of the Atlantic for quite awhile now.

I don't believe any of this to be a natural evolution at all or changing opinions concerning energy use.

if it wasn't pumped into peoples minds through constant agendas and advertising of a "green earth" and the save energy mantra we heard for decades. How will/are they doing this?By controlling the things we buy.

People are being lead to believe that old school agitator washers should be relegated to museums and that they are dated and energy hogs. If you pump lies into peoples heads long enough, they will believe it as truth.

I don't see this as a matter of opinion of how one washes. It's more a slow burn of being "re-educated". I have biblical reasons for why I see it this way.

On a site like this I can't really cite why I believe what I believe without the threat of being kicked off so will leave it at that.

I suppose one will eventually be forced to adapt, but in the meantime will keep those full fill water hogs and enjoy the blessings God has given and giving of thanks for all things !

Vintage Bendix washer from 1950's.

Load done and dusted in about 30 minutes.

It isn't so much amount of water used per se, but energy required to heat it be that from boiler or some other water heating system, and or washing machine heating water itself.

Whenever anyone talks about energy use for washing machines (and dishwashers for that matter), it's hot water they're going on about.

Obviously greater volume of water used more energy is required to heat it.

launderess said:

Vintage Bendix washer from 1950's.

Load done and dusted in about 30 minutes.

Click to expand...

Whoa! Impressively clean and uncomplicated looking inside.

That looks like a motor, a drain solenoid, a spin shit solenoid, two water valves and a heater.

Does anyone have the wiring diagram and timer contact chart for this machine?

I like what I'm seeing including the fast cycle.

I was introduced to front loaders by a Sears appliance salesman at Montgomery Mall in Bethesda, Maryland. He explained that front loaders work with gravity, lifting the fabrics and letting them fall naturally, rather than stirring them around. That was 17 years ago and the idea still makes sense to me. Top loaders are judged in enthusiast circles (e.g. here) by turnover, but that's just not a question with front loaders, where the load is turning over all the time.

Even if I could have a front loader here it would have to be a smaller compact unit. Most of the front loaders are just too deep for my space. My machines need to fit in the space so I can close a sliding door I want to have installed over them.

Chetlaham said:

Does anyone know if this washer pumped the water out between the 15 minute auto soak and extra heavy settings?

Click to expand...

The general problem appears to be continuous draining caused by the control board (safety feature, designed to prevent household flooding).
I came home after 2 hours and it had been stuck in the draining cycle. The machine goes through this safety feature for 8-10 then it SHOULD shut off; it doesn't.

csedd said:

The general problem appears to be continuous draining caused by the control board (safety feature, designed to prevent household flooding).
I came home after 2 hours and it had been stuck in the draining cycle. The machine goes through this safety feature for 8-10 then it SHOULD shut off; it doesn't.

Click to expand...

I don't believe the model of washer shown in the picture in reply #42 has a control board.

However, the timer did run with the lid open. The lid switch would just break the motor's neutral connection. So the motor would stop, me personally thinking the machine was paused and soaking, only to come down stairs and find my preciously concocted soak water gone and that ugly drain pump gargling. There was just so many obnoxious and cruel things about model T washers.

agiflow said:

If any place on earth gets it's share of water that would be the British isles.

Click to expand...

We do get the occasional drought you know, it only takes a slight shift in the jetstream, although in this region they usually result in just a hosepipe ban. There was a notable one in 1976, with water turned off in some areas and people getting their water from standpipes in the street. :- https://www.countryfile.com/country...t-happened-and-what-was-the-impact-on-britain
I particularly remember the swarms of greenfly, followed by massive swarms of ladybirds, particularly being covered head to foot in ladybirds while out fishing with my dad in his boat which was completely covered with them too. It would get so bad, you'd see holidaymakers fleeing the beach, moaning about being bitten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drought_in_the_United_Kingdom
And there are warnings of possible water shortages this year, due to a lack of new reservoirs: https://www.theguardian.com/environ...drought-summer-reservoir-water-levels-dwindle

But, as laundress pointed out, the biggest issue, is the more water used during the wash, the more electricity needed to heat it (virtually all modern washing machines sold in the UK are now cold fill only). The large amount of hot water drawn from the hot water storage cylinder also used to be one of the negative selling points of a twintub toploader, over a frontload automatic machine as I recall.

I vaguely recall there was quite an effective advert, in the 70s, I'd guess, promoting the advantages of the manufacturer's automatic front load washing machines over twintubs, but I can't remember the advertiser.

hvtech42 said:

If it wasn't mainly about fitting into tight spaces, why were the early FLs so much less successful in America?

Click to expand...

Because Maytag invested heavily in top loaders from the beginning with wringer washers and they owned and drove the market. It was what people in the U.S. got used to and then wanted.

People I know that have the front loader washers always had problems with them.
Leaking door seals, coins winding up in the drain pump tearing up the impeller, drum bearings going bad, etc.
My neighbor's got a Bosch stackable set, swore to it as the best..... until things started going wrong with it.
I just never felt that they were as effective as top-loaders.
Even with a heavy load, my old Maytag A492 manages to provide a good rollover action.

As for extending the soak time, on occasion I simply stop the machine during the wash cycle and leave it for a while, sometimes hours.
A bit of Oxy-Clean does wonders for brightening up things.