Why would a SQ be any more likely to rust than any other washer? If you're speaking of the tub, I thought those were 300 series stainless steel with a lifetime warranty against rust. I know someone who had a solid tub model, and the SS tub still looked new when they got rid of it after 20 years.
GE at our restore today
- Thread starter petek
- Start date
Why would a SQ be any more likely to rust than any other washer? If you're speaking of the tub, I thought those were 300 series stainless steel with a lifetime warranty against rust. I know someone who had a solid tub model, and the SS tub still looked new when they got rid of it after 20 years.
panasonicvac
Well-known member
Not saying it's guaranteed to happen but if I were to soak my clothes overnight, I'd rather not take the risk.
https://automaticwasher.org/threads/rust-in-my-speed-queen-washer.92723/
https://automaticwasher.org/threads/fixing-my-speed-queen-rustbucket.96842/
https://automaticwasher.org/threads/rust-in-my-speed-queen-washer.92723/
https://automaticwasher.org/threads/fixing-my-speed-queen-rustbucket.96842/
Distinction must be made between the outer tub and inner basket. SQ has a porcelain outer tub. The inner spin-basket is SS. The second link above shows that the outer tub is rusting, not the basket.
That only happens using way to much bleach or other abrasives in excess during prolonged soaks. Outside of machine misuse an metal outer tub does not give problems.
That video shows a washer that can't rinse and can't handle suds. The rinse at 13:05 has more suds than the wash despite the large amount of water relative to the load. The machine also needs to default to a slow first spin at 7:23 and then pulse itself to prevent suds locking the machine.
Speed Queen doesn't have inner basket re-reinforcements that whip up suds, Speed Queen has a clutch so any suds drag doesn't over heat the motor, Speed Queen accelerates gradually in spin and has a spray rinse to knock down residual suds. Speed Queen rinse water is far clearer than GE's.
If you're getting suds lock on a Speed Queen you are using way to much detergent.
Second issue- look at how lightly loaded the machine has to be just to get turn over. GE knows this hence the ribs on the wash basket- so clothes touching the side can actually get clean when loaded with more clothes than the few seen in the video.
Also, from the comments in that video:
The motor can't tolerate suds of any kind due to the lack of clutch. While GE did good (IMO) going to a PSC motor getting rid of the centrifugal start switch, they should have kept the clutch so the machine can actually handle large loads and/or sudsing. A suds lock of any kind will cause the motor to trip out or burn up where as any vintage washer or Speed Queen classic just slips its belt or clutch clutch without issue.
The motor can't tolerate suds of any kind due to the lack of clutch. While GE did good (IMO) going to a PSC motor getting rid of the centrifugal start switch, they should have kept the clutch so the machine can actually handle large loads and/or sudsing. A suds lock of any kind will cause the motor to trip out or burn up where as any vintage washer or Speed Queen classic just slips its belt or clutch clutch without issue.
What a POS! Suds locking AFTER a neutral drain with no excessive detergent or a spray rinse. Poor rinsing and can't balance a load that's not out of the realm of normalcy. Agitation is much nosier than a DD. Did any GE top loader spray rinse after the FF's? I know Hydrowaves didn't. This model didn't, either.
The tub re-enforcements hamper performance and just cause drag. No other washers had them that I know of.
My 98 Model T did spray rinse twice for 5 seconds after the deep rinse on the Cottons cycle and once in the first spin for 5 seconds and twice in the final spin for 5 seconds on the Permanent Press Cycle. Latter early 2000s models very quickly abandoned the spray rinses.
I hated the spray rinse being in the final spin. I once put some damp items in the machine, set it to the whirl icon for what I thought would be a wring out, only to then become flabbergasted why the items came out wetter than they were put in.
The Model T I had was unpleasant surprise after unpleasant surprise.
GE T model automatic washers
Were an interesting machine for sure, overall they were great performers and a huge improvement over what they replaced.
GE obviously set out to build a better performing cheaper to build machine so they could remain competitive in the Appliance market with washing machines.
They initially were fighting with the union workers and threatened to send the whole project overseas, but instead they brought the cost way down on the product by sourcing parts that they previously made themselves. The most notable part was the transmission. It said that it was made by the Murray lawnmower company I believe.
The biggest problem in the T model machines was the transmission and brake assembly. They had a very high failure rate on it the extended the warranty to eight years on the parts to try to keep people happy with them. We were changing a lot of transmissions in them for a while.
The article about this machine when it was introduced in Appliance Manufacturer magazine, stated that they did try stainless steel and porcelain steel tubs. They decided because of cost to go with the plastic tub, which was actually more durable than the porcelain tubs and probably less expensive. A porcelain on steel tub is actually the cheapest wash basket to make once you get the tooling in place etc. a stainless steel tub would actually be the cheapest one to assemble, but the cost of the materials is higher.
Other companies such as whirlpool direct drive machines went to a stainless steel tub in the Maytag versions, it was cheap and easy to do. They also had plastic tubs in direct drive washers that were sold in some of the cheaper models of things like the Coronado‘s that whirlpool built because customers like the idea of a non-rusting tub it all depended on the market they were trying to hit.
The video of the T model washer running in reply number 31 is not suds locking it is cycled this way so that it can accelerate and eliminate the possibility of suds locking it takes pauses like that automatically it depends on the model some did it and some did not do this.
It is also often normal to see more studs in the rinse cycle than the wash cycle. This is because the suds suppressant goes out with the wash water that are in the detergent. There’s nothing unusual about that, if you don’t like seeing a little bit of suds in the rinse water put some fabric softener in.
But overall, the T model washer was a great performer. It certainly performs better than a Speed Queen top loader, we saved one of the early model T model machines that we’re gonna rebuild for the museum. It needs a transmission, of course, but I was able to score a transmission for it.
My only real complain about the T model washers as they were noisy during the agitation. They also had a more anemic agitation than direct drive machine. You couldn’t pack them quite as full and get the same great cleaning that you got with the Whirlpool DD machines.
The T model machine that we saved has the extra large holes in the bottom of the wash basket. These were eliminated a couple years into production because they had too much trouble with the pump clogging they were so effective at getting sand and grit out of the wash load that when customers put something like a rubber backed rug that was disintegrating in the machine, the bits of backing which would literally clog the pump almost immediately when it went to drain, we used to have to do service calls to clean out the hose leading to the pump when someone did a disintegrating rubber backed rug, but it really demonstrated just how effective the machine was getting rid of the dirt and crap that stays in other washers.
John L
Were an interesting machine for sure, overall they were great performers and a huge improvement over what they replaced.
GE obviously set out to build a better performing cheaper to build machine so they could remain competitive in the Appliance market with washing machines.
They initially were fighting with the union workers and threatened to send the whole project overseas, but instead they brought the cost way down on the product by sourcing parts that they previously made themselves. The most notable part was the transmission. It said that it was made by the Murray lawnmower company I believe.
The biggest problem in the T model machines was the transmission and brake assembly. They had a very high failure rate on it the extended the warranty to eight years on the parts to try to keep people happy with them. We were changing a lot of transmissions in them for a while.
The article about this machine when it was introduced in Appliance Manufacturer magazine, stated that they did try stainless steel and porcelain steel tubs. They decided because of cost to go with the plastic tub, which was actually more durable than the porcelain tubs and probably less expensive. A porcelain on steel tub is actually the cheapest wash basket to make once you get the tooling in place etc. a stainless steel tub would actually be the cheapest one to assemble, but the cost of the materials is higher.
Other companies such as whirlpool direct drive machines went to a stainless steel tub in the Maytag versions, it was cheap and easy to do. They also had plastic tubs in direct drive washers that were sold in some of the cheaper models of things like the Coronado‘s that whirlpool built because customers like the idea of a non-rusting tub it all depended on the market they were trying to hit.
The video of the T model washer running in reply number 31 is not suds locking it is cycled this way so that it can accelerate and eliminate the possibility of suds locking it takes pauses like that automatically it depends on the model some did it and some did not do this.
It is also often normal to see more studs in the rinse cycle than the wash cycle. This is because the suds suppressant goes out with the wash water that are in the detergent. There’s nothing unusual about that, if you don’t like seeing a little bit of suds in the rinse water put some fabric softener in.
But overall, the T model washer was a great performer. It certainly performs better than a Speed Queen top loader, we saved one of the early model T model machines that we’re gonna rebuild for the museum. It needs a transmission, of course, but I was able to score a transmission for it.
My only real complain about the T model washers as they were noisy during the agitation. They also had a more anemic agitation than direct drive machine. You couldn’t pack them quite as full and get the same great cleaning that you got with the Whirlpool DD machines.
The T model machine that we saved has the extra large holes in the bottom of the wash basket. These were eliminated a couple years into production because they had too much trouble with the pump clogging they were so effective at getting sand and grit out of the wash load that when customers put something like a rubber backed rug that was disintegrating in the machine, the bits of backing which would literally clog the pump almost immediately when it went to drain, we used to have to do service calls to clean out the hose leading to the pump when someone did a disintegrating rubber backed rug, but it really demonstrated just how effective the machine was getting rid of the dirt and crap that stays in other washers.
John L
Last edited:
While I agree with most of what is being said, owning a Speed Queen and having used two model Ts I can assure you the Speed Queen cleans, rinses, extracts and takes care of clothes many times over what a model T can do.
angus
Well-known member
I don't know if those machines were actually "Raytheon"built. I had the Amana version of that machine purchased in early 2000. At that time Amana had already been sold to Goodman and while the original design may have been based on the Raytheon design, I believe those were built by Goodman. What I DO know was that while that machine performed well while it lasted, it only lasted three years. The main tub seal kept failing, and water kept leaking - resulting in several replacements to the spin bearing. The most bizarre part was that by the time that machine failed in 2003, Amana had been sold again, this time to Maytag. So for the final repair attempt, those machines were being serviced by Maytag techs who had literally no idea how to fix the problem. That poor guy was at my house for over six hours, had the machine completely apart and was on the phone for hours trying to figure this out. I was lucky though. The appliance store took mercy on me and replaced the machine with a Maytag. Unfortunately, that machine was beset with inner tub issues - the first had rust within a year, then each of the three repair attempts failed as the three replacement tubs were damaged. Yet again, hats off to County TV and Appliance in Stamford, CT - they took THAT machine back and replaced it with a top of the line Whirlpool in 2004. That machine is still chugging away happily today with no repairs in 22 years. I sold it to my friend when I got my Speed Queen and he moved into his new house. Granted, he isn't tough on machines - only does on the average four full loads per month (he is an engineer), but still....
As for the GE badged models of this machine, as I recall, there was a strike at Appliance Park and GE needed to outsource appliances - so they rebadged Amana washers and dryers. As for other appliances - ranges, refrigerators, not sure who supplied those.
As for the GE badged models of this machine, as I recall, there was a strike at Appliance Park and GE needed to outsource appliances - so they rebadged Amana washers and dryers. As for other appliances - ranges, refrigerators, not sure who supplied those.
The basket is stainless steel, the outer tub is porcelain on steel, which can rust if there are imperfections or it gets damaged. It seems to have been a much more common problem back east than out here in 5% RH Arizona... Splashed water dries out in a few minutes here most of the year, in the summer in Maryland, the puddles can sit for half a day or more.
panasonicvac
Well-known member
I don't see what was wrong with that GE in the video, and that amount of a load is about what I'd put in as well. As what John pointed out, you're always gonna have suds coming out during the rinse cycle. I used to do a second rinse cycle on my Kenmore and even during the second rinse, I still have suds coming out especially with hard water and I'd always put in the right amount of dosage like what the detergent manufacturers suggest. Even I've seen SQ do this as well. Unlike SQ, I haven't had a problem with the sudsing during the spin cycles on either my Kenmore or GE. Were those GE machines perfect? No. Did they had flaws? Yes. Maybe I don't have a ton of experience but I haven't had a load before where I was disappointed in a GE. Definitely had overloads but that's something a front loader can easily do with no problem. I wish the hot water tank wasn't in front of the GE at my cousin's cabin because if that were to get replaced, I'd totally recommend them getting a front loader. The GE set we left behind at our last cabin got replaced because whoever bought it ended up renovating the storage room where the set was and now has a front loader that's stacked.
Last edited:
mrb627
Well-known member
The stop and start spin in that GE is not a water lock or suds lock.
The machine is designed to spin and pause twice after the wash bath.
The machine is designed to spin and pause twice after the wash bath.
There's no spray rinse, hence all of the damn suds in the rinse cycle of the GE. My HA806 has no suds in the deep rinse and that's being on a water softener and heavy handed with TOL detergent. They are good rinsers to begin with and I took it further by installing a 90 second timer motor giving the spray rinse an additional 30 seconds over the already programed 1 minute spray rinse. The tempering valve also adds more volume of water by adding hot water to bring up the temps. A good long spray rinse is key though and due to regulations, has been programed out of top load washers for several decades. This is where vintage almost always wins in most cases.
That GE is under loaded compared to a Speed Queen or Whirlpool. Which I do not blame the user because model Ts need to be underloaded in order to get good turn over.
Yes the rinse cycle will have some level of suds, however some machines have more suds than others. Simply due to the fact some washers rinse better, others are worse.
Manufacturers suggestions are just that: suggestions. In most cases I use less than the recommended amount and still get great wash results.
Just to be clear, as others have said, the GE in the video isn't actually suds locking. It starts and stops at the start of spin to prevent suds locking. My issue with that is added complexity in the timer, and more than can go wrong. My Speed Queen does not need to pulse the spin. It does pulse the agitation on the delicate/handwash cycle however to achieve a true fine wash.
Reply number 46, hi Chet
The horrors of a pulse spin, lol
It’s far harder on a washer to try to spin with a full load of clothing and water burning up the belts, this GE not only has a clutch to absorb the shock, but it was completely drained when it started to spin like all washing machines built today.
John L
The horrors of a pulse spin, lol
It’s far harder on a washer to try to spin with a full load of clothing and water burning up the belts, this GE not only has a clutch to absorb the shock, but it was completely drained when it started to spin like all washing machines built today.
John L
Last edited:
The parts diagram for WHDSR315DAWW shows a capacitor and clutchless motor.
Most GE washers had PSC motors by the time control panels had various shades of blue. So no clutch.
Pulsing the spin means sub increments in the timer. More complexity and more that can go wrong.
Where as on the other hand washers with slipping belts like Maytag went 30+ years so spin drain is not an issue when accounted for.
Most GE washers had PSC motors by the time control panels had various shades of blue. So no clutch.
Pulsing the spin means sub increments in the timer. More complexity and more that can go wrong.
Where as on the other hand washers with slipping belts like Maytag went 30+ years so spin drain is not an issue when accounted for.
Last edited:
Hi Chet, you are correct. This model does not have a clutch. It does have the PSC motor.
It’s still a far more durable drive than using a belt as a clutch the fastest selling part on a Maytag dependable care washer and a Speed Queen top load washer for that matter is the drive belt both machines are very hard on belts
There’s no reason to be scared of a sub interval switch other than it’s complicated for some to understand they’ve been used on washers and dishwasher since the 1950s they seldom ever have caused a problem.
John L
It’s still a far more durable drive than using a belt as a clutch the fastest selling part on a Maytag dependable care washer and a Speed Queen top load washer for that matter is the drive belt both machines are very hard on belts
There’s no reason to be scared of a sub interval switch other than it’s complicated for some to understand they’ve been used on washers and dishwasher since the 1950s they seldom ever have caused a problem.
John L
vacerator
Well-known member
Perhaps so under normal operating conditions and not overloaded.
I agree with that eliminating the clutch rids of one more potential failure point. However, that assumes the machine will never suds lock or drag or spin a heavy load. When that happens there is no slip, the motor draws more current, overheats, and shuts down. Assuming it does not suffer a loss of longevity or burn up altogether. Perhaps this is not a problem with modern electronics that can sense the drag and jump right to an extra rinse (at the cost of more water, time and control complexity) however it was and is a very real problem with EM washers.
GE got rid if the sub-interval contacts when they did away with the spray rinses, however, they brought them back into the spin sequence. Nothing seems to make appliances more reliable despite the performance losses consumers keep having to take.
GE got rid if the sub-interval contacts when they did away with the spray rinses, however, they brought them back into the spin sequence. Nothing seems to make appliances more reliable despite the performance losses consumers keep having to take.
phillymatt53
Well-known member
My A482 is 39 years old and the original belts are fine.
I've noticed a pattern on this forum where modern machine enthusiast erase and re-write history. Covering up successes while hyping trivial limitations of vintage machine. And in such a way that those who've never used or don't remember a vintage machine are likely to believe it.
Speed Queens are hard on belts, especially the older models before re-engineering the design (total belt demolishers) but Maytags strangely last a very long time when properly setup and adjusted correctly with the motor carriage working smoothy. You'd think a slipping belt on a spin drainer as a clutch would demolish a belt rather quickly but it last incredibly long on helical Maytags. The engineers certainly got that design right *hat tip*! Speed Queen sort of copied it, made it more complex, less reliable, and significanlty more difficult to replace.
I think mostly to to gain tub space. Except Whirlpool, every time a manufacturer has tried to make a larger tub machine it has resulted in a less reliable less easy to service product.
For those saying larger tubs are better, to that I say you should be sorting which will force smaller 16-18 pound loads.
Suds-lock can be handled via a pressure switch that's sensitive-enough to detect it.
Calypso has an oversuds routine based on motor current during spin ramp-up. It'll also drop-out of spin to a neutral drain if the pressure switch is triggered during spin ramp-up (referenced as CND - controlled neutral drain - on the cycle logic charts).
Our 1962 WP had chronic issues with suds-lock related to the high-sudsing detergents of the time, including a few instances of suds-lock happening in both the first and last spins. I immediately noticed that the 1976 WP which replaced it had much less, if any, trouble with suds-locking. I always wondered if there was some subtle change in the design that helped avoid it.
Calypso has an oversuds routine based on motor current during spin ramp-up. It'll also drop-out of spin to a neutral drain if the pressure switch is triggered during spin ramp-up (referenced as CND - controlled neutral drain - on the cycle logic charts).
Our 1962 WP had chronic issues with suds-lock related to the high-sudsing detergents of the time, including a few instances of suds-lock happening in both the first and last spins. I immediately noticed that the 1976 WP which replaced it had much less, if any, trouble with suds-locking. I always wondered if there was some subtle change in the design that helped avoid it.
Similar threads
