, is that the same "tranny" as the regular Unimatic ? oil-filled tranny? but just engineered/designed for a faster and shorter stroke ? why didn't they stick with that mechanism ? seems like it turns over VERY well yet would not tangle or roll sheets as badly or quickly as a regular unimatic would
Greg, it’s not a Unimatic transmission it’s a Pulsamatic Transmission, it looks very similar to a Mutlimatic, but only one belt and no clutch. I have almost no tangling in my Three-Ring agitator Unimatic when I take an extra moment to load it properly, but with the Pulsamatic even with properly loading it can tangle more. But really tangling can be eliminated by proper sorting and loading. What you really have to be careful with is not to wash all long sleeve shirts together in on wash load, I just sort and mix other things together. Sheets need to be picked up from the center and loaded into two sections of the washtub, intermixed with the pillowcases. Really the only Frigidaire washer I have found that is difficult to stop the tangling in is the 1947 Frigidaire and that's because of the bowl shape in the wash tub that they changed in 1950. Even consumer reports said in 1958 "Special care required in loading to avoid tangling". Obviously the people at CU figured out how to prevent tangling or they would not have been so kind.
Which Pulsamatic do you feel performs better, this one with a 3 Ring agitator and the rubber "Energy Ring" or the earlier one with the solid black Bakelite agitator.
Hi Tom, I don't know what you mean by the solid black Bakelite agitator, the earlier Pulsamatic agitator had a rubber pulsator as well, but the upper section was black bakelite. I think the '57 performs a bit better with the redesigned wash tub, but I find there really is very little difference.
