Bad News About High Efficiency Washers

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

technigeek

New member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
1
When I was a teenager in the 1960’s, I worked as a maintenance man in an apartment building and I’ve always been interested in fixing appliances and how they work. Since then, I‘ve acquired a lot of knowledge on the subject of mechanical engineering, and I was contacted to be an expert witness in a class action lawsuit against the makers of the new “High Efficiency” (HE) washers. These class actions provided part of the information in the following article in Consumer Reports:


The main complaint about these HE washers is that they don’t use enough water to get the clothes clean after going through the cycle once. In many cases, the clothes have to be run through twice and sometimes the rinse cycle has to be repeated. It’s the same problem as experienced with the low flow toilets – they don’t use enough water to get the job done the first time. The laundry just gets rolled up like a cinnamon roll then the drum reverses and rolls it up in the opposite direction.

In addition, the lack of enough water and the “damp washing” technique causes excessive abrasion between the clothes which generates a huge amount of lint which forms a sludge that is not completely flushed out of the machine during the spin-drain cycle. This sludge gradually builds up between the drum and the outer tub and it forms mold and mildew.

Among other models, we tested the Whirlpool Calypso HE washer (now discontinued) for an equivalent of one year of use and it eventually quit working altogether to due to the pump becoming clogged up. We disassembled the machine and when we pulled out the basket (the drum which holds the clothes) we found about 7 pounds of caked sludge had accumulated in the bottom. The problem with sludge build up is common to both the front and top loading HE washers regardless of the manufacturer and it is directly attributed to the lack of filling with an adequate amount of water.

In addition to the sludge problem, most of the front loaders have problems with the front bearings (around the door) which causes the drum to break loose during the spin cycle – which is usually 1000 RPM or faster. If the front bearing goes out when the drum is spinning at 1000 RPM, the whole machine is smashed beyond repair. In fact, on another project I was working on, I took a trip to a large scrap metal yard and I noticed that there were two of the new front loading washers in the pile waiting to go through the steel shredder and magnetic separating process. The cabinet was not significantly damaged by being dumped off the recycling truck. However I was able to open the door and found the drum was completely seized up and distorted by what appeared to be a catastrophic bearing failure.

In the class action against Whirlpool and their Calypso machine, we got a $5 Million judgment and a $ 1-1/2 Million against Maytag because of the poor washing ability, build up of sludge and mold inside the machine, and catastrophic mechanical failures. The only thing that’s impressive about the HE washers is their fancy appearance over the old fashioned “box with a lid of the top”. Beyond their techy appearance, they are not worth paying over $400 for. Accordingly, given the high cost and poor reliability of these HE washers, consumers are very hesitant to buy them.

However, the appliance industry has organized a lobby which has given tons of “campaign contributions” to federal and state lawmakers in return for legislation which mandates that only HE washers can be sold. The rational being sold to the public is that the new washers are for water and energy conservation, they are supposedly “environmentally friendly”, and reduce greenhouse gases.

However, based on the experience California has gained with the low flow toilets, consumers are going to be forced to deal with these not-so-great washers for many years to come.

 
What is that s***t???
I can't believe that, maybe HE made in USA (all European washers are HE) aren't good at all!
As for front loaders (the only ones that I care...) I had a bearing failure only once in 22 years that I'm on this planet and that was an old machine in a rented flat.
Here I have a Philco machine that is 12 years old and still goes strong.
... I'd better stop otherwise somebody will ban me if i get really angry, there's no limit to how much somebody can be ignorant!!!
 
Some people...

Really need to get their facts right......

Front load machines have been pretty much standard in the UK/Europe for over 30 years. The bearings are at the BACK of the drum/tub- there are none round the door!.

The sludge is detergent residue caused by a combination of low temperature washes and use of liquid detergent- a service wash of a full measure of powder detergent and the hottest wash possible once a month should prevent this.

Having said that I must confess im not totally convinced by the videos ive seen of HE top loaders...

Seamus
 
Isn't the "clean washer" setting designed to remove any accumulation of sludge etc? My Duet has this option. It uses quite a bit of water and really thrashes it around.

I do notice that the mesh screen "socks" that I use on the end of the drain hose do fill up with lint much faster than they ever did with my old TL machine and I'm replacing them more often, but if this is due to rough treatment of the clothing, that goes contrary to everything I've ever heard about how FL machines are better on clothes.
 
Absolute Crap

Hi Technigeek,

Interesting that you join as a member, and then within 24 hours compose a ridiculous post like this.

Most good quality FL HE machines work fine with 15L or so per fill, I agree that TL HE machines will always have more issues, but to claim that all FL machines dont work and fail prematurely is going beyond ignorant.

Secondly, low flow toilets can and do work. The Standard in AU has been a 6L full flush and a 3L half flush for the last 20 years. The new generation, of which I have 3, is now 4.5L for a full flush and 3L for the half. I've never had any issues with particulate matter not being removed the first time. Perhaps if the US switched to a flush down model, rather than stupid vaccum based designs, the problem would go away.

Please go back to wherever you came from, and think before you go spouting foundationless generalisations in future.

Regards

Nathan
 
I subscribe to Consumer Reports and read the washer reports

I believe that CR said that they could no longer recommend any TOP LOADING machines due to poor washing ability and/or exhorbitant price (because of new energy and water rules). This was the first time in decades that they could not give a "recommended" rating to any TOPLOADER.

That said, they did give "recommended" ratings to several FRONT LOADERS, and quite a few were given good to excellent ratings on cleaning ability.

Here is the text from CR itself:

"Lower prices have helped traditional top-loaders outsell better-performing front-loaders. But the differences in washing ability have become more dramatic this year because of stricter energy standards. Indeed, for the first time in years, we can't call any washer a Best Buy because models that did a very good job getting laundry clean cost $1,000 or more. If your budget is limited, consider waiting for prices to come down. But if you need a washer now and can live with mediocre washing results, consider the top-loading Whirlpool WTW5540S[W], $400, or the front-loading Frigidaire Gallery LTF2940E (Lowe's) or GLTF2940E[ ], each $750, or LG WM1814C[W], $800. "

They gave "recommended" status (marked with an asterisk) to the Duet 9400, Bosch 500, and LG WM0642H. In addition, they gave qualified recommendations to three lower priced machines as detailed in the paragraph above. In their tests, all machines with good to excellent cleaning ability cost $1000 and up, which is why no washer was labelled a "Best Buy".

Read the CR text CAREFULLY. It implies that differences in cleaning ability (between top and front loaders) have widened (in favor of front loaders), and that no top loader does a good job cleaning anymore. However, the article does NOT state that no top loaders clean well. It does state that no machines under one thousand dollars cleaned at the good to excellent level, with the possible exception of the Frigidaire 2940 or LG 1814. And no machine was called "best buy" because they base that award on a combination of quality and price.
 
ps to brisnat81

I wish Australia would switch to vacuum toilet models....everywhere I go in Australia, I fill the sinks and watch them drain to observe the Corilus effect as the water swirls clockwise. I did the same at Kingsford Smith right after landing on my first trip down under, and was crushed to learn they had flush down toilets that don't allow the water to funnel and swirl.

;)
 
What CR did say was that most front loaders sold today are not as gentle with washing as in the past, which is a natural occurance of using less water. However one wonders how CR loaded it's front loaders, that is were they mixing towels with shirts, and so forth.

Top loading washing machines were handicaped in that most simply cannot wash as before due to water restrictions. You cannot do laundry in any sort of "immersion" technique if one does not have adequate water for immersion to take place.

Have seen photos of muck and such stuck onto washing machine outer drums, but much of that was caused by factors ranging from soap/detergent use to water quality; and of course failing to use hot water often enough to disslove all the muck and soap in the first place.

L.
 
I believe CR's report of less-than-gentle fabric handling on a couple of front-loaders was due to their extra-long wash cycles. My Frigidaire FLer's longest cycle is 55 minutes, only 18 of which are for the wash portion.
 
Its a different experience

Hi Passat,

It was an interesting experience, experiencing a vaccum toilet for the first time. I'm sorry ours dont swirl properly :)

The hotel we stayed at in SF had new low flush toilets. It got to the point that we would stand there and beg for the flush to be successfull, and usually by the 2nd or 3rd flush it would've worked. Its quite odd to need to spend so much time, watching particulate matter swirling around in a vortex :)

The hotel we stayed at in NY had old style toilets, and it was a single flush each time. :)

Choice has just released its annual reliability reports. It rates Miele and Bosch as the most reliable machines, but interestingly also finds that there is no appreciable difference between TL and FL machines in regards to reliability. In 2004, only 32% of Australians owned a FL, in 2007 this has increased to 42%

Miele Bosch and F&P would be bought again by owners, however significantly fewer people would purchase a WHIRLPOOL, LG, MAYTAG or ARISTON again. The most common comment in regards to Ariston, is that it breaks down too often.

The TL best buys were all F&P's, the FL Best Buys were 1 Miele, 2 Bosch, a Blanco, Electrolux and an LG. They bag Samsungs nantechnology, and also raise concerns about its safety, due to a lack of testing.

I'm taking my mother shopping tomorrow night, to get a new baby Miele. I converted her to FL washing 6 months ago, and the old Bosch that I had aquired for her, has finally died. In Brisbane we are being asked to keep our water consumption down at 140L per person per day, I cant see how anyone could manage that with a top loader.
 
brisnat81

Bonza on ya, mate. So you're a banana bender, eh? (I speak pretty good Strine for a Seppo....). Here in California we are encouraged to conserve water. We have no worries at home with our 6 liter (1.5 gallon) toilets....the trick is to hold down the lever until the entire tank has emptied. If you release the lever too soon, you get only a partial flush. I wouldn't come the raw prawn with ya, mate, it's all in how you use the lever.

En route to Sydney the first time, I kept checking the Coriolus effect in the bathroom sink. When the funnel began to swirl clockwise, I called my travelling companions so they too could witness the miracle. A few moments later, the caption chimed in on the PA system to inform us that we were now south of the Equator. So you can imagine my deep disappointment in the toilets at Kingsford-Smith Airport. ;)
 
In defense of OP

Keep in mind that AU and UK washers are low-water use--but they use enough. Here in the US, the front loaders barely get the clothes wet.
 
My suggestion would be to buy a good frontloader

That is about all I could say. With the implemation of an internal water heater, it does help to break down dirt, and do away with detergent build up. I love my washer, they were spendy, you, in the long run get what you pay for, remember , they did have frond loaders back in the day, and there are lots of laundries in the states that only have front loaders, many are here in the NW, and Portland, where water cost a premeium, it makes sence that we would want to use less water, and my washer does two to three rinses, on top of the interm spins which also remove soap and water.It is also built like a tank.
 
It's the water temperature

The reason the recent toploaders did so miserably is that when set on hot, the water is warm and when set on warm, it's barely above cold. This helps on the energy label, because it is mostly the heating of the water that drives the energy use up.

So with lower temperatures, the clothes don't get as clean. You could buy the toploader and either use a hose to fill it with hotter water or rewire it to fill with hotter water. It is not the washing action that is making the machine clean poorly. Purchasing a $300 to $400 washer over a $1000 washer can buy a lot of hot water. Of course as energy costs rise further, the savings of a more expensive machine will be greater.

At some point there is a minimum of water to do the job, you can't go lower. As mentioned, the usual front loader cycle uses at least 2 rinses, vs. 1 for the typical toploader. And somehow the lint needs to be dealt with. Any type of agitation will break down the fibers, and that is what most lint is. At least some older machine designers realized that and had systems like GE filter-flo and Whirlpool self-cleaning built-in filters. The old Bendix front loaders had a removeable trap which trapped an amazing amount of lint and incidently coins and such that were left in the clothing.

Martin
 
Lg Tromm Front load machines.

My LG front load machine is just wonderful. I have had it nearly a year and have had no problems whatsoever. It does an awesome job and my clothes have never been cleaner. so, opinions are like as*h*les, everyone has one.
 
I think it's interesting when front-load HE machines are trashed for their low water usage. I own such a machine, and it doesn't "wet wipe" or "damp wash" at all. There really is water in there! Those tilted tubs are deceiving; they may look waterless at the front of the tub near the window, but at the rear of the tub there are several inches of water. I used to have a White-Westinghouse front loader from the pre-HE era; it even had a water level control dial. It used more water than today's HE front-loaders, but quite honestly it didn't get clothes any cleaner. In fact, it washed no better than a top loader and was a horribly slow spinner, which meant clothes took longer to dry.

It takes some adjustment going from a traditional top-loader to a high-efficiency front-loader, and my guess is that most people who make the change don't do all of their research to properly adjust their washing habits. Too much detergent and improper sorting, both of which can lead to excessive linting, are likely to blame. We're an informed group here, but that doesn't mean everyone else is.
 
Generalities

I'm chalking that whole rant up to generalities.
It is not fair the lump all HE front loaders into your accusation.
Now all I can comment on is my own experience. And it contradicts what you have written here Mr.TechniGeek.
I am an Industrial Engineer, so I too am no slouch with the mechanicals. Below are my findings and ratings (subjective of course to personal observation).

I've grown up with a Maytag LA511. It uses ALOT of water on XL load and washes "quite well." It has an "in agitator" lint filter which catches alot of debris, but not much lint. No it's not faulty, because the Maytag Neptune dryer it's mated to only has half a screen-full of lint. So the wear in the LA511 is "acceptable" and not excessive...based on my observation.
LA511: washes "quite well" (8/10)

Upon entering college, I was thrust into a new realm of laundry; the college laundry room, equipped with SpeedQueen front loaders. They would have 2 post rinses and when observing washers that were broken with standing water, looked like they used a fair amount of water. I washed my clothes in these machines for 2 years. And found them "acceptable" washers. They got the clothes clean, but I think had too short of wash periods to get tough stains out. One caveat, they were ALWAYS broken. Mainly to rear bearing failure due to students dumping full capfulls of standard detergent.
SpeedQueen FL: washes "acceptable" (6/10)

Moving out of the dorms and to an apartment, I've now experienced Maytag Neptune FLs at the local laundromat. This, is my favorite washer. The Neptunes wash quite well and are good at getting alot of (not all) tough stains out. The Neptunes I think are some of the most thirsty FLs out there too, so that means they rinse quite well with 3 post rinses usually. My aunts have a first gen. Neptune pair and they did have to have the pully, wax motor and bearing repaired mostly under warranty. And since then it's been perfect according to them. I'd go out on a limb and call the Neptune the "more reliable" FL out there.
Maytag Neptune FL: washes very good. (9/10)

On both front loaders I've used, I've never noticed any adverse signs of clothing wear. Understanding how a FL works, it makes very little sense to me that a properly operating FL would wear clothes more than a thrashing TL...even the slow helical drive machines beat the crap out of the clothes more than a FL would.

I will believe a lawsuit of sorts against Whirlpool on the Calypso machines. I've never really heard good things about them. I hear alot of them break before 3 years. That in itself deserves a lawsuit, especially for how expensive of a machine they were.

Don't generalize.
All you know is what you know. It's impossible to know everything. Knowledge is a limit as it approaches zero. You're always heading there, but you'll never get there.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top