Frigidaire TL'ers: Dumbing Down Gets Even...Dumberer

[launderess]

Basically the only way top loading washing machines are going to meet ever stricter government mandated energy requirements, is to either reduce the amount of hot water they take in, or find away to heat water themselves,thus not relying on house hot water supply.

Some newer top loaders are decreasing the space between inner and outer tubs, to lower water usage, much like vintage solid tub machines. Others will have to do as above, and lower "hot" water temperatures down to what most would consider warm or lukewarm water.

There simply won't be any room in the future, at least in the United States for domestic washing machines that use 15 or more gallons of hot water per wash cycle. Nope, they don't have a bit of use for em.

Savvy and smart consumers are sticking with and or seeking out vintage washing machines, as word gets around, much like low flow toilets how bad the government fix was to a small problem.

L.

 

[frigilux]

Low Water-Use Toilets: The pressure-flush models are fantastic; They do the job better than any high water-use golden oldie. It's the new gravity toilets that suck. That's where it all went wrong in Toiletville.

Washers: When the price of water increases 10-20 times what it is now (and it will, kids; water will be the petroleum of the future), or when each house gets a set number of gallons of water per week before the mains automatically shut off (again, I firmly believe the youngsters at this site will see this occur in their lifetimes), then the LG front-loaders that can wash 20 pounds of laundry with 15 gallons of water will make much more sense.

 

[tuthill]

Toggleswitch

Great minds think alike! I have the same exact set up servicing my 806.

From the sink...

 

[tuthill]

...to the machine!

 

[tuthill]

Gotta love the 806 and its warm rinse option... COMEPLETE ATC. And the fact that it's "semi-automatic" is comepletely no bother to me. I wouldn't dream of starting this machine and simply walking away!!

 

[volvoguy87]

Toilets...

I have learned that the energy and resources used by an appliance should not be the only consideration. You must also consider the energy and resources required to produce the appliance/fixture, its reliability, its lifespan, and the difficulties and energy and resources required in its disposal. The most efficient appliance/fixture is worthless if it takes lots of energy and resources to produce, breaks frequently, is difficult or impossible to repair, and/or has a short useful life. In other words, I can deal with more water usage if it is extremely reliable for a long time.

As a historic preservationist, I often deal with buildings. I will be the first to admit that many modern gravity toilets have some MAJOR shortcomings. They tend to suffer from a problem I call "C.F.S." "C.F.S." stands for Can't Flush S**t, literally or figuratively. I'll let y'all guess what the last word is. I hate the pressure-flush toilets because, compared to gravity toilets, they are expensive, mechanically complicated, failure prone, and loud. I also think that average building occupants should be able to attempt basic repair to toilets because they are so important and fail at the most inopportune times, particularly if you only have one of them. I think that a toilet should have the performance of a power-flush toilet, but the reliability and ease of repair of a gravity toilet. How is this possible? Just look to the past!

A century ago, how did people increase the power of their flushes without mechanical assistance? They mounted the tank several feet above the bowl! Pipe is cheap, gravity is free, has no moving parts, and is quite reliable. In fact, if gravity does fail, flushing toilets will be the least of our concerns.

Have a chuckle at some potty humor. If you can't win, at least smile,
Dave

 

[j2400]

I don't know if this is still the case, but I remember reading an article a number of years ago that said many people, frustrated by new toilet's performance, or lack of, went to Canada, which didn't have the toilets with stringent water use requirements.

 

[mielabor]

Hmm, I think that the water problem is a bit exaggerated. Unlike oil, water can be (and naturally is, in the form of rain) recycled.

I have always wondered why toilets with high-level cisterns went out of fashion to be replaced by lousy-flushing low-reservoir models. This already took place before water usage became an issue.

 

[j2400]

In some places, water either is or will be an issue. Yes, water is naturally recycled. But sometimes the supply isn't great enough for the population.

I wouldn't be surprised if Washington doesn't have trouble eventually. This is ironic, given the amount of water in the for of lakes and the ocean. But infrastructure investments are often minimal. I don't think that the state does the best job of thinking ahead. I know of one area that is growing, fast, and is entirely well based. Some are saying the wells won't be enough. And should a really bad drought hit, there'll be problems.

 

[toggleswitch2]

~Toggleswitch:Great minds think alike!
Be careful of what you say. There may be a torch-wielding lynch-mob forming right now! LOL.

~The Chinese ARE planning to take over the world!
So are the Moslems. If they kill each other will they leave the rest of us alone? (eyes roll). In a Hyacinth Bucket accent: "World domination is SO '60's Richard, dear".