launderess
Well-known member
No they didn't go there!
Funny Whirlpool Advert.
- Thread starter launderess
- Start date
Help Support :
toploader55
Well-known member
I remember this ad !!!
A bit of testosterone in that room, but I think the guy with the white socks and loafers with his arm on the control dial helps Ma with the laundry.
A bit of testosterone in that room, but I think the guy with the white socks and loafers with his arm on the control dial helps Ma with the laundry.
FRIST SUPER CAPACITY WP WASHER
This machine would be from around 1966-7, I just completed the restoration of the Kenmore equivalent to this washer The Kenmore 518 over the last few weeks. These WP-KM Super capacity washers I believe to be the largest capacity top loading washers ever made for home use. They made them from 1966-7 through about 1981 when they reduced he tub size from 27 gallons to around 23. This was mainly done to give WP built washers a better energy rating and to reduce some vibration complaints that they would get when these machines were installed on weak flooring.
This machine would be from around 1966-7, I just completed the restoration of the Kenmore equivalent to this washer The Kenmore 518 over the last few weeks. These WP-KM Super capacity washers I believe to be the largest capacity top loading washers ever made for home use. They made them from 1966-7 through about 1981 when they reduced he tub size from 27 gallons to around 23. This was mainly done to give WP built washers a better energy rating and to reduce some vibration complaints that they would get when these machines were installed on weak flooring.
This picture is in the pool as an occasional POD. Each time it shows up it seems to bring out some fun commentary of one sort or another.
As to the large capacity BD machines, John is correct. WP seemed to debut the machine first, I do believe around 1966. Kenmore's first 518 was a 1967 model, followed by the 1968 version. I'm not sure what changed with the '67 but obviously Kenmore felt the need to re-number the model for some sort of change or changes somewhere.
Some in-house Whirlpool technical literature from the time discussed the larger diameter basket as this machine was being introduced to the service community. Combining the wide basket (which was both wider and deeper) with stock basket drive pulleys from the standard capacity machine gave the large cap. better water extraction due to greater centrifical force. I can't quote how much better, but enough to warrant publishing by WP.
What many always seem to exclude here on AW in their frequent exclamations that WP/KM BDs don't spin fast enough is that they have some of the largest diameter baskets in the industry, thus spinning more water per RPM than other narrower basket machines.
I wasn't aware (Thanks John!) that the 18lb. belt-drive was the largest capacity top loader out there. I knew it was huge, but I though perhaps the big DD machine was comparable?
The big 18lb. machine ended production in summer 1981. The newest I've noticed was made around mid-year. Same for the oldest of the "energy efficient" generation, which had slightly smaller baskets and shorter suspension rods. I've never noticed a noticeable difference in useable capacity between these two machines (I am using one of each right now), but I presume the older machines hold a few more doilies, etc.
The "energy efficient" large cap. machines were VERY widely produced from late 1983-1987. I imagine that if each machine used 10 gallons less water per load, that they saved a tremendous amount of water over time.
Gordon
As to the large capacity BD machines, John is correct. WP seemed to debut the machine first, I do believe around 1966. Kenmore's first 518 was a 1967 model, followed by the 1968 version. I'm not sure what changed with the '67 but obviously Kenmore felt the need to re-number the model for some sort of change or changes somewhere.
Some in-house Whirlpool technical literature from the time discussed the larger diameter basket as this machine was being introduced to the service community. Combining the wide basket (which was both wider and deeper) with stock basket drive pulleys from the standard capacity machine gave the large cap. better water extraction due to greater centrifical force. I can't quote how much better, but enough to warrant publishing by WP.
What many always seem to exclude here on AW in their frequent exclamations that WP/KM BDs don't spin fast enough is that they have some of the largest diameter baskets in the industry, thus spinning more water per RPM than other narrower basket machines.
I wasn't aware (Thanks John!) that the 18lb. belt-drive was the largest capacity top loader out there. I knew it was huge, but I though perhaps the big DD machine was comparable?
The big 18lb. machine ended production in summer 1981. The newest I've noticed was made around mid-year. Same for the oldest of the "energy efficient" generation, which had slightly smaller baskets and shorter suspension rods. I've never noticed a noticeable difference in useable capacity between these two machines (I am using one of each right now), but I presume the older machines hold a few more doilies, etc.
The "energy efficient" large cap. machines were VERY widely produced from late 1983-1987. I imagine that if each machine used 10 gallons less water per load, that they saved a tremendous amount of water over time.
Gordon
mickeyd
Well-known member
Whirlpoolus Maximus
`
`
mickeyd
Well-known member
Capacitus Gigantimus
`
`
mickeyd
Well-known member
On the PP cycle,
at extra-large level, with the double cool-down, it uses so much water, you can almost see the lake's water level go down. Next time I have the means, will show the open tub and an extreme close-up of the control dial. Off all the machines I know, this one's control dial is my favorite: it is mammoth and moves so easily with very bright clicks and the PP cycle is almost 3 inches wide !!!!
When my Aunt Alice gave me this because of a little rust at the bottom of the cabinet, she regretted it because her new GE wouldn't take her comforter, and she said she was so used to the big tub, she figured any new machine would be just as large. Not the case.
This Whirlpool LDA 690 is a wonderful, wonderful washing machine..
at extra-large level, with the double cool-down, it uses so much water, you can almost see the lake's water level go down. Next time I have the means, will show the open tub and an extreme close-up of the control dial. Off all the machines I know, this one's control dial is my favorite: it is mammoth and moves so easily with very bright clicks and the PP cycle is almost 3 inches wide !!!!
When my Aunt Alice gave me this because of a little rust at the bottom of the cabinet, she regretted it because her new GE wouldn't take her comforter, and she said she was so used to the big tub, she figured any new machine would be just as large. Not the case.
This Whirlpool LDA 690 is a wonderful, wonderful washing machine..
mickeyd
Well-known member
Not quite full, just the large setting
`
`
LDA-6900
Kewl machine! I remember that model, haven't seen one in years.
Kewl machine! I remember that model, haven't seen one in years.
mickeyd
Well-known member
Telepathy kills me
Glen, I was just thinking of you. You asked me a few years ago for the model number of this gem, and for a close-up of the panel. I just ran here to message you, re: these pix, and here you are. WOW. The energy vibration has flown up to lift-off.
Glen, I was just thinking of you. You asked me a few years ago for the model number of this gem, and for a close-up of the panel. I just ran here to message you, re: these pix, and here you are. WOW. The energy vibration has flown up to lift-off.
mickeyd
Well-known member
One more: GOLD ON GOLD,
I'm done. BYE
I'm done. BYE
GREAT pics Mickey!!
In case anyone wonders, the best way to tell an original size large capacity machine from the energy efficient 1981 and newer models is to look at the perfs/holes in the basket.
As you can see in Mickey's pics, the holes go nearly to the top of the basket in the original versions. They go only about 1/2 to 5/8 of the way up in the newer, AND the rows on the tub bottoms are only two wide in the newer, but four wide in the older. FYI
In case anyone wonders, the best way to tell an original size large capacity machine from the energy efficient 1981 and newer models is to look at the perfs/holes in the basket.
As you can see in Mickey's pics, the holes go nearly to the top of the basket in the original versions. They go only about 1/2 to 5/8 of the way up in the newer, AND the rows on the tub bottoms are only two wide in the newer, but four wide in the older. FYI
You know I have to go there because of this AD......but this lady, like my mother, has 7 kids, me being the 7th, at that point, its pretty much a water slide......lol
I'm just a fan of the larger capacities.....
I'm just a fan of the larger capacities.....
searsbest
Well-known member
SUPER CAPACITY
My parents daily driver is an LDA5800 circa..1976.....you could wash a matress in the damn thing...... I'll have to take some pics of it the next time I am there.
My parents daily driver is an LDA5800 circa..1976.....you could wash a matress in the damn thing...... I'll have to take some pics of it the next time I am there.
70series
Well-known member
You sure could wash a mattress in that model. I've seen that in action as well as a similar model from the year before. The tub was cavernous, the Surgilator was beautiful, and dirt was no match.
Happy New Year Everyone!
James
Happy New Year Everyone!
James
mickeyd
Well-known member
Good day to all
Thanks, Gordon.
And you know what guys. this version has the older, standard size Surgilator, no wings, no bottom plates, but it works just fine.
Thanks, Gordon.
And you know what guys. this version has the older, standard size Surgilator, no wings, no bottom plates, but it works just fine.
Speaking of the agitator....
Though consumers probably weren't aware, the 1966-1981 WP large capacity machine underwent three dimensional variations that altered mechanical components significantly during their production run.
The first version, 1966ish-1973 was built to the same scale as the standard tub model, with the agitator shift rising similarly out the lid well of the machine. This first version had a four inch (or so) longer agitator shaft, special centerpost length, and therefore a custom spin tube. There is a huge distance between upper and lower bearings in these machines, and they are known for loud operation when worn.
In 1974 the machine was re-designed to use the same transmission and agitator shaft as the standard, and thus the agitators were re-designed and shortened. WP's answer to this was to use the standard Surgilator. Kenmore debuted the Pentas - the Vane and Swirl. These agitators require separate extensions to be added in order to accomodate a fabric softener dispenser. When this change was made, ALL belt-drives in production used the same transmission - the portable, the 24-inch models, and all 29-inch machines. I think that's pretty cool...
In 1978, the centerpost and spin-tubes were shortened five inches (a modification which is both great and awful in my opinion). Agitators didn't change nor did the view externally of the basket/agitator, but basket drives and spin tubes are different between the models. I like this modification because seldom if ever do we come across 1978 and newer machines that have worn bearings. The bearing roar/clack of worn bearings is not heard in these machines and WP finally solved the bearing issue that eventually can be the death knell for older BDs. BUT, this same short centerpost is also highly dependent on good center seals, which when failing or failed can cause large amounts of water dumpage into the bearings and down onto and into the transmission. The older machines can do the same thing, but it takes longer for the seals to fail miserably enough to flood these machines from all the way up the centerpost, thus the machines often lived longer. Cleaning up and repairing a gooey, flooded centerpost machine is not a fun job.
MickeyD - you CAN use a winged Surgilator in your machine should you ever want to do so. It would transplant/fit perfectly and might make for an interesting comparison of one 'tater versus the other.
Gordon
Though consumers probably weren't aware, the 1966-1981 WP large capacity machine underwent three dimensional variations that altered mechanical components significantly during their production run.
The first version, 1966ish-1973 was built to the same scale as the standard tub model, with the agitator shift rising similarly out the lid well of the machine. This first version had a four inch (or so) longer agitator shaft, special centerpost length, and therefore a custom spin tube. There is a huge distance between upper and lower bearings in these machines, and they are known for loud operation when worn.
In 1974 the machine was re-designed to use the same transmission and agitator shaft as the standard, and thus the agitators were re-designed and shortened. WP's answer to this was to use the standard Surgilator. Kenmore debuted the Pentas - the Vane and Swirl. These agitators require separate extensions to be added in order to accomodate a fabric softener dispenser. When this change was made, ALL belt-drives in production used the same transmission - the portable, the 24-inch models, and all 29-inch machines. I think that's pretty cool...
In 1978, the centerpost and spin-tubes were shortened five inches (a modification which is both great and awful in my opinion). Agitators didn't change nor did the view externally of the basket/agitator, but basket drives and spin tubes are different between the models. I like this modification because seldom if ever do we come across 1978 and newer machines that have worn bearings. The bearing roar/clack of worn bearings is not heard in these machines and WP finally solved the bearing issue that eventually can be the death knell for older BDs. BUT, this same short centerpost is also highly dependent on good center seals, which when failing or failed can cause large amounts of water dumpage into the bearings and down onto and into the transmission. The older machines can do the same thing, but it takes longer for the seals to fail miserably enough to flood these machines from all the way up the centerpost, thus the machines often lived longer. Cleaning up and repairing a gooey, flooded centerpost machine is not a fun job.
MickeyD - you CAN use a winged Surgilator in your machine should you ever want to do so. It would transplant/fit perfectly and might make for an interesting comparison of one 'tater versus the other.
Gordon
mickeyd
Well-known member
Hi Gordon. Are there 2 versions of the Winged Surgilator?
One with the 3 half plates extending from the bottom od the agitator, and another with arches on the ends of the plates sticking straight up into the tub?
Memory has two distinct pictures. I would look for the first, thanks for the suggestion, but I don't like the second.
Thanks for the suggestion.
One with the 3 half plates extending from the bottom od the agitator, and another with arches on the ends of the plates sticking straight up into the tub?
Memory has two distinct pictures. I would look for the first, thanks for the suggestion, but I don't like the second.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Mickey -
I have only seen the one version in a belt-drive, the one you like. It may be that the other was a DD agitator? I didn't know there were winged Surgilators in early DDs until I saw one at John's in October.
Is this pic the one you like?
I have only seen the one version in a belt-drive, the one you like. It may be that the other was a DD agitator? I didn't know there were winged Surgilators in early DDs until I saw one at John's in October.
Is this pic the one you like?
kenmoreguy89
Well-known member
I don't understand this ad!
I do not see the sense nor the funniness of this ad!
But the machine is very beautiful![this post was last edited: 1/10/2012-15:41]
I do not see the sense nor the funniness of this ad!
But the machine is very beautiful![this post was last edited: 1/10/2012-15:41]
