Kenmore/WP vs Others For Rinsing Ability

[j2400]

I've recently been using an older Kenmore belt drive.

I've read here complaints about the neutral drain that Whirlpool used vs. the spin drain others used. And I was wondering earlier today, as I watched the Kenmore drain, how much of a difference a spin drain (on another vintage machine, of course!) might make.

 

[j2400]

I probably should have titled this differently--although one big question on my mind with neutral drain vs spin drain is whether spin drain might work better for rinsing.

 

[yogitunes]

my opinion is that the spindrain machines seem to extract more water than the neutral drain, but that could just be rpm...a real benefit i seem to like about spindrain is that during the first part of the spin, the water flows up and over top and back into the machine which kinda cleans the whole interior where as any scum at the top of the water level of neutral drain clings to the top and sides of the outer tub....and that can build up over time and cause problems and odors

 

[davek]

It's probably fair game to bring this up here, especially since it's not really working on my machine: wouldn't multiple spray rinses probably do a better job rinsing the clothes with less water than any immersion rinse? I realize the full tub rinse carries soap away, but spray rinse spins the water through the fabric. You could set the machine up to do tons of spray rinses before it used as much water as filling the tub.

Once I found out what a spray rinse was, I immediately wondered why they didn't do that only.

Anyway, I would think that the fact that Kenmore/Whirlpool machines do have a spray rinse is a big thing in their favor. I don't see a spin drain making nearly the difference that spraying fresh water through would. Any machine lacking that feature I would consider at lease somewhat inferior in rinsing.

 

[jons1077]

Davek,

Someone at Whirlpool felt the same way as you at some point. They made a DD model Kenmore for a while that had the selling point of using less water by eliminating the deep rinse completely. It had the normal full wash, neutral drain, went through several minutes of long spray rinses, then continued spinning the clothes dry. I believe it supposedly used 25-30% less water when washed on the highest water level.

Jon

 

[launderess]

Spin Rinse Only

Has been tried on various vintage washing machines (Hoover and other twin tub units, amoung others) and can still be found on some washing machines.

Problem comes in designing a system so water is not merely bounced off laundry and sent down the drain, as the washer spins.

Rinsing is a process of dilution. In a spin rinse only, one must allow laundry to absorb a high level of water, to the point of saturation or even over saturation, then extract. This process must be repeated enough times to get the job done.

Obviously aiming a spray of water going full force at a fast moving tub with laundry is not going to get satisfactory results. Many modern units slow spin speed down to allow for the saturation of laundry, while spraying water. Spray is then stopped and machine ramps back up to full speed to extract. Again, this process is repeated over and over.

Having just spent Saturday using the Hoover TT for doing a large load of sheets, am here to tell you that while spin rinsing can indeed give good results, it can also lead to lots of creasing.

Spin rinses tend to work better on loads of "small" items. Large things such as blankets and or several sheets can be rather hit or miss, IMHO.

Oh yes, depending upon the design of the system, and machine capacity, one is going to need a pretty robust motor and pump to cope with handling a continous heavy load over several "spin rinse" cycles, followed by a final high speed spin dry. There is also the problem of coping with excess foam and or suds lock.

L.

 

[DADoES]

Whirlpool had the Resource Saver model as well.

F&P has had shower rinsing for years, with further adjustment for the volume of water used. Shower rinse is the default for Regular & Heavy Duty cycles on the EcoSmart models, with a deep agitated rinse tagged as the Softener Rinse option. My 1999 GWL08 and 2004 IWL12 do deep rinsing as the default, with shower rinse as an option. It works a little different. All the sprays aren't at full spin speed, there are a couple saturation-flush periods at 25 RPM with the pump running.

 

[toploader]

"Anyway, I would think that the fact that Kenmore/Whirlpool machines do have a spray rinse is a big thing in their favor. I don't see a spin drain making nearly the difference that spraying fresh water through would. Any machine lacking that feature I would consider at lease somewhat inferior in rinsing."

Like all late model front loaders? Sorry I couldn't resist.

 

[maytagbear]

I never liked the neutral drain

Never. I may be very incorrect, but it just seemed like the dirty wash water was better spun out, instead of being drawn through the clothes. Again, I may be wrong, but that's how it seems to me.

Lawrence/Maytagbear

 

[launderess]

Cannot speak for all, modern or otherwise front loaders, but on the "normal" and "Permanent Press" cycles, my Miele washer tumbles to and fro when draining wash and rinse water. Thus laundry does not merely sit in the tub whilst water is drained through.

The commercial SQ washers at the local laundromat do the exact same thing.

Another thing my Miele does is adds water to the wash cycle before draining wash water. Granted this is done to "cool" the water to prevent shocking textiles when going from hot to very hot to boiling wash temps down to cold. However it does begin the dilution process necessary for good rinsing.

L.

 

[DADoES]

Considering that Whirlpool/Kenmore has been doing neutral drain toploaders from the late 1940s through the present (except for a brief period with the first direct-drive units), it apparently isn't objectionable to the consumers who have bought many thousands of the machines.

 

[turquoisedude]

I like the neutral drain - I never had a machine that did this until I got my paws on an Inglis H560 (Canadian WP clone). I always thought this was a great idea to drain out the dirty wash water instead of spinning it back into the clothes.

 

[davek]

I have to say that I agree with Turquoise dude. In fact I'll take it a step further and say that neutral drain might even be better in a machine with a perforated tub. Particulate soil from the clothes is going to be heavier than water. As it is washed from the fabrics, the agitation would allow it to fall through the water, past the other clothes, and to the bottom of the tub. Provided there are holes at the lowest spot, they would fall to the outer tub completely away from the clothes. The oily soil is lighter than water and would float to the top and be suspended in the foamy suds at the top. This foam gets spun out of the tub, and you hope it doesn't leave any significant amount of itself behind on the clothes it was sitting on.

Movement during the drain would stir up particulates where they might redeposit on the clothes, while spin drain would carry dirty foam away before it could settle on clothes. Since these two things are at odds, I guess Whirlpool long ago decided that A was worse than B. Provided the suds are carried away before they 'go away,' it seems logical that neutral drain is probably OK.

Probably a good reason not to use HE detergent in a top loader.

 

[favorit]

frontloaders and neutral drains

FL do neutral drains on woolens cycle, old ones do it even on delicates and perma press. The old Candy I've in the garage has interim spins between cotton rinses only.

Do agree with Maytagbear : intermediate spins improve rinsing performance.
My older Miele hasn't interim spins on permapress, the newer has them and rinses much better. This machine has interim spins even on woolens (to avoid shrinking : neutral drain --> distribution-->spin )

The only thing I miss in the newer machine is the cooldown on cottons 60°C . It does it only @ 75°C or 95°C, while @ 140°F it drains suds, distributes and spins @ 1000 rpm. This hot fast spin is a nice way to wrinkle (if you line dry), so i reduce it to 600 rpm then switch it back to 1200 while rinsing. Otherwise i run permapress to have the cooldown

 

[rpm]

When did the Kenmores stop having the 4 sprays, deep rinse and 4 more sprays?
Mine just has a deep rinse and two sprays. I always thought it was better to have them after the wash cycle and would rinse away the suds.

 

[hilovane]

My Asko W-6000(technically) neutral drains, although sometimes it'll tumble in one diretion, as the drain appears to "kick in" during the tumbling sequence.

As much as I love my Asko, I don't like the fact that it neither spray rinses, or has a true "deep" final rinse, but five or seven (the latter as an option) rinses.

 

[logixx]

Resource Saver Spray Rinse System

https://secured.whirlpool.com/Servi...49271fb329785256ab000569a5e/$FILE/4322534.pdf

 

[kenmoreguy64]

Couple of Kenmore thoughts....

Davek - You are right on target with the dirt and oils as to how they leave a Kenmore/Whirlpool's tub. In many machines I've seen, some detergents, especially powders, will form a white barrier on the bottom of the tub. It can occasionally be a dirty-colored barrier as well. I always figured this was heavier-than-water sand and substrate from detergents coupled with some dirt. As well, I have seen many a machine have a scum buildup around the top of the tub where the high-water marks are. This is usually a layer about 1.5 inches wide, and can usually be removed using a paint scraper. Kinda the more gross part of washer work.

RPM - I was wondering the same thing regarding the spray rinses on Kenmores. As far as I've seen, most all the domestic, full-size belt drives had the four sprays, followed by deep rinse, followed by four sprays. This I understand varied a little bit in 1960s BOL machines. My very late built 1986 machine has the four and four, as has every other machine I've worked on that had its replacement timer wired properly. One of the more common replacement timers won't spray rinse at all unless a jumper wire is spliced in, which some lazy servicers seem to choose not to do.

The oldest direct-drive machine I ever experimented with (from 1988) had the two sprays only in the final spin, but I totally agree with you - the spray rinses might be more useful in between wash and the deep rinse. In my 1993 DD I used to complain about the lack of pre-rinse sprays, as that machine often suds locked when it was really new.

Gordon

 

[jdinstl]

4D4 Rinses...

...I remember my Mother's old Kenmore pushbutton doing this number. If I recall correctly, the tub would slow down a bit (release the clutch on the spin, maybe?) spray, then go hell-bent-for-leather, de-cluth, spray, and repeat. Then it'd fill, agitate, etc. Maybe it didn't slow down, I'm hitting the "back in my day" age where Everything Was Better, and the younger generations rolls their eyes.

Washer-amateur me didn't know that all washers did not do this. When I got my first new washer/dryer set, I thought that kind of weird. I guess I'm in the same camp as Lawrence/Maytag bear, as the rinse-out is spun away, versus agitated through the clothes, drained, then spun.

My kingdom for a 4D4 washer, I'd feel better, haha!

Just my amateur thoughts mind you...this is an interesting discussion, I'm learning a lot here.

John

 

[rickr]

I agree....

IMO, a spin drain is only an advantage if the machine is of a solid tub design.

 

[DADoES]

John, there's no such thing as "declutching" during spray rinses on a belt-drive Kenmore or Whirlpool. Spin may slow a little due to drag of the accumulated water (or suds lock) until the pump drains it away, but the clutch doesn't disengage. The mechanism has three modes: agitate, spin, and neutral drain. Agitate and spin are mutually exclusive of each other, unless the mechanism is broken. Shifting into/out of agitate controls water recirculation vs. drain by a mechanical linkage to a valve lever on the pump. Machines that don't have a recirculating filter (either the waterfall type or the hidden self-clean) still have the pump valve, which functions to block the drain port during agitation and open the drain port when not agitating. Neutral drain is simply the motor, pump and transmission running with neither agitate or spin engaged. If not spinning, then the basket brake is engaged.

 

[gyrafoam]

Glen--

When I had an early sixties Whirly---that used to sudz lock (imagine that!) it used to switch back and forth between drain and spin. I had seen the same thing in other Whirly/Kenmore's so I thought it was normal. Fast-forward to a conversation I had with Lefever a few years ago, and he said what was happening was that when the machine went to spin the sudz would fool the machine into thinking it had a tub of water-----so it would stop spinning.

The '63 Kenmore I have now, doesn't do that and will keep right on going sudz-lock and all----so go figya.

As for the neutral-drain issue----IMO I think it is all right as long as there are not really oily/greasy garments in the wash load. When the machine goes to drain, the foam/grease/oil gets deposited on top of the clothes it was removed from and I'm not convinced it is rinsed out by the spray-rinses. Those spray-rinses certainly don't get rid of that nasty black ring of grease/oil most of us are used to seeing at the top of the Whirly/Kenmore agitators.

I still think a good hot OVERFLOW rinse is the best way to get rid of lighter than water soils such as grease and oil, but in lieu of that I'll take a spin-drain followed by a spray-rinse any day when dealing with grease/oil in the wash.

 

[DADoES]

Steve, that is true, of course. Enough water, kicked up high enough during spin, would trigger the water level switch ... but that isn't normal operation.

My dad ran a service station (Gulf, anyone?), so there were plenty greasy/oily work clothes run through the 1962 Whirly. Hot water was rarely used, warm was the recipe of choice, but of course with a warm rinse. LOTS of suds-locks (with Tide, of course!) I don't recall a scum ring in the basket or on the agitator, although I'm sure there were deposits in the outer tub. We had that machine (LJA-3200) for 14½ years, replaced with the LDA-7800.

 

[gyrafoam]

Glen--

My parents had a charge account at Glass's Gulf for years. They were the gas station of choice for our family, and the service was excellent no matter which (Gulf station) one you went into to.
Those were the days.

Funny, most of the old Whirly/Kenmore's I remember had that "quirk" but my current one doesn't! The agitator on mine does collect the ring on the agitator-----but since the agitator is black it hardly shows-up-------unless one takes a paper towel or cloth and rubs it clean.
Oh well, no big deal. Part of the machine's personality.

The Tide you describe in use at the gas station----was that back in the days when Tide had phosphates? Just curious, as I notice the Viva I use is the best at cutting grease, and takes it with it----down the drain. I remember when Tide was like that.

 

[DADoES]

Tide

Well, Steve, dad had the station from 1959 (through 1984, 25 years? 27 years? 1989, 30 years? I don't recall now when he sold-out the business) so I'm sure it was phosphated back in the day. They did use Tide there for washing the service bay concrete floors and front lot. Bought it by the case, so we always had it at home also. Which is one of the reasons it was so hard to get mom to try different detergents (Salvo, Dash, All, Oxydol, Cold Power, etc.).

As many times as the LJA-3200 suds-locked, I don't remember it triggering the water level switch, so must not have been very often if it did. I know spin slowed down to a *crawl* in the worst blockages so maybe it didn't kick the accumulated water up high enough. I was quite surprised when the LDA-7800 arrived as it *rarely* suds-locked.

 

[kenmoreguy64]

Steve & Glen -

Regarding suds locks in Whirlpool belt-drives.....I think a suds-lock re-trigger of the level switch depends on the setting in the level switch (lower levels being easier to re-trigger than high settings), but most importantly the condition of the fill-control hose on the earlier machines and the air dome in the later ones.

The rubber fill control hose that supplies air pressure to the level switch in the 60s machines could get clogged with lint, suds residue and minerals, thereby narrowing it like plaque in human arteries. It would then take less pressure and less water/suds sloshing around to trigger a partially loaded fill control hose than it would a new one.

The drawbacks with this hose were the reason behind Whirlpool going to the separate chamber shaped air dome. This too can get build-up in it, but it has less of an effect.

In your machine Steve, I'd be willing to bet that it's pristine condition at least partially explains it's behavior.

Personally, I seldom see a suds-lock in a belt-drive, and that's with 44 years experience using them. I believe that to be due to my mother's use of low sudsing detergents and mine as well, coupled with the large capacity machines that I use at times which have a monstrous tub drain hose as compared to the standard tub. Suds don't remain in the tub nearly as long with those large outlet hoses.

Gordon

 

[jdinstl]

DADoES...

...thank you for the explanation. Like I said, I was not sure (in other words, have no clue as to what I was talking about) And it was a long time ago.

Thanks again!

John

 

[bobbyderegis]

Has anyone noticed how clear and suds free the rinse water is on a GE Filter-Flo? No matter how big of a suds cake in the wash, they always seem to rinse clear.
Bobby in Boston

 

[gansky1]

To see the difference in the spin vs. neutral drain machines, you only need to disassemble a Maytag and WP/KM machine at the same time. You won't need a scraper to remove any detergent/softener/filth residue in a Maytag, it likely won't have any at all. IMO, a washer that cannot keep itself clean isn't worth the metal (or plastic) it's made of, no matter how lenient Sears' credit terms were that accounted for most of their sales.

That being said, I still love the "personality" of the Kenmore/Whirlpool washers, in spite of, or maybe because of the silliness of their belt-driven madness!