Leave Our Washers Alone!!

[westyslantfront]

I have heard that top loaders were to have been discontinued in 2007, but now it is supposed to be in 2012. It is due to water usage. Meantime, plenty of people are watering their lawns, filling their pools, taking long showers, etc. without a care about water usage, until it comes to the washing machine. I have heard so many people say they are willing to spend more on a front loader because it saves water. Perhaps that is false economy. I have seen a Frigidaire Affinity where you could NOT see water in the tub, only wet clothes and they did NOT come clean.
Leave our washers alone and I hope that it will not come to pass that top loaders are discontinued.

 

[westyslantfront]

And as for "global warming", for all the people who claim global warming is happening, I have also heard many people claim that it has not been proven. With the people buying and selling "carbon credits" I wonder if it is not all a scam,
perhaps manufactured by Al Gore and others. Based on the last two winters in Tucson, I think we may have global cooling.

 

[andrewinorlando]

Ross, I think the folks in the Northeast would agree with you!!!

 

[nmaineman36]

Not so...you would think that with being in the Northeast that water is abundant and it is but our water rates keep going up. Here in Lynn Mass our lovely Water and Sewer Commission is raising our rates again. Why you may ask...because people are conserving so much water that they are not making the same kinda money that they used to before conservation measures went into effect. Now to me if they want people to use less and they got that right now then I think that they should tighten their belts like the rest of us.
I have the front load washer and my dishwasher uses only 6.3 gallons for a full load and I have an Oxygenics shower head that cuts the water down and the toilet...but somehow our water bill is a nice cool $150 every quarter. Maddening I say.
In Maine for some strange reason the more you use the less you pay. Makes sense huh.....

 

[pturo]

I think this whole green thinking needs to be regionalized. Here, in upstate NY, we need big 4 wheel drive vehicles for winter for survival and to get to work. Not so a Hummer in Miami Florida or Phoenix. Why aren't they requiring solar power in the southwest, to take the energy burden off? When we have sub zero weather for a week, we should be able to apply for disaster relief for our oil bills.
People in Flordia should be driving electric golf carts that plug in to the garage outlet. There isn't a goddam hill for 400 miles. The norteast has mostly a lot of water, and good water, leave our washing machines alone. Southern California, which is a desert, should ban top loading machines or the state to give credit on taxes to make it equivalent to purchasing a top loader in price.

I think the Federal Government should let the states decide these issues because of our diverse resource and climate variances on this continent.

 

[rapunzel]

This article appeared on one of our news websites yesterday. This bloke was named 'Australian of the Year' last year. He is primarily a biologist, but, of late, has appointed himself climate expert 'number one'. In a similar vein, but a slightly shorter time-frame, Prince Charles has given humanity 18 months to stop carbon emissions, or lots of really bad climate things will happen to us after that, oh dear! I wish he, as well as Flim Flammery, Al Gore et al, would realize that the most damaging carbon emissions come from their mouths, which they appear unable to distinguish from their rear ends.

Here, again, we have solid proof that neither education, money nor fame either pre-requisite or bring about intelligence or a propensity for rational thought.

The 21st century is off to an interesting start.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=565502

 

[tolivac]

I can agree with the first entries on this-TIME TO VOTE THE WASHER BANNERS OUT!!!in the upcoming election.This issue should be a MARKETPLACE decision-not poiltical.If folks want the energy saving washers,dishwashers,and water saving potties they will buy them.My water bills average less than $25 per month-and I have TL washers and an older water hogging KA dishwasher.After all its MY water bill--not theirs.this energy mess is a big scam.And yes I can agree water and energy are LOCAL issues.they should be solved locally-love how these "green" folks complain how much water washers and dishwashers,toilets use but they dump hundreds of gallons of water on their lawns and gardens weekly.and that watering contributes to runoff pollution.Whatever fertilizer pesticides put on the lawns runs off from the watering into the enviornment.I don't use those things on my yard and don't have to water.We have had enough rains this spring here-its making up what was lost in the drought last year.I am in no market for an overpriced FL washer-for some of the prices on them-just take your clothes to the cleaners.Water worries over!Don't get me started on the "Gullible Warming " from the "Post"-Al Gore.Watched his movie---what a BORING crock!

 

[MrX]

There's no ban on them in Europe

In Europe the market ultimately did decide on the front loader way back in the 1960s and 1970s.

Top loader agitator washing machines, for a whole variety of marketing reasons, didn't take off here. The main reason was that because of WWII, the European economy was pretty much wrecked in the 1940s and 1950s and by the time the consumer spending had recovered in the early 1960s, the front loader automatic had become a practical design. In the US, the top loader agitator machine was the first automatic to be mass-marketed in the 1930s/40s and it became the dominant design.

European marketing of washing machines also tended to cause an association between top-loading agitator machines and labour intensive, old technology that wasn't fully automatic as manufacturers pushed automatics, which were almost exclusively front-loading.

The preference for the 'built-in' fully integrated kitchen in Europe also had a huge impact. People like the idea of a washing machine that fits under a counter top, rather than a free-standing machine that sits in a basement. The ability to stack washer/dryer sets also made them more attractive.

When it comes to energy efficiency over here it's really a market decision, the inefficient products are labelled as such.
Everything's rated A to G (a = efficient .. G = grossly inefficient). People tend to buy A rated machines where possible.

Water's also charged for and metered in most of Europe which tends to ensure that people opt for more water-efficient machines generally.
So, the market does decide!

The very high spin speeds found in many European machines aren't necessarily something that needed to be exclusive to front loaders. I don't think it would be that difficult to come up with a very high spin top loader if it were a priority.

In general, Europeans tend to avoid tumble drying (higher energy costs and more environmental focus). So, washing machines that could hit anything up to 2000 rpm are rather more popular. Again though, it's marketing driven. For decades the spin speed has been a major feature of most machines to the level that many of them include it in their model numbers or have it emblazened upon their front panel. No self-respecting housewife would have anything that didn't sound like an Airbus A320 engine when finishing up her washing!

Also, I honestly think the porthole door has a major impact on sales here. Try selling a washing machine that you can't see the clothes in! People like to see things tumbling around and it's particularly impressive when your clothes go into warp 8 too at the end of the cycle

Market front loaders properly, and people will opt for them if they so chose!

 

[toggleswitch]

~In Maine for some strange reason the more you use the less you pay. Makes sense huh.....

Bulk discounts are sometimes necessary. OTOH...

Utilites have many fixed /overhead costs (i.e. those that do not vary with usage levels) that have to be passed along to consumers regardless of level of usage of their product/service. So yes if everyone conserves, the price PER UNIT of items sold MUST go up to cover those costs. Of course variable costs follow usage and are not the point here.

This is why cellular/mobile phone service continues to become more affordable. The fixed-overhead costs are now spread over a much larger subscriber base.

Also the R.O.I. (retrn on investment) to stockholder stays in a certain range. So if the CEO and CFO make $20,000,000 per year, all said and told, the utlity will charge to cover that and still return to stockholders the "stanard" market-level return. Bottom line=> Public and semi-public utlties have little incentive at times to reduce their costs. The rates will simply be approved to be raised to cover costs and provide a "standard" R.O.I.

 

[toggleswitch]

~For decades the spin speed has been a major feature of most machines to the level that many of them include it in their model numbers or have it emblazened upon their front panel.

HELL for creating wrinkles however.

 

[westyslantfront]

I was just in Best Buy yesterday. At the entrance was a pair of LG's on sale. The washer and dryer EACH were marked down to
%1,999.00. With taxes, delivery, etc. I can see a total
of $4,500.00. Last September, I bought a Whirltag top loader for
$399.00. How long does it take to make up the difference in water savings? I consider it false economy to spend $4,500.00 to save water.

Ross

 

[tomturbomatic]

The top loading automatic was not the first design in the 30s and 40s. America's exposure to top loading agitator washers came from the wringer washers that were produced even before the advent of electrical power sources. The first automatic washer was built by Bendix and was a tumbler. In spite of inferior performance when compared to agitator machines, their convenience made them huge sellers before WWII halted most domestic sales. The machines were still made, but for installation on ships and in military installations. After the war, Bendix was the first company that could offer automatics for sale. As other manufacturers brought out automatics, they were mostly top loading agitator washers since it was not too difficult for companies that had made agitator type wringer washers to use those designs as stepping stones to automatic washer design. Also, agitator washers using the washing products of the time, generally gave better cleaning than the front loaders with smaller tubs and sudsing concerns. By the early 50s, Bendix was on the defensive, claiming that they had a proven, dependable design for their machine which sold for much less than newer, more complicated machines of unproven durability. Their machine had changed little since its origination and looked dated next to the newer, more highly styled machines. AVCO chose not to spend their money on redesigning the Bendix washer until it was too late then they sold the laundry line to Philco.

 

[MrX]

I was just in Best Buy yesterday. At the entrance was a pair of LG's on sale. The washer and dryer EACH were marked down to
%1,999.00. With taxes, delivery, etc. I can see a total
of $4,500.00. Last September, I bought a Whirltag top loader for
$399.00. How long does it take to make up the difference in water savings? I consider it false economy to spend $4,500.00 to save water.

Ross

Sounds grossly over priced to me.
The difference over here is that you can pick up a front loader starting from about €250 (bottom of the line and won't exactly be a great machine), but still it exists.
It seems in the US front loaders are still rather high end luxury goods.
The price will drop as they become more of a commodity item.

Also, don't even bother converting from € to $ the rates are insane at the moment and I don't think you'll get a realistic comparison, because of the dollar's recent woes anything priced in € is very expensive.

I'd say it's driving Miele's US prices through the roof.

 

[thomasortega]

Front loaders washer has many vantages over traditional top loaders.
Spin speeds technically can be higher, lint removal is much more efficient because the whole drum acts like a filter and due to less amount of water, it´s totally filtered more times during a cycle.
It´s washing efficiency is better than top loaders and it´s much more gentle to the clothes.

They are more complex and a higher price is justificable because it´s manufacturing costs are higher too but, but, but... in north and south Americas they are considered luxury items yet, that´s why they are much more expensive.
When demand on this kind of washer increases, the price will be reduced.

I love top loader washers because of the nostalgy, but even the mordern traditional top loaders are obsolete and there´s nothing else to enhance and make them more friendly to the environment. No matter if we have enough water or if we have money to pay the water bills or the detergents. it´s not a reason for us to spend more only because we have more.

If every person in the world do his part, our world will breath better.

For example, there are many people who never used a hanger to dry the clothes, only the dryer. We could reduce a lot the impact with little actions like this.
On warm days, with a high speed spin washer, the clothes can dry quickly and with no impact.
Or, why don´t reuse the washer´s water to mop the floors? oh, yes, i forgot, "i have money to pay for the water bills so i don´t need to wait for the first spin cycle with a bucket in hands, no matter if each gallon of water saved is a gallon of water less to treat."
it seems to be insignificant, but when we think globally, this is a huge difference.
try to get only our home... multiply 1 gallon of water per person... now calculate the savings in a week... now a month... two years... 10 years.... OMG, enough to fill hundreds of swimming pools.

 

[decodriveboy]

My water bill

is about $12 a month, and that includes all water use, sewer charges, etc. This is because I take military showers, NEVER water my lawn (biggest waste of water ever -- not the laundry) and the water is always off when not in use while shaving or brushing teeth.

I agree, leave our washers the hell alone and let the public decide what is best for their needs. How is a three hour cycle saving energy? The clothes still come out stinking from being washed in a teaspoon of water.

 

[volvoguy87]

Water...

One thing about utilities is infrastructure maintenance and repair. Many people complain bitterly when their rates go up, even if it is to repair leaking pipes and broken equipment, not for additional water.

As for saving water, I am generally all for it, BUT...
I will not replace a serviceable appliance for a new one if the new one is inferior. Inferior to me means the following: longer cycle times, less effective, more failure prone, more flimsy, and a shorter expected lifespan. In the case of comparing my 1980 Maytag A208 against my mother's GE Adora HE front loader, the GE is inferior in every way.

There is also the matter of gray water recycling. Gray water is sewage from sinks, laundry, and showers. In many cases, it can be used to water lawns and plants. A Suds Saver is a great example of reusing gray water. If using gray water for irrigation, you could reuse ALL water from washing if you are careful not to use detergents which could kill or damage vegetation (like borax or chlorine bleach). Imagine washing without producing one drop of wastewater! If you are going to water your yard anyway, the water consumption of your washing machine in this situation is irrelevant.

Presently, due to a lack of water and drain connections, I have no hot water connection where I use my Maytag. I connect the cold water washer hose to the garden hose and drain into a large trash can. I wash with Cheer or Roma depending on the load and I sometimes use Mrs. Stewart's Bluing. None of those has adversely affected the lawn or plants, and even the pH of the soil has not been affected affected. We had the greenest garden on the street last year during the drought because the wash water, which would have ordinarily gone down the drain, was used to water the plants.

TOP LOADERS ARE THE BEST FOR ME!
Dave

 

[MrX]

"~~ I agree, leave our washers the hell alone and let the public decide what is best for their needs. How is a three hour cycle saving energy? The clothes still come out stinking from being washed in a teaspoon of water."

If that's the case you've obviously experienced some absolutely terrible front loaders!

My normal cotton cycle at 40C (104F) takes a little over 1 hour to complete and that's with 5 rinses and a very long 1600rpm spin. The clothes come out absolutely perfect and not at all 'stinking', nor do they have any stains/marks/odours other than a mild smell of detergent.

Even a 30 minute 'quick wash' at 30C (86F) will produce acceptably good results.

I really think that many people on this forum are perpetuating a myth that Europeans do all their washing in 3 hour boil-wash cycles and that this kind of washing cycle is necessary in all front loader cycles. There could be nothing further from the truth, I would suspect that most machines in Europe are never set to do a high temp whites wash. The vast majority of laundry is done at 40C or less in relatively short cycles (taking just over an hour to complete). Modern enzyme laced detergents (which have been around for decades) don't require those kinds of very high temperatures to clean effectively.

If you ran 90 degree cotton white cycles regularly, your clothes would be completely destroyed it's only suitable for sanitising 100% cotton or linen sheets. Many towels won't even survive those washes as the stitching will shrink. They're a nice option to have, but they're rarely used.

 

[MrX]

"~~ I agree, leave our washers the hell alone and let the public decide what is best for their needs. How is a three hour cycle saving energy? The clothes still come out stinking from being washed in a teaspoon of water."

If that's the case you've obviously experienced some absolutely terrible front loaders!

My normal cotton cycle at 40C (104F) takes a little over 1 hour to complete and that's with 5 rinses and a very long 1600rpm spin. The clothes come out absolutely perfect and not at all 'stinking', nor do they have any stains/marks/odours other than a mild smell of detergent.

Even a 30 minute 'quick wash' at 30C (86F) will produce acceptably good results.

I really think that many people on this forum are perpetuating a myth that Europeans do all their washing in 3 hour boil-wash cycles and that this kind of washing cycle is necessary in all front loader cycles. There could be nothing further from the truth, I would suspect that most machines in Europe are never set to do a high temp whites wash. The vast majority of laundry is done at 40C or less in relatively short cycles (taking just over an hour to complete). Modern enzyme laced detergents (which have been around for decades) don't require those kinds of very high temperatures to clean effectively.

If you ran 90 degree cotton white cycles regularly, your clothes would be completely destroyed it's only suitable for sanitising 100% cotton or linen sheets. Many towels won't even survive those washes as the stitching will shrink. They're a nice option to have, but they're rarely used.

 

[hotpoint9534]

I've never had any problems with front loaders not cleaning.

It's a good idea to run a 90c wash every few months to clear all the detergent deposits which build up from inside the machine. I've seen some filthy front loaders over the years, and more often than not it's because they've never washed over 40c.

On certain models the alloy in the drum spider would start to corrode and eventually snap (used to happen on the 95 and WM series Hotpoints especially). Moldy door seals are also a common sight on neglected machines.

Tom