Maytag mvwp586gw / Maytag mvwp585gw Video Available on YT

[pinkpower4]

A video has been posted by Kirk Rivas.

I am guessing the 585gw model has the 5-yr. warranty, and the 586gw has the 1-yr. warranty?

Price looks to be about $1035 USA, so it's looks like the upgrade didn't add too much to the current cost.

Like the newer design better especially the knobs. Wonder if they're interchangeable?

More importantly. I am curious if the 575 model can be converted to the newer the 585/586 model? If so, what parts would have to be switched out?

Given the cost of parts, one would probably just be better off buying this whole unit new especially if they've had it for a few years or more, but I thought I would ask. It's possible a newer one may be scrapped due to a bad gearcase or something, so it is interesting to know since these parts can sometimes be purchased on their own or through eBay.

This is still my second overall pick, and my first pick if one considers the wash action. The dual action agitator is very effective at moving clothes down, in, and through the water.

My first overall pick would be the Speed Queen TC5. At this price difference (looking to be around $1300 where I live now vs the $1035 of this Maytag), I could justify the price difference to get the SQ. My opinion is that the Maytag needs to be priced lower if they really want to have the edge. Both are good washers, but the main differences I see as a consumer that has used both is that there will be less minor repairs with the SQ because it uses a real transmission, and the SQ should last a typical family longer. For the typical consumer control boards/gear case on the Maytag will probably be the point of replace. I think bearings going out will probably be the point of replace on the SQ. Only time will tell. Of course, people that can do the repairs themselves including the more labor intensive ones, get parts at cost, etc. may keep these going longer.

Thoughts?

 

[gelaundry4ever]

video

I am going to watch the video.

 

[panasonicvac]

Not surprised that it doesn't use the old school DD system. No thanks for me, I'd rather just keep using my Kenmore and fix it up for as long as I can. Or I'd just get a Speed Queen TC5.

 

[ryner1988]

Not surprised that it doesn't use the old school DD system.

And I'm not really sure why it doesn't, being that it's non-high efficiency in every other way including water levels. You'd think they could make it a truly commercial machine by putting a real transmission in it. This is proof of what many have suspected all along -- the VMW platform isn't about high efficiency as some people like to think it is. Yes, a lot of VMW machines are high efficiency but the reason for the platform is a cost-saving measure. I think the DD platform was getting too expensive to produce in today's market.

 

[speedqueen]

No DD transmission

They haven't been in production or tooled for large scale DD production since 2010. They have been VMW on coin models for some time as well, this IS their commercial platform at this point.

 

[ryner1988]

Reply #4

Yes I am aware of this. I'm just pointing out that back when DD's stopped being produced, it was rumored by some that it was because of efficiency standards tightening and the DD platform couldn't meet those. Obviously that is not actually the case, being that we still have these full-fill TL washers. There must have been other reasons, so I can only surmise that cost was a large part of it.

 

[pierreandreply4]

if my curent washer daily driver ended up being a lemon

if my curent washer turn out after 3 years to be a lemon or with a major defect and needed to be exanche because of extended warenty i think i would chose the model in the video just would just like to know cycle leght for each cycle for this model? and if it would mean exchanging the dryer as well to have a match set woukd go with the matching electric dryer

 

[panasonicvac]

I was hoping they'd bring back the old school DD system just like when Speed Queen brought back their old school top load washer. I'd agree that the DD top load washers was most likely getting more expensive to make. But they would've still competed against the reliability to SQ's TC5. Probably would've costed around the same as the TC5 or maybe a little less which I would've had no problem with, you basically get what you pay for. Speaking of price, the other Maytag is now discounted for a closeout at $809. Only 7 left until they're gone for good.

 

[combo52]

Washer, energy, efficiency

Is more than just water consumption, new style VMW type machines, spin much faster than TC fives and direct drive Whirlpools , they also use about 1/4 of the electricity to run the machine, they’re also 40 or 50 pounds lighter using a lot less materials to build the machine.

All of this is taken into account in the design and energy efficiency of machines, in any case, there’s no top load washer that I would buy today.

If you’re serious about washing machines, get a Speed Queen front loader or possibly a whirlpool or Maytag front load washer.

John.

 

[gelaundry4ever]

washer video

I saw the video, and I was disappointed. There's no direct drive system. It will break at any moment with a normal family. I count on it.

 

[DADoES]

 
The wash action is very aggressive with a real dual-action agitator that rolls the load like a direct-drive.  The periods of longer strokes also sloshes everything back and forth like an old-style belt-drive.  The cycle progress is quicker than some other VMW models.

 

[drummerboy928]

This machine also has the heavier duty 1/2 HP motor, belt, and other components. IIRC the old models really only struggled with the gearboxes, since they use the same plastic gearbox as the other models. I don’t doubt that they used it again in these new models, but I wouldn’t say that they would be horrible machines, especially now with the added water level selector. At a moderately reasonable $1,034 without sales pricing, I can see these being a pretty strong competitor in the field of modern washers.

 

[windrivers]

New Style VMW Type Machines

"...they’re also 40 or 50 pounds lighter using a lot less materials to build the machine."

Does producing cheap crap using less and cheaper materials that last a fraction as long really save resources and energy in the long run?

Junkyards are full of "efficient" appliances.

I wonder if these efficient machines ever recoup the savings in use that it costs to produce and replace these machines as they fail. How much energy, water, petroleum products, etc. does it cost to produce these machines that are designed to fail in a certain time anyway?

But I'm sure Whirlpool is proud to have you think they're "green" as they keep you buying their newer, better, and disposable products.

 

[combo52]

Old washers and dryers

Are not lined up in a junkyard somewhere or being buried in landfill.

They are generally crushed and ground up and recycled for metal, Content and , etc..

It’s a difficult equation to decide whether a new machine pays for itself or not in savings and energy. It seems that even these new cheaper machines are lasting a decade or so judging by what we see going into the recycling.

In any event anybody that’s interested in and serious about a washing machine has a little business buying a top load washer they are simply an inferior product, they’re not good for your clothing. They’re not good for the environment or not very efficient overall.

John

 

[windrivers]

Recycling

Have you studied the recycling industry? I don't believe it is as efficient and green as it's made out to be.

How much energy and resources are used to separate the materials, crush them, grind them up, etc.? I've read a lot of stuff people think are being recycled are being hauled and dumped in other countries.

Even if every part of every machine was 100% recycled with no waste, which they aren't, there are still all the resources it takes to build new machines out of the recycled materials, shipping, etc.

So I think it's a stretch to say that a machine saves resources by being 30% lighter when it lasts 30% as long. From my experience I think 10 years from a new Whirlpool is optimistic.

I'll buy what I want. I do my own research and buy what is best for me, as do others on this thread. I know you would never buy a top loader and you're pretty proud of yourself for it, but others would for various reasons. I've got a laundry room that's made for a TL, I've got plenty of well water, and my clothes aren't made out of paper products. I've got to admit FLs may be better in some ways, but to me they appear to be over-hyped by certain people to the point of defying physics.

 

[ryner1988]

"From my experience I think 10 years from a new Whirlpool is optimistic."

My VMW Whirlpool lasted just under six years. It finally did this thing where it got stuck shifting between drain and spin, reminded me of a computer getting frozen up, although usually with the computer turning it off and back on or perhaps unplugging and replugging it usually solves the frozen issue...not so with the whirlpool VMW. Whatever I tried, I couldn't get it to unhang itself from that point in the cycle. Repairman told me it was the gearbox but since I know a bit more about these machines now I wonder if it was actually the mode shifter that gave out.

I do think these commercial versions might last a few years longer than that, but only time will tell.

 

[ryner1988]

Regarding FL vs. TL, I agree FL is probably the way to go in the modern market in many cases though not all. As mentioned above, some peoples' houses just aren't made for the design of an FL. My dad and stepmom have a tiny pass-through laundry room, you walk through it from the garage to get to the rest of the house. There are the laundry machines on one side and the furnace on the other and literally enough room to walk between them. The washer is next to the garage door so I can't picture a front loader not getting in the way of the garage door opening/closing or there even being enough room to have both front-opening doors ajar on washer and dryer to load/unload laundry. I'm sure modern houses are structured differently to account for this but older houses definitely look like they were built with TL's in mind.

 

[DADoES]

 
The process of shifting between agitate and spin occurs outside the transmission "gear box" on the VMW platform.  The optical reader that monitors basket rotation is also part of the mode shifter.

 

[maytag85]

Reply #13

If top loaders really aren’t your thing, then why is their top loading machines in your profile picture?

 

[combo52]

Recycling, major appliances, etc.

Modern front loading washers can use as little as 1/4 of the electricity, the hot water half the detergent and 1/3 the water of a traditional top loading washer.

There is no evidence that these new machines only last 1/3 as long many of these VMW washers will actually last 30 years in the usage they’re subject to in homes.

Yes, it takes a lot of energy to build a washing machine. That’s why modern machines that weigh half as much already are saving a lot of energy in manufacturing and shipping costs I just delivered two new high-efficiency top loading washers today to people we easily just picked the machine up and carried it up and down the stairs. We can’t do that with older machines or even TC5000 so even if these new washers last half as long you’re still way ahead when you consider that they use so much less energy.

For people with tight laundry rooms, the 24 inch European size machines will fit easily, a 24 inch European machine will do the same approximate load as older top loading washer, such as a Maytag or direct drive whirlpool.

Even if you have unlimited free well water you still have to heat it. You still have to put enough detergent in it to make it work and you still have to pay to run the washer which takes at least three times as much electricity as a modern washer if you have a standard split phase motor running the washer.

Hi Sean, reply number 18 are you really that out of things? I think everybody realizes that my picture is a picture of a museum showing off the technology of the last 70 years of washing machines that is not my laundry room. I think that’s pretty obvious.

John.

 

[ryner1988]

The front load vs. top load debate will go on and on until both sides are left screaming into the void. I think it's safe to say we all have washers we like and ones we don't. That's what's so great about this board -- so many different opinions and a wealth of knowledge to bring to the table. It'd be a pretty boring world if we all thought things should be done the same wouldn't it?

 

[panasonicvac]

I definitely agree with you, it would suck living in a place where everything is exactly the same. And I also agree that there is no ending battle between what is better between a top loader and a front loader. Both have it's pros and cons from my experience. In the end, we just use what we like the best. As for me, I'm a type of person that would love to have both a top loader and a front loader in my house. We did it at our last cabin before and I really liked that idea. But if it all had to come down to this where if I was given a choice to keep only one washer in the whole wide world and use it for the rest of my life, what would it be and why? It would be my Kenmore 90 Series. I love that thing so much, it is my all time favorite. I think it's what really got me into laundry in the first place. And there's a good chance that I may end up using that machine for the rest of my life since it's the only washer that I own.

 

[appnut]

Y'all remember when I got that original Fridgemore FLer in October 2006? It was like 3.0 or 3.2 cu. ft. and it held as much, if not more than the Lady Shredmore.

 

[ea56]

Bob,
those Frigidaire FL’s from the late 90’s early 2000’a were really very good machines. If they still made FL’s like those I’d have one in a hot second. They were relatively fast, cleaned excellently and weren’t temperamental about going into a spin AND maintaining a spin. I owned two of these, should have never gotten rid of the last one.

Eddie

 

[windrivers]

Reply #19

John, you say "There is no evidence that these new machines only last 1/3 as long...". Yet pretty much anyone who has owned both machines can tell you that new machines are not likely to last anywhere as long. I used 1/3 as an example, who knows whether it's exactly 1/3, but I don't see how you can deny what many call "planned obsolescence" and deny that it's wasteful. And then, isn't it you who states that a Speed Queen front loader will last twice as long as a Speed Queen top loader as if it's a fact? Where's your evidence for that?

Then you go on to talk about how much better and energy efficient machines are just by the virtue of being lighter. Again, comparing a SQ TL to a SQ FL, which one weighs something like 70 pounds more? Surely not the physics defying FL. Exactly what machines are you talking about that "weigh half as much" that are saving so much energy? Or are you just using "half as much" in the same way as I used the 30% figure that you attempt to discredit?

Styrofoam plates weigh a fraction of the cost of china plates. So they're more environmentally friendly? Especially considering you don't waste water washing them, or waste energy heating that water. Or maybe you're using only disposable plastic plates that are 100% recyclable using no resources?

 

[qsd-dan]

Most of the weight savings isn't geared for the purpose of customer or the environment, it's for shipping materials from other countries, specifically 3rd world countries....mainly China. I'd rate recyclability as a strong priority of being environmentally friendly as well. Plastic is certainly not one of them. All of those good old machines from the past were made from quality, virgin metal and are very recycle friendly. What happened to all of those millions of plastic outer tubs is DD Whirlpool/Kenmore machines that people threw out? Probably sitting in landfills leaching toxins into our water supply, screwing around with out endocrine functions.

 

I'd also rate longevity and reparability as environmental pluses. Back in the 90's, it was still easy to obtain most parts and repair most machines back to the 50's, at least from the Big 3 (Whirlpool/Kenmore, Maytag, GE). Today, lots of parts are obsoleted after 10 years from end of production, if not sooner.

 

[gelaundry4ever]

GE filter-flo or whirlpool

Give me a GE filter-flo or a whirlpool clean touch any day of the week. none of these new machines will get your clothes clean in a gallon of water. I am so sick and tired of these energy and water restrictions. I just want clean clothes! I don't care about the environment! You can't have both!

 

[windrivers]

You can't have both!

At the risk of getting off topic, I'm not so sure. I think good policies and some sense could take care of both. But right now, despite what ever the intentions may be, we're getting neither.

I'll leave it there, but I understand what you're saying.

 

[slb77]

From the parts breakdown looks like they're still using that stupid plastic hub, yet I've come across some newer vmw machines that have metal hubs in the basket held down with a spanner nut. I have seen several of those plastic hubs strip out, i believe the quick ramp up in spin may be partially to blame, every other topload slowly ramps up to speed or goes up in steps, the programming in the controls in any of the mvwp machines tries to imitate a traditional transmission driven toploader too much for the lightweight plastic parts in those machines. Only good thing about the vmw transmission is at least it doesn't spray oil out all over the place like the GE toploaders do. Haven't seen a GE yet that didn't have oil all over the belt and pulleys from the gearcase.

 

[ryner1988]

Reply #21

I thought you had an LG front loader as your daily driver...maybe I'm thinking of someone else?