Is there any modern washer on the market that fills 100% (to the top) in both the wash and final rinse? I see washers with a deep wash option on YouTube, but they all seem to spray rinse, even on "second rinse".
Modern washer the fills all the way
- Thread starter Chetlaham
- Start date
Help Support :
check thread 936305
there's a post in this forum talking about new BOL models of Kenmore TL machine and they happen to mention in the thread an AMANA machine which has the option for deep fill ...along with a video.
I watched the vid and you could set it for deep fills on wash and rinse.
The above thread number is regarding that post in the thread
there's a post in this forum talking about new BOL models of Kenmore TL machine and they happen to mention in the thread an AMANA machine which has the option for deep fill ...along with a video.
I watched the vid and you could set it for deep fills on wash and rinse.
The above thread number is regarding that post in the thread
There's another brand/model that has choice of 5 water levels and options for both a shower rinse or deep rinse (two deep rinses one of the cycle choices).
brucelucenta
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 1,924
Unfortunately government control is going to restrict making top load machines that actually fill all the way up soon. So either people will have to get front load machines or be satisfied with washing clothes in the same amount of water a front load uses in a top load machine.
joeypete
Well-known member
Maybe now with Trump in office, he'll get GE to bring back the Filter Flo! hahahahaha
Select Fabric Softner
Most TL machines that have Deep Fill option will have the Fabric Softner option for the rinse. This cycle fills the tub up to dilute and distribute the fabtic softner but can be used without the fabric softner. This way you can have a deep fill wash and deep fill rinse.
Most TL machines that have Deep Fill option will have the Fabric Softner option for the rinse. This cycle fills the tub up to dilute and distribute the fabtic softner but can be used without the fabric softner. This way you can have a deep fill wash and deep fill rinse.
Softener and deep wash
I take this model can fill all the way up on both? Or is the rinse only a partial fill like those dreaded ropers?
I take this model can fill all the way up on both? Or is the rinse only a partial fill like those dreaded ropers?
Whirlpool 3.5 cu. ft. High-Efficiency Top Load Washer with Water Selection in White, 12 Cycles WTW4616FW - The Home Depot
Do more laundry in half the time by owning this affordable Whirlpool High-Efficiency White Top Load Washer. UL listed product.
www.homedepot.com
Yes.
Though DeepWaterWash seems to have been tweaked to still sense the load size, and adapt the water level in a way that covers the load. So that if you only wash 2 jeans on deep water setting for example, it uses still more water, but not an entire tub. At least it appeared to me that on the more recent DeepWaterWash videos, loads were just about covered in water and water level varried.
The one washer I could warrant both on would be GEs line with Deep Fill option. While their system allows incremental increases, you can make it use a maximum fill no matter what (I think it was by pressing and holding the Deep Fill button). Further, they allow you to increase the water level after the cycle has already been started and even after the fill is completed.
Further they offer a fabric softner and a warm rinse option. And you have the choice between agitator or just a wash plate.
Though DeepWaterWash seems to have been tweaked to still sense the load size, and adapt the water level in a way that covers the load. So that if you only wash 2 jeans on deep water setting for example, it uses still more water, but not an entire tub. At least it appeared to me that on the more recent DeepWaterWash videos, loads were just about covered in water and water level varried.
The one washer I could warrant both on would be GEs line with Deep Fill option. While their system allows incremental increases, you can make it use a maximum fill no matter what (I think it was by pressing and holding the Deep Fill button). Further, they allow you to increase the water level after the cycle has already been started and even after the fill is completed.
Further they offer a fabric softner and a warm rinse option. And you have the choice between agitator or just a wash plate.
Load sensing on deep fill
That would explain the agitator running during the fill! Darn. While that in itself is not a problem, I imagine that grinding back and forth agitator would wear the clothes down. Call me not a fan.
That would explain the agitator running during the fill! Darn. While that in itself is not a problem, I imagine that grinding back and forth agitator would wear the clothes down. Call me not a fan.
Yeah, the new Cabrios that use that cross-over of VMW mode switching and the DD motor do some verry low level agitation, and so do the current HE VMWs, but the GEs as well.
That low level agitation is part of the Catalyst-kind of treatment that makes HE washers such good cleaners but in return requires more time: All detergent, low water, high agitation. Higher fills later suspend the loosend dirt out of the laundry into the now abundant water.
The agitator turning during fill is AFAIK not actually sensing, just the translation from low water concentrated wash to deeper fill wash (that transition happens with or without DWW (DeepWaterWash), as described at the begining of the manual).
The WP machines that have a belt-drive system (known from and AFIK only used with the VMWs) only sense during the spin ups and downs at the begining by the means of monitoring the time to speed up/slow down; there is no direct feedback from the motor to the MCU, only a seperate tachometer that checks speeds and thus tells the MCU whether to ramp further up or not. That MCU is only programmed for 2 speeds (you'll see these machines only label low or high spin in the manual) with few arcs (long, medium, short redistribution) if I remeber correctly, so much simpler.
The DD motors use a true inverter system with Hall-sensor, which allows them to actively slow down, sense current at any time (and thus resistance), and have an (almost) infinite amount of agitation speeds and arcs. They can further verry accurately say how much the stator has turned, as each single magnet on the rotor passing by it creates a signal, and the direct conection means there can be no slip what so ever.
Those sense during agitation, but not really for load size, only to adapt the arcs and power supplied to the motor.
That low level agitation is part of the Catalyst-kind of treatment that makes HE washers such good cleaners but in return requires more time: All detergent, low water, high agitation. Higher fills later suspend the loosend dirt out of the laundry into the now abundant water.
The agitator turning during fill is AFAIK not actually sensing, just the translation from low water concentrated wash to deeper fill wash (that transition happens with or without DWW (DeepWaterWash), as described at the begining of the manual).
The WP machines that have a belt-drive system (known from and AFIK only used with the VMWs) only sense during the spin ups and downs at the begining by the means of monitoring the time to speed up/slow down; there is no direct feedback from the motor to the MCU, only a seperate tachometer that checks speeds and thus tells the MCU whether to ramp further up or not. That MCU is only programmed for 2 speeds (you'll see these machines only label low or high spin in the manual) with few arcs (long, medium, short redistribution) if I remeber correctly, so much simpler.
The DD motors use a true inverter system with Hall-sensor, which allows them to actively slow down, sense current at any time (and thus resistance), and have an (almost) infinite amount of agitation speeds and arcs. They can further verry accurately say how much the stator has turned, as each single magnet on the rotor passing by it creates a signal, and the direct conection means there can be no slip what so ever.
Those sense during agitation, but not really for load size, only to adapt the arcs and power supplied to the motor.
Sensing
Thank you for clarifying this!
If the goals is to concentrate cleaning of detergents, and perhaps get more water into garments- that agitation during the fill is still not justified in my book. IMO all its doing is wearing at the fabric. Ample water is one of the hallmarks of achieving low wear/linting in top load washers.
Thank you for clarifying this!
If the goals is to concentrate cleaning of detergents, and perhaps get more water into garments- that agitation during the fill is still not justified in my book. IMO all its doing is wearing at the fabric. Ample water is one of the hallmarks of achieving low wear/linting in top load washers.Yeah, agitation is verry rough during this time, but the amount of time you have this verry verry rough agitation never exceeds 2-3 minutes, so only a small percentage.
But to show you that isn't that bad:
The SQ is bad in reviewd.com's test for fabric care.
The WP HE agitator is bad as well.
http://laundry.reviewed.com/content/whirlpool-wtw4815ew-washing-machine-review/science-page
http://laundry.reviewed.com/content/speed-queen-awne92sp113tw-washing-machine-review
But systems that use recirculation and spins are more gentle as they only agitate in proper water levels, you are right.
But to show you that isn't that bad:
The SQ is bad in reviewd.com's test for fabric care.
The WP HE agitator is bad as well.
http://laundry.reviewed.com/content/whirlpool-wtw4815ew-washing-machine-review/science-page
http://laundry.reviewed.com/content/speed-queen-awne92sp113tw-washing-machine-review
But systems that use recirculation and spins are more gentle as they only agitate in proper water levels, you are right.
My trust in places like reviewed.com are limited... I'll leave it at that for now.
But, why force consumers to put up with extra roughness/wear when it can be eliminated? Could this be a ploy to perhaps even out impeller machines? Having sites such as consumer reports say 'in testing we have found that a deep fill conventional agitator washers produced just as much linting and clothing wear as an impeller washer. This proves the touted claim that conventional machines are gentler than HE impeller machines is pure myth'? Soon or latter consumers will be compelled to use 16 gallons or less per load.
But, why force consumers to put up with extra roughness/wear when it can be eliminated? Could this be a ploy to perhaps even out impeller machines? Having sites such as consumer reports say 'in testing we have found that a deep fill conventional agitator washers produced just as much linting and clothing wear as an impeller washer. This proves the touted claim that conventional machines are gentler than HE impeller machines is pure myth'? Soon or latter consumers will be compelled to use 16 gallons or less per load.
16gal or less
I pointed out in that verry thread you took that number from that there is no fixed usage limited that just is. All regulations are connected to a drum size.
And yes, this is basicly forcing people to recognize what we in the EU learned in the 50s:
If you want to be efficent and clean well while being gentle, the FL is the way to go. Is and was always, and will always be.
TLs are faster, but in certain ways more complicated and just worse performers in pretty much any way.
I pointed out in that verry thread you took that number from that there is no fixed usage limited that just is. All regulations are connected to a drum size.
And yes, this is basicly forcing people to recognize what we in the EU learned in the 50s:
If you want to be efficent and clean well while being gentle, the FL is the way to go. Is and was always, and will always be.
TLs are faster, but in certain ways more complicated and just worse performers in pretty much any way.
I know, but for a typical top loader at 3.5 cu regulations will force under 20 gallons in 2018, or at least somewhere in that ball park.
Top load vs front load. Id argue Europe chose front loads in the 50s due to limited resources- and FWIW my understanding is that front loads from the 50s and 60s used just as much water as US top loads. Though I could be wrong on that last part.
Top load vs front load. Id argue Europe chose front loads in the 50s due to limited resources- and FWIW my understanding is that front loads from the 50s and 60s used just as much water as US top loads. Though I could be wrong on that last part.
warmsecondrinse
Well-known member
"...you can make it use a maximum fill no matter what (I think it was by pressing and holding the Deep Fill button)..."
I know that on at least some Kenmores from the 60's-80's one could rotate the water level dial past 'max' to the rotation limit and hold it there. While you held it the machine would continue to fill until you released the knob. Now that I think about it, I've no idea how common that feature is/was.
"But, why force consumers to put up with extra roughness/wear when it can be eliminated?"
Now you've done it...[melodramatic sigh]... You've just moved the discussion in to an area of abstraction a distressingly high number of consumers simply can't follow. Unless you have something like a Filter-Flo so they can see and touch physical evidence of extra roughness/wear immediately after the wash the majority will never make the connection. The connection between that type of wash system and a garment wearing out in one year as opposed to two is simply too far removed in time for most of the sheeple to follow.
And how many people do you know who seem to believe that media messages override laws of physics? That's be another obstacle to overcome before people could grasp your point.
Apologies to all for my rant. Some of you know I'm a sarcastic bitch prior to full caffeination;-)
Jim
I know that on at least some Kenmores from the 60's-80's one could rotate the water level dial past 'max' to the rotation limit and hold it there. While you held it the machine would continue to fill until you released the knob. Now that I think about it, I've no idea how common that feature is/was.
"But, why force consumers to put up with extra roughness/wear when it can be eliminated?"
Now you've done it...[melodramatic sigh]... You've just moved the discussion in to an area of abstraction a distressingly high number of consumers simply can't follow. Unless you have something like a Filter-Flo so they can see and touch physical evidence of extra roughness/wear immediately after the wash the majority will never make the connection. The connection between that type of wash system and a garment wearing out in one year as opposed to two is simply too far removed in time for most of the sheeple to follow.
And how many people do you know who seem to believe that media messages override laws of physics? That's be another obstacle to overcome before people could grasp your point.
Apologies to all for my rant. Some of you know I'm a sarcastic bitch prior to full caffeination;-)
Jim
No need to apologies, I enjoy company that can speak their mind
Good news!
Found a model that doesn't agitate when filling! And does a deep wash and rinse
Found a model that doesn't agitate when filling! And does a deep wash and rinse
Typical consumer
Yeah, the typical enduser is usually entirely not like us or those that developed the machine. They care less, for most, it's just a chore.
In terms of wear: It really depends on how often you wear stuff and for what occasion, how you wash it and what it actually is.
For example, I have 4 T-Shirts in different blue tones. Those are about 3 years old, washed once a weak, so 150 washes round about. Because they are only one color, the fadeing is not as apparent, and because I only wear them while doing light stuff like studying or cleaning, there is barely any small holes.
Then I have about 10 T-Shirts that I wear to university, dance clases, basicly whenever I interact with others. They are white with several different kinds of prints of all colors of the rainbow. Because I wear those while being more active and because I use an oxygen bleach agent to keep the dominating white fabric really white, the prints fade quite quickly and depending on the specific makeing sometimes holes start to pop up. Thus, simmilar to my underwear, socks, shoes and jeans, they only last 50-70 washes (or weeks that is) at max, or round about a year, give or take.
So yeah, there are more gentle systems, and HE vs non-HE in the day to day use will probably not make such a huge difference. With ones washing habbits, one might be gentler then the other, for the others the opposite.
But I *think* the FLs are surperior in most any way, being more gentle, more efficent, better cleaning. Only slower.
So I *think* that the days of any OK TL system, be it HE or not, are counted, soon. Not that they are a bad system, just not as good.
Yeah, the typical enduser is usually entirely not like us or those that developed the machine. They care less, for most, it's just a chore.
In terms of wear: It really depends on how often you wear stuff and for what occasion, how you wash it and what it actually is.
For example, I have 4 T-Shirts in different blue tones. Those are about 3 years old, washed once a weak, so 150 washes round about. Because they are only one color, the fadeing is not as apparent, and because I only wear them while doing light stuff like studying or cleaning, there is barely any small holes.
Then I have about 10 T-Shirts that I wear to university, dance clases, basicly whenever I interact with others. They are white with several different kinds of prints of all colors of the rainbow. Because I wear those while being more active and because I use an oxygen bleach agent to keep the dominating white fabric really white, the prints fade quite quickly and depending on the specific makeing sometimes holes start to pop up. Thus, simmilar to my underwear, socks, shoes and jeans, they only last 50-70 washes (or weeks that is) at max, or round about a year, give or take.
So yeah, there are more gentle systems, and HE vs non-HE in the day to day use will probably not make such a huge difference. With ones washing habbits, one might be gentler then the other, for the others the opposite.
But I *think* the FLs are surperior in most any way, being more gentle, more efficent, better cleaning. Only slower.
So I *think* that the days of any OK TL system, be it HE or not, are counted, soon. Not that they are a bad system, just not as good.
Similar threads
