Modern washing machine energy usage claims: propoganda, or real?

[launderess]

Above post pretty much sums things up...

Either method of doing laundry will get you there; H-axis or top loader with central beater; however the former will do so with less bother, energy and chemical use along with other benefits over the latter.

Automatic top loading washers are really just one level up from using wringer washer. That in turn took over from washboards, dolly pegs and other methods of doing washing by hand. However the underlying principles remain the same. Heavily to even moderately soiled wash should be pre-washed/soaked, never start with hot water, never wash in dirty water, stains should be attended to before going into the wash.

With front loaders that self heat water you can dispense with some pre-treating because cycles start in cool or cold water then gradually reach hot or warm. This shifts certain stains that would be set by hot water ( starches, protein, albumen).

All methods of doing laundry arise from the same five main principles: time, water temperature, chemical action, mechanical action, and amount of water. Any decrease in one normally requires an increase in the others and vice-versa.

Top loading washers use far more water than H-axis washers but also a more powerful central beater (mechanical) action. The detergents and other chemicals used are highly diluted (all that water) but that is made up by the above mechanical action.

H-axis washers use principles more in line with doing laundry by hand. Soapy/detergent water is pushed through textiles while they tumble back and forth. This action also causes fibers to flex and open releasing soils. The action of hitting sides of wash tub (lifting and dropping if you want) replicate the same actions of hand washing. Because you are pushing water through laundry rather than moving it through water you can use less of that substance and still obtain good results. Add a forced pump system that recirculates water through the wash and water use can be lessened further still.

 

[qualin]

Regarding henene4's comment....

Just for the record, I'm not anti-HE. In fact, it makes sense to me and detergents these days are designed for it. (I'm sure the scientists that do the R&D at the detergent manufacturers know what they're doing.)

What I'm against is TL HE. The concept, I believe, this being my own personal opinion and not backed up by any scientific evidence, just doesn't work as well as a FL. I mean, there are numerous videos of people with HE TL machines that show just how slow and ineffective the turnover is with a washplate or agipeller. It seems to me that TL HE is just a stop gap solution. I did once think about buying a washplate machine, but after seeing those videos, I'm just not sold on them anymore.

In replying to Joe's post, (Reply #29), you pretty much hit the nail on the head. The same cleaning or better, but with lower operating costs.

Honestly, like I said before, there are absolutely no benefits to the cost savings if the machine isn't built to last or needs the occasional time-consuming and labour intensive bearing job because it was under designed or used cheap poor quality bearings.

I honestly don't think I could add anything more to this thread...

 

[vacerator]

Ansolutely

on the above last three posts.
F/L bearings also wear, and are costly to replace.
Maybe ceramics can enter the engineering design, of course the price points are also calculated according to how long the average life span of the washer is.
Also what the assembly employees are paid, and keeping them employed as well.
There are still plenty of North American grandmothers out there who will not try a front loader no matter what they are told.

 

[launderess]

And there were American women who clung to wringer washers

Long after fully automatics came along. Again to each his or her own.

It is worth noting on both sides of the Atlantic commercial laundries going back to the late 1800's onwards went with H-axis washing machines and have never looked back. Some places may have had a one or two top loaders for small odd loads, but never would they used for routine wash.

Now all this being said again if you need to plow through tons of laundry quickly a top loader is up your street. However again how much time are you saving if the thing is done properly for badly soiled/stained washing. By the time you pre-wash/soak, pre-treat, main wash and perhaps a few rinses you've hit thirty minutes or more. The fastest commercial based washers from SQ can knock out a load in about the same time.

Speaking on that subject one reason have considered getting a wringer washer (besides it being one step up from doing things in a tub...*LOL*) and that yes, can get through tons of wash quickly compared to the Miele or AEG, and with better results than the laundryette's SQ washers.

The cycles on my local laundromat machines are too fast (about 30 min or less) and water often not hot enough (very short prewash with cold water, no spin after draining and filling with water for the wash, uses tap hot water), to get things really clean. Am noticing persons who routinely do wash at this place have plenty of tattle-tale grey.

Now wouldn't want to do my entire wash each week with a wringer, but for the odd large load of sheets it may just do.

 

[vacerator]

So True!

My mom even had a wringer washer when I was a young tyke.
My top loader plow through loads of laundry in a hurry? No, only four or bath towels at a time. Two pair of pants, three or four shirts, socks, and some undies.
Now it's an impeller type. It's not made for large loads.
The bulky cycle uses a full tub of water, twice, with nominal roll over. A large load floats on the top of the water.