New energy star washers - good or bad?

[candoo]

Can anyone tell me if the latest "energy star" front loading washers are better or worse in terms of performance, cycle time or whatever. Are the new machines just accomplishing the wash task differently than older machines or are they lesser/better in some way in because they are "energy saving"? This may only apply to to machines here in North America, unless Europe has these new regs as well.

Thanks,
Candoo

 

[arbilab]

Can't say with certainty. The trend is toward disappointing performance and reliability.

Washers are not a big energy sink to start with. An average 1/2hp washer motor uses 0.5kW for a half hour (with motor efficiency loss considered). At 12c/kWh, costs the staggering sum of 3 cents per load. X 3 loads a week x 4 weeks a month = 36 cents a month for the motor.

What little cost the washer extracts is in terms of hot water, so most "energy star" washers claim savings by strangling hot water use. Some will not wash above 100F--just barely adequate to liquefy body soil--no matter where they are set. Most prohibit warm rinse. In cold climates, winter tap cold water will resolidify any remaining soil, guaranteeing it remains on the clothes. Almost all will scrimp on all fills, leaving toploaders to beat laundry to death. Whatever water is saved is worth much less than the cost of replacing shredded clothes. Underfilled frontloaders may not tumble, the clothes just ride the drum around.

IOW, "energy star" has resulted in a series of very poor compromises made by monomaniacal bureaucrats knowing nothing about laundry. Knowing how well they do everything else, do you want government doing your wash? With a great deal of research effort and a generous budget it is possible to find a suitable compromise, but most off-the-truck washers today don't work worth a dam unless the "energy star" features are circumvented.

JMO.

 

[glenfieldmathk1]

Europe

Here in Europe - all machines have to have the following features.

Based on the lowest energy consuming programme, as stated by manufacturer:
Wash at at least A Class Wash results, at both full & Partial load on 60 and 40C - energy is calculated over the year and then a rating is given on a energy efficiency scale.
An Energy rating label - A+++ to D, with A+++ being the best.
A+ is the same as A-10%, A++ is the same as A-20%, and A+++ is the same as A-30%.
Some manufacturers go further (such as in Germany and on display at IFA) is a Bosch rated A+++-50% (equivalent to A-80% or A++++++++), while AEG in the UK offer a A+++-20% machine, again equaling A+++++ or A-50%.
In order to get such high efficiency rating - as started in a previous thread, the machine wont actually reach the temperature selected, its a lot lower.

By the end of this year - all washing machines must have a 20C wash programme.

Tumble Dryers:
No real changes
just a new Energy label comes in by the end of the year.
ranging from D to A+++ - the values have been adjusted. Though A+ is the same as A-20%, A++ is the same as A-40%, and A+++ is the same as A-60% etc.

(Details correct according to EU energy label official website)

 

[dj-gabriele]

The real difference is that in Europe if I want a TRUE boiling wash I simply select it and voilà water starts steaming under the self-heating-magic-power of the machine.
Plus also PERFORMANCE IS RATED, not only energy use!

If I want to be an ECO guy I use the normative cycles that will compensate low temperature with longer wash times (mind, low is around 45°C for the ECO 60°C) and 35 for the ECO 40°C.
That is 113°F and 95°F respectively.

But as said I can choose a very hot quick cycle and live happily! (I really do love hot water washing!) while rinsing in warm/hot is simply a non-issue here since the introduction of synthetic soaps in the 50s when all the machines switched to cold water rising. (Warm water rinsing is just useless and wasteful).

 

[glenfieldmathk1]

On the new Energy label, that's been around for a few years now - Wash Performance is NOT included.
This is because all machines have to wash at A rating - Its just like the law that all machines must have 20C.
On the old label, yes Wash performance was included on the scale.
Only spin performance is now shown.

 

[dj-gabriele]

This is because all machines have to wash at A rating

Exactly, they have such a strict rating that all the machines must fall in the "A" or better range.
So it's not necessary anymore to put it in the label

 

[candoo]

So then, can I take it that these same "energy star" machines have selectable cycles that can wash the "old way" with enough water and heat to properly wash a load?

 

[dj-gabriele]

Not at all, EU norms are valid only in Europe and Energy Star is just a little more than nothing and that "more" is just crazy.
Luckly over here is just a pair of words and nothing else.

If you want something "the old way" you've got to find an old machine or make yourself a plc controlled one with custom levels and such.

 

[pierreandreply4]

it depends if you went a frontloader or a toploader

as you know front load washers have electronic control boards and if you went a topload they are not the same unless you go with ge or this old style inglis washer or huebsch the canadien branded speed queen washer.

 

[glenfieldmathk1]

Candoo, You can purchase new Maytag top Load washers with Deepwash option, which will "Wash the Old Way"
But yes, nothing really goes as good as the old top load machines.
Here in Europe, only 1 cycle (well 2) have to be designed for the energy label, all the others can use as much water, as much energy etc as they like.
I guess in the states, Canada, Aus etc that they also only have to have 1 or 2 designated cycles for energy star rating, and the other cycles can be normal?

 

[henene4]

I recognized that washers with a spray system mostly give better results on the energysaving cycles in fact of rinsing, while the washperformens is quite good throughout the line, in my opinion...

 

[DigAPony]

The trend is toward disappointing performance and reliabilit

Good post! I didn't realize washers use minimal electricity.

In N. J. rates with Jersey Central Power and Light, (also known as "Jerky Central") are currently slightly under 11 cents per KWH. However, added taxes and fees run up the bill more than the actual power used.

Cold rinses are another issue, with a private well water temps are ice cold winter and summer. A warm rinse option is nice to have.

 

[candoo]

"What little cost the washer extracts is in terms of hot water, so most "energy star" washers claim savings by strangling hot water use."

-Wouldn't this be a situation rectified by the European way of heating the water directly in the machine?

" unless you go with ge or this old style inglis washer or huebsch the canadien branded speed queen washer"

- so, are the Huebsch machines less "Energy Star" and wash with enough hot water?

"If you want something "the old way" you've got to find an old machine or make yourself a plc controlled one with custom levels and such."

-Yikes!! that sounds troublesome and pricey.

" Energy Star is just a little more than nothing and that "more" is just crazy."

- Not quite sure what you meant by this.

 

[pierreandreply4]

the only risk is this

no internal water heater like my 2004 whirlpool duet is that hot water wash on normal casual is that the washer will cooldown the water abit and this also means that water temp might be dumb down like for expemple hot will not be water heater temp warm water will be like cool ect unless you can fine a washer from 1990 and earlier but i do not know much front load that are before the energy star rating

 

[frontloaderfan]

"in the states, Canada, Aus etc"

I can't speak for Oz, but in the US, most newer washers, with a few exceptions like Speed Queen/Huebsch (top as well as front loading) use a PITIFULLY small amount of water to "wash" the clothes, no matter what cycle you select. My 2012 Frigidaire FL fills to about three-quarters of an inch of water in the empty (!) drum on the "Normal" cycle and maybe up to two inches on the "Bulky" cycle. Like Pierre's Whirlpool FL, it also has no onboard heater. When the "Hot" temp is selected, the initial fill is with hot tap water but if it needs to add additional water during the first few minutes of the wash cycle, it does so with cold water only, thus dumbing down the "hot" temp to what used to be warm.

I solve this annoying problem by having a two gallon watering can filled with hot water on stand-by. Once the machine has all of it's two cups of wash water in the drum, I dump the hot water in the watering can into the machine via the detergent drawer. Sounds like something out of the century before last, but it's the only way to actually get the clothes truly clean.

Our pencil pushers in Washington need to come up with something better than prohibiting modern washing machines from using a decent amount of water in order to save the planet.

 

[washman]

There is an option

frontloaderfan for now this can be avoided by getting a SQ top loader. You have far more control over the water fill than on any front loader.

 

[candoo]

"I solve this annoying problem by having a two gallon watering can filled with hot water on stand-by. Once the machine has all of it's two cups of wash water in the drum, I dump the hot water in the watering can into the machine via the detergent drawer. Sounds like something out of the century before last, but it's the only way to actually get the clothes truly clean."

- frontloaderfan- that does indeed sound like something out of the last century. too bad the government regulators think that this is "high efficiency" - sounds more like frustration and "Low Efficiency" when one has to do the wash twice to get it clean. Presently, we have a 2003 Miele W1966 with up to 95 deg C wash. I'd like to hang on to it forever if it would last, but nothing does. So I'm starting to get a feel for the market and see what might be a good replacement when that time comes.

I'm enjoying what you all have to say here, and learning a lot.

So far, from what you all are saying, if I were forced to get a washer tomorrow, I'd probably go back to Miele and get a W3037 or maybe a little giant.

 

[arbilab]

Miele is one of those 'high budget' options that still leave one a modicum of control over temperature and fill.

Noticing a great many replies from UK/EU where standards are entirely different from North America. No native NA brand includes a heater. All are limited to faucet hot temp--120F-140F--minus the loss in filling a cold tub, and many mix the faucet hot down even further because the government told them to.

I do not know the extent to which Canadian standards follow US standards, which best I can tell are the most absurd in the entire world.

 

[frigilux]

Actually, the only "native North American" brand that doesn't offer an internal water heater is Speed Queen. You have to go into the top-end models of other brands, but heaters are available. Look for Steam, Allergy, or Sanitize cycles. If the machine has one of those, it has a heater.

There are any number of excellent front-load washer options on the market from LG, Frigidaire, Maytag, and Whirlpool. I have a new front-loader and have never, ever had to wash a load twice because it didn't come clean the first time. If you've had a good experience with Miele, then buy a new Miele when the time comes.

If you want a traditional top-loader, Speed Queen is the obvious choice; but I wouldn't have one of their front-loaders due to lack of cycle flexibility and lack of a water heater.

Advice: Buy a front-loader with an internal heater so you have the option to wash in truly hot water (Allergy cycles around 130 degrees; Sanitize cycles around 150-155 degrees) and use the extra rinse option if you feel rinsing is sub-par.[this post was last edited: 9/10/2013-04:55]