New Maytags are shipping!!!

[combo52]

New Washer Models

Well I am glad that Speed Queen is getting them worried and WP is extending the warranty.

 

A real factory warranty is always better than stupid service contracts, and yes virtually all major appliances built in North America are built in Union Plants, except junk like Bosch that are built in South Carolina.

 

[mattl]

Got to agree with Kevin,  having used a new top loader I'd never own one.  FL is the only way to go anymore.  I seriously think wash plates are a joke.  As others have said  stuff on the top of the load stays on the top of the load.  Tried  loading stuff all kinds of ways, always a disappointing result.

 

[askolover]

After owning a FL for the past 19 years I can say the same thing...I will NEVER go back to a top load! 

 

[joeypete]

Very cool! Looks like WP is using these to target Speed Queen..and using features of the new GE machines, with the deep fill option. They are def working the kinks out of these new washers. I'm impressed.

 

[mark_wpduet]

Question about the same look/different machines

So people shopping for a washer and think all models are the same underneath because they look the same, but you are saying they are not? Which leads me to me next question.

If one machine that is a pig in lipstick that has an agipeller vs the machine that has an agipeller that is a lion in a dress. Will the lion in the dress agipeller wash better than the pig in lipstick agipeller? I guess what I'm saying is that if they are different underneath, but both agipellers, what would make one move clothes better than the other one?

 

[henene4]

One platform has the recirculation and the direct drive motor which is way more versatile then the basic belt drive version which only has 2-3 wash motions.

 

[combo52]

Wash motions ????

It doesn't make any difference whether it's a direct drive or belt drive mechanism in a high-efficiency top load washer, the impeller can turn In either direction as many turns in either direction or as few turns in either direction or in just one direction it's up to the engineers to design the programming.

However with either of these designs it's not possible to have the impeller jumping up-and-down like a Frigidaire so it is limited to just a back-and-forth motion,but there's no difference in the two types of drive mechanisms in this regard

 

[washman]

Except

for Frigidaire stuff.......I think their plants in SC are non union as SC is a non union right-to-work-for-less state.

SQ is union, has been for a number of years.

This thread is amusing to me. Again, it proves that you really do need water to properly clean the laundry. FL excepted, they have always gotten by with less, but a TL machine needs water to do the job effectively.

Hi Frig!

 

[henene4]

Wrong, Combo52

The more basic VMW designs had a limited amount of wash motions (normal, slow, the short distribution strokes).

The more TOL Oasis once always had a more advanced motor controler using various more agitation speeds and arcs. Heck, alone the fact that the Oasis designs had a motor sensing routine for basket disingagement and could actively slow down the tub (which the VMW can't as far as I am aware) shows the Oasis DDs were more advanced in that matter.

I think murando can chime in there. He owned both and even stated that fact in one of the older posts.

 

[joeypete]

The DD version does use the F&P SmartDrive system that detects load/fabric differences and adjusts accordingly. The VWM system I believe was intended for use with an agitator, which it works fine with. I'm not sure why they offer an impeller version with that drive system...probably for a cheaper alternative. It seems to work ok but the DD system is def better.

 

[vacerator]

Oh,

I was under an impression that Whirlpool is no longer using the Fisher&Paykel smart drive c-sinus Hall sensor motor design, but mounted the motor from the belt drive VMW directly to the gear case.
As there are no online service manuals yet, can some none clarify please?

 

[joeypete]

I believe they just changed how the motor is mounted...that's why it sounds a little different. Andrew will know...he's the Whirlpool guru haha.

 

[revvinkevin]

 

 

Henrik, did you NOT read what Combo52 wrote?

 

The design (direct drive vs belt drive) makes NO difference as to what it's capable of doing, "motions" etc, it's ONLY a matter of how the engineers PROGRAMMED the motor controller for each cycle.

 

Also, I think it's safe to say that John (Combo52) is more of an expert than you are, being he has been selling and repairing appliances A LOT longer than you have been alive.

 

Kevin

 

[murando531]

I always feel it would be easier to explain these things if I had a presentation board and a pointing stick, haha.

I do have to agree with Henrik and respectfully disagree with John. Yes, the two designs have full theoretical range of motion, but the behavior of the two drive systems are entirely different, which explains why there is such a contrast in the performance of the two.

And yes, vacerator, you are partly correct in that they added a "gearbox", but it is still the same BPM motor used in the Oasis/F&P design. The gearbox is simply there for torque conversion for the same reason it is used in the belt-drive VMW machines.

The VMW belt-drive has only three common agitation profiles: Normal - 360 degree oscillations, Short-strokes for distribution - ~90 degree oscillations, and Long stroke, usually ~2-3 rotations each direction, used primarily in the Bulky/Deep Fill cycle. The speed in which the motor spins to generate the agitation strokes doesn't change, only the duration in which it "pulses" each direction. On the other hand, the Oasis and VMAX designs with the BPM "pancake" motor have quite a few profiles. On a Normal cycle, it will frequently alter its behavior, for example, it can start out with aggressive oscillations at 450 degrees or so, then step down to medium 360 degree osc., then a slower version of 360 degree osc, then a quick short 90 degree, then back up to medium 360. Even if it were to stay at 360 degree agitation the entire time, it can change the behavior of those oscillations by rotating more aggressively or gently. In addition to more variety in its agitation behavior, it can also "sense" the load and adjust accordingly. For example, a light load of typical fabrics will result in gentler agitation, never really going into the aggressive ~360 and ~450 degree, but settling between the medium and gentle strokes. A heavy load with mixed fabrics and things like sweaters and jeans tends to alternate those more vigorous strokes in to help move the load properly, with short gentle strokes throughout to help distribute and keep balance.

Joeypete is right, the belt-drive VMW design is perfect for the traditional fill agitator machines, because the standard back and forth motion throughout the cycle is perfect for that type of washer, but for the HE washplate, it's not quite as effective, and results in lethargic rollover and tangling/balling the load to one side.

In all of this, drive systems aside, the biggest game changer is the addition of a recirculation pump in the flagship Oasis and VMAX machines. The VMW has no recirculation system at all, and in my opinion, a recirc pump makes or breaks an HE top-loader.

The best way to see the difference is just watching videos of the three. As far as parts diagrams, I'll do my best to find each of them and post when I have time.

In regards to the newest design, the VMAX, I finally found a technical education manual that explains exactly how they work and how they differ from its Oasis predecessor. I also have the diagram and a photo for the new machines in question for the thread's original subject.

http://https//s3.amazonaws.com/sm-backend-production-attachments/Job+Aid+-+W10758836+(L-87).pdf

 

[murando531]

And no RevvinKevin, I'm sorry, but by combo52's logic, that's the same as having a Dodge Charger SE sitting side by side with a Charger SRT HellCat, and saying that there's no difference in performance because "they both have engines and wheels". It makes no sense. Seeing the VMW operating next to the Oasis or VMAX clearly differentiates the two machines and how they work.

Here's an example. This is a video of the VMW belt drive Cabrio, same as the equivalent model Kenmore and Maytag Bravos X. Notice the pulsing to turn the tub rather than a smooth fluid rotation, and the same repetitive agitation throughout the entire cycle.



Also, photos of the drive system underneath.

 

[murando531]

And here is a video of a flagship model Oasis machine with the recirculation pump and direct drive BPM motor. Skip to about 26:00 for the start of the agitation if so desired. Note how the agitation changes frequently throughout the wash portion.



Here's another with a full heavy load of towels. Agitation begins around 17:00. The agitation changes from aggressive to medium a few times, and there is no way to deny the drastic difference in rollover performance as opposed to the video with the VMW belt drive.



Photos of the drive system. Note that with the Oasis design, there is no square metal panel directly under the BPM motor as there is on the VMAX. The Oasis has no gearbox whatsoever, as the rotor is directly attached to the agitator, and the basket floats to disengage/rengage for agitate and spin. The pumps are also placed a bit differently, with the recirculator at the front of the machine on the VMAX, where on the Oasis they're both at the rear.

 

[joeypete]

See I knew Andrew would have the answers hahaha.

I can tell you what, at 41 years old I'm probably considered young by many people here and old by others...but in my 41 years I've discovered that age does NOT always mean more knowledge. My nephew will be 24 this December and by age 8 he was dissecting all kinds of electronics and could tell you how they worked inside and out. We were all astonished (and worried that the FBI would be coming to the house hahaha). It was amazing how much knowledge filled that little head of his.

Same is true for a lot of things. Every time I've bought a car, I've had vastly more knowledge about the vehicles than the salesman did...yes even ones that had been selling a particular brand for decades. Sure they knew all the options, etc but I knew the history of the model...the engines/transmissions and so on. I'm finding this with appliances too. My coworker's husband was an appliance repairman for 20 years and I was helping them pick out new appliances. Just because you sell and repair things doesn't mean you know every detail about them...or how they are designed and why.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful...nor is anyone here. Combo52 is very knowledgeable about appliances but Andrew and Henrick both are thinking more along the lines of engineering aspects of these machines...more so than just on how they work or don't. More facts than just opinion.

 

[revvinkevin]

Yes, the two designs have full theoretical range of motion

 

 

Thank you, that is EXACTLY my point!

 

I'm NOT talking about the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">performance</span> of the machines, or how they wash clothes here,  (or a 300HP car versus a 700HP car).   I am talking about how both the belt drive and direct drive designs are capable of doing the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">exact same things, functions, motions, etc.</span>     Again, it's only a matter of how the motor controller is programmed!   

 

If Whirlpool engineers programmed a <span style="font-size: 12pt;">direct drive machine to operate/function/perform like a belt drive machine, it would.   And vise versa, if they programmed the belt drive design to have the same motions as a direct drive design, again it would.</span>

 

<span style="font-size: 12pt;">This is my point, not how the machines wash or how the clothes move or how one has recirculation and the other doesn't.</span>

 

 

 

 

[johnb300m]

Direct vs Belt

This is not entirely true.
It fully depends on the actual designs and capabilities of the motors.
It's possible that the motor used in the belt driven VMW just simply CANNOT respond to the actions if it were simply plugged into a direct drive motor controller.
Plus you have a belt in between, so you'll have movement losses due to the damping of a belt. Torque loss, grip loss etc.
BPM motors are usually more responsive and able to be tighter controlled. That's why they can do such quick and powerful variables of motion, over the types of motors usually applied to a belt.

NOW, only if WP connected a pancake style BPM motor with a belt to a VMW tub could the VMW possibly have the same mannerisms as the direct drive machine. But you'll still have the lossy springiness of a belt in between. With the increased possibility of belt slip. The motors that drive belts are usually less torque, or dialed down to not tear up the belt.
With the direct drive motor, you can have 100% torque, right away, to control wash motion.
It's a huge difference.

In NO way does it matter that you can turn a shaft the same way with either a direct drive motor or a belt link.
It doesn't matter. That's not how WP designed the machines.
The theoretical does not matter.

That's what us engineers have to fight with everyday.
All you regular people out there. Y'all don't get it's NOT JUST THAT SIMPLE.

 

[murando531]

Exactly what johnb300m said.

To say that the two designs are exactly the same just "because they can turn back and forth" is foolish. The two motors are entirely different devices with entirely different capabilities. The single-phase motor in the VMW operates at set speeds. The BPM rotor/stator motor has infinitely variable speeds and torque. To say that they'd work exactly the same way just because of a programming change makes no logical sense.

And if the two COULD work the same exact way just from changing programming, why would they have two entirely different designs in the first place? They could just use the cheaper-to-manufacture VMW design for everything and save the cost of the higher end BPM system.