New Ratings on Washers in Consumers Reports!

[frigilux]

Launderess, you know I have nothing but massive respect for your wide-ranging knowledge!

One more question for those of you with the very low water usage FL'ers: Do the rinses use more water, or are they as 'wet-nap' as the wash cycle?

 

[lavamat_jon]

Frigilux - the lowest rinse level in my machine reaches the lip of the door seal (that's if it's sensed there is a small load) - for a standard load the water is usually an inch up the door. With water plus selected the water is 4 or 5 inches up the door.

The water in our old Bosch however wasn't visible at all - only on the rinses of the Delicate cycle!

Jon

 

[peterh770]

Miele 1918 "Water Plus"

On my machine, I would say the normal water level is about 2 inches below the door. Pressing the "water plus" button adds about 1 gallon of additional water to the Cotton cycle wash and all rinses, and to the Perm Press wash, so the level is then about 1 inch below the door.

It's the programmable options that allows the user to raise the water level on the Cotton cycle rinses to the "high" water level, which is about 1/3 the way up the glass. The high water level is the default rinse water level on the Perm Press cycle and the default water level for both wash and all rinses on the Delicate cycle.

 

[launderess]

Now that is funny.

On my Miele, the default rinse for all cycles is the high level which is the normal wash/rinse level for "Delicates". I know this because one time set the program selector to delicate cycle after using a cotton wash program, and the machine didn't add anymore water. However, if one sets the machine to "Woolens" which has the highest wash and rinse water levels, the machine will add more water (assuming one chose another cycle for washing, such as cottons). Down side to this is that being a timer controlled machine, if all that water is not pumped out within the alloted time for say "Cottons", the timer will still advance. This will cause the washer to abort the graduated spin/final spin as a machine protection system. Again, tried this once and the machine simply wouldn't play ball.

My machine uses so much water during the rinses for in "Cottons" that heavy, thick/thirsty items like towels will really sop up allot of water. So much so have to take care as one can hear the drum literally bounce down low as the towels tumble about. Still, makes for great rinsing as again, if using the proper detergent by the third rinse the water is almost always totally clear.

L.

 

[48bencix]

But I loved

Front cover says

"Washers that don't wash"

LOL

Martin

 

[sudsmaster]

If you want a modern front loader with higher than average water levels, very good washing performance, and average gentleness, consider the Neptune 6500. It uses an average of 25 gallons per load - about twice as much as other modern front loaders. I would recommend, however, getting an extended service agreement. Mine was for a total of 7 years and cost $120 (for the 7500). It has saved me hundreds in repair bills.

And yes, I think the 7500 is a great washer. The only thing it really lacks is a window. But then with all the smoked gray windows in modern front loaders, not sure if there's much difference.

 

[peterh770]

This appeared on AOL today. Look at the pics. Does anyone who puts pics with these articles have a brain?

Loading…

money.aol.com

 

[whirlcool]

Duh,
early 80's Maytags, ALMOND appliances, wodgrained handles on the refrigerators. My how 80's!
They must have lifted that image from a museum somewhere!

 

[peterh770]

And further in they have the Neptune TL on the washer page...

 

[tolivac]

I also shop for washers at the swap shop at this point-GO VINTAGE-preferably BD KN or WP machines.I have looked at the "pretty" FL machines at BB and Lowes,HD,but can't get motivated to buy them because of their high prices-at how some of them are priced-might as well send out your clothes-it would be cheaper.most areas have a local laundry service.Its the same idea as the high priced lawn tractors-it would be cheaper to have a lawn service do your lawn.And with those high prices on the laundry equipment--how is the water savings going to offset their high prices-Can't justify it for me.Maybe if these were more reseanably priced-it would make more sense.

 

[launderess]

CR clearly states that depending upon water and energy costs, one may never recoup the extra costs for some "HE" machines. Even in areas with high water/utility costs, it still may take ages of use (with the same machine), to offset the extra cost.

Problem with many of the domestic front loaders sold in the United States is they are big on flash and short on substance. Who needs 15 different cycles and a washing machine that speaks seven languages? Start with a solid built machine like the SQ front loaders, add a decently powerful internal heater, and perhaps a simple range of cycles (mechanical timer or electronic), and that should be that.

Top loading washing machines are going to become history if makers cannot figure out a way to deliver good results and meet the energy mandates.

Really is a pity Americans do not seem to like 220v washing machines. A high powered heater would go along way towards solving much of the long cycle times, especially with American TOL detergents, which are pretty agressive and designed to work in short wash cycles.

L.

 

[tolivac]

It would be nice to have a 220V 15-20A outlet in the laundry room for newer washers.After all many folks who are woodworkers install 15 and 20A 220V outlets in their workshops or garages to run table saws or radial arm saws-one I know of put a 60A 220V outlet in the garage to run his 7Hp surface planer.Like the 220V table saw-the washer would want 15-20A 220V to run the heater.The 15A 220V outlet could run a table saw with a 3hp motor.These are becoming more common with serious home woodworkers.If such a washer were to become available-at a RESONEABLE price an electricain could run the 220V line for it.Again I feel the energy standards adopted for laundry equipment should be scrapped-Its too costly for consumers and accomplishing nothing.I wished the Republicans did that when they were in power.Let folks have a greater freedom of choice.If only FL were available-that laundry service around the block from me just may get my business!

 

[DADoES]

Energy consumption per se is not the only criteria. Water consumption is becoming a large factor, which is what will put toploaders out of the picture. My IWL12 is excellent for energy consumption, on par with, if not better than some frontloaders, but higher on water consumption, even with the shower-rinse. Toploaders that vie with frontloaders for reducing water usage (impeller model Oasis and Cabrio, and the ill-fated Neptune TL), get bashed for poor rollover and tangling and/or poor cleaning and/or wear-tear on the clothes. That's just a fact-of-the-matter on fundamental topload design when water is cut to the point that the clothes can't float. But then frontloaders that are continuing to cut water use are now getting bashed for the same things. It's coming to the point at which consideration may be needed on whether reducing water use to literal wet-wipe levels with increased clothing abrasion is more reasonable in conservation terms than more water with less clothing wear-and-tear. How often do YOU buy new clothes ... and is it to keep up with fashion changes (in which case wear-and-tear is likely not a factor) or because your clothes are worn to threadbare?

 

[tolivac]

I don't understand why politicians are so concerned about water use in washers-when hundreds of gallons of water is dumpted on lawns and gardens each spring and summer.With the amount most households dump into their yards-you could do SEVERAL top load washer loads with that water.also factor in amounts used to fill swimming wading pools and washing cars.For some folks washing their car could use a few TL washer loads of water.Then even filling a small pool could again use several coldwater TL washloads.Why aren't politicans concerned about those water users?At this point I would be more concerned about the outdoor use of water.For instance I don't water my yards-and its fine.And I take the car to a car wash-they use less water and even do a better job than I could do by hand-and its free at my car dealer!Their car wash filters and reciculates the water-they just ask not to have your car washed there if you got it real dirty from deer hunting.

 

[magic clean]

There is no easy way to control water use with regard to lawn watering, car washing, swimming pools etc. Except perhaps through exorbitant pricing of water & sewer rates and tough water restrictions.

Appliances & plumbing fixtures on the other hand can be manipulated to regulate water use.

 

[tolivac]

I read thru the washer reviews in the June issue of Consumer Reports-doesn't sound promising-At this point I am going to stay vintage-and even stock up on older TL's (good excuse to expand my collection)Check your thrift and swap shops-and estate sales-and even garage sales-and Monday Morning shopping--the curb.

 

[lederstiefel1]

I can only add that maybe MIELE was and is the best brand in the world - that is true! But I like tub-washers most...so what shall I do? Buy vintage machines!!

Ralf

 

[washabear]

I just saw the report. Kind of bizarre. Among 21 top loaders, 13 are "Whirlpool," 5 are GE, and 3 are other brands. Talk about a reality check! Where's Speed Queen? I also find it hard to believe that many of these machines suddenly wash less well than they did before. Do I detect a slant here? And how come the Kenmore 700 and 800 series rate poor for washing, whereas the 400 rates fair and the 600 rates good? Other than cycles, settings, and other doodads, aren’t all of them essentially the same under the hood? What’s going on here?

I did find it interesting that CR has no Best Buys this time because all the machines they like are relatively expensive. I guess if I were buying a new machine right now, it would be the Frigidaire 2940 front loader, even though CR says its washing is "mediocre."

 

[frigilux]

Lawn Watering: It actually uses thousands of gallons, not hundreds, in many cases. I have a large-ish lawn and had to water it once a week the first year I lived in my house. After listening to my lamenting about water bills, he said "Set your lawn mower to its highest setting AND LEAVE IT THERE!" Since then, I've only had to water certain spots (southwest side of lawn) once or twice in a season. I can only imagine how many tens of thousands of gallons that sage advice has saved.

It took a bit of time to get used to having taller grass, but the lawn looks much thicker and it's fun to see it wave in the summer breeze. It gathers more dew and self-waters. While some of my neighbors' lawns turn brown as they mow it down to shag carpet lengths, mine looks green and healthy throughout the season.

On TL washers: I've always thought the pricing strategy should flip-flop; Reduce the price of water and energy-saving FL'ers, then restore water temps and maximum water levels to TL'ers but charge a much higher price for them. Those who just aren't ready to make the switch to a FL'er can still have a quality washer, albeit at a price.

On the poor showing for some KM/WP TL washers: Do the machines that rate a poor cleaning score (ala my Frigidaire) step down to gentle agitation part way through the cycle? I was also a little mystified that certain models scored so poorly in cleaning. It's frustrating that the CR of old would have taken the page space to explain such discrepencies. Now we don't even get full ratings for dryers! I still think their testing is on the level, but the lack of any written explanations about models is becoming increasingly frustrating. At this rate, the entire washer articles will soon take up only one page. G-r-r-r-r-r!

 

[decodriveboy]

Consumer Reports

...is crap.

It's a marketing tool used by corporations to encourage people to buy these gimmicky appliances with built-in expiration dates. They look pretty, fall apart early, don't use enough water, and end up wasting more time and energy in the end when you have to wash and re-wash your smelly clothes and replace them from all the friction due to the overlong cycles.

Want a washer that saves energy? Here it is:

Introduce a front loader with an internal heater, maybe 3 different cycles, and a water level that fills 1/3 up the window so only 2 rinses would be necessary.

Have a maximum-speed spin take place in between each drain to remove soap and suds, and a couple of spray rinses.

The cycle time would be cut in half, saving electricity, and the water savings would still be there because the need for 3 and 4 rinses has been eliminated thanks to a reasonable water level.

But, unlikely to happen, as that would just make too much sense.