New Speed Queen AWN542 owner here

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

Sorry John

my rants are far from political. They simply reflect a realistic attitude that few seem to possess these days.
I don't blame the manufacturers 100%. I blame government for intruding (and us for allowing such intrusion) into areas that, sorry to be blunt, is NONE of their business.
No offense, but I really could care less if anyone at all agrees with me.

That being said, if I had no other choice, I would look long and hard at at SQ FL machine. I am not totally against FL machines, just ones that are overdone with electronic junk and mold problems.
ANd just because the current mindset is pro FL and Eco-washing does not mean I have to agree with it.
 
Washman: You portray yourself as a fiercely independent thinker, but your posts make it abundantly clear that objectivity isn't in play, here. You don't need to repeatedly interject your hatred for Al Gore, the left wing, and the government into your posts; we already understand where you're coming from.[this post was last edited: 9/11/2013-05:14]
 
OK guys, back OT

IIRC, household washers were originally invented as front-loading machines. The only reason why the U.S. and a few other countries preferred top-loading ones maybe because it has something to do with the patents.

TL are wasteful with water and detergent, some settings like warm rinses are surplus, I think. Also the extra rinse function which uses even more precious water. The fact, that Americans won't give up on this technique is very tenacious. SpeedQueen is a fine example, the controls on their FLs orientate themselves to traditional TL settings...
 
The way I look at it...

We are more likely to run of dirt than water. One thing I never understood is why front loaders use so little water for one cycle, after a few cycles it would be using just as much as a top loader so it doesn't really matter if were saving a little bit of water, some of you make it seem as if we are in some worldwide drought.

Its not like the average american is going to have a choice whether they want to use a low water washer or not soon anyways, so really...within the next 5 years, only people with machines made before 2011 or vintage machines will still be using lots of water in their washers so there is no need to worry about the world running out of water, I wouldn't say we'd have to worry about that at all even if everyone was still using top load washers made before 2011.

But I have to say, im not completely against the whole high efficiency thing if they could come out with a HE washer that actually cleaned and somehow rinsed properly...then I may go for it but I still dislike electronic/digital controls. Whoever said it was totally unnecessary for electronic controls you are absolutely right! Just a waste of money.
 
Next wars...

...will be because of water not for oil. So everyone should be up to save water as much as he/she can. It makes just no sense if we, for example, in Germany save water like idiots and the rest of the world consumes it as if there is no tomorrow.
 
One can hold the government accountable for mandates involving water and energy usage. However, the full brunt of blame for the use of sub-par electronics, as well as machines that give out shortly after the warranty expires lies with manufacturers.

Like many here, I'd prefer a mechanical cycle control over the the insubstantial electronic controls on new machines. But electronics per se aren't the problem. They are very reliable in aviation and space travel, where conditions are far more adverse than those experienced by any home appliance. The problem is the poor quality of the electronics, and that they are used to restrict, rather than enhance, cycle flexibility available to the user.

Manufacturers have learned they can produce short-lived appliances that are unfriendly (or not cost-effective) to service---and charge $1,000+ for them, to boot---with little backlash from the general public. It makes far more sense from a corporate standpoint to force consumers to buy a new washer than to repair the one they currently own. It's called free enterprise!
 
I agree 100% frigilux

Electronics CAN be more reliable than they are but I submit this............do you think it is a marketing ploy of sorts to differentiate a product in a crowded market?
A concentrated plan to get consumers to believe they actually need touchpads and status screens and such?
In terms of "gee whiz" factor, the SQ falls far short. But then again, aren't we after clean clothes at the end of the day?
 
I've always had a front-loader as my "daily driver", but have also enjoyed having various top-loaders as a 2nd machine in the laundry room.

Currently, that's a 2012 Frigidaire Immersion Care impeller-based washer. Picked it up more out of curiosity than anything. Unlike most other impeller machines, you can choose your own water level with this one. The impeller is actually bolted to the tub, so the entire tub indexes back and forth to create the wash action. I use it for three or four loads each week, mostly because it's fun to watch the reverse rollover (the load blooms up from the center and heads toward the tub walls). Wouldn't want it as my only washer, though. It doesn't like large, bulky items like sheets and blankets; it's completely useless for washing comforters.

John (combo52) brought one home (he services appliances) and had dismal results with it. In fact, the only positive thing he could say about the machine was that the fabric softener dispenser worked well. I have the upper-end model which provides more options for longer wash periods, so I have had better luck with cleaning ability.

To John's single accolade, I would add that it's nearly impossible to create an out-of-balance, cabinet-banging situation. It has a traditional suspension system rather than the hanging suspension most impeller machines have these days. It does a great job of balancing the load with slower "agitation" during the last few minutes of the wash period. Unfortunately, there's not much else to celebrate about it, LOL.

If I were told I could only have one washer and it had to be a top-loader, there's no question it would be a Speed Queen. I only hope they don't eventually adopt a trait of some of their latest commercial top-loaders, which reportedly spin out half the wash water, then refill and call that the deep rinse.

[this post was last edited: 9/11/2013-11:47]
 
I don't think electronic controls are an attempt by manufacturers to differentiate themselves, but they are cheaper to produce and indeed a marketing ploy to appeal to all those people who are addicted to touchpads and touchscreens on devices they have foolishly come to rely on to get through daily life.

 

I'll take knobs, timers, tactile buttons and good old fashioned road maps over the devices of today that remove even the smallest amount of brain power from a large array of daily tasks.  At this rate, the entire planet will soon be populated by a bunch of morons who can't think for themselves and will do whatever they are told by a pane of glass.

 

Still, that doesn't mean I'll intentionally run up my electric/gas and water bill just to make a point that's rooted in hatred, which is equally moronic.
 
My Take On Top-Load vs Front-Load Washer

I have had over 10 topload washers in my lifetime. I have had Kelvinator, Whirlpool (belt-drve) and Kenmore compact washers, three different sets of Kenmore direct-drive washers, a GE Harmony washer, a Maytag (Norgetag) washer, two Speed Queen Washers, a Hoover twintub washer, and a LG topload washer. Out of all of these the Whirlpool belt-drive compact washer and the Speed Queen were my favorites.

After having some issues with my LG topload washer after the recall work was performed, I traded it in for my LG frontload washer. After washing in this washer for 6 months, I can honestly say I get better results with my frontload washer.

For YEARS, I thought clothes could get cleaned only if you use a topload washer. I believed the clothes swirling in all the water and being sloshed back and forth were the only way the clothes could be cleaned. When I first used my frontload and noticed how little water was being used, I said there is no way in hell my clothes are going to get cleaned. Believe me, I have put everything from lightly soiled clothes to towels soaked in dog pee and vomit into that washer. Everything was clean and smelling fresh.

The reason I write this is alot of people are stuck into believing that you need lots of water to clean clothes. I did too. For a long time. I, also, am against the government dictating how much and how hot my water should be when washing. I am very against that. I pay the utility bills; therefore, I should be able to use how much water and energy I want.

There are other advantages for loving my frontload washer better than my topload washers. I noticed my shirts and jeans look newer much longer. There is less lint in the dryer. My most important point: my clothes are dry in less than 30 minutes because my washer spins at 1300rpms for several minutes. The water in clothes is very light due to that. I can't think of any topload washers that spin that fast.
 
Powrbruh-- I've found the tumble wash action of a front-loader to be very gentle on fabrics, even though cycles are longer. My dress shirts last far longer before collar edges and cuffs start to show wear. And you're right: There's noticeably less lint in the dryer filter when I wash in the front-loader.

Glad to hear you're getting great results with your LG!
 
IIRC, household washers were originally invented as front-loading machines. The only reason why the U.S. and a few other countries preferred top-loading ones maybe because it has something to do with the patents.

Not true actually, Bendix did submit patent applications for their front loader in the mid 1930's and the machine first became available in 1938, but at the very same time in the 1930's Blackstone, Beam, Frigidaire and General Electric were submitting patent applications on their top loading designs. Blackstone's top loader was introduced in 1941, but all production stopped quickly as WWII started. At that time soap (before detergent was introduced) which caused suds was much more effective being handled and removed by the top loader. Hands down a solid tub top loading washer can deal with suds much better and must faster than any front loader.



And that is why the top loader was superior for decades, until low sudsing detergents were perfected. What happened in the above video would have taken a loooooooooong time to be purged from a modern front loader, where as a vintage solid tub washer laughs at it.

and

I can't think of any topload washers that spin that fast.

Frigidaire and early GE top loading washers spun at 1140rpm, hence my name :-) and hence their amazing overall performance.[this post was last edited: 9/11/2013-18:56]
 
Although....to be fair to new front-loaders, a very small load washed with a triple-dose of liquid Tide will create a huge amount of suds, completely filling a 4-cu. ft. tub. Several times more suds than shown above! Not that I would ever subject my Frigidaire to such abuse just to force the machine into its oversudsing protocol for my own amusement.  

[this post was last edited: 9/12/2013-06:47]

frigilux++9-12-2013-06-46-35.jpg.png
 
And that is why the top loader was superior for decades, ..

This thesis has to be explained closer. I don't see any superiority in V-axis toploaders over front loaders besides not to stoop down.
 

Similar threads

william8
Speed Queen TC5 Anniversary and sudsing issue.
Replies
18
Views
48
william8
william8
E
Speed Queen Washer and Dryer
Replies
5
Views
32
combo52
combo52
kalanikaau1
Thread Number: 38893 revisited
Replies
0
Views
6
kalanikaau1
kalanikaau1
E
Speed Queen Washer AWN412
Replies
3
Views
19
Chetlaham
Chetlaham
pierreandreply4
doing homework
Replies
1
Views
6
maytaga806
M

Latest posts

Back
Top