Interesting thesis out of Germany regarding older washing machines.
Old Washing Machines Are Less Efficient and Consume More Energy
- Thread starter launderess
- Start date
Help Support :
Team Launderess sets up her spot for a leisurely afternoon at the beach.
[this post was last edited: 9/3/2015-07:27]
[this post was last edited: 9/3/2015-07:27]
Of course they do as European shoppers pick machines by efficiency and that's how they've been marketed for nearly 25 years at this stage.
You're always looking for triple A rated performance - wash, spin, energy.
The A rating is also a sliding scale that moves with technology development so, as machines become more efficient the bar is moved higher and higher.
So, basically the A+++ ratings are being determined by the latest high end machines and everything else follows.
Before that system came into existence, there were no such ratings and people wouldn't even have been aware of energy consumption or water consumption, unless a manufacturer made it a unique selling point like the old Zanussi Jet System range in the 1980s
You're always looking for triple A rated performance - wash, spin, energy.
The A rating is also a sliding scale that moves with technology development so, as machines become more efficient the bar is moved higher and higher.
So, basically the A+++ ratings are being determined by the latest high end machines and everything else follows.
Before that system came into existence, there were no such ratings and people wouldn't even have been aware of energy consumption or water consumption, unless a manufacturer made it a unique selling point like the old Zanussi Jet System range in the 1980s
I can see that in the older Miele machines, and other brands, that gave several rinses after the wash before any spins. WHICH used to rate machines on rinsing and in the 60s and 70s, none got a higher score than fair.
2packs4sure
Well-known member
Anyone factored in the billions of dollars wasted ?????????
I wonder if anyone has ever factored in the billions of dollars wasted by consumers buying those thousand dollar front loaders from the 2000 - 2010 era that lasted 5 or 6 years with many breakdowns in between only to junked in year 7 and then buying another $1000.00 front loader.
I wonder if anyone has ever factored in the billions of dollars wasted by consumers buying those thousand dollar front loaders from the 2000 - 2010 era that lasted 5 or 6 years with many breakdowns in between only to junked in year 7 and then buying another $1000.00 front loader.
realvanman
Well-known member
Yes, or the Energy and other resources wasted
Constantly scrapping those machines and building new ones.
*Recycling*, while better than the landfill, is a very wasteful process.
Keith
Constantly scrapping those machines and building new ones.
*Recycling*, while better than the landfill, is a very wasteful process.
Keith
2packs4sure
Well-known member
Yes, or the Energy and other resources wasted
Also the fuel costs in transporting those beasts with their cement balancing weights.
More fuel used to ship new, then haul off to the junkyard, not to mention the sprained backs of the fools trying to install and position those things.
Also the fuel costs in transporting those beasts with their cement balancing weights.
More fuel used to ship new, then haul off to the junkyard, not to mention the sprained backs of the fools trying to install and position those things.
Just skimmed the article a bit so far, I intend to read it in depth. I have a hunch that there will be a lot of negative comments here posted by people that didn't fully read and comprehend the article.
What say we give these three authors the benefit of the doubt before we bash the study?
What say we give these three authors the benefit of the doubt before we bash the study?
realvanman
Well-known member
Ours is a Special Group
So naturally we are going to be extra defensive about our beloved vintage machines
We are unusual in as much as we see and appreciate the quality in both design and execution of most things of the past. While most will holler the mantra of "dated", we appreciate things that last, and that look good, and even feel good. One can feel the difference in quality between today's flimsy plastic and yesteryear's quality, merely by handling the machines, and their controls. Heck, one can see the difference before they even touch lol.
What I'm saying is only that we're biased (or informed?) in ways that the majority are not, and so some nitpicking from us is to be expected I don't have children, so I probably save some resources just by using my old machines less? I don't know, some of those modern front loaders are admittedly VERY efficient.
Still, it's an interesting article. I too have only skimmed it so far, but do look forward to reading it in it's entirety.
Keith
So naturally we are going to be extra defensive about our beloved vintage machines
We are unusual in as much as we see and appreciate the quality in both design and execution of most things of the past. While most will holler the mantra of "dated", we appreciate things that last, and that look good, and even feel good. One can feel the difference in quality between today's flimsy plastic and yesteryear's quality, merely by handling the machines, and their controls. Heck, one can see the difference before they even touch lol.
What I'm saying is only that we're biased (or informed?) in ways that the majority are not, and so some nitpicking from us is to be expected
I don't have children, so I probably save some resources just by using my old machines less? I don't know, some of those modern front loaders are admittedly VERY efficient. Still, it's an interesting article. I too have only skimmed it so far, but do look forward to reading it in it's entirety.
Keith
bradross
Well-known member
Hear, hear, Keith!
Keith, you've made some great points! I cannot STAND front loaders - I don't think they get laundry anywhere near as clean as a good toploader - or furthermore - an old wringer washer! I think you need a significant amount of water to really clean clothes, and using a wringer - or a top loader with suds-saver feature - is not wasteful of water.
I got back recently from England, where front loaders are the norm, and in 3 weeks, never felt that I was getting clean laundry. Additionally, I don't think they rinse efficiently, PLUS they take so long to complete a cycle.
That's my "two cents" worth!
Keith, you've made some great points! I cannot STAND front loaders - I don't think they get laundry anywhere near as clean as a good toploader - or furthermore - an old wringer washer! I think you need a significant amount of water to really clean clothes, and using a wringer - or a top loader with suds-saver feature - is not wasteful of water.
I got back recently from England, where front loaders are the norm, and in 3 weeks, never felt that I was getting clean laundry. Additionally, I don't think they rinse efficiently, PLUS they take so long to complete a cycle.
That's my "two cents" worth!
Rinsing is primarily about forcing clean water through the clothes and removing it.
Multiple saturate and spin cycles are probably a lot more effective than just a big deep rinse.
Front loaders definitely get the clothes very clean. It's scientifically proven. The rinsing issue can depend on cycle and option selections though too.
Multiple saturate and spin cycles are probably a lot more effective than just a big deep rinse.
Front loaders definitely get the clothes very clean. It's scientifically proven. The rinsing issue can depend on cycle and option selections though too.
realvanman
Well-known member
My Mom has a Front Loader
That's why I have her nice '80's Whirlpool
I don't *feel* like her front loader gets clothes very clean, but admit that, of course, *feel* is very unscientific She likes it, so that's what matters.
I do like the rippin' fast spin speed it can do. The clothes come out damn near dry lol.
But I too do not like how LONG it takes to run a cycle.
And, her machine in particular (LG, I believe), draws the water in little bursts, a practice which her flash water heater does not agree with lol.
Keith
That's why I have her nice '80's Whirlpool
I don't *feel* like her front loader gets clothes very clean, but admit that, of course, *feel* is very unscientific
She likes it, so that's what matters.I do like the rippin' fast spin speed it can do. The clothes come out damn near dry lol.
But I too do not like how LONG it takes to run a cycle.
And, her machine in particular (LG, I believe), draws the water in little bursts, a practice which her flash water heater does not agree with lol.
Keith
philr
Well-known member
I would like to see tests done here in North America with old front and top-loaders and also test of new washing machines (top and front loaders) with old detergents, and the same done with new detergents!
Not that I care that much (or at all!) about efficiency.
In fact, I'd like if some scientific tests were done on the entertainment factor and consumer appreciation of vintage vs new appliances. I don't care much about how clean my clothes are, I want a machine that is fun to touch, fun to operate, fun to look at and fun to watch (or even to listen to!)!
I hope a few others think like me, at least here!
;-)
Not that I care that much (or at all!) about efficiency.
In fact, I'd like if some scientific tests were done on the entertainment factor and consumer appreciation of vintage vs new appliances. I don't care much about how clean my clothes are, I want a machine that is fun to touch, fun to operate, fun to look at and fun to watch (or even to listen to!)!
I hope a few others think like me, at least here!
;-)
Uh-Oh, sounds like I should be formalizing the results from those 'Totally Unscientific Laundry Tests' from now on... LOL
To be fair
Paper was released over ten years ago (2005) and much as changed since.
Study covered washers from IIRC the 1980's and perhaps earlier (cannot recall atm), much has changed since 2005 including various mandates about energy use affecting appliances sold in Germany.
Also IIRC the paper does account for the particular habits/traits of Germans; they are shall we say thrifty and often demand value for money. In short want something that will give service and usually hold onto it until the thing cannot be repaired.
Love both my older Miele 1070 and more modern Oko-Lavamat 88840; but would have to say in terms of overall performance the latter comes out slightly ahead.
In terms of rinsing the Miele only has one short pulse spin after three rinses with the only full spin taking place between the fourth and fifth rinse. OTOH the Lavamat spins after each of the rinse cycles. It has been known going back to the days of mangles/wringers that laundry comes out cleaner if water is extracted after the main wash and between each rinse.
That being said the Lavamat like many modern machines will do at least two deep rinses before spinning if "Sensitive" or "Fine" rinsing is selected; just as with the older machines.
Have always assumed one reason older European washers didn't spin after the first few rinses was both to cool down laundry after a hot to boiling wash. That and to prevent suds locking by diluting out as much detergent/soap from the wash before it was spun.
In terms of overall water use European H-axis washing machines for both commercial and domestic had long been decreasing water use during wash cycles. This came about as it was found wash results were better as concentrated soap/detergent and water solution being forced though the wash gave better cleaning than it swirling in a tub of water. You want high water levels for rinsing
Paper was released over ten years ago (2005) and much as changed since.
Study covered washers from IIRC the 1980's and perhaps earlier (cannot recall atm), much has changed since 2005 including various mandates about energy use affecting appliances sold in Germany.
Also IIRC the paper does account for the particular habits/traits of Germans; they are shall we say thrifty and often demand value for money. In short want something that will give service and usually hold onto it until the thing cannot be repaired.
Love both my older Miele 1070 and more modern Oko-Lavamat 88840; but would have to say in terms of overall performance the latter comes out slightly ahead.
In terms of rinsing the Miele only has one short pulse spin after three rinses with the only full spin taking place between the fourth and fifth rinse. OTOH the Lavamat spins after each of the rinse cycles. It has been known going back to the days of mangles/wringers that laundry comes out cleaner if water is extracted after the main wash and between each rinse.
That being said the Lavamat like many modern machines will do at least two deep rinses before spinning if "Sensitive" or "Fine" rinsing is selected; just as with the older machines.
Have always assumed one reason older European washers didn't spin after the first few rinses was both to cool down laundry after a hot to boiling wash. That and to prevent suds locking by diluting out as much detergent/soap from the wash before it was spun.
In terms of overall water use European H-axis washing machines for both commercial and domestic had long been decreasing water use during wash cycles. This came about as it was found wash results were better as concentrated soap/detergent and water solution being forced though the wash gave better cleaning than it swirling in a tub of water. You want high water levels for rinsing
Thanks, but my nearly 33 year old Maytag uses 40 gallons for an ex-large load and everything still comes out perfectly clean. Sometimes I think its better to keep what you have as long as it works just fine. I am not doing several daily loads in it, so it works for me.
BRAD
I agree with you 100%! You have to use WATER to clean clothes and washing in our wringer machines is a way to save water and get CLEAN clothes. That's my 2 cents worth too.
I agree with you 100%! You have to use WATER to clean clothes and washing in our wringer machines is a way to save water and get CLEAN clothes. That's my 2 cents worth too.
Adding to my above post.
Modern European front loaders now often have sensors that can tell the machine when the laundry temperature is "hot" and perhaps cool it down via rinses before spinning. That or one can select from various options to cool down the wash water such as the addition of cold water before draining. This once was standard but now is a feature often turned off by default but can be reactivated via programming.
As for suds lock modern washers with fully electronically controlled motors can easily deal with too much froth/water whereas older machines may have had problems.
My Miele will simply stop spinning if the pump/sump is overwhelmed but keep the pump running to get rid of things. Once that period has passed the machine is given the all clear to begin spinning again. If too much froth still remains the process is repeated. However should the timer "time out" of that spin portion; tant pis, the machine will now enter rinsing regardless.
Now the AEG will slow the spinning down and or stop while continuing pumping in response to suds lock. More importantly it seems to hold the timer so spinning will continue on full cycle once conditions are right.
Modern European front loaders now often have sensors that can tell the machine when the laundry temperature is "hot" and perhaps cool it down via rinses before spinning. That or one can select from various options to cool down the wash water such as the addition of cold water before draining. This once was standard but now is a feature often turned off by default but can be reactivated via programming.
As for suds lock modern washers with fully electronically controlled motors can easily deal with too much froth/water whereas older machines may have had problems.
My Miele will simply stop spinning if the pump/sump is overwhelmed but keep the pump running to get rid of things. Once that period has passed the machine is given the all clear to begin spinning again. If too much froth still remains the process is repeated. However should the timer "time out" of that spin portion; tant pis, the machine will now enter rinsing regardless.
Now the AEG will slow the spinning down and or stop while continuing pumping in response to suds lock. More importantly it seems to hold the timer so spinning will continue on full cycle once conditions are right.
electron1100
Well-known member
Propaganda
Just sounds like propaganda to me, probably financed by a large corporation in the back ground.
But as I refuse to be guilted into an "eco" lifestyle I will carry on with my 34 year old machine, I want clean clothes at the end of the day
I have said it before I will say it again, none of the Three modern "eco" washers I had (Hoover, Bosch, Hotpoint) can touch my old Hoover 1100 with its high water levels on wash and rinse for cleaning or rinsing, and come to think of it the Hotpoint with its constant spinning of clothes to get the suds out used to crease them far more.
Gary
Just sounds like propaganda to me, probably financed by a large corporation in the back ground.
But as I refuse to be guilted into an "eco" lifestyle I will carry on with my 34 year old machine, I want clean clothes at the end of the day
I have said it before I will say it again, none of the Three modern "eco" washers I had (Hoover, Bosch, Hotpoint) can touch my old Hoover 1100 with its high water levels on wash and rinse for cleaning or rinsing, and come to think of it the Hotpoint with its constant spinning of clothes to get the suds out used to crease them far more.
Gary
Similar threads
