Older Whirlpool
- Thread starter laundryboy
- Start date
Help Support :
Can't tell if that's almond or just bad lighting/age. Wish there was a lid open shot. If it has a backlit timer and fluorescent light, then it's pretty much the WP washer that was next door to me when the couple moved in in 1965 or 1966.
supremewhirlpol
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,134
Does anyone know where this machine is located? I'm wondering the same thing as you appnut.
laundryboy
Well-known member
Location
Its located near Binghamton NY, about an hour south of Syracuse..
Its located near Binghamton NY, about an hour south of Syracuse..
supremewhirlpol
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,134
In fact I was given an Imperial 80 by one of my cousins that looked like this and was white. The issue with it was that a leak started in the area of the reservoir filter and one of the joints rusted out as a result. So, while in the middle of the cycle the entire tub drops against the front of the cabinet(with water in it). That machine could not be fixed, unfortunately. The tub tray was so rusty that I needed to use a masonry pry bar to get the spin tube and transmission out. But what I found that was interesting was that the clothes basket was slightly bigger in this machine, compared to any other BD Whirlpool I've seen. That clothes would not fit in any other machine as it was too big. Also the tube in the center of the basket was taller. Was this machine a special model?
Looks to be an LDA series, 1976-1977. Probably LDA-8xxx. PartsTap.com lists LDA-8000 and LDA-8800. No console light. LDA-9800 did have a fluorescent light.
LDA was the last year of machines with a full-height centerpost. The next model-year LFA went to the short centerpost for belt-drives. IIRC.
supremewhirlpol
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,134
What was the advantage of the full centerpost vs. the half centerpost?
Melvin,
The short centerpost models eleminated metal content in both the centerpost/superstructure and in the spin-tube of the basket drive. Between the two I would bet each machine saved over a pound of steel, maybe a bit more. Couple that with the tens of thousands of machines that were made weekly for nearly 10 years of the short post, and that's a LOT of material saved. That short design lives on in every direct drive machine made.
But, from what I've been told, the primary reason for the short post design was to improve centerpost spin bearing life. In a standard machine, 1977 built and older, the upper and lower sleeve bearings are about a foot apart. During a "lifetime" of family use of say 12-15 years, these bearings repeatedly wore to the point where the machine will make clack, pop, rattle, and slapping sounds as the spin tube flops around in gaps that have worn in the bearings. This was the undoing of my Mother's 1961 Kenmore, which was so loud in spin that you could hear it outside the house, with all doors and windows closed (this in a well insulated house built for Detroit winters, lol).
I have heard bearing noise like I describe in numerous if not all well-used older machines. Some also had a tremendous vibration in the centerpost, which would be amplified by the bearing/spin tube gap combination.
The 1978 and later bearings are about half as far apart. Not only do they almost never make noise, the shorter distance between them accepts far less wear from the spin tube, extending bearing life. I have seen only one or two short post machines that had bearings worn enough to warrant replacement, even in machines having been in service for 20+ years.
I have often expressed disgust for the short centerpost design because it caused the premature death of thousands of machines due to water getting into the centerpost and transmission (under the agitator). However, the worn bearing issue certainly was indeed solved by the redesign.
Gordon
The short centerpost models eleminated metal content in both the centerpost/superstructure and in the spin-tube of the basket drive. Between the two I would bet each machine saved over a pound of steel, maybe a bit more. Couple that with the tens of thousands of machines that were made weekly for nearly 10 years of the short post, and that's a LOT of material saved. That short design lives on in every direct drive machine made.
But, from what I've been told, the primary reason for the short post design was to improve centerpost spin bearing life. In a standard machine, 1977 built and older, the upper and lower sleeve bearings are about a foot apart. During a "lifetime" of family use of say 12-15 years, these bearings repeatedly wore to the point where the machine will make clack, pop, rattle, and slapping sounds as the spin tube flops around in gaps that have worn in the bearings. This was the undoing of my Mother's 1961 Kenmore, which was so loud in spin that you could hear it outside the house, with all doors and windows closed (this in a well insulated house built for Detroit winters, lol).
I have heard bearing noise like I describe in numerous if not all well-used older machines. Some also had a tremendous vibration in the centerpost, which would be amplified by the bearing/spin tube gap combination.
The 1978 and later bearings are about half as far apart. Not only do they almost never make noise, the shorter distance between them accepts far less wear from the spin tube, extending bearing life. I have seen only one or two short post machines that had bearings worn enough to warrant replacement, even in machines having been in service for 20+ years.
I have often expressed disgust for the short centerpost design because it caused the premature death of thousands of machines due to water getting into the centerpost and transmission (under the agitator). However, the worn bearing issue certainly was indeed solved by the redesign.
Gordon
70series
Well-known member
Nice washer. Looks very much like a washer my father's cousin had, which was an LDA-5800, so this must be of that series. May it find a home.
Have a good one,
James
Have a good one,
James
Similar threads
