omg who is next!!!

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

Help Support AutomaticWasher.org:

"You say you would pay to see a wash-in with a row of top loaders washing hardly anything full of water just to see the foreigners running around like chicken littles, well then how would you justify that to a family who are bathing their kids in 2 plastic buckets of water."

Move?

"By the way why does it matter if the washing isn't done in 10 minutes flat, as Chris says don't you have other things to do besides waiting for your washer to finsh? if speed in washing is so important, consider getting a twin-tub, they are faster than any other washer, you can actually save water by spinning wash water back into the washtub,which I do in mine."

My point was it wastes electricity using a washer that takes 2 hours to do the job a good TL does in 30 minutes.
 
It doesn't save you electricity using a top loader verti

Have a look a two exaples; both Whirlpool made machines!

http://www.whirlpool.co.uk/app.cnt/whr/en_GB/pageid/pgproddtl001/catid/3/subcatid/11/prodid/662
The toploader is rated G energy, meaning that it will waste at least 390 Wh per kg of clothes while a front loader, in this case a 8 KG, also from whirlpool, see it here

http://www.whirlpool.co.uk/app.cnt/whr/en_GB/pageid/pgproddtl001/catid/3/subcatid/11/prodid/30789
uses less than 190 Wh per KG of dry clothes you put in! Plus it uses 100 litres of water less for the same job!

Also cleaning ability is A for the front loader and G for the top loader!
And think that Whirlpool is a low end brand, if you put it verus a Miele, the top loader simply disappears (and for Christ's sake, not only Miele is quality and Miele is not the only European brand in existence!)

So the figures for an averange 60°C washing are:

- Top loader G class: 0,39 KWh per KG * 8KG = 3,12 KWh used (like running a dryer) plus 165 L of water

- Front loader A+ class: 0,17 KWh per KG * 8KG = 1,36 KWh used plus 64 L of water

That's a difference of 1,76 KW and 101 L of water!

NOW THE FIGURES FOR COLD WATER WASHING

For the top loader we assume a running time of 30 minutes, the only thing powered is the 1/2 HP motor (373 W)

For the front loader we assume a running time of 45 minutes with the motor (200W) spinning only half the time during wash plus 15 minutes spent for spinning at doble the power.

Here are the calculations:

TOP LOADER: 1/2h * 373 Wh = 0,187 KWh used + 165 L
FRONT LOADER: 3/4h * 200Wh * 1/2 + 1/4h * 400Wh = 0,175 KWh + 64 L

The difference in electricity expenditure here is much less but the water use is less than 2/5 in respect of the top loader.

Now, if you're not satisfied you can bash me as much as you want but with the expensive resorces we have in Italy, each saving is a big saving and the same way of thinking should be used everywhere in our single World.
 
I am not going to bash you, but those links are not that great as there are no wash times other a few mentionings. The PDF links appear not to work to get better details.

If you look under the ENERGY section for the FL, it did a 140 minute wash. There appears to be no mentioning of the TL's ENERGY test in time but I doubt it was anywhere near 2:20.
 
Yes, 140 minutes it the wash time at 60°C; if you get to download the instructions you can see that low temperature washing times are way shorter! And all those machines also have a quick wash at either 30°C or 40°C that does the job on everyday wash of lightly soiled clothes in as low as 15 minutes.

Even if the cold water cycle were to last 2 hours (which doesn't) the eneregy consumption would be 0,3KWh. With 100 litres of water wasted less.

At your rates of 2000 gallons per 30 USD = 2,92 € / cubic metre

you would save 0,29 euros (0,40 USD) per wash not to mention the savings in electricity while washing at anything hotter than tap cold (which in reality happens all the time).
I think that 0,40 USD is the expense for 3 KWh, isn't it?
 
This discussion has, as usual, turned into a cost vs. performance debate.

Are top loaders energy hogs? You bet, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I'm the one who pays my energy and water bills every month, and until that changes, my government will have nothing to say about it. And I can do three loads in my TL SQ in the same 90 minutes that it takes most FL's to do one load.

If push comes to shove in the U.S., when our SQ eventually dies we'll either go vintage or go back to beating our laundry over rocks next to a river.
 
If commerical Laundry took over a hour to do a load of linen

We would NEVER get any where. No foumula need be more than 55 to 60 mins at the very most..
 
i have washed my clothes MANY times in cold water, THEY DO NOT COME CLEAN, and that was with using tide, so i emailed tide about it and they sent me an email back saying that all of thier detergents including tide cold water should be washed in 60 degree or warmer water, plus, after a while, the detergent both liquid or powder gums up on the inside of the washer, all you people that think it is soo great to wash in cold water.... would you wash your dishes in cold water?? or your hands?
 
Well first things first

A front loader could take all day to run a cycle and would still use less energy than a top loader. I believe something like 90% of the energy used in any washing machine comes from heating the water. Since a front loader uses so much less water than a top loader, it can run for hours on end and still use less energy.

Ofcourse running a top loader using only cold water will cut down on energy use dramatically, but the results will no doubt suffer because of it.

I personally feel that to demand your washing machine is less efficient just because you can't be bothered to go away and leave it to do its job for a bit longer than older machines, regardless of the consequences, is EXTREMELY selfish and greedy. It's all well and good saying you have plenty of water and affordable energy now, but using it irresponsibly is just going to make it all the more likely that this won't be the case for much longer.

Matt
 
"I would almost pay money to go to a US wash-in with a whole bunch of TLs running full of water not washing hardly anything just to see the foreigners run around screaming as if the sky was falling down."

That is possibly the most irrational and immature comment I have ever heard.

Thanks by the way Gabriele!

Matt
 
Frontloaders & washing times & washing habits

Hi, some thoughts :

#####Don' t mess commercial FL with household ones######

Commercial FL usually have faster formulas than household FL; i.e. Miele's Little Giants run "cottons 140°F/60°C" by 49 mins, household mieles need 105/120 mins .
Both machines are the same size; speed is the main requirement in commercial machines : occurring not clean items are rewashed, while Mrs Housewife wants perfection a.k.a. "A" wash performance.
Obviously commercial machines use slightly higher levels to achieve a faster saturation of the load (meaning shorter washing times)

@@@@@@ Washing habits @@@@@@@@@

We Europeans (and Aussies too) now and then simply load our washers and forget about them, so we don't care if they take 45 mins or 118 mins. In "emergency" situations ("that very shirt I want to wear this evening")we have quick cycles, usually 30 min, latest machines have a 14 mins W-R-R-S cycle (IMHO way too short)

You Americans seem to be still used to do some guesswork as you did in the non-automatics age. Probably that's why you feel all this need for speed. Or maybe you still wash just one day per week ??

§§§§§§§§§ Washing times §§§§§§§§§§

Old frontloaders had a thermostop (timer stopped at the beginning of the main wash until the selected temp was achieved; in the meanwhile the cylinder kept on tumbling)

So, colder the temp meant shorter the wash. Washing heavy soiled non colourfast clothes was an issue as the wash step was too short. In the 80' s began the boilwash "sunset" and the 60°C/140°F era was rising. Lower temps and longer times to save energy, so longer times were even considered a selling point

The trick to have a 60°C wash that lasted a little more than a boilwash was the "economy button" to extend washing time. Miele first introduced the automatic time warranty meaning that a warm wash lasted as a boilwash. Today every AAA rated euro FL behaves this way, unless you press "short", "timesaver" or similar options

PS @ Pierreandreply : which FL doesn't have a perma press cycle ?? that's sounds veeery strange. FL can also spin faster without wrinklin' thanks to pulse spins
 
To the Rugged Individualists on City Water & Sewer :-)

With increasing population, water/sewer utilities are faced with rising demand. If it gets to the point where they must expand their facilities, this can be very expensive and complicated. It's much easier to reduce demand, by encouraging more efficient appliances, less thirsty landscaping, lower-consumption fixtures (BTW, there are great-performing and inexpensive 1.6 gallon toilets these days, like American Standard Cadet 3 and Toto Drake. I have one of each, and they're amazing to watch...no time or kinetic energy wasted on "swirling", just slam dunk down the drain). So there's a big picture beyond your willingness to pay your own bill.

Just for argument's sake, let's say your house is on well water. Your present well doesn't put out much water, but it's adequate if you have efficient appliances and fixtures. Plenty of water is available, but you'd have to pay for a new, much deeper well in order to reach it. How much would you be willing to pay for a new well, so you could use your top-loaders and old toilets?
 
You guys are missing the point. I'm not saying there aren't situations where FL washers are more appropriate. What I am saying is, I won't allow an obscenely bloated and overreaching government to dictate how much water I'm allowed to use to clean my own clothing. This kind of socialist BS might be good enough for Europe, or Australia etc, but NOT HERE. As long as our government isn't paying our energy bills, it's none of their damned business how much we choose to use. When new powerplants and water reserves/treatment plants are required, who pays for those? Yep, we do.

Look, bottom line here: we already have the technology to produce so much energy, there wouldn't even be a need to meter it. E.g. France now produces something like 85% of their energy from nuclear plants. What's standing in the way of progress is a government who's been in bed with the oil industry for over a century now, and a hysterical socialist left-wing faction who's afraid of damned near everything. In their little pea brains, they scream about global warming out of one side of their mouth while they scream about the evils of nuclear power out of the other side. If it wasn't so tragic it would be downright funny.
 
little pea brains

Why is it that some people can't discuss something without resorting to insults?

I see it time and time again...

Why can't we just accept that the Europeans have different outlooks and customs without resorting to insults?
 
Energy consumption

The Australian Governement legislated some years ago that ALL major appliances have energy rating labels affixed.

This is based on the cycle the manufacturer chooses to have their machine tested for wash performance and includes the cost of water heated externally at a set rate should it be required such as with a top load machine.

Maytag 6AMTW5555 = 805Kwhr - top load
Maytag MAH7550AAW= 473KWhr - front load

Both 8kg machines and both using a warm wash both on the cycle Maytag choose for wash performance testing....cycle time is irrelevant in this test.

nuf said....
 
> Why can't we just accept that the Europeans have different outlooks and customs without resorting to insults? <

We've had this same debate over and over, and over again. It just gets old reading posts from people who, for whatever reason, are unable to go this website's main page and read the third line of text:

"Automatic Agitator Washer"

Not agitation. Agitator. As in top loading washing machines. I've always thought that's the main focus of this site. If that's incorrect I definitely do apologize for the insult.
 
"The website, cyber-library and discussion forum dedicated to automatic clothes washing machines, dryers and dishwashers, collectors of antique and vintage Automatics, as well as anyone who likes to do laundry and dishes Automatically!"

I dont see a mention of agitators in that statement
 
Oh my, now that really is nitpicking.

The "third" line is a graphic, possibly taken from the control panel of a WCI-58, such as the one animated on the page.

Seems to me that lines 4 through 6 are more relevant to the intended spirit of the site:
<blockquote>The website, cyber-library and discussion forum dedicated to automatic clothes
washing machines, dryers and dishwashers, collectors of antique and vintage
Automatics, as well as anyone who likes to do laundry and dishes Automatically!</blockquote>
Perhaps Robert should comment on this.
 
'We Europeans (and Aussies too) now...'

The three or four Australians, including myself, who participate in this forum are hardly a valid representation of commonly held views or laundry habits of the broader Australian community. Laundry habits in Australia are by and large not European. Whilst front loader sales have increased, top loaders still make up the bulk of sales in this country. Over 80% of Australian households have a top loading washing machine of some discription. Our laundry habits are by and large 'not' European. They are Australian and historically influenced by US technology. We have European immigrants here, who may stick with their European way of doing laundry and people from lots of other backgrounds that do laundry in their particular way.

To all those who may not be aware or unsure, please note that Australia, like the US and Canada, shares a European history, but we are not part of Europe. We are Australians forging our own cultural and national identity quite separate from Europe and America. We may be influenced by and import ideas and technologies/products from abroad, but we generally adopt them to suit our Australian way of life.

regards

rapunzel
 
Agitators indeed!

Goodness! Is there no end to people? So a washing machine has to have an agitator for us to be talking about it, and the rest of us should be eternally grateful that we are allowed to mention anything else. What about those top loaders with impellers could we talk about those?

I have to say I am dissappointed over some of the ugly attitudes that have reared themselves up on this thread. We all live in this world together whether we are from America the land that has it all or the dryest country on earth Australia. If we dont all make a contribution to conserve resources there will be no America or no any other country for that matter. We will all be dead. And all this hoo haa about "choice" over a cheap top loader that no one ever really liked to begin with.
 
> So a washing machine has to have an agitator for us to be talking about it <

Who said that? What I have a problem with is the attitude that front loaders are somehow superior, or inevitabile -- on a website that was founded and exists primarily for the discussion of vintage top loading washing machines.

No America? We will all be dead? Thanks for illustrating my point about Chicken Littles.
 
vintage top loading washing machines

Front loaders can be vintage too.

I look at this website because I like washing machines of all kinds, top and front, twin tubs too. I am also interested to see what people use in other countries around the world.

And it is not Chicken Little syndrome. In Australia we DO have a water shortage that has to be dealt with. Out population is not getting smaller and if we want to enjoy the same quality of life as we do now some hard decisions have to be made now. If not who knows what will get forced on us later on.
 
The statistics have changed for Australia....

Here is and excerpt from the Australian Bureau of Statistics data of Jan 2008 on washing machine ownership (and appliances in general) with the link below.

'Almost all households in Australia had washing machines (97%) (table 5.3). The more energy efficient front loading washing machines were used by 22% of households. This proportion increased from 13% in 2005. The highest proportion of households with front loading washing machines were South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory (28%) (table 5.11).

Since 1994, Australians have used their washing machines less frequently. In 1994, 62% of households in Australia averaged 5 washing machine loads or less per week, and this proportion has increased to 75% in 2008. In the same period, the number of households loading 6 or more loads per week decreased from 38% in 1994 to 25% in 2008 (table 5.12).

The use of cold water in washing machines has been steadily increasing in Australian households, rising from 61% in 1994, to 74% in 2008 (table 5.13)'

Whilst Rapunzel may not be 'spot on' with the stats, he is correct that the majority of people still have top load machines though this is changing rapidly. From the above statistics you can see that since 2005 there has been a 70% increase in the ownership of front load machines (13-22% average). That is a relatively large change in 3yrs. Additionally, I am in the ACT (Canberra) and we have the highest ownership in the country...possibly because we have been on water restrictions since 2004 (and this is WITHOUT any financial incentives). This is about choice. People may have a financial incentive, but they are also taking responcibility for their actions and what happens in the future with resource usage.

I also think that some people may have missed what I have tried to say...

- That we ALL have a responcibility to the environment via our consumption of water, power and waste (sewerage and disposability of appliance)
- That either way cleans (top or front)
- That TIME taken by a machine to perform a function is irrelevant (it GIVES us time regardless)
- That governments have differing ways of influencing behaviours (I prefer ours to the USA...at this point in time, we still have a choice when buying new, the choice for Americans is being restricted by legislation on manufacturing which does make me wonder how much choice you really have)
- I (and most Australians and MANY Americans) live with water restrictions
- That we have consideration for the impact we cause not only today, but down the chain.
- That this issue is bigger and more important than the effect on your back pocket (it isn't ALWAYS about how much you save by using less)

Ultimately, the tide is turning on consumption. 'Because we can' is no longer a good or moral reason to use something long term. Everywhere you look there are people, manufacturers and elected officials trying to make us use less. Less petrol, less power, less water to create less waste and recycle more rather than send it to land fill.

When it all boils down to it, I don't begrudge anyone using an appliance appropriately (you define it!) be it vintage or new. What I do begrudge is the 'don't give a toss' attitude that some people exhibit when responding to others and that includes deriding your elected officials. If people don't like what is happening in their oun country, they should lobby those responcible for making the changes. If you can't be bothered voting and having a say with your vote or writing a letter to a local member, then your criticism and moans fall on deaf ears no matter how valid they are.

And finally, a particularly inspirational man once said 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country'

We could all learn a lot from that.....

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Latestproducts/0E43C98B32A7FE85CA25750E00109A1D?opendocument
 
'In Australia we DO have a water shortage'

That depends on where in Australia you are. Precipitation is subject to regional and cyclical variations, drought and flood cycles. Australia is by far 'not' the dryest continent in the world. Antarctica still holds that crown.

Water shortages in many urbanized parts of this country have more to do with politics, water allocation policies and current infrastructure than actual rainfall. Over the last 12 months NSW had more rainfall in many areas than we can poke a stick at. There is plenty to go around, it is just not being captured and managed correctly.

On the national level 80% of our pottable water is used up by farming, industry and business. Only 20% is used for domestic purposes. Out of that 20% an average of 15% is used for laundry. Yet, it is the domestic sector that is being held to disproportionate account over water consumption and expected to fund the bulk of largely questionable government initiatives and management programs. Thus, getting people to switch from top to front loaders does not constitute a real fix in the short and even long term. The amount of funding that is allocated to current appliance rebate schemes, government propaganda and consumer re-education programs is actually contributing to the 'waste'.

cheers

rapunzel
 
Rapunzel

Oh I am only too aware that water is being wasted by business, and that home use is only a fraction. Still I hate to waste water. I collect the water that is sitting in dishes and put it in the garden. I hate it when I see that people still hose their concrete driveways. I once had a flatmate who would spend over 30 minutes in the shower.

Afterall, if we are going to be rationed off on water use like in Brisbane and Melbourne, we need to make the best use of it.
 
Rapunzel

You are correct. Most usage (and waste) comes from industry and it are the elected officals both State and Federal who have failed all of us over the past 30yrs by not investing enough in water infrastructure.

...then we have the other lobbys that prevent the infrastructure from being built because of sensitivity to environment, endangered species et.al.

So the easiest short term solution is to change consumer usage with the carrot and stick approach which is what most State Governments are doing. Rebate for going efficient and stick with higher prices to discourage 'excessive' use.

Now if we could just build dams where all the rain seems to fall these days, we would at least reduce one problem.
 
Getting back to washing machines...

If agitator top-loaders become unavailable in the US, what'll be the alternative for people who have to replace one of those 24" "laundry centers", with a little agitator tub on the bottom and a dryer on top? One answer would be a compact dryer stacked on top of a compact FL washer. But I don't know how well this would work for my relative who has one of those laundry centers -- He's on the second floor of a pretty rickety condo building, and the FL vibration could be a problem. Maybe Whirlpool or GE will come out with an HE TL based 24" laundry center? Or maybe the laundry centers will get an exemption.
 

Similar threads

W
Whirlpool Washer Rant!
3 4 5
Replies
132
Views
9K
DADoES
DADoES
Z
Should I get my old Kenmore direct drive washer fixed?
Replies
27
Views
1K
goatfarmer
goatfarmer
N
Frigidaire FFTW1001PW - Repair vs. a New TL?
Replies
8
Views
381
gelaundry4ever
G
H
Speed Queen TV2000wn - early review / permanent lid switch fix
Replies
5
Views
2K
appledude1
A
rp2813
Window Air Conditioner Advice/Suggestions
Replies
26
Views
2K
rp2813
rp2813

Latest posts

Back
Top