Out with the sort of old, in with the somewhat less old

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

Help Support :

retropia

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
1,296
Our trusty Kenmore model 417.40042990 bit the dust. It began making an awful racket during the spin. I checked the shock absorbers for broken mounts; they looked fine. The tub, though, could be manually moved about a lot more than I thought was appropriate.

While out of town, we had a repair tech we trust come in for a second opinion, and just by moving the tub around, he confirmed it had a broken spider. He said he could repair it for around $500, which didn't seem terrible, but he advised against it. At the age of the washer, other things could start to go bad, like the electronic board and the motor. We decided it probably wasn't practical having it fixed.

We'd purchased it with its matching dryer around the year 2000 if I remember correctly, and it gave us great service for 13 years. We did have the pump replaced at some point, but that wasn't terribly expensive.

I let the tech take it off to be recycled, and I hope I don't regret not getting it fixed. Will I find a replacement front loader that we like as well?

retropia++7-27-2013-11-54-56.jpg
 
Fortunately, we had a backup washer in the garage. This KitchenAid Superba model KAWS850LQ1 was built, I think, around 2005. Maybe someone can tell a manufacturing date from the serial number, which is CR1908559.

What I like about this machine is that it is a direct-drive Whirlpool derivative, so it is reliable, easy to repair and parts are plentiful. It has three agitation speeds, high, low, and ultra low, which should offer enough flexibility to alleviate concerns about harsh agitation of direct-drive washers.

Another thing I like are the dispensers for detergent, bleach and fabric softener. They flush water through them to dilute as they dispense, plus it keeps the dispensers clean. I believe there was a similar Kenmore Elite washer that had this feature for awhile. I'm not sure if Whirlpool offered anything similar in its lineup.

This machine was serviced by those trusted technicians in Maryland, so we are looking forward to wash-day bliss and continuity while we figure out what to do about replacement front-loaders.

retropia++7-27-2013-12-05-24.jpg
 
Of course it does offer an extra rinse, which I decided to make a video of. I have no idea what specific features should be included in a washer video, so feel free to let me know of improvements I could make for future videos.

As it had been many years since using a top-loader, I was a bit shocked by the amount of water it consumes. It is a guzzler. This makes me wonder whether the extra rinse is a feature we really need to use. Our detergents are all HE, so I don't think getting rid of excess suds will be an issue.

In any event, the KitchenAid will only be a daily-driver for (I hope) a short period while we figure out what to do regarding new front-loaders.

 
Why do you went to buy a front loader when that kitchenaid t

Why do you went to buy a new frontloader when that kitchenaid topload washer can do a much better job washing your clothes than a front loader and is it so iomportant to have a backup washer me i only have 1 and when it breaks it will be replace and i have seen your video and i would say stick with that kitchenaid topload washer it cleans much better than a frontload washer.
 
I'm looking for the matching KitchenAid dryer, preferably in gas. Ultimately my goal is to have the KitchenAid set next to the replacement front-loader set, everything setup to use all at the same time, should we so desire.

Our city is jacking up its water and sewer rates every year, so water usage is an issue. The city still has many miles of antique sewer lines, some still combining both sanitary and storm sewers. In heavy rainfall, it can cause raw sewage to overflow into the rivers. It will be expensive digging up streets, sidewalks and lawns to modernize the sewer lines. Hence, rates are going up and there is a need to consider water usage.

The old Kenmore front-loader offered a happy compromise, I thought, between cleaning ability and water usage. We never had any complaints about its ability to clean, and it definitely used less water. It also did a better job extracting water. Towels and jeans, for example, are taking longer to dry coming out of the KitchenAid.

Still, the KitchenAid is going to be a permanent fixture in the laundry arena and I will enjoy getting to know it better.
 
Shame to hear that the old Kenmore would probably be unfixable: The simplistic no-nonsense Front-Loader is more or less a thing of the past, unless one is willing to pay big $$$s.

But, every cloud has a silver lining: You've ended up with a top-of-the-line KitchenAid DirectDrive machine, well built and obviously quite capable of doing a very respectable job, if the word of mouth on this forum is to be believed!

As for cleaning power of Top-Loaders vs. Front-Loaders, that is really dependant on the machine's tub design, as well as many other factors, such as detergent choice, tumbling speed, water level, temperature (whether or not you believe in using different wash temperatures), spinning times, rinse water levels and cycle specifics.
I personally notice less lint on our clothes after switching to an FL machine - especially on lighter loads and cycles that one *should* be using for their daily clothes (Not some generic, energy saving "Cottons" cycle!).
Of course, we could argue all day about what is better, and it is really a matter of personal choice versus the experiences you've had with either option.

Congratulations on your "less old" acquirement, and I hope it serves you well for as long as you own it :-)
 
Looks immaculate...

Hi 'retropia'... it's such a shame your Kenmore bit the dust... I think it's a nice machine (I've only seen them on pictures) and yours still looks in pristine conditions (physically)!

I still can't get over the fact that some folks say (justly... according to their own experience) that TLs cleans better than FLs... I wish I could be persuaded: by contrast, what happened to me yesterday is 1 example that supports my convictions in favour of FLs once again. There I go... I was wearing a white t-shirt yesterday that got some black greasy stains which I probably got while I was hastily holding the car boot lid open... as soon as I got home I squirted some stain remover on it and I left it for a while to allow it to penetrate into the fibres. After about 10 minutes I soaked the whole thing beating it with my hands... simulating somewhat the operation of a TL washer and leaving it to soak further. The stain faded slightly but I didn't feel rewarded enough as my item still looked... well... stained!

I wasn't going to have that... so, I fished a few more items from the laundry hamper and I started a small (normal cycle) load in the washer (FL). It took over an hour to complete the cycle (I could've chosen a shorter 1, but I was dealing with a stubborn stain), and the results were impeccable... so, no more traces of black grease on my white garment! That's what I'm talking about... some stains require the time element to allow to be eliminated (obviously together with the other elements of the wash process)... no matter how much agitation and water and detergent you put on them... they'll still be there laughing at you :-D

See you later.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top