Poor Speed Queen "HomeStyle" Line

[jetcone]

I have to agree with Toggle on this one

I have never found CR to be totally open to new ways of washing and fairly weighted testing results!!

I have had the commercial SQ Horizon FL in my tenants unit for 6 years now. It is installed on the third floor of my house. If any machine was a problem it would be unbearable on the top floor. I hardly know when they are doing laundry and they do ALOT of laundry. I have to empty that coin box every 6 mos. they do so much.
Also they are very picky about clean clothes and they stuff the thing full and never complain about how clean the items are. You can bet there was WEEKLY cursing when I had the Staber 1000 dud up there, she HATED that machine along with me!
In my experience it has been an outstanding performer.

 

[frontloadfan]

Consumer Reports Need Improvement

Consumer Reports sure could use some improvement. What they really lack is detailed information that someone looking for a washing machine needs. As far as I can tell they don't provide the below:

specific size (they give hints but not specific volume)
specific number of cycles
whether machines have internal heaters
Top spin speeds
Does machine offer soak function/deep rinse?

In years past they did a better job of alerting you that machines were almost identical (back when the 3.1 Frigidaire front loader was branded under three different brands). No reference to the close relationship between the top Kenmore and Whirlpool front loaders. I mean think how great it would be to say they are both made by Whirlpool and the significant differences are ---. Especially funny was the ratings for the Siemans and Bosch front loaders. They make the same general comments for both machines and the pictures show the machines to be identical, but no reference is made to the fact that they are basically the same machine. You would have thought it would have occured to the testers, duh, isn't this the same machine we just tested?? If there are any differences, it would be nice for them to be pointed out.

Also what would be good would be to explore "families" of machines. For instance, to quicky sum up the difference between the $1000 whirlpool front loader and the $1300. In a few words, what are you getting for the extra money? The chart shows that the $1300 whirlpool is given more points, but they don't make mention to the fact the more expensive machine has higher spin speed, more cycles and an internal heater.

 

[the7]

jetcone,
Like to know the model no of your commercial SQ Horizon FL. Is it more robust than the home style ones?

 

[varenovator]

CR ignores real world issues

Where in CR's tests are any mention of vibration??? Consumers have had issues with this for years - it's one of the most important decision point for many. But CR has zero in their test process. Their criteria hasn't changed despite the growing use of second floor laundry rooms. I agree, they are way behind the times. They also seem to be behind in their testing schedule - how many times have you read ratings where there are models that CR flags as already discontinued? Or even models not flagged, you discover they are discontinued anyway?

 

[frigilux]

While I still defend CR, I also have questions about their reporting. Why, for instance, did it take 2 years of testing the Calypso before there was a mention of how much linting/tangling was happening?

Getting back to the original theme of this thread, I re-read the testing results of the SQ FL'er. Everything looked pretty good except for the washing score.

I can't believe that with all the FL'ers out there, no one at SQ thought "Gee, maybe we should offer the option of a longer wash." Sorry, but I think it's completely indefensible of them to charge $1400 for a machine that doesn't clean well, not because of inherent design flaws, but because no one thought to add 15 minutes to a wash cycle.

You wouldn't HAVE to opt for a longer wash---in fact, I wash a lot of lightly soiled loads on my Frigidaire's 30-minute QUICK cycle, which has a 6 minute wash and only 2 rinses, with great results. But I'd hate to see what one of my uber-stained loads of kitchen towels, etc. would look when they emerged from that cycle. And there ain't NO WAY I'm going to pretreat every stain on every towel, bar mop, dish rag, chef's apron, napkin and tablecloth. I'd use a whole container of pretreater for every load! I pretreat NOTHING.

I use a medium dose of powdered Tide CW, 1/3 cup of chlorine bleach, a bit of Downy to break down the suds in the last rinse, and set the cycle for the longest (18-minute) wash, using temp-controlled 65-degree water. No extra rinses or pre-wash/soak cycles. Occasionally, if the load is a Bob Load, I'll reset the machine and add an extra 10 minutes of wash time. Perfectly clean results. All stains removed, clothes rinsed well.

One should expect nothing less from a washer in the 21st century.

 

[launderess]

Ok, read the entire CR review on W&D last night, and here is my take on things.

First, this has to be the most piss poor review of appliances CR has ever given. One may write to CR if time permits and let them know this.

Review does give any information as to what the test load consisted of,what sort of soils/stains were used on test garments, and so on. In fact the entire "review" of washers takes up about 1 and 1/3 page with parts of those pages showing features. Cycle chosen was "normal" but what that is varies by washer IMHO.

Here is what CR stays about SQ units:

"Short isn't always sweet. Odds are, you've used Speed Queen's commercial machines if you've ever visited a laundromat. But that hard-wroking heritage did not help its consumer models in our tests."

"The front loading Speed Queen washer's 35 minute regular cycle proved too short to clean our test loads thoroughly. A thermostat instead of the usual moisture sensor also accounts for the matching dryer's unimpressive performance. Added gripe: control knobs for both that turn in just one direction."

Now has ANYONE used a washer with quasi mechianical timers that turned more than one way?

Review does not speak to the fact a SQ front loader is built vastly better than the mainly plastic Kenmore "HE2" series CR raves over.

Rankings:

HE Front Loaders Only:

Kenmore Elite HE4T
Whirlpool Duet HT
Frigidaire LTF2940E (Lowes version)
Kenmore HE3
Maytag Neptune MAH8700
Bosch Nexxt Premium
LG WM1814C
Siemans Ultra Sense
Whirlpool Duet GHW9150P
LG WM2277H
Maytag Neptune MAH9700
Frigidaire FTF2140E
GE WBVH6240F
Kenmore HE2 4646
Frigidaire Gallery GLTR1670
Naytag Neptune MAH6500A
Miele Touchtronic W113
Asko W6021
Speed Queen CTS90AWN

 

[toggleswitch]

CR really is a disgrace.

No clue whatsoever. I like their once-a year buying guide just to get an idea of newer features across the board on all types of products.

Save that little benny, it's fabulous, colorful toilet paper.

 

[DADoES]

Some current models of Whirlpool/Kenmore/KA have timers that turn both ways. GE machines with mechanical controls that are really electronic turn both directions.

But as has been said, it is idiotic for *that* point to downgrade a rating.

I'm thinking that CR mostly nowadays goes by retailer descriptions and listings of features when they buy the test machines, as compared to testing the machines thoroughly themselves to determine the features and capabilities. CR has repeatedly said F&P washers do not have ATC ... when we know they do.

 

[varenovator]

The timer comment speaks to CR's lack of credibility. I think it is true that any 'knob' that turns both ways is really an electronic control disguised as a knob for the comfort/familiarity of the consumer. SQ should have gotten a reliability plus for not using electronics that are the source of so many service calls (how many of us with 'old' mechanical controls have had them go bad?).

As I've posted elsewhere, if you look at the ratings for the individual categories in CR's latest report, there is no logical explanation on how they came up with the 'overall' rating. I did a quick regression analysis, and came up with results that said that 'gentleness' is a negative factor - the better the rating, the worse the overall rating. The results also showed that the only atributes that were statistically related to their overall ratings were Washing Performance and Capacity (values of all other aspects could reasonably be interpreted as contributing zero to the overall rating). Oh, also, the only other valid factor was washer type - frontloaders get +5 (i.e. a front loader with the same ratings as a top loader would be rated 5 points higher), and a HE top-loader (Harmony or Calypso) gets -6 (same ratings results in 6 points less than a toploader, and 11 points less than a frontloader). Go figure.
And how do they give the Whirlpool Calypso, which they state clearly has problems with tangling and wrinkling clothes, a half-red-spot (second from highest rating) on gentleness??? And with all of their 'sophisticated' test processes, why are they completely silent on vibration issues? You would think that they could set up a floor joist system and test out the issue.

 

[the7]

Among these FL, my favorable 3 are the LAST 3.

 

[frigilux]

The Miele and Asko got very good overall scores, receiving a 63 and 61 respectively. By contrast, the highest score for a TL (Whirlpool Gold GSQ9669) was 61...which also garnered a very good rating for gentleness, which I found surprising. (I believe they test for gentleness by throwing in a bunch of squares of open-weave fabric with no hemmed edges. The more threads pulled out of place, the less gentle the washing action.)

The only area in which the Miele and Asko didn't receive a very good or excellent rating was for capacity. In fact, the Miele was rated as the quietest machine of the all tested models, both TL and FL.

By contrast, the equivalent of my Frigidaire received only a good rating for washing, good for capacity and good for gentleness.

As with a broken record, I repeat: Just because a model is 17th on the list doesn't mean it's a bad machine which was poorly rated. The point-spread between the top-rated FL model (Kenmore HE4T, scoring a 79) and the 18th on the list (Asko W6021, scoring a 61) is really not that much on a scale of 100. Except for the fact I prefer a machine with greater capacity, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to purchase either a Miele or an Asko.

Granted, the 19th model was the SQ, which received only a 31 due to it's poor washing score. Once SQ takes care of that, their machine will score much, much higher.

I have NO defense for their petty comment about the SQ's dial turning in only one direction. It was a ridiculous criticism.

But come one, kids; SQ is charging $1400 for a machine that doesn't clean well. Who deserves the criticism, here? If it was a GE, we'd all be bitching up a storm about it.

 

[sudsmaster]

I got my paper copy of the March 06 CR today in the mail. So now I can see the actual ratings.

It is a bit mystifying that Asko and Miele placed so low, purely on the basis of capacity. Oh well.

I also made a trip to the local Sears today, to see the Oasis. There was an empty spot where the washer once stood. The saleslady said they had gotten in 500 machines, and they all sold very quickly. But she hadn't heard back from any customers as to cleaning performance. I note that CR says they found the Oasis to clean "competently" although it arrived too late to be included in their complete testing.

I was also interested in how the GE FL fared. Although it scored very good on washing, energy efficiency, and noise, it suffered with regard to capacity and gentleness. I think it also got dinged for its supposedly long cycle time, but I think perhaps CR misread the display, mistaking 1 hour 5 minutes for 105 minutes?

I'm also concerned that CR probably uses the default "normal" or "regular" wash cycle on which to base all its testing. I think it would be better to do a more thorough evaluation, and see just what each machine can do, maximum, in terms of parameters such as washing efficiency and gentleness. I'd be willing to bet that the Miele and Asko would rate much higher in terms of washing efficiency if their high temp long cycle options were chosen. And so on. At best CR is a snapshot of a slice across the center of each machine's capabilities - but it probably doesn't give much of a clue as to which machines are capabable of far better results than the average machine.

 

[tolivac]

Saw the statement in their reviews-"the timer knob turns only one way"WOW-you guys at CU FINALLY noticed that after how MANY years of appliance tests and reviews???I will have a LOT LESS credibility in their reviews from now on-was a WASTE of money to renew to read something like that.

 

[sudsmaster]

Frigilux,

Is it true that Speed Queen is planning a revamp of their front loader line?

 

[varenovator]

I heard from the sales manager at one of our local chains that SQ will be rolling out a new line in 2007. It will feature a larger door to better compete with the rest of the FL's out there (the SQ rep had told him that their research/feedback from customers was that the small door opening creates the illusion of small capacity, and that there are some real ergonomic issues with it). It will be interesting to see if they can pull it off without falling into the same trap as other manufacturers (large door = more water in boot issues, major redesign = major flaws). One thing he thought they were not going to do is go to electronic controls; SQ at this point feels that they are a quality/customer satisfaction liability.

 

[the7]

At present, SQ TL and dryer use electro-mechanical timer/selectors which have timer-motors. The selector knob advances/moves by the timer motor.

However the present SQ FL uses electronic timer/selector where there is NO timer-motor. The selector knob is simply a switch for selecting different washing cycles and does not advance/move at all.

Don't think it is a good idea to for SQ to increase the door opening because this will involve major mechanical change. A larger door opening will incease the hazard of door leakage, boot and mold problem. There will be more stationary area of door to interfer with the tumbling/spinning laundry. Some water may be needed to be pumped out for "Add a garment" function because the water level may be above the larger opening.

There are one fixed "NORMAL solid" choice each for REGULAR, PP and Delicate cycles in the present electronic timer/selector.
The older model prior 2003 uses electro-mechanical timer/selector which has "HEAVY, NORMAL and LIGHT soil" for REGULAR cycle, and "NORMAL and LIGHT soil" each for PP and DELICATE cycles. The older model is more versatile than the present model.
In REGULAR cycle, the older model could choose 7 min (LIGHT solid) to 15 min (HEAVY soild) for wash phase while the present one has one fixed 9 min wash phase. What a shame?

IF SQ is going to introduce "improved versions" for FL, they should re-introduce the "electro-mechanical timer/selector" and a more versatile "electronic timer/selector" which includes "HEAVY, NORMAL and LIGHT soild" choices.
They should also include "internal heater" for the front control model as well the rear control model. There is not needed to increase the door opening.

My choice from the "improved version" SQ FL (if available) would be a front control model with electro-mechanical timer/selector plus internal heater.

 

[frigilux]

The7-- OK, that explains why CR mentioned the unidirectional control knob. Like most people here, we were under the impression they were complaining about a mechanical cycle timer which only turned one way. If it's only a cycle selector, then it is odd it only turns in one direction, as most other models I've toyed with turn in both directions. Either way, it's still a petty complaint.

Since the SQ TL has a mechanical timer, I believe most of us believed the FL had the same. Interesting. Thanks for the clarification!

 

[the7]

Typing errors.

Sorry for the typing errors in my post.
"solid" and "soild" should all mean "soil" or "soiled".

 

[launderess]

Spoke with that nice man from Alliance Laundry/SQ before the holidays and he stated the following changes would be coming to the SQ front loaders:

Larger door opening
More "user friendly" controls and IIRC addition of "rinse & spin" cycles along with perhaps some others.

When SQ first began the PR blitz/launch of their residential laundry line, had the chance to speak with this same gentleman and told him about THS and this forum. Also bent his ear to give him a "housewife" view of their front loader verus the competition. Had no idea the man would actually visit either site, but he did and does so every now and then to keep up on the buzz. All suggestions (mine and others) were brought up at product development meetings, the results we shall see in the 2007 model line.

As for the comment another poster made that SQ FL washers do not clean well for the money, that is a load of flannel. Of those whom have purchased the units, have not heard one complaint about laundry results.

With proper loading, chemicals, and the mechanical action supplied by the washer, long cycle times really are not needed. Yes, it would be nice to have a longer cycle than 9 minutes for normal, but nothing stops one from stoppping the washer and restarting it again to wash longer. Same thing many, many owners of mechanical top and front loading washing machines have done for ages.

L.

 

[DADoES]

My dad won't wash anything longer than 6 mins.