Questions regarding Maytag LA712 refurb (series 04)

[ps91rick]

Hi all.. I’m new here.. I picked up a new-to-me ‘87 Maytag LA712 in Almond yesterday — a matched pair with a gas dryer for $75. The original owner who I got them from told me that he started noticing that the clothes were not getting as clean as they used to — and they occasionally had stains. So, I’ve got the front off the machine today and its pretty filthy on the platform that everything is mounted on — what appears to be lines of soot and general grunge. The belts on the bottom of the machine are SUPER loose so they will be replaced.

I ran a couple of quick cycles and the last one, one complete, I found grease on a part of the tub that I know was clean before the last load started. My older brother believes this is caused by the tub seal failing. Does that sound like a fairly reliable diagnosis at this point? I’ll be visiting a local appliance place tomorrow to grab some parts and at his point I’m targeting the following list :

1) belts
2) tab seal & bearing(?)
3) motor rollers
4) spanner wrench

Should there be anything else I need to look at getting? I’ll attach a pic of the bottom showing the soot marks. My brother thought the soot came from the belts but they’re under the plate where the soot came from — so that came from somewhere else. Maybe its associated with the clutch on the bottom of the tub or something.. ??

 

[combo52]

LA-712 Rebuild

Hi Rick, you don't need motor rollers, you may not need belts unless the larger main drive belt is badly worn, they are supposed to be very loose.

 

You do need damper pads and an aluminum damper dome.

 

You probably need a main tub seal kit and maybe a transmission depending on the condition of the agitator shaft in the upper seal area.

 

You have a very big but doable project ahead of you, we are here to help if you want spend the time and a few hundred bucks  on this washer.

 

John L.

 

[ps91rick]

Thanks John.. I actually started taking things apart until I couldn’t go any further. Here’s a pic of the tub with the agitator removed. Thoughts?

 

[combo52]

LA-712 Rebuild

Hi Rick, you very likely have water in the transmission and oil is now making its way up and out.

 

As mentioned in my post above you have a real job ahead if you want to save this washer.

 

John L.

 

[qsd-dan]

Full tear down and rebuild with this guy, which is the best approach for long term reliability, anyway. Best to do it while most of the parts are still accessible.

It'll certainly need a new damper and damper pads. A fresh coat of paint on the base wouldn't be a bad idea while it's all apart.

Stem and boot seal are a given and a new spin bearing is just a couple of more steps.

I agree with John that the transmission has a good possibility of water contamination with grease coming out like that. This makes a transmission tear down inevitable. I'd even say that the shaft needs to be removed from the upper housing and inspected (a real pain if you've never experience this but not nearly as bad as pre 1975 machines). Any water contamination here will quickly take out both the shaft and sleeve bearings. Removal of the upper shaft is the only possible way to gauge immediate problems.

Motor carriage will certainly need attention. I've never come across a 20+ year old Maytag that doesn't at minimum need the tracks cleaned and regreased. Reusing the rollers/glides would be foolish at this stage. This area is important for proper agitation and crucial in the spin department, so don't skimp here. New belts are a must after putting that kind of work in, but get the real deal, no aftermarket junk.

It's a great machine to learn on and worst case scenario, find another 1980-1993 tall tub Maytag washer and swap the control panel over (and motor, if a single speed) and you're set to go.

The link below is from a member who performed a detailed rebuild sometime back, which will give you an idea what's involved and help you along the way if you decide to go that route. The only noteable difference is that your '87 will have a lip seal at the bottom of the transmission tube vs an o-ring inside the lower housing. There's a Youtube clip on how to replace this seal without using the special tool.

Rebuild of Maytag Transmission and Transplant into LAT 9800 AAW.

To the best of my recollection this is my step by step rebuild, with photos, from last summer of a Maytag Newton style trans. put into a newer LAT model. I hope this is helpful to someone. Here’s the HA408 machine’s top. Almost hated to take it apart. It was salvageable. It came with a HDE606...

www.automaticwasher.org

 

[ps91rick]

Thanks guys! I just bought a brand new transmission from a supplier in my area that I trust. With that said, I’ll order the damper pads & damper and motor rollers and go from there. I’m sure there are other items I won’t know yet til I dig into it further.. I just got a spanner wrench to take the tub out and will see what that reveals.

 

[ps91rick]

Ok.. So I got things home and tackled a bunch of stuff.. The first thing to notice is that the new transmission looks vastly different than the old one. The old one more or less is what I’ll call a horizontal “flat” unit with what appears to be a large counterbalance weight opposite the trans itself. The new model looks like a car differential more and doesn’t appear to have the counterbalance.. Is that just an artifact of a newer design and that they’re interchangeable without issues elsewhere?

I tried using the spanner wrench, but it wouldn’t budge the spanner nut or whatever its called. I tried using pb blaster w/o luck. I eventually bought a cold chisel and beat it off that way and boogered up the cone beneath the nut area. Oh well.. One more piece to replace.

Right now I’ve got the main tub out and am trying to get off the inner bits that sit beneath the main tub and on the splined transmission rod.. But I’m stuck as it just wants to spin the trans. I locked the trans from rotating by using a 2x4 but now the spanner won’t move anything. More PB blaster is on it soaking.. I might try a propane torch perhaps tomorrow if nothing else works. The inner “casing” of this area looks particularly bad.. and is leaking oil constantly — see attached photo.

Photo 1 : shows the existing transmission style — flat and horizontal with a counterweight
Photo 2 : shows the replacement transmission — differential style
Photo 3 : shows the old part that I’m stuck on trying to remove — yes, the Allen screw has been removed
Photo 4 : shows the part above that will eventually be replaced — part of the transmission kit

 

[DADoES]

 
Your new transmission is the orbital design.  Different internal gearing design, faster/shorter agitation stroke than the original pitman design.  It will retrofit into your machine.

 

[rp2813]

If you're like me and prefer the old school classic Maytag long stroke agitation, the new transmission isn't going to provide it.

 

Stop what you're doing if you'd rather return the new transmission and hold out for the older Pitman style, which is what's on the machine now.  From a brief search I did, they cost about the same as the orbital type.

 

[ps91rick]

Ok.. now you’ve got me wondering .. what’s the major differences between the two styles of agitation? Does it just regulate how long a “stroke” is when agitating — whether (for instance) it spins one direction perhaps 75% and then reverses and the newer style only goes to 50% or something along those lines? I don’t frankly know which is better — and more importantly whether I can get my $ back IF I changed to the old style.. I’ll have to check on that. I was just reading the linked to thread regarding rebuilding the transmission that I have with the big counter balance and in my case I’m wondering what the condition of the internal parts might be like since it’s had water infiltration and whether its even worth rebuilding. I think you’re saying though that I can get a new “old-style” trans somewhere? The local parts place I go to only appears to sell the Orbital style..

They also told me today that the Damper dome is no longer available. I’ve not bothered to double-check to confirm. I also ordered a new motor mount as the rollers are not available separately and according to the pictures in the linked-to thread, the poly rollers are riveted on the tray. This one thing has a 2 week lead time. Oh well..

 

[eurekastar]

The mounting stem on my A407 wouldn't budge no matter what I did, so I had to take my angle grinder to it.  I also installed the new orbital drive transmission; however, I wasn't satisfied with it and found a good pitman style tranny and reinstalled it. 

 

[combo52]

Newer Style Orbital Transmission

This was the single biggest improvement that MT did to the Helical Drive washer in its nearly 50 year production run. [ 1956-2006 ]

 

MT made this change around 1990 several years later they came up with a dual action agitator, This was by far the best agitator in a MT TL washer up till this time. [ you will need a different agitator if you use this better transmission ]

 

The advantages of the newer transmission are faster shorter stroke, which gives better load turn over, slightly greater capacity and better overall cleaning with see fabric wear and less chance of clothing damage.

 

And the new design is easier to service and much safer.

 

 

John L.

 

[ps91rick]

Hmm.. thanks for that.. I’ll keep that in mind as I proceed here. Regarding the switch from Pitman to Orbital.. I found another thread here on the site talking about the two and Maytag apparently switched at about the same time this machine was manufactured and mine just happens to have the pitman style. It seems people seem to like that style.

IF I want to rebuild it, I’m wondering if I’m going to run into problems with getting replacement parts that might be in rough shape — or rusted badly — including possibly the agitator shaft. Hmm .. things to ponder.

 

[qsd-dan]

Don't be afraid to crack the transmission open and take peek inside. There's only 5 gears and a shaft in the lower case and 1 gear attached to a shaft in the upper. Worst case scenario, install the orbital transmission you already have on hand.

 

[ps91rick]

I spent a bit of time spec’ing the parts needed IF I return the orbital trans — and moving forward that way. I was reading the other thread about not being able to get replacement agitator shafts and he repaired his own.. My local dealer is selling those IF I should need them,.. Maybe they started making them again. Anyway, seems like most of the parts outside of the internal trans parts are available. I’ll consider this over the next few days. Thx!!

 

[rp2813]

After a closer look, the Pitman transmssions I saw on line are not the original type for your washer.  They fit later Maytags produced after Whirlpool took over.  Why they still call them Pitman when they're a short stroke design, I don't know.

 

I'm not a fan of short stroke agitation on any make of machine.  It gets on my nerves.  If you don't mind the frantic chick-chick-chick of short stroke action, install the orbital.   Speed Queens had a long stroke that traveled 210 degrees until they radically changed their design a year or so ago.   I would imagine on classic Maytags the long stroke is similar, accompanied by a satisfying thrum-thrum sound.

 

My A712 was maufactured 33 years ago in May of 1987.  It made it just under the wire and has a Pitman transmission.  I wouldn't have bought it from a private party a few years ago if it had the orbital. 

 

[ps91rick]

I guess I lucked out as I didn’t know anything about there being two different types of transmissions. Mine was produced in November 1987...

I think I’ve made my mind up to re-build the existing transmission .. I’ve looked up the components that came as part of the Orbital kit (The tub seal & whatnot).. Obviously I wont know about other potential parts til I get the thing apart..

Can I ask one thing? One of you suggested that I should replace the aluminum damper. It took me a bit of time to figure out what part that was referenced, and I was told today at my local store that the damper is no longer available (even though their site claims otherwise). It’s part number 203725. I see other sites claiming its not available anymore. My question is — why should this be replaced? Just wear because it’s aluminum and it wears or ?? I found one that I can obtain but wondering about whether I really need it or not. What happens if I don’t replace it?

 

[qsd-dan]

The damper was obsoleted in December of 2014 but every single 2 belt Newton made Maytag from 1966-2006 used that exact part. It shouldn't be too difficult to locate a good used one.

The agitator shaft was part# 200730 (2-0730). Towards the end of production, Maytag no longer sold just the shaft by itself but as a kit which included the shaft along with a stem seal and boot kit, part# 22002124. Both of these have long since been obsoleted and no longer readily available nor will they be put back into production again, at least by Whirlpool, anyway. Whatever is floating around in the back of dusty warehouses and small appliance stores is it.

 

[combo52]

Rebuilding a Maytag DC Washer

Hi Rick, When the damper pads get very worn and fall out the aluminum damper doe gets badly worn and scored and if you just replace the pads it is likely the repair won't last long or work well. The dome of the damper is highly polished aluminum, it might be possible to repolish the damaged dome but I have never tried to do so, We have lots of good used ones to sell if you can not find one.

 

Hi Ralph, SQ still makes washers with the long stroke transmission [ TC5000 ] for home use, the big difference between SQ and DC Powerfin agitator washers is SQ has a much better agitator design and a bigger diameter tub. Maytag was the only TL washer in a comparative test to ruin delicate clothing in one washing with this bad agitator design and long stroke transmission.

 

I worked with a Maytag dealer till the end of MT and our customer complaints went way down once they changed transmissions, only problem was turn-over did not improve over the older PF agitator till the came out with the LS dual action agitator.

 

John L.