Here is a link to SQ products in Oz. I hope it isn't geo-blocked. They don't sell the agi-tub version of Speed Queen here.
https://speedqueenhome.com.au/#topload
https://speedqueenhome.com.au/#topload
Speed Queen Australia
- Thread starter rapunzel
- Start date
Help Support :
I didn't see any prices. Here in Canada the top loaders go for around $1499.Cdn and up and the front loaders if you can get one around $2k.Few outlets even sell them. They aren't sold as SQ either but Huebsch. They're not big sellers obviously.
About AU$2,800.00 for the top loaders and $3000.00 and up for front loaders. Used, reconditioned SQ machines sell for over a grand. There are a lot of people who want these machines and they are happy to pay that kind of money.
Huebsch Manufacturing Company
Started in 1907 making tumble dryers. Don't know when Alliance Laundry Systems got their mitts on Huebsch, but don't think there is much difference under bonnet between domestic SQ laundry equipment and Huebsch.
For some reason Alliance sells domestic laundry machines in USA under Speed Queen, while up north things are branded Huebsch.
https://ca.huebsch.com/products/home-products/top-load-washers/
Huebsch does market commercial washers and dryers (coin vend, OPL, etc...) in USA.
https://huebsch.com
Started in 1907 making tumble dryers. Don't know when Alliance Laundry Systems got their mitts on Huebsch, but don't think there is much difference under bonnet between domestic SQ laundry equipment and Huebsch.
For some reason Alliance sells domestic laundry machines in USA under Speed Queen, while up north things are branded Huebsch.
https://ca.huebsch.com/products/home-products/top-load-washers/
Huebsch does market commercial washers and dryers (coin vend, OPL, etc...) in USA.
https://huebsch.com
mielerod69
Well-known member
Poor performance
The Speed Queen got one of the worst ratings in Choice. I think the agitub version is not available in Australia as there is a good chance it would not pass the minimum soil removal test. The current machines need nearly 3 hours to achieve an 80% soil removal score with an 8.5 kg test load.
https://www.choice.com.au/home-and-.../three-washing-machines-to-avoid-in-the-sales
The Speed Queen got one of the worst ratings in Choice. I think the agitub version is not available in Australia as there is a good chance it would not pass the minimum soil removal test. The current machines need nearly 3 hours to achieve an 80% soil removal score with an 8.5 kg test load.
https://www.choice.com.au/home-and-.../three-washing-machines-to-avoid-in-the-sales
I have never consulted Choice magazine, but I have used Miele and other highly rated products, and they are very good. However, my SQ removes soils and rinses extremely well. I rate it very highly. [this post was last edited: 1/25/2022-07:12]
Choice test
I have been a Choice subscriber for years, I think they generally give good advice.
The latest test result doesn't include a Speed queen but they still have an article "Washing Machines to Avoid" which rates the previous Speed Queen as the number 1 washing machine to avoid. There is a link to the (now discontinued) model's test results. They are only for subscribers so I won't divulge them here, but it was poor for dirt removal, spin efficiency, very poor water efficiency, poor choice of cycles and features. Main positives were good rinsing and quiet. Reading between the lines, I think they seemed a bit shocked such an expensive machine could perform so poorly. I don't think it will hurt SQ's (small) sales - people buy them BECAUSE they use loads of water and aren't new fangled, which is also why they don't wash all that well. People also buy them because they were pissed off at the short life they got from some other brand and want to pay more to get a better washer. Good luck with that.
I don't know how different these machines really are from the old Speed Queen Marathons, but the couple of them I worked on years ago didn't impress me. Not particularly durable despite the sales hype and the extreme price. (Here they cost about double the price of a basic Miele front loader, about 3 to 4 times the cost of a basic Bosch front loader.)
The link below is to Choice's "Washing Machines to Avoid" article, which is public, NOT subscriber-only.
https://www.choice.com.au/home-and-.../three-washing-machines-to-avoid-in-the-sales
I have been a Choice subscriber for years, I think they generally give good advice.
The latest test result doesn't include a Speed queen but they still have an article "Washing Machines to Avoid" which rates the previous Speed Queen as the number 1 washing machine to avoid. There is a link to the (now discontinued) model's test results. They are only for subscribers so I won't divulge them here, but it was poor for dirt removal, spin efficiency, very poor water efficiency, poor choice of cycles and features. Main positives were good rinsing and quiet. Reading between the lines, I think they seemed a bit shocked such an expensive machine could perform so poorly. I don't think it will hurt SQ's (small) sales - people buy them BECAUSE they use loads of water and aren't new fangled, which is also why they don't wash all that well. People also buy them because they were pissed off at the short life they got from some other brand and want to pay more to get a better washer. Good luck with that.
I don't know how different these machines really are from the old Speed Queen Marathons, but the couple of them I worked on years ago didn't impress me. Not particularly durable despite the sales hype and the extreme price. (Here they cost about double the price of a basic Miele front loader, about 3 to 4 times the cost of a basic Bosch front loader.)
The link below is to Choice's "Washing Machines to Avoid" article, which is public, NOT subscriber-only.
https://www.choice.com.au/home-and-.../three-washing-machines-to-avoid-in-the-sales
Perhaps it has to do with the standardized testing method that they can only use the regular normal cycle without options. Consumer Reports does that I believe because that is the cycle upon which the energy star labels are based on. A particularly low performing washer "for soil removal"on it's normal may fare much better with optional adjustments such as a heavy duty cycle or extra rinse etc.
Of course it has to do with the standardised testing methods.
We have a website called ‘Product Review.com.au,’which is primarily a review and response platform for consumers. Consumers have the option and are encouraged to verify their product purchases to lend their reviews credibility, and many do. Speed Queen are among the most highly rated washers on that website and not just there.
I’ve read the review linked in Rod’s post and disagree with Choice. My experience with this product is vastly different and I have been using it for decades. I don’t wash in cold water and their annual cost projections are way off in my case.
I purchased my current SQ washer in 2007 and it has operated flawlessly since. My clothes are very clean and in excellent condition. It is my sister’s kids generation who pay top dollar for clothes, with gaping holes, that look as if they were ripped off the back of a homeless person.
SQ have primarily stuck to the same design where other appliance manufacturers have not. They provide products for which there clearly is a demand big enough to maintain a long-term market presence.
That consumers are prepared to pay top dollar for both new and reconditioned machines and bring repeat business, indicates that SQ must be doing something right.
We have a website called ‘Product Review.com.au,’which is primarily a review and response platform for consumers. Consumers have the option and are encouraged to verify their product purchases to lend their reviews credibility, and many do. Speed Queen are among the most highly rated washers on that website and not just there.
I’ve read the review linked in Rod’s post and disagree with Choice. My experience with this product is vastly different and I have been using it for decades. I don’t wash in cold water and their annual cost projections are way off in my case.
I purchased my current SQ washer in 2007 and it has operated flawlessly since. My clothes are very clean and in excellent condition. It is my sister’s kids generation who pay top dollar for clothes, with gaping holes, that look as if they were ripped off the back of a homeless person.
SQ have primarily stuck to the same design where other appliance manufacturers have not. They provide products for which there clearly is a demand big enough to maintain a long-term market presence.
That consumers are prepared to pay top dollar for both new and reconditioned machines and bring repeat business, indicates that SQ must be doing something right.
