Speed Queen AWN 432

[mrsalvo]

I have SQ 432SP113 model that I bought in 2015/2016 and it’s proven to be very reliable and durable, cleans anything thrown at it. It has the angled fill, which I like. For my needs, it has served pretty good, as long as it’s not overloaded. Have seen fabric damage on very heavy loads, so I avoid packing it. Big, heavy, bulky items I take to the laundrymat.
Knock on wood, no mechanical issues at all. Like the quick cycle times.
I wish the rinse was longer, but compensate by turning the timer for longer cycle on the rinse (sensitive skin issues).
I don’t have any current plans to replace it.

Barry

 

[combo52]

Speed Queen top load washers over the past 15 years

Have been extremely reliable, both the TC and TR machines, the TC style old machines were excellent performers, they worked much better than any dependable Care Maytag for sure, and you never had to go back and reset an unbalanced load and you never have a speed queen walk, because the superior self leveling rear feet.

Construction quality in corrosion resistance of the Speed Queen bass pan is superior to let Maytag used as well. You’ll never see a rusty base pan in Speed Queen.

John

 

[panasonicvac]

Huh that's interesting. Because when I used both of these machines before up in the Pacific Northwest, I didn't remember the water shooting out straight since they both didn't had the normal eco cycle. But of course this was years ago. I was thinking that all of these newer style SQs' was shooting water out at an angle until I saw some videos on YouTube like this Amana for example that was shooting water out straight. I thought that's a bit boring. But I did seem to recall that one of these AWM593W I've used before down in the Grand Canyon state filled water up all over the tub. I thought that's pretty cool. Anyways with that being said. I may not like the government stricting regulations but this is one thing that I'm actually glad they did. I think the normal eco cycle and water shooting out at an angle helps without having to use a extra rinse cycle.

 

[Chetlaham]

If I am correct that AWM593W uses a two belt system. Here is a thread covering such a washer in depth:


 

https://www.automaticwasher.org/cgi-bin/TD/TD-VIEWTHREAD.cgi?94186_34~1
 

The Raytheon system is my second favorite washer design ever after the Maytag dependable care. Modern Speed Queens is my third favorite. Anything Maytag/Herrin/Norge/Amana/Atlantis/Performa with a milk stool suspension and big juicy transmission I am drawn to. Though I think most of these designs were rather poorly executed. The performa was born out of economy rather than making a larger capacity version of the Dependable Care. Early Speed Queens had early steal failures, Magic chef was all around mediocre, WCI horribly engineered and cheapened what could have been a good design. I have less an affinity for anything that hangs like BD Whirlpools, but I'll give their engineering the credit of making the best of it to the point of outshining washers like the Atlantis.  


 

I agree regarding what you said about being able to skip a deep rinse. I think that 4 30 second spray rinses or 3 45 second spray rinses or two 60 second spray rinses would be enough to adequately rinse a large load. Enough that it should be offered on all cycles.

 

@combo52: You bring up a great point yet again. If Maytag was still around they could change the base pan to rival Speed Queens. Dependable cares would have been perfected by this and a few other changes with a bit more evolution.    

 

[gelaundry4ever]

GE washer

And probably my least favorite from a build quality standpoint is the GE post FF washers. Their transmissions are tiny and couldn't hold a candle to the ones you listed, Chet. It's like they sounded like they'd fall apart during agitation and blast oil everywhere.

 

[Chetlaham]

The whole washer sounded like it was trying to self destruct during agitation. Spin was quiet, but the gurgling and vibration from the drain pump made the washer sound louder than any other washer in existence. Transmission was crazy small as well as the clutch. Remember the FF clutches? They were roughly 5 times as big as the model T clutches. Later model Ts did away with the clutches at the expense the motor would trip out on a suds lock.There is even a thread here where that happened.   

 

[gelaundry4ever]

GE washer

I remember that. And, I remember the motor shrieking steadily on the normal/fast speed setting, where the filter-flo on the other hand had a motor that did an assertive hum.

 

[Chetlaham]

FF motors were indestructible too. They could get quite hot and not fail. The start relay assured there was no centrifugal switch to engineer into the motor or fail. FFs definitely sounded better in all respects. 

 

[combo52]

Start relays on Filter Flow GE washers

Would often stick and cause the start winding to burn out it was really not that great system, the centrifugal switch that everybody from Maytag whirlpool in Westinghouse used was a far more reliable system in a split phase motor to start it.

GE did not use a centrifugal switch because it was so close to the ground And centrifugal switches have to have fire or spark, arresting capabilities, and GE decided to put a relay up higher instead, it was not a good decision.

The motors in the T model washers, both with and then the better yet without the clutch, never went bad in comparison to the number of Filter Flow motors that we had to change. The motor used in the new top load washers after they eliminated the clutch was an amazing motor. You’ll never see one of those wear out.

Also the clutch in the T model washer, and the one Speed Filter Flow are nearly identical in size, however, in the T model washer, the clutch didn’t have to do much, and I never saw one of those fail compared to Filter Flow machines where the shoes would wear down and tear through the outer cast-iron drum.

John

 

[gelaundry4ever]

GE motors

So why did GE use shrieking motors on their plastic tub washers while they used more assertive sounding motors on their filter-flos?

 

[Chetlaham]

Reply 38-

 

You bring up a lot of good points. Regarding the centrifugal switch I have to disagree. Whirlpool BDs had a centrifugal switch in a machine without a base pan.  The switching is internal and the body should not emit any sparks of fire.

 

 

The clutch-less motors were definitely better provided you did not have a suds lock.

 

Do you have a pic of the inner clutch drum from a FF vs that of a clutch model T? I still remember the two speed clutch being 5 times the size in comparison but its been a while I will admit. 

 

[gelaundry4ever]

clutch noise

So did you hear any clutch noise from the post GE ff as opposed to the FF? I wish somebody could show a cutaway of the transmissions on both machines and the oil they both used.

 

[Chetlaham]

I remember no distinct noise from the post FF clutch.

 

As reliable as not having a clutch is, you should be able to physically hold the tub stationary while the motor spins while not have the motor trip out or stall. A good clutch gently brings up a tub to speed while reducing torque on the motor.

 

 

On the model T design without the clutch the motor could trip out in the first spin during a suds lock with the timer advancing into rinse and final spin without the motor ever running. Not much of an advantage.

 

[gelaundry4ever]

motor noises

What motor noises do you remember on these machines?

 

[Chetlaham]

Just boom and hum from the centrifugal models, nothing special.

 

I do remember that if you disconnected the electric drain pump during spin the washer was probably the quietest washer I ever heard.

 

[gelaundry4ever]

double knocking

I remember the double knocking noise during agitation. My filter-flo never did that. My filter-flo had a hum similar to a whirlpool direct drive during agitation, and you can definitely hear the thundering cabinet due to the aircraft cable suspension during spin. And this was on normal speed.