SQ TR7, TR5 & TR3 Verified glowing reviews

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

Help Support :

Re: Reply #59

Good idea Joe! But in light of the intensity of some of the exchanges perhaps an IV drip of Antivan might be more in order.

Holy Mackerel! They are just washing machines for Christs Sake! Now I know the premise of this website is primarily devoted to the interest and love of these machines, but get a grip!

Everyone has there own likes, dislikes and expectations for their washing machines. One mans poison is another mans treasure. It servers no purpose to denagrate others for their opinions, other than to create ill will. There is quite enough of that to go around in our country and world right now. It might be best to try and get along, live and let live, wash and let wash.

That’s just my two cents worth.

Eddie
 
.
One reason the GTW330ASKWW gets a pass is it regularly costs about half of the new SQ machine.
It also will go on sale for significantly less than that, whereas SQ machines never seem to go on sale appreciably.
Cost is a factor, but so to is expectation. A lot of people here loved the old SQ TL machine, despite it's many short comings. So then SQ "improves" it, jacks up the price, but takes away the very quality people loved about the old one (besides a substantial metal cabinet), it's ability to wash dirty cloths clean vigorously, using lots of water. The amount of water stayed the same (I guess), however SQ only made a nod in the "vigorous" direction by using an agitator instead of a wash plate...it would appear to not have fooled many here.
I too essentially lack a dog in this hunt, no sleep lost. So unlike some disgruntled former fans, I will no doubt be happy to someday buy the new SQ machine --USED-- at a far lower price point. That said, like Bill Clinton, I feel their pain ;-]
 
Yes he did put the detergent into the fabric softener dispenser. No wonder these machines get "poor results"
 
There is still hope...

As this new speed queen motivated me to create a new washer in a hurry, I'm having long conversations with the company CEO and the marketing manager to, eventually, invest some money in a speed queen and run the official test only to make a comparison with the Avalon.

And i gave the suggestion to make the test live on youtube, only to make sure nobody would have a chance to say we cheated.

Then i will just sit and laugh.

It is sad, all manufacturers fail someday, once I failed so terribly that for months I thought about quitting my job at Electrolux and never again sit on a drawing desk.

The best quality an engineer or designer can have (and consequently the company) is admit the mistake and work hard to correct it ASAP.

This SQ washer is THE mistake. It doesn't even need a test to know it will never clean as expected when you invest a fortune trusting the SQ tradition. Even one of those silly "Panda" washing machines clean better. Actually, even the WonderWash, our hand crank washing machine cleans better than that "thing".

But, the industry survives with competition. Thanks to this catastrophic mistake, i had the chance to convince the company CEO to invest over 1 million dollars to swim in an ocean never explored by the Laundry Alternative Inc. before: Full size washing machines.

It was my chance to show people it is possible to follow the ridiculus D.O.E. standards (actually find gaps to be able to use a full tub with tap hot water and other two full tubs to rinse), agitate clothes like a vintage washer (almost like a Shredmore) and at the same time have profit not by reducing quality and using flimsy parts or appealing to programmed obsolescence.

In 7 months we did it. AND it will have a super long full warranty (parts and labor).

Sorry Speed Queen. You could've done your homework and every time I came with a crazy expensive idea, my boss would continue saying "Thomas, calm down! we're not Speed Queen, we're just The Laundry Alternative.

Now we can proudly say the same thing... We're NOT Speed Queen, We're much better than that crap.

I'm ready for terrible first impressions. Our new washer is 100% made of plastic (PP and Kevlar) while SQ is made of steel and porcelain. But our washer not only washes much better, Every millimeter of it was designed and overdimensioned to last.

Do you know any other company that gives 10 years full warranty (parts and labor), 15 years on PCB (parts and labor) and 25 years on bearings (again parts and labor) as standard?

This is how we trust the Avalon.

And the Avalon was just a drop in an ocean. It opened the doors to me, My boss finally realized I am able to design excellent washers (i have over 50 models that reached the market on my portfolio) We will have a premium full size HATL washer, just like the europeans and a washer dryer combo on the same platform. The company is changing a lot thanks to this SQ mistake. Until now, our competitors were Panda and Haier, with the super compact washers. Now we want to compete with the big ones, Samsung, Whirlpool, LG, Electrolux.

 

Sorry, Speed Queen but.... Thank you for making this huge mistake and doing nothing to correct it.

In a couple of weeks, I'll be glad to post here a video with the final prototype that is coming to my lab. No tests needed, just watch 10 seconds of the agitation and you will be sure it cleans better than a Speed Queen.
 
Please excuse me for suggesting this, but...

...if agitator top-loaders such as Speed Queen are getting bland results; and wash-plate top-loaders aren't any better...

... wouldn't it make sense just to grasp the bloody nettle and go out and buy a front-loader?

And before anyone says any different, the front-loader, originally being of American invention (i.e. Bendix), has been well tested by a good proportion of the rest of the world - for absolute yonks. And it works.

So - get out of the mindset of using a 'now constrained technology', and embrace alternative technologies. After all, I'm sure there are many on here who once had cathode ray tube televisions, who have upgraded to newer technologies such as plasma, LCD, LED, OLED. And similarly mobile phones to smartphones. And so on.

And for those of you who think that the modern 'Speed Queen' brand is a goddess to be worshipped, just remember this: Hoover Limited in Britain, was once amongst the quality gods - and came an almighty cropper ('Free Flights Fiasco', ultimately Hoover Ltd was bought by Candy). Now Hoover's products are absolute rubbish.
 
With some of the posters here, I am detecting a lot of cognitive dissonance. Rolls-Rapide, you are right about the front loaders, but Speed Queen discontinued their front loaders (though one can still get the stack) so what sense does that make?
 
This is just plain silly.

Those defending the 2018 Speed Queen are just sailing their barges down the river de'nial.

Whilst watching the villagers wash their clothes CLEANER on the banks than their piece of ill-conceived machinery will ever get them.

 

Look - we all have our loves and passions. I happen to prefer thumpers (especially in PANK!) to anything else. I am not, however, going to pretend that they aren't just as good at tangling sheets (yes, dahlinks, I do the four zones) as they are at washing - and nothing washes cleaner.

 

So, come on SQ apologists - you're just hurting your case by telling the rest of us (and the independent testers) we don't know what we're talking about. You sound like corporate shills. Perhaps you are?

 
 
stain removal

I was taught in home economics class to remove the stains before throwing them in the laundry. I still do that today. At the very least I pre-treat them. This post has nothing to do with the cleaning efficiency of any particular washing machine. I just don't like to have to repeat the process.
 
Panthera, you are a college professor, don't you think all those positive reports are an effect of cognitive dissonance. But I guess you weren't a psychology professor, were you?
 
Let's face it - SQ top-loaders have always been crap, and the 2018 ones are just the shittest of the lot. The old 50s/60s solid-tubs? A Maytag, Filter-Flo, Frigidaire or Norge would wash circles round those things. The modern Raytheon Amana-derived beasts made up to the end of last year? The tubs index like crazy, the agitation is anaemic and the roll-over non-existent. The wash-plate machines don't work (with the exception of the one Bendix designed in the 50s, I forget what it's called, rolls over like crazy!) and are still water-hogs with larger loads... why not just bite the bullet, as RR suggested, and go FL? SQ may not be listening, but now that Maytag has brought out its new commercial TL, I wonder if they could be persuaded to introduce a FL version?
 
Speed Queen always terrible, I beg to differ

The 50s/60s solid tub models washed quite well, actually. Even Consumer Reports said that they washed well at the time. Maytag was the anemic one with only 180 degree arc and slower agitation, little turn over when loaded to capacity, The agitator wasn't suited to the narrow, tall tub of an automatic, especially the large capacity "deep tub" models. While I have never used a solid tub SQ, I have owned a Maytag A207(just got rid of it, actually) and presently have a GE FilterFlo in service as a secondary(classic & fun) machine, the FF cleans better than the 'Tag and our modern SQ is on par with either.

 

The semi-modern "Raytheon" models are quite good machines, they only index for maybe a week after purchase. That is what ours did. It has good turn-over unless you really overload it. The wavy "Flex-Vane" agitator works quite well. We like it far better than the Roper DD machine it replaced.
 
True, the Maytags are a bit sensitive to overloading, but as long as you don't... and with the perforated tubs, they extract and rinse better. The modern SQs always index even after multiple years in service unless you go very easy on loadings...
 
Here is the thing about a Speed Queen solid tub washer...I know because my parents had two of them when I was growing up and I was doing the laundry...even way back then. Yes they did wash quite well , but thats where it ends. Capacity was lacking and doing laundry for 7 people was alot of work with this washer...like 2 plus loads a day. I once decided to just do laundry once a week and when you have 7 people...5 kids and 2 parents...I was doing laundry all day long on Saturdays. Like 14 loads straight, from dawn til dusk.
Water use was eye opening considering how small an "extra Capacity" solid tub was at the time. Extraction of said water from the load left alot to be desired especially from the bottom of the tub. Now if you have a plugged Ejector tube, like I had toward the end of this washer's life, Sand has nowhere to go and detergent residue stayed right at the bottom of the tub. I was using a vacuum cleaner to suck up the powder residue. I put up with alot with this washer.
When my parents replaced this washer with a Maytag A510 back in 1984, talk about an upgrade. Capacity was outstanding compared to the thimble sized wash tub of the SQ. Never had residue and the washer extracted better than the SQ, plus it used water more efficiently. I even saw that clothes were cleaner coming from the Maytag and lint free. If a Maytag washer is loaded loosely to the top row of holes in the washbasket, there is no issue with rollover, or lack of rollover. The 510 and my beloved 613 were all good turnover machines.
 

Similar threads

E
Speed Queen Washer AWN412
Replies
3
Views
16
Chetlaham
Chetlaham
M
Which Whirlpool VMW is most prone to bad bearings?
Replies
8
Views
30
combo52
combo52
B
Speed Queen DF7 stainless steel dryer door sagging
Replies
4
Views
11
biggpete
B
M
Speed queen inverter board failure
Replies
7
Views
15
montrose818
M
panasonicvac
LG Washer/Dryer 5 year Update
Replies
8
Views
30
panasonicvac
panasonicvac

Latest posts

Back
Top