The New SQ TL Washers

[speedqueen]

My Thoery on the Agi-Tub

I think I figured out why SQ decided to use an agi-tub on what is still really a traditional top load automatic. The reason why is that on the "Normal Eco" cycle they couldn't cut water usage any more with the previous design. They already eliminated the rinse cycle, but if they had to cut the wash water level any more on "Normal-Eco" than the 3-4 inches that they previously did, a large load at a small water level would be simply too much resistance between the tub and the agitator and the transmission no matter how well built would fail in short order. With the new "agi-tub," since the tub will move with the agitator there is no such risk that a large load and a low water level could do any damage to the drive mechanism. The whole tub, clothes, agitator and all mould just move back and forth with no more resistance than that of a large load with a high water level.

I do however share everyone's concerns that washing performance will be negatively effected. I have been looking a videos of the old Frigidaire skini-mini and an unempressed with the action. I hope SQ has found a way to perfect that action so it works better.

 

[Chetlaham]

Water treatment

1. You are basing this statement on existing technology, infrastructure, and the ASSUMPTION the laws of physics have been exhausted. Put enough brain power and man power to work and you can device a system that gives a lot more fresh water with less energy. Especially if that energy is coming from a sustainable source. I am sure people are rolling their eyes at my education post, but that is simply folks basing things off their own experience in education 20 to 50 years ago. A lot has changed since then that most know little about.

2. "Given that *none* of the whiners here have signed up for a new power plant and/or water/sewage treatment plant in their backyard/neighborhood" Again, pure assumption. Who says you need more real-estate for any of these? Who says there isn't technology, both prototype and commercially available to maximize existing real-estate? Want a good example? Google "gas insulated substations" or "SF6 insulated substation" "neighborhood friendly substation". Power companies now can move many, many times more power from the same if not smaller footprint of existing air insulted substations, often with the option of being able to enclose the gas insulated gear in a building that blends in within its surroundings. Said technology is being implemented everyday across this country at hundreds of sites with few noticing it. In fact you might hear 'yahhh, there used to be transformers there but they demolished all that and built some type of office building'

New powerplants... what about all the existing ones that have been closed or are scheduled to close?

https://instituteforenergyresearch.org/topics/policy/power-plant-closures/

I know people will make the argument 'but those were mostly coal, not to mention dated' Of course, but the space is there to build nuclear or NG; or you could just use the latest in clean coal technology...

The resources are there and the technology is there, it just has to be implemented. HE is great way to delay taking care of the real issues in society...

 

[earthling177]

Well, you do realize that you are singing my tune, right? I don't have a copyright on it, being that's it's so old it's not even *my* tune. It's just the tune of people linked to engineering in any way, shape or form.

And no, I don't know everything, but I do live in Boston, which, while not quite the center of the Universe they like to think they are, we *are* part of the hive mind of bleeding-edge high-tech. If it's not started here, it was started somewhere where our colleagues work. I have friends at Google, for example, I could tell you stuff, but they'd have to kill me (and you too) because there are non-disclosure agreements.

Here's the thing: *all* the things you mentioned cost money, time, research, development, resources etc. Things that Google and Apple do because they are near trillion-dollar companies who can see recovering all that they invested over 50+ years are not a dime a dozen.

Heck, even the "closed" power stations that you mentioned, there are *lots* of coal power stations that have converted to gas-fueled turbo-fan generators long ago. If you think that it would be cheaper to empty the building and just install a new nuclear plant or gas turbofan plant, by all means, run and tell them, because they, or their investors, thought it was either cheaper to give money to consumers to buy High Efficiency bulbs, A/C, washers etc, or they decided to shutter the plant altogether. I'm thinking it was no as profitable to them to upgrade, replace or whatever.

And, pretty as a new building would be, with a power plant, or water or sewage treatment plant inside, I am willing to bet that all the people complaining about the compromise being less waste so we don't *have* to have more plants in our own neighborhoods would not sign up for such. Just ask people around here in Boston, who basically just got a few new water treatment plants, or even the ones that have "just" been upgraded, if they want to go for a repeat -- they'll scratch your eyes out, it took years of construction with *all* the involved clogged traffic, potholes, new holes dug up for power, gas, water etc.

Here's the thing we should *all* be ashamed of: even our "high efficiency" appliances lag *years* behind other places. There are *other* machines in Europe that use less water and electricity than ours. Now for the frigging surprise, the *companies* are the *same* here and there, and they could *easily* just produce the things here, or, if we look at the current economic climate, since they are producing appliances not in USA anyway, they could just order their offshore factories to make some for us.

They don't.

Guess *who* that benefits, the country (USA), you and me and others (the public), or the investors?

The prize goes to the correct answer, which is the investors.

You and I, and the rest of the Americans are left sucking our fingers when we are lucky enough to have a home to go to and a job to pay our bills, because there's a huge percentage of the population that has been scrambling to survive, so that the uber rich can have 2 extra pennies, and the uber rich are the people telling us forever that frontloaders leak on the floors, have bearings that break too soon, that high-sudsing detergent is best and we should not look at what goes over in Europe when it comes to better chemistry and engineering.

I love looking into the future, new developments and stuff just around the corner, but what is good for Microsoft, Apple, Google etc is not likely to show up for you and I if that would depend on the Koch brothers and you should not count on it.

Because, when it comes *right* down to it, it was a no brainer to switch to gas turbofan generation a decade ago, it was cleaner, more reliable, and in places, even cheaper -- but people cling to stuff that should have been discarded eons ago, and they'll continue to do so.

Cheers,
   -- Paulo.

 

[Chetlaham]

I will reply more latter, but don't forget the regulations that squash it. Yes- near multi trillion- but from acquiring the best talent on earth and a tenacity to never give up on something now matter how impractical it might seem. IMO the egg does come first in this case. Which thankfully for the first time in 50 years we have an administration that is trying to put an end to the dark age regulations.

If electricity was produced from renewables and water purification easy, then efficiency would not matter. Yes it is cheaper to subsidize efficient light bulbs and push Energy star then upgrading 60 year old infrastructure. But in the end thats not addressing the root of the problem.

I have used this argument before and I will use it again: Why did the US, the richest and most resourceful country on earth, choose TL over FL when they could have easily made FLs as they did TLs? Why TLs?

 

[henene4]

Efficency would not matter

It would. Basicly every task you get as an engineer is based on the goal of total process optimisation.
Efficent is always better as long as the result is sufficent. There is no but about that.

 

[Chetlaham]

Not always- and I can think of many of examples. Sometimes cost and simplicity take over efficiency. Most things can be a lot more efficient but often are not for those reasons. A box fan someone purchases would use 1/4 the power with a PSC motor, 1/5 with an inverter, but a shaded pole often gets thrown in because its cheaper and more reliable.

 

[Chetlaham]

Process optimization

Better example: there are dishwashers that will fill an outer tank before emptying the water into the wash tank. The idea is that heat will be drawn out of the wash tank and pre-heat the incoming rinse water saving energy. And it does save energy and is thus more efficient. But in most cases the engineers tasked for making consumer DW choose not to employee this type optimization. Same with GE not evacuating the sump, the process would be far more optimized if all the water was flushed out between drain and fill.

 

[henene4]

Efficency isn't the same as efficency

Example one: Yes, that is optimized towards efficency, just that efficency here relates to the efficency of the production process.

Example two: Both machines are optimized towards the efficency of the process of cleaning dishes, just that different measures were taken to reach that goal.

You always want efficency, just what you focus on changes. Efficency can mean a lot of things.

Thus, the laundry process would almost always be designed to be more efficent in one way or another to compete with other manufacturers even if there were no regulations. And most likely, as us monkeys love money, and lower usage means more money in your pocket (and that is seen and meant on a verry basic instinctive level, and our instincts are to dumb to understand the "time is money" argument), optimisation would be towards ennergy&#92water usage.

There are good ways to implement these optimisation steps. Several manufacturers in the EU have a 3 or 4 focus point system for washers.
One setting (default) is optimized to give overall efficency, meaning usual wash&#92rinse results, average cycle times and average usage.
One setting is optimized for energy&#92water usage. While maintaining simmilar cleaning results, it saves resources but needs more time.
One setting saves time and therefor it will use more resources to get simmilar (or slightly lesser) wash&#92rinse results.
And sometimes, there is a performance option, which betters wash&#92rinse results by adding resource usages and sometimes time.

There is always the goal of improvement, the goal of getting more efficent, getting better at something. Question is just in which way you want to be better and how you want to do that.

 

[earthling177]

That example with the dishwasher works very well in countries where the dishwasher is expected to heat its own water. It will fail miserably in countries where the machine has only a hot fill. Like USA.

 

[earthling177]

I am unlikely to respond further in this thread, because this has already turned into a political discussion, which is properly done in the private forums, and anyone who wants to discuss this further is welcome to start one there, because no matter what, I will be repeating there what I've said before, so I don't think there's any interest to begin with. Unlikely doesn't mean I *won't* though, it will depend a lot on how the conversation turns here.

That having been said, there's plenty that you may have missed, so I will try and convey what I know.

Let's start by "regulations that squash it" -- just like a judge in USA can't sue someone not directly linked to their person (that is, Mr. or Ms. Sam Doe can sue someone who crashed against their own car, but they can't start a suit on my behalf because they live two blocks from me and saw the perp crash against my car), by which I mean, judges have to *wait* until someone files a lawsuit, laws and regulations can't just start themselves. Someone has to *ask* for a law to be introduced, and, in the *current* economic climate, it's *unlikely* that a regular citizen can do it and bring it to the end. A *bunch* of concerned citizens can put a lot of pressure and maybe they'll succeed.

Where am I trying to get here? To the point where the *vast* majority of laws were petitioned/started by big corporations that ply politicians with money and favors. It's called "Regulatory Capture" (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture).

Say Boeing (or Ford or whatever) comes up with a new safety protocol/device. They do *not* want the tsuris associated with just introducing it in their newest product. That *might* expose them to lawsuits from people who will claim, for example, that the company *knew* their wares were not as safe without seat-belts, for example, like their older models. What do the companies do then? They get together with *other* companies who make similar wares and lobby (with millions of dollars) for a new law/regulation to not only *force* (or give deep incentives) for *all* the other companies to install the same thing (so the first company doesn't lose money by installing stuff others do not have to spend money on), *but*, and this is crucial, the new law/regulation *grandfathers* the old equipment, thus *exempting* the companies from the unpleasant task of having to tell the people using their old wares to go take a long hike.

And, those regulations are *written by* the corporations, *exactly* the way *they* want them.

Notice, for example, that in other countries, laws are likely to say "the toilet has to work *well* with at most 1.6 gallons/flush" and toilets in those countries work pretty well (just see, as an example, Toto Toilets). Not so in the ol' USA -- here, the law *carefully* says essentially, "the toilet can not use more than 1.6 gallons/flush", thus freeing the manufactures from R&D of *new*, *improved* toilets that wouldn't clog with the new low-flow.

So, take a look at the "regulations" you people have been bitching about. Until a few years ago, they simply said that machines that qualified for an EnergyStar status would qualify the manufacturers for special "treatment", including tax breaks, money incentives etc. This may have changed a bit in the last iteration, but even that is not "you can't make traditional toploaders" like you people cry about, which is why SpeedQueen was able to say "screw it, we'll make a toploader".

This situation is not very far from what happens to cars and other vehicles: manufacturers are free to make whatever cars and trucks they please, *as long as* the *average* of the fuel economy is kept to a certain level. And even then, there are exceptions and exemptions and people who are in that industry, please correct me, but for example, Ferrari does *not* offer any cars that meet the low end in our market unless they are bundled with some other manufacturer that perhaps only sells subcompacts. BMW, Mercedes, and other luxury cars sell vehicles which are taxed as "gas guzzlers" and develop over 300 HP, for example.

It is not forbidden, it's a luxury for the few who can afford paying for the resources and the necessary taxes.

In the brief time (just a few decades, really) when the uber rich were taxed more than we mere mortals, we had plenty of money to *install* a huge electric grid. We *should* have money to update/upgrade/replace necessary parts, but the investors want the very last cent of any profit, which is why it has been deferred for 60 years to the point it's now nearly falling apart.

But even then, there is an *awful* lot of *waste* -- other countries have a standard of living just as high as ours, if not higher, and they spend way less on resources than we do. They can run 3 loads of wash with less resources than we run just one, for example. Not to mention anything about keeping their homes heated in winter, or cars.

You say "If electricity was produced from renewables and water purification easy, [...]" and we need to ask: *why* do you think things are the way they are here? There are *plenty* of countries, including our neighbors in Canada, that people pay the "hydro" bill for electricity. Hydroelectric plants *are* using renewable energy. So are wind farms and plenty of other things. We *could* have been at the forefront of renewable energy but the petroleum corps made sure to pay enough politicians that plenty of our top scientists moved abroad to help the *other* places get it first. There are plenty of stories of cities in US that used to have a pretty good public transportation system which was bought wholesale and dismantled by petroleum companies so that people would buy cars. Is it true? Dunno, before my time.

But that *does* bring me, finally, to your other question:

"Why did the US, the richest and most resourceful country on earth, choose TL over FL when they could have easily made FLs as they did TLs? Why TLs?"

On one hand, just like you said, we had *plenty* of people with enough money to spend, and an automatic washer was worth a *lot* to housewives back then, someone recently just posted a link to a TED Talk saying how much time and effort such an appliance saved the housewife, that she could then read, teach her kids etc.

Then there's the fact that, just like today, manufacturers want to *patent* stuff so they can extoll the virtues of this thingie that they have an exclusive on. Tumble washers are hundreds of years old, in the mid-1800's, for example, all the commercial laundries that the affluent sent their clothes to used tumble washers. No, they were not automatic, but *most* of what could be patented about them had been, and had fallen into the public domain.

The *only* things that people did not have a patent to until the first automatics showed up were the control mechanism and the suspension. And the very first automatic, the Bendix front loader, was not a soft mount, it was in fact secured to the floor. But between Bendix and Westinghouse, the first frontloaders made it very hard for others to compete.

Two other things then cooperated to make users go to toploaders: one, they resembled the wringer washers which people were used to at home. And second, companies like P&G saw the writing on the wall pretty soon -- if the new machines could use just about half of the soap/detergent, they'd be screwed pretty soon. While it was true in fact that at that time there was little preventing unsupervised kids from opening the door to a front loader and making a mess on the floor, it was also true that such kids could easily get a small beach toy pail and dump several gallons of water on the floor just by opening a toploader and bailing water "out" if they wanted to, and many did.

We have *all* heard so many times the "bearings fail soon" and "frers leak on the floor" stories that were started by corporations, both the ones that only made detergents and the ones that didn't make any frontloaders, that it's been repeated on this site to this day. And yet, if we ran a search, we'd find an awful lot of people who are here complaining about a *toploader* leaking on their floor, but those are forgiven somehow.

People wax nostalgic about their toploaders with an agitator because that's all they've known. The ones that are just barely now turning 20 don't remember that before the enzymes soup modern detergent became, their mothers were removing stains by brushing them with lots of different concoctions and long soaks *before* they got their "10 minute wash" followed by rinse and spin. The people for which pre-treating their garments with Shout, Zout, Spray-n-Wash etc is still a routine task are still wasting time, effort and resources doing that, when they could have been all this time just toss the clothes in the frontloaders and let the machine do the work instead. It takes *over* 30 minutes to pre-treat everything by hand and soak them, then another 30-45 minutes for a traditional toploader to run the cycle. That is over one hour, and you were *working* during some of that time.

Here's the alternative: the detergents you use (Tide etc) have the *same* enzymes the pre-treaters have. It takes about 15 minutes for the enzymes to do their work. Any washer that has a 20-30 minute *wash* time, then rinses and spins will *automatically* clean your clothes for you. Of course, if you come back when your toploader is about finished with the wash portion and restart the cycle so it will wash for 20-30 minutes, it would work, but not automatically. It will *also* wear out your clothes faster than a front loader.

Why, why, oh, why don't we Americans know this? Because we had so many resources and we could pay for them. Because we like to think we're the best in the world and there's *no way* that our designs got to Europe and they improved it.

It took people to move to Europe (or Europeans to bring their washers here) to introduce some of us to a modern front loader that could automatically pre-wash, start a wash with a new wash solution and heat it above the temps of the central water heater and then rinse it pretty well and extract so well that the dryer took way less time to finish the job for us to even pay attention.

To this very day, people are afraid to look at the new things and questioning why the "government" is "forcing" us to use them. When in fact, it's corporations writing their own laws so they do not have to do any R&D to produce something better, they can sell machines that waste more resources and don't wash as well as the very machines the same corporations sell abroad.

And people have the *nerve* to come here complain? Wake up and look around you. Ask someone with an Asko, Miele, Siemens, Bosch, AEG etc if they want to switch back to a toploader. The ones that say anything against their machines want something *bigger* so they won't need to go to a laundromat and face a lukewarm or cold wash ever again.

And no, I'm not nearly as angry as my writing makes me sound.

What makes me angry is not that we have a portion of the population that forgot we needed laws to prevent corporations from polluting the air, the soil and the water we all share. They don't know that they are being peons for corporations that spend more in that propaganda than in R&D for better stuff, which is why we *used* to be a country where everyone bought things from, when we sold the best.

What makes me sad and angry is that an awful lot of stuff that was invented *here*, and a lot of it in Universities when the government used to give grants for research, were left to linger for long enough that the patents expired, European countries then *improved* them a *whole lot* and then they come back here as "Euro" stuff, which, in a very American way, we are supposed to pooh-pooh and ignore, as if that would make our lives any better.

If we were *any* smart, we would recognize this "Euro" stuff for the royal gifts that they are: we did not have to spend any time or money developing them, people who are in places with very expensive utilities use them all the time saving money and resources, and getting the job done better.

People complaining about how the government "oppresses" the average American, or even our corporations are kindly invited to move to libertarian paradises such as Ethiopia, Somalia, Namibia etc, where you all can pay no taxes, get no services and have as many weapons as you feel it will make you safe.

And, because we are your friends, whether you recognize this or not, please write us about how your experience of such places is going. Particularly after 6 months or so, when most of the marauding gangs will have stripped you off of all you had and a place with a government like ours might be able to send in the Seals and Marines to rescue you.

Cheers,
   -- Paulo.

PS: countries that don't let people pollute their waterways and make the corporations clean up after themselves and/or pay dearly for such cleaning services do not have nearly the same difficulty and spend nearly as much as we do, because their water *stays* clean to begin with, instead of having to spend thru the nose to remove all the crap the corporations dump in the water, air and soil here. For what's worth.

http://https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

 

[maytag85]

The only way to be efficient is to get the job done right! It is not efficient when it has to be done all over again!

 

[earthling177]

Yup, that's right.

That's why I discarded two toilets that used to clog all the time despite the fact they used 1.6 gal/flush, and I replaced them with two Toto toilets that use aaall of 1.2 gal/flush and, in the 4 years or so they've been there, they have *never* failed to flush and have never clogged. I've put the plungers in the basement the day the toilets were installed, and they are still there with a thick layer of dust.

That's why I wash my clothes in frontloaders: I only have to cycle them *once*, that's the way it's been since 1999, and I save a ton of electricity, water and detergent. Not to say anything about time, I have not pretreated clothes in nearly 20 years.

That's why I put my dishes in an Euro dishwasher: they have always gotten way cleaner with way fewer resources than when I used to have the American stuff. They break way less often too.

I could go on, but then I'd be the obnoxious guy who is "elitist" and "rubbing other users' noses" on what I have or how much I own.

I might also be breaking one of my own rules, which is to try to be nice to people, because they don't always know all they need to discuss a situation, and some people here already have a hard enough life trying to survive in a harsh world that is unforgiving to people who can't keep up, and while I'm willing to be not so nice to people who *can* keep up, I am not willing to inadvertently or willingly hurt folks who are on the Aspergers spectrum, of which there are a bunch in here. It's unfair that they believe the crappy propaganda from the manufacturers and corporations, and I can only offer data and hopefully be patient enough for them to process the new info without hurting them.

Face it, my dad was a professor of Mech Eng for over 40 years until he retired -- in 1992, we used to have an Amana set, which is basically a spruced up copy of the SpeedQueen (at the time Raytheon owned them or something). My father heard the machine run for a few minutes and told me everything that was wrong with it (including transmission). The machine was still under warranty, so we sold it at a good price while it was still working, and got something else. A year or so later, a *ton* of people started complaining about the SpeedQueens and the Amanas, some of them are users in this very website.

Their revisions did not seem to make the machines much better. I had some hopes that the machines improved a lot when in the last few years folks here who fix them told us the design had improved remarkably.

This new design is a big departure from what they used to be, and I, for one, hope it fixes most of the problems.

But at the time when TLs were more common, SpeedQueens and Amanas were nothing more than average. Their only claim to fame is to be one of the last ones to be left on the market. Any washer in my basement currently finishes the job faster and better with less pre-treating, less manual interference etc than the Amana I used to have.

All of you are welcome to buy the sets and love them. You can fool yourselves into thinking they are the last good thing on this earth.

But please don't expect us to agree with you.

 

[infusor]

Test results

I think it's funny, people on here complaining, saying " my old fashioned top loader uses lots of water" " and cleans way better" when orginations like consumer reports, good housekeeping, reviewed.com ALL agree that front load machines clean the best, all of their labratory tests show the results, and americans still think their water hog diluting detergent cleans better, it just shows how ignorant people can be.

 

[maytag85]

Top load washers will always be king!!

There are front load washers that work quite well, but I will always like top loaders more than front loaders! Front loaders do save water, but they aren't as fun to watch as a top loader.

 

[cfz2882]

top loads get better results with certain loads...

...at least in my experience,using different front load and agitator top load machines:bedsheets and heavily soiled work clothes seem to come out better using the top load machines.

 

[Chetlaham]

Dishwasher with heat converter

I disagree- think about long lines where the water has chilled. Transferring that heat over does save something.

"Face it, my dad was a professor of Mech Eng for over 40 years until he retired -- in 1992, we used to have an Amana set, which is basically a spruced up copy of the SpeedQueen (at the time Raytheon owned them or something). My father heard the machine run for a few minutes and told me everything that was wrong with it (including transmission). The machine was still under warranty, so we sold it at a good price while it was still working, and got something else."

Honestly, I see a lot of unfounded Speed Queen bashing and I think that comes from not understanding the product at hand. The new Speed Queens are so far from the Amanas. Yes the design is similar, but the seals were horrible (good chance your machine had a leak), the outter tub was plastic, they had a "gimmick" transmission and there were several other issues as well best left unsaid.

"A year or so later, a *ton* of people started complaining about the SpeedQueens and the Amanas, some of them are users in this very website."

Yes- and I have seen those reviews. No offense to anyone, but they often come from a lack of knowledge or experience in laundry. Ie, the lady who had an unbalanced load and the tub was hitting the sides. But that isn't a Speed Queen defect, any top load will do that (or begin to walk) with an unbalanced load. Another case was an agitator leaving holes in clothing which SQ was willing to send a hand inspected agitator, another scratches on the front that was traced back to the dealer... I could go on and on with examples, and outside of quirky noises that do not effect operation, not one of them was truly the result of poor engineering on Speed Queen's part. We could even pick up on the rough seems of the tub, but if one were rub their finger against them chances are nothing would happen.

"Their revisions did not seem to make the machines much better. I had some hopes that the machines improved a lot when in the last few years folks here who fix them told us the design had improved remarkably."

LOL, how? They aren't dropping like flies anymore after a few years of normal use. Do you really think laundry mats and military installations would put up with that?

"But at the time when TLs were more common, SpeedQueens and Amanas were nothing more than average. Their only claim to fame is to be one of the last ones to be left on the market. Any washer in my basement currently finishes the job faster and better with less pre-treating, less manual interference etc than the Amana I used to have."

Ok- I am skeptical about your claim regarding time. What top loader finishes a cycle faster than a Speed Queen on a normal cycle? Not just the name, but the actual time difference. And regarding manual interface... Huhh? I just add clothes, detergent, softener, and then pull the knob. 30 minutes latter clothes clean. There are TL SQ models that come with second rinse and prewash for those who need them.


"I am not willing to inadvertently or willingly hurt folks who are on the Aspergers spectrum, of which there are a bunch in here. It's unfair that they believe the crappy propaganda from the manufacturers and corporations, and I can only offer data and hopefully be patient enough for them to process the new info without hurting them."

I am not intending to diagnose anyone or make anyone feel different, but I think that could apply to everyone here, myself certainly included. We are an odd yet really cool group, and technically anyone from the outside could make the Apserger's claim. But then again you could apply that to so many others outside this group.

But going on- yes I am 100% aware that FL use less water. Yes European FL with their advanced detergents and built in heaters out clean and outperform both US TLs and FLs. I fully understand that fact and it does not hurt me. However what does hurt me on the other hand is when an all knowing entity with a checkered history tells me what to buy and use. The government has no business regulating free will, and most sects that have done so through out history are not viewed in a good light. There are so many more things out there that need more attention like our healthcare, education, 3rd world infrastructure and out of control opioed crisis- all which do far more harm by leaps and bounds then people using a TL washers. Said entity will even arrest you for collecting rain water despite going against what they are supposedly trying to accomplish.

Yes this thread has become somewhat political- but I think thats inevitable considering that politics is forcing fundamental changes in laundry- politics that are altering the process and anatomical make up of the very machines we use.

Heres the thing. You want people to switch? Put FLs, and good Euro style FLs on the market and over time people will make the switch when they are saying "yahhh, you know that FL I bought, apparently it saving me money. Give it a try, you might too"

 

[earthling177]

"I disagree- think about long lines where the water has chilled. Transferring that heat over does save something."

And conversely, in the many other cases when the water heater is close by and you cool down the next fill by warming up the water you are about to dump? Oh, sure, we can put another complication or two, like a sensor to tell which water is hotter or whatever. Heat recovery works well abroad, where al the dishwashers have a cold fill and heat up their own water.

As for my Amana -- no it was not broken when I sold it or even leaking. My dad used to have very good hearing which served him well in teaching Mech. Eng. for over 4 decades. He was able to listen to stuff working and describe if the gearing was well manufactured, for example. Or things that were straining. Or a number of other things.

SpeedQueen did not begin to address those problems until about 5-10 years ago, and it seemed to really get better about 3 years ago. We hope this new design will do well or at least better than their previous designs.

My "review" as it were of my Amana, which at the time was nearly identical as the SpeedQueens in laundromats is based on having used lots of other brands, some toploaders, some frontloaders.

The particular model I had (1992) did not wash particularly well and didn't rinse well either. So, to clean very dirty clothes that our household had with the detergents back then, we often had to pre-treat everything that was very dirty with Spray-n-Wash or similar, then we'd do a pre-wash and soak, and *then* the regular wash, which had to be followed by a second rinse and spin. That used to take 2 hours or more, a good half hour or so was manually pre-treating stuff, and we had to go back to the basement to reset the machine from the pre-wash/soak to wash and then second rinse.

All my current frontloaders finish the cycle in less time: one in 65 minutes, one in about 45 minutes and the other in about 90 minutes depending on the phase of the moon. And I don't have to pre-treat, soak or come back to reset the machine.

Granted, newer detergents are better now but if the agitator was the same, the wash arc and speed are the same, the wash time is the same, I don't think I'm committing violence here to say I'd expect the performance to be just as basic/mediocre as it was back then.

And if I remember right, the outer tub on my machine was porcelain coated steel. The inner basket was stainless steel.

"Oh, *I* don't need any of that, my clothes are clean enough to come out clean from a SpeedQueen without pre-treating..."

Wow, good for you! You could be happy with just about anything they offer couldn't you? Why claim this washer is special then? Because the people I know who had dirty socks, children's clothes, clothes with heavy soil from working on farms or fixing cars etc were all doing what we were doing, and yes, a "regular cycle" finished in 45 minutes or less, but was *not* enough to *clean* stuff without help.

As for the claim that the free-market will let people "adequately" choose the best machine, that's *exactly* what hurts you people: everywhere people have been given a choice, they've been picking up the frontloaders. Ever since they've been relaunched in USA, even before all the "serious" EnergyStar thing hit and manufacturers started dumbing down toploaders, people who have been using washers properly have been leaving toploaders behind for good. The few people who got issues and went back to the toploaders are finding the same issues there too, including mold and mildew, and those are the people who use cool/cold washes with crappy detergents.

Now for the politics thing: I'm done with this, if you are still interested, go to the other forums and start a thread there, I might respond.

There is no pleasing people who in the same breath and sentence complain about the lack of healthcare, education, bad infrastructure and "out of control opioid crisis", *all* of which have been shown to benefit from government "interference" stopping the bad corporations from abusing unsuspecting public. The very opioid crisis you complain about was started and fueled by the greed of the pharma industry, who lied to us about the safety of their meds and pushed doctors to prescribe them assuring them the meds were safe when they knew they were not.

Just take a look at places with "no government interference" like Somalia, Ethiopia and compare them to here right now or even better, here 50 years ago, when the government *funded* a lot of education, healthcare, basic research that led the country to be the First World Superpower.

By all means, don't stop there -- also take a look at how we used to be *before* government started telling people that selling snake oil would land them in jail, and stopped food suppliers from loading the food with sawdust and other crap. I don't think that people who lived thru the Great Depression of '29 appreciated having to go thru that just so a few robber barons could live at the top of the chain, when banks were not as well regulated either.

And I have *never* heard of government prohibiting people from collecting rain water, where the heck is that going on?

Here's the way I see what you are saying and what I'm saying: I think a government that regulates commerce and protects the public from the greed and excess of bankers, corporations etc is *great* and they should leave me and what I do in my bedroom alone. What I hear *you* saying, because it sounds an awful lot like what the other half of the population is saying, I hear that group of people saying that government *should* have a right to tell me what my sex life should be, that if I'm not straight I should not have the right to serve my country or walk the streets safely, and that I do not have a right to clean air, water or soil, and, to compensate me for my troubles, they will remove all regulations from bankers, corporations etc, so they can rape the public at will until we're as poor as people in Ethiopia right now, or even people here in 1929, and we should thank our lucky stars that we're not in jail for owing money or, if someone really hates us, they can make up some story that me and someone else were having non-missionary sex, or participating in felatio or anal sex.

NO THANK YOU!

If you think about it, you have benefited from government assistance way more often than you give it credit. And unless you have millions of dollars to your name, you have, like everyone else here, used government services that cost real money more than you paid. You use electricity, phones, water, sewage, roads, interstates, police, firemen etc.

Even things you've paid for: when you get something FedExed or UPSed to you, it's *way* cheaper in USA to use those services than in places where the government is so bad that roads and interstates are in shambles, for example.

It's just that people freakout when they pay 10 dollars in taxes, but it's OK to avail ourselves of services that cost way more than 10 bucks, like the internet you are using right now.

As for people on the Asperger's spectrum, if you can look at this thread and not identify at least a couple of them, I dunno what to tell you. I don't think they deserve to be treated badly.

Anyway, have fun, if you want to continue this conversation, please start a new thread in the proper forums, I am way past done here.

Cheers
   -- Paulo.

 

[agiflow2]

Come now Paulo and enlighten the rest of us. Who are these poor you accuse of Asbergers ? Surely you know. Name names please and have the balls to call them out.

 

[earthling177]

ROFLMAO!!!

Patrick, that is low even for you.

No one *accused* anyone of Asbergers[sic].

What I *said* is that there are people in this very thread who are on the Asperger's spectrum, it's obvious to anyone who cares, it's more than clear that they are having a very hard time with this stupid discussion and *I* for one do not want to contribute to that any more than I've already have.

If you were a better person, you'd have the balls to refrain from such a post and asking for names in the first place. And if *I* were a better person, I would not right now be wondering -- What Would Jesus Do?

If you or anyone else want to continue this conversation, there are *two* private forums for controversial stuff. Make use of them.

Have fun!
   -- Paulo.

 

[Chetlaham]

And that is my point, there are so many cases where something can be made more efficient, but practicality limits that.

In your case with pre-treating yes it takes longer- but in my case 30 minutes vs 65-90 is a major time reduction. 45 minutes on regular? Sounds like those guys have low water pressure.

Yes- collecting rain water:

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...0-days-jail-collecting-rainwater-his-property

"There is no pleasing people who in the same breath and sentence complain about the lack of healthcare, education, bad infrastructure and "out of control opioid crisis", *all* of which have been shown to benefit from government "interference" stopping the bad corporations from abusing unsuspecting public."

No, its the opposite. Who runs the public education system and has done so more and more over the years? No child left behind/common core? The government has. Who has crippling regulations that squash infrastructure projects like new highways? The government. Who legalized powerful opiods (ok they were liberal for once) and then criminalizes the fall out? The government. Maybe the better term would be the are doing it all wrong. But still, the majority of cases involve oppressive laws and over-site. Somalia and Ethiopia are extremes that do not further the argument as there is a LOT in between them.