The New SQ TL Washers

[agiflow2]

I hope this works out well for speed queen. I will gladly embrace this new way of washing as long as it can still get grimy work clothes clean. I certainly hope it rinses better than the one I have now.

It's not that bad but could definitely use improvement without using the second rinse switch so much.

 

[infusor]

Rinsing

Agiflow2 i think that was the main reason for the new mechanism was rinsing ability on the eco cycle, with the spray/spin sequence there is not much you can do with a transmission, it limits the spin/pause patterns, with the new motor there is so much more you can do, not to mention less moving parts easier to repair too.

 

[brucelucenta]

I will really find it interesting to see how well this works.

 

[hilovane]

I find both sides of this discussion interesting; since I didn't look at everybody's post, has anyone uttered "GOD SAVE THE QUEEN?"

As for me, it's all moot. My SQ TL (mechanical controls) is a bit over 1.5 years old. As I had mentioned elsewhere in the past, I do prefer FL's having had an Asko and then a Maytag (in a way, they both offset one another; the Asko was overall the superior washer; but the Maytag had better capacity, and would tumble as it filled, unlike the Asko) But, since I couldn't afford a SQ FL, let alone another Asko, or Miele, I figured if I have to get a TL, SQ was the only way to go. I have no regrets about my decision.

It's not out the realm of possibility that it could be the last washing machine I'll ever buy.

 

[rapunzel]

I will not be embracing anything. Agitub my arse. I want real agitation from an agitator. My plan is to keep repairing my current Speed Queen if and when necessary.

I also must add that Fisher and Paykel top loaders are superb machines, which are extremely well designed and I do like the many programmable options they offer. Comparing LG, Samsung and a whole bunch of other washer, Fisher and Paykel are way ahead of all of them in performance, quality, built and programming. If I wasn't such an intransigent, churlish old bastard, I would consider replacing my Speed Queen with a Fisher and Paykel washer. I don't get why Fisher and Paykel is not more popular in the US. They are attractive, perform as well as most other highly rated washers and represent very good value for money.[this post was last edited: 11/6/2017-22:57]

 

[agiflow2]

I used to see F&P over here in more mainstream outlets like Lowe's. I think they are now being sold through smaller independent outlets . The only thing I didn't like about F&P washers,..that is before they redesigned them, was they felt very cheaply made.

I understand why they had that plastic top so there would be no rusting but the sheet metal for the body was very thin gauge. The agitator also was less than impressive with full loads in videos I have seen.Lots of thrashing and very little if any turnover. The agitator blades were paper thin.This is just an observation though.

I actually prefer the impeller version of the F&P washers. They look like they perform better and I have been impressed by the videos I have seen of those models in action. The newer large capacity agitator models look decent decent also. The newer redesigned cabinets and controls look to be of much better quality . Have not seen one live so can't comment on build quality.

 

[rapunzel]

The agitator design for F&P machines hasn't really changed in years. They use flexible vanes to give a gentler wash and are up to the task. You are right, the newer models have more substantial lids and overall they are no less sturdy than any of the other major (Asian) brands that are on the market. As for durability, sure, older F&P models don't quite appear to be as sturdy and solid as traditional, American style top loaders. However, they last the distance, clean and rinse well, are known for being reliable and they are a very easy machine to service and maintain.

Lets face it, traditional top loaders, like the ones we all grew up with are almost extinct. So Speed Queen still produces washers that, by all accounts, appear to be solid and sturdy. However, they are also a lot more expensive than most other washers. I can't wait to get reviews for the new agitub models. The proof of any pudding is always in the eating.

 

[agiflow2]

Agreed rapunzel. Just to digress for a moment. When WP was using F&P motors they seemed to have better wash action than what they use now. I know the high end models are still using a DD motor, but they are a combination of the DD and belt driven cabrios.

I could hear gears when I turned the wash plate of one of the current models. The F&P based washers had more powerful wash action.

 

[Chetlaham]

I'll be honest

I think Speed Queen did the right thing. As Infusor said I don't think they will risk it. I mean ultimately I'd like the classic concept of filling all the way to the top to remain forever, but with the current regulations SQ was forced to make changes.

With those changes if I had to choose between a mod shifter that could fail in 10 years (which would make the machine practically junk-able) and a fail proof part then I would go with the fail proof design. Remember, Speed Queen is trying to get 20 years (at least) out of these machine. A mod shiftier is a gamble in addition to necessitating a suspension system change. I don't know, maybe they could make a sifter serviceable that does not require removing the inner and outter tub when it fails, but still.

 

[infusor]

Speed queen reps response

Thank you for your question. In 2018, there will be stricter government regulations we need to comply with for one cycle on the machine. There will be some modifications to our current top load washers beginning with January 2018 production. What will not change is that our design specifications remain at 10,400 cycles giving you a long life, a high degree of reliability backed by a strong warranty, and great Washability. For most cycles, you still get a full tub of water for wash and rinse and the temperature you select for washing is still hot or warm or cold and not blended. I hope this helps!

 

[Chetlaham]

"For most cycles, you still get a full tub of water for wash and rinse and the temperature you select for washing is still hot or warm or cold and not blended"

Wait, is my leg being pulled here? Because that is to good to be true. If that is true my respect for SQ just went up in that they could have ditched that all together. Glad to see an effort to give customers what they want.

 

[user 3941]

F&P TopLoader

I got mine this past Saturday and I have to say it's a very good machine, aside from the fabric softener dispenser, which will dump the FS in the spray rinse, regardless if you select the FS option (which adds a deep rinse in addition to a spray rinse). That is extremely frustrating and all I can gather is that in the manual they discourage the use of liquid "conditioner", so my guess is it's intentional to reduce scrud build up...still, I'm not happy BUT...

Rollover is excellent...yes it's a straight vane but it has very vigorous agitation and it does rollover well, as long as water level is proper. It does have an auto level, which I discovered works good for smaller loads. Larger ones it actually estimates very well, but it's just not enough to get good rollover. But nice thing is you can over ride it easily after.

It's extremely quiet as well. So for the most part I'm very happy with it...just that dang FS option! haha I may try a Downy Ball to see if that works better.

 

[brucelucenta]

joeypete

So did you get the new 2018 model? If it has a straight vane agitator, it sounds like you did. Does the entire tub move back and forth to wash?

 

[frigilux]

I think joeypete bought a Fisher & Paykel, not a Speed Queen.

 

[gusherb]

I considered one of those F&P machines in lieu of the SQ TL. Ultimately I had my heart set on the SQ, which actually ended up costing less than the F&P. Still curious to use one and see how it performs compared to the SQ though, I believe those machines can use a ton of water with the right settings. 

 

[mark_wpduet]

Confused -

You said it now has a "proper" neutral drain as if it's a good thing they no longer do spin drains? I thought all the washer fanatics loved spin drains? I remember my Grandma's Frigidaire would spin a tub full of water out in no time, and I always hated the fact that our Lady Kenmore didn't do that. I think spin drains are better unless there's something I'm missing.

 

[appnut]

SQ was the last to have two major things

And old-fashioned agitator washer and a solid tub washer with overflow rinsing. 

 

[user 3941]

Yes i did buy the FP. It's probably comparable to the SQ. Very user friendly and you are able to adjust things to your desire. I liked it for the larger capacity, and considering I just barely fit all my towels in it's 3.9 cu ft tub, I'm glad I bought it over the SQ.

It's kind of like when I switched from Windows to Mac...a little weird but I learned to love it immensely. I'm sure it will be the same for the FP.

Yesss it's uses a shit ton water. LOL. But it's temp efficient with the Eco Active re-circulation spray. I'm not in a drought area so I'm happy.

 

[rapunzel]

The SQ still uses a shit ton of water, especially if one selects the three deep rinses over the eco rinse option. That's the whole point, isn't it? Having that choice to either go with the water saver option or not to.

The same applies to Fisher and Paykel. Depending on the model most of them give the option of an auto sense fill or manual water level select. The default, to my understanding, is the intuitive eco option that comes on every time the machine is turned on. This option is supposed to only fill the washer through auto sense and with only as much water as is absolutely necessary for the load size and fabric mix to be washed. In the manuals it is described as using almost as little water as a front loader would do for the same size and type of load. The load is fully saturated, but not to the point that it is fully suspended in the water. Combined with the eco rinse it is meant to be almost equivalent to a front loader wash in water consumption and wash action. However, if intuitive eco is deselected, the washer fills and operates like a regular top loader. Both the straight vane agitator and low profile wash plate are designed to allow for such low water volume and still thoroughly agitate clothes without excessive wear and tear.

F&P also offers five different water temperatures, which the machine will mix and sense. With hot being tap hot, hot/warm equal to 40C (104F), warm 30C (86F), warm/cold 20C (68F) and cold being tap cold.

Now, getting back to the 2018 SQ model using the agitub system. A picture of the agitator for the new model was posted earlier. It really dosen't look like that much. One would think that with an agitub they ought to incorporate structures in the spin tub that cause more water turbulence when the tub is spun to create agitation. Will the clothes still move through the water as vigorously and in the same toroidal movement with the new system?

The service tech response mentioned further regulatory compliance making desing changes necessary. However, many markets that SQ sells to do not apply American regulations. Thus, one would assume that SQ may still manufacture regular, belt driven agitator washers for overseas consumers. At least I would hope so. By making such a fundamental change to their top loaders, I feel that they are dumbing down their design. [this post was last edited: 11/8/2017-04:03]

 

[user 3941]

Yes, that's what I like about the FP is that the agitator model (at least in the US), is not an HE machine. The auto level works decent actually, though I discovered that while washing bedding it's best to select the water level manually.

Best thing I like is that the water temp isn't dumbed down, unless you want it to be. I selected warm and it felt almost hot to me...haha. Nice! I turned controlled cold on instead of tap cold because out tap water gets pretty chilly in NH this time of year.

It's a very cool machine.