That is the only S.Q. I ever remember seeing with a side-ways opening lid.
Anyone else ever seen one like that?
Anyone else ever seen one like that?
Todays POD----
- Thread starter gyrafoam
- Start date
Help Support :
All the SQ's I remember had left-opening lids.
From 1957 thru 1980 almost all Speed Queen Washers had side opening lids, the exception was the coin-op machines that had back opening lids. When SQ went to the perforated tub design they redesigned the cabinet with a back opening, just like their earliest machines.
The Double Mint Twins
As a matter of fact, here is my next restoration project...
As a matter of fact, here is my next restoration project...
Robert, I remembered you had one of these, but not two to hopefully make one complete machine 
YAY
YAY
oldwasherguy
Well-known member
robert,does the new speed queens operate on the wash cycle with the lid up?Im thinking of buying one for everyday use. Don.
hreodbeorht
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2006
- Messages
- 38
what's that RCA to the right? CTC-5? 7? 9?
Looks like a CTC-7
Looks like a CTC-7
Yes I have two of them, I'm going to take the best parts of both, since both a relatively rough and make one good one.
Phil, as for the TV that is a CTC-7 that I've been waiting to restore, I restored my CTC-9 and it works beautifully, I use it almost every day.
Don any washer can be cured of its saftely lid switch blues with a little mechanical work.
Phil, as for the TV that is a CTC-7 that I've been waiting to restore, I restored my CTC-9 and it works beautifully, I use it almost every day.
Don any washer can be cured of its saftely lid switch blues with a little mechanical work.
LMAO-----
This is why I shouldn't try to post anything first thing in the morning!
The S.Q. in my workshop has a side opening lid-----DUH!
This is why I shouldn't try to post anything first thing in the morning!
The S.Q. in my workshop has a side opening lid-----DUH!
mrcleanjeans
New member
Is it true about the SQ?
Was this "Royal Pair" famed for dependability ?
Was this "Royal Pair" famed for dependability ?
mrcleanjeans
New member
Like I was asking,was this a TRULY dependable pair?Who knows the answer?
Like I was asking,was this a TRULY dependable pair?Who knows the answer?
That's all advertising nonesense. There is really no way to determine that because Consumer Reports didn't start reporting on Frequency of Repair that early.
But if you look in the library, the 1958 Washer Report from CU shows Speed Queen as rated dead last out of 21 Automatics reported on.
Top rated machines of the '58 Report:
#1 Was the Ultra-Clean Frigidaire Unimatic,
#2 was the first Helical Drive Maytag,
#3 was the Lady Kenmore Cycla-Fabric.
That's all advertising nonesense. There is really no way to determine that because Consumer Reports didn't start reporting on Frequency of Repair that early.
But if you look in the library, the 1958 Washer Report from CU shows Speed Queen as rated dead last out of 21 Automatics reported on.
Top rated machines of the '58 Report:
#1 Was the Ultra-Clean Frigidaire Unimatic,
#2 was the first Helical Drive Maytag,
#3 was the Lady Kenmore Cycla-Fabric.
mrcleanjeans
New member
I get by with a little help from my friends
Thanks Robert,I appreciate you and all youv've done both here and the vacuum website,and as for that site,thanks to the creativity and genious of the others also,it is now a reality.
Thanks Robert,I appreciate you and all youv've done both here and the vacuum website,and as for that site,thanks to the creativity and genious of the others also,it is now a reality.
I think so.
When I was in college from 1980 to 1984, the dorms had green coin-op solid tub Speed Queens like the one in the POD, and they were very old (probably 20+ years old). The students kept them running virtually 24 hours per day, and often packed them so full of clothes that the clothes did not move at all during agitation. (Like Mixfinder says, Americans think wet = clean). Despite their age, they endured this abuse day in and day out with no problem whatsoever. They never exhibited any signs or sounds of struggling to handle the excessively heavy loads that were always stuffed into them. They always spun at full speed no matter how heavily loaded, and they never suds locked. When they did break down, it was always because a sock would go over the top of the way-overloaded tub and jam the pump. The repair man had fashioned for himself a long wire hanger he used to slip down between the inner and outer tub to find and retrieve the sock or whatever without taking the machine apart. Otherwise, I only remember one machine breaking -- it wanted to spin when it was filling. The dryers were Speed Queens too, but a little newer, and they never broke down. So yes, I'd say they were very dependable.
And fun to watch. The overflow rinse made it easy to keep white laundry white because the rinse water was crystal clear by the time the rinse cycle ended.
But the wash tub was very, very small. They were very hard on clothes because the aggressively fast 210 degree agitation always started (with an unbelievably loud bang) when the tub was only half full of water. The rollover was poor, and got worse during the wash cycle as more and more water splashed out of the tub. They didn't get clothes particularly clean, and the clothes emerged linty. Corduroy pants emerged practically destroyed.
They're a very fun washer for a collector to have on hand. But I'm not sure I'd want one for everyday use.
When I was in college from 1980 to 1984, the dorms had green coin-op solid tub Speed Queens like the one in the POD, and they were very old (probably 20+ years old). The students kept them running virtually 24 hours per day, and often packed them so full of clothes that the clothes did not move at all during agitation. (Like Mixfinder says, Americans think wet = clean). Despite their age, they endured this abuse day in and day out with no problem whatsoever. They never exhibited any signs or sounds of struggling to handle the excessively heavy loads that were always stuffed into them. They always spun at full speed no matter how heavily loaded, and they never suds locked. When they did break down, it was always because a sock would go over the top of the way-overloaded tub and jam the pump. The repair man had fashioned for himself a long wire hanger he used to slip down between the inner and outer tub to find and retrieve the sock or whatever without taking the machine apart. Otherwise, I only remember one machine breaking -- it wanted to spin when it was filling. The dryers were Speed Queens too, but a little newer, and they never broke down. So yes, I'd say they were very dependable.
And fun to watch. The overflow rinse made it easy to keep white laundry white because the rinse water was crystal clear by the time the rinse cycle ended.
But the wash tub was very, very small. They were very hard on clothes because the aggressively fast 210 degree agitation always started (with an unbelievably loud bang) when the tub was only half full of water. The rollover was poor, and got worse during the wash cycle as more and more water splashed out of the tub. They didn't get clothes particularly clean, and the clothes emerged linty. Corduroy pants emerged practically destroyed.
They're a very fun washer for a collector to have on hand. But I'm not sure I'd want one for everyday use.
Well, untill my '69 S.Q. decided to fry a solenoid in my kitchen, it had been my daily driver for a while. (Yeah, a side opening lid).
I had put it in place after I started to sense trouble with my "Gold Crown" '68 Rollermatic, and took it out of service.
The first thing I noticed was that the S.Q. seemed to have an edge in cleaning ability over the Frigidaire. (Heresy!)
Especially the terry type cotton cleaning cloths.
The '64'Tag Highlander and the '63'Kenmo did good jobs too, but did not handle greasy towels as well as the S.Q. does with that overflow rinse. The 'Tag would have a greasy ring at the top of the tub and agitator---the 'Kenmo (with that "neutral drain") just re-deposited the grease on the top of the load as it drained and left a ring on the agitator.
So I developed a liking for the 'Queen I did not think I would have. Am in a holding pattern just now, but will soon install a new solenoid, and plan on bringing the "Queen back to work!
I had put it in place after I started to sense trouble with my "Gold Crown" '68 Rollermatic, and took it out of service.
The first thing I noticed was that the S.Q. seemed to have an edge in cleaning ability over the Frigidaire. (Heresy!)
Especially the terry type cotton cleaning cloths.
The '64'Tag Highlander and the '63'Kenmo did good jobs too, but did not handle greasy towels as well as the S.Q. does with that overflow rinse. The 'Tag would have a greasy ring at the top of the tub and agitator---the 'Kenmo (with that "neutral drain") just re-deposited the grease on the top of the load as it drained and left a ring on the agitator.
So I developed a liking for the 'Queen I did not think I would have. Am in a holding pattern just now, but will soon install a new solenoid, and plan on bringing the "Queen back to work!
