Top Load or Front Load....?

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

Help Support :

No doubt in my mind that a good ole Whirlpool belt drive washer with the wavy agitator in it will wash filthy clothes as well or better than anything ever made. It certainly should, it beats the hell out of whatever it is washing. Not that this is a bad thing, but most people don't have filthy dirty clothing all the time that require that. It does it in record time too, but it can be harsh on clothing and promotes lint. A front load machine of today does a lot of soaking and tumbling the clothes. As long as it takes to do a load, it too should certainly be good and clean by the time it is finished. I just find that my front loader does an excellent job of cleaning, rinsing and spinning out the water and it does this with greatly reduced wear on my clothes and virtually NO lint at all along with using FAR less water with 3 extra rinses than the Whirlpool does with just one rinse. I guess it is a matter of what you want, but I am quite happy with my front load machine and can see why they seem to be taking over. The new HE top load machines attempt to do the same thing as front loaders, but cannot simply by design.
 
Bruce, if a wash system like the Whirly belt drive is that effective, you can shorten wash times and maybe include some soaking to minimize wear on clothes. Of course, when you put your cotton t-shirts and knits in for a full 15 or 20 minute beat-up and do this every week, they'll be showing some signs of abuse. However, with the advent of the flexi-vane, agitation has become a lot more gentle on clothes. CR evaluations of agitation systems, used here in Oz, do not show gaping differences in wear and tear on clothes. Whatever discrepancies there are they are not worth losing sleep over. If consumers have huge problems with the performance of their washers, may it be linting or cleaning, the source of the problem is usually the consumer.

Paulo,

You are correct, but you are not totally correct. Government agencies set performance and manufacturing standards for appliance makers, which are legally binding. Whilst some efficiency standards may not be mandatory as such, there are very generous financial incentives and various disincentives to garner sector compliance. Thus, government interference has set the ball rolling and continues to influence the boardroom decisions of appliance manufacturers and importers.

The same applies to new building codes and what builders are allowed or encouraged to include in new developments. This very much sets the tone for what consumers may then purchase as far as large appliances are concerned. By not including a hot water connection and standardizing the washer space in the laundry area as an under-counter installation, consumers will automatically choose a front loader that heats its own water. To modify the laundry to accommodate a top loader is just another expense in a housing market that is already totally overpriced.

If a product does not meet government agency standards, it may either not be rated under those standards or be banned from sale altogether.

Of course the manufacturing sector has undergone huge changes over the past 4 decades and the products that we are offered today are the result of those changes. It appears that some states in the US, like California, have extremely restrictive regulations to change consumer behaviours.

Australia hasn't gone down that path quite yet. However, our appliance imports are now predominantly focused on Asian and European products. American appliance companies like Whirlpool either only offer their European product pallet to Australians, or they occupy an expensive niche, like the commercial laundry market, as is the case with Speed Queen and Maytag products. Consumers can get these niche products, but they have to pay a much higher price for them.

A while back I spoke to a bloke who used to be an official service rep for Kleenmaid (Speed Queen) washers. He is now retired, but still goes out freelancing as a repairer. According to him, reconditioned Speed Queen and Maytag washers are much sought after. He apparently reconditions and sells at least one or two machines a week offering a full year's warranty on them. There are a lot of consumers desperate for regular washing machines with mechanical controls and traditional program options. [this post was last edited: 4/5/2017-22:56]
 
I would like to see an unbiased scientific analysis between clothing that has been washed in a TL and dried and clothing washed in a FL and dried.  Then take the same clothing and analyze how much or little residue is actually left after normal cycles were used.  I know Asko recommended the first time clothes are washed in their machine to NOT use any detergent due to the residue left in the clothes from previous inefficient rinsing.  After 4 rinses in the Asko I dare say there wouldn't be much residue left.  New Askos rinse up to 7 times. 
 
I think that you can get most clothes clean in just about any washer. I do know that with front load machines there really is virtually no lint at all. It all drops off the clothes or towels or anything else and lint goes through the holes in the drum to the bottom of the outer tub where it is pumped out. With a top load machine it just doesn't happen that easily. Rinsing several times in a front loader gets all the soap residue out of the clothes much better than one rinse in a top loader too. With a front load machine, the clothes are dropped over and over in soapy water to clean them. In a top loader something actually physically engages with the clothes forcing them to move. What do you think would be easier on the clothes?
 
CR research is supposed to be unbiased. As for the 'scientific' research that has found the gold standard for water to clothes ratios and the best agitation technology to satisfy that standard, please show it to me. With all the claims and counter claims I have yet to see a 'scientific' paper, from an independent research body not connected to the appliance industry, that proves that front loading washing machines of x capacity, using y liters of water, achieve the best laundry outcomes possible. Of course this paper would have to prove via that same 'scientific' process that top loaders are unequal to the task.

A number of commercial laundry industry bodies claim that top loaders harbor more bacteria than front loaders and must therefore not be considered for use in large residential settings like nursing homes, motels etc. - I have not ever seen evidence that supports this claim either. When and where did clothes, laundered in top loading washing machines, cause cross infections and outbreaks of disease? I've been scouring the internet for evidence, but have, so far, been unsuccessful in locating anything at all. They don't even qualify where, inside the machines they have tested, these reservoirs of bacteria are located and what the chances are of clothes actually coming into contact with them. Their apparent studies also do not take into account that, in commercial residential settings, clothes are machine dried. Which would further reduce any bacterial load left on laundered clothes and linen. However, commercial and residential establishments are now forced to buy these very expensive 'commercial' front loaders. Having worked with both top and front loaders in that set-up, I can see how an industry body can force businesses into spending more money on products that inherently do not provide better outcomes for users. It's a real money spinner though.
 
That's right laundress - however in the cases of nursing home laundry staff spreading gastroenteritis among residents and care staff, this occurred, not because of the washing machines that were being used, but the way that laundry staff were handling contaminated laundry. One paragraph referred to a faulty tunnel washer that was suspected of cross-contaminating linen.

None of the articles that you linked to make any distinctions between domestic top and front loaders at all. They reference laundry processes, chemicals and temperatures however. Neither is there any mention of clothes being machine dried and how that affects bacterial and viral loads on laundry. Based on the proposition that high temperature are most effective at killing lots of pathogens, I surmise that traditional American tumble dryers are probably the best at killing off anything that may be left on laundered clothes.

Bacteria are mostly good for us, especially the ones that we commonly encounter in our regular environments. They give our immunity the workout that it needs to help us survive. Getting sick with common bacterial and viral infections is actually good for us. We will never eliminate pathogens. They are part and parcel of the world we live in and they can grow in the most unexpected places.
 
Hmmmm

I own and use toploaders, twin tubs, and the occasional wringer. I don't own a FL but's it's because I like the 60's 70's era US machines, and the Hoover twinnie built a stone's throw away in Canton OH, and I like restoring/finding/working the antiques. I don't have anything against FL's, I just haven't yet needed to buy one when I have a basement FULL of washers already.

But one thing I bet they outperform TL on: kids nylon winter coats. they fill with air and just stay on the top of the TL's, never pulled under. For the offbeat "floating" clothing, I'll someday pick up a used FL if local Craigslist has a cheapie.

But from what I've seen at friends homes, I trust my TL's to rinse better.
 
The title of this thread is a bit too generic because grouping an LG or Samsung Front Loading washer and a vintage Westinghouse FL in the same category doesn’t really work. The same goes with comparing a modern base impeller top-loading washer with a Frigidaire Unimatic or a vintage Whirlpool belt-drive TL, it just doesn’t work.

So about two months I was given this 2007 LG washer. The door hinge was frozen in the open position due to corrosion from a leak in the boot. If fixed the leak and took the door hinge apart and greased it and now it works perfectly. So after using the Unimatic almost exclusively for a few months, I have now used the LG nearly exclusively as it was designed without making any mechanical adjustments for over a month and here is my personal opinion…

For washing ability I’d say it is excellent. It seems to clean well and remove stains from things. You only need about 1/8 to 1/4 of the detergent that I use in my vintage machines although for me personally I couldn’t care less about the amount of detergent I use, whatever works best for each machine I’m fine with.

Rinsing is another story. I see a lot of people calming that these new front loaders are rinsing better but in my opinion this has not my experience. I always use the extra rinse option (so three rinses total in the LG) along with the “water plus” feature. While it seems to rinse okay, what I’ve noticed is sheets still have quite a bit of detergent smell for two to three days after putting them back on the bed. With most of my vintage machines this is not the case using the same Tide detergent, but more of it in the vintage machines. When I put sheets back on the bed there is little to no smell of detergent what so ever out of the vintage machines, especially the solid tubs. I have huge newish Turkish bath sheet white towels. I always use bleach on these and I can clearly smell bleach on the towels when I remove them from the LG. I never smell bleach when I remove those towels from the Unimatic where I normally wash them. I use 1/4 cup of bleach in the LG and 3/4 of a cup in the Unimatic bleach dispenser. Another big difference I noticed is the towels are slightly less soft when washed in the LG than they are out of the Unimatic. I’m not sure if that is attributed to rinsing ability or not, but I suspect it is. I don’t use fabric softener in towels that are less than a year old.

Water extraction seems really good, I use extra high speed spin for nearly everything. I’ve been drying most loads in the Wards gas dryer which has a very accurate auto-dry cycle. Loads of 4 large bath sheets towels are drying in nearly the same time (about 25 to 27 minutes) as the Unimatic or GE AW6, both with 1140rpm spin. Those same towels take 35 to 40 minutes to dry in the Wards dryer from my vintage machines that spin below 700 rpm.

As for overall gentleness I’m not quite sure and need more time to experiment. I did notice after a month of using the LG the back pockets of my Diesel jeans were starting to fray slightly. I don’t know if that would have happened anyway using any of my other machines, but the Diesel jeans that I wear generally last a long time. I’m not convinced that the smack action of tumbling those clothes in a small pool of water with a large vertical fall for 40 to 45 minutes overall between wash and rinses is all that gentle, then tumbling again in the dryer.

Dryer lint seems slightly less out of the LG about on par with my non-back and forth style agitator washers. Back and forth agitation seems to produce the most linting. However the difference overall is not all that much.

So Phil is right, I’m not convinced that this method is superior for overall results. However the savings in water is significant which is good that the general population is heading in that direction.

Overall I’d say it is an excellent washer for the masses. Most people unless they are allergic will never notice the difference between properly rinsed and just okay rinsed clothes. I did have a GE Harmony washer a while back and was not at all impressed with that machine, I thought it was way rough on the clothes unless you forced it to fill all the way up. If I had to choose between a modern front loader and a modern top loader for sure I would pick the modern front loader. Thankfully however I don’t have to make that choice.

unimatic1140++4-7-2017-14-52-2.jpg
 
"That's right laundress - however in the cases of nursing home laundry staff spreading gastroenteritis among residents and care staff, this occurred, not because of the washing machines that were being used, but the way that laundry staff were handling contaminated laundry. One paragraph referred to a faulty tunnel washer that was suspected of cross-contaminating linen.

None of the articles that you linked to make any distinctions between domestic top and front loaders at all. They reference laundry processes, chemicals and temperatures however. Neither is there any mention of clothes being machine dried and how that affects bacterial and viral loads on laundry. Based on the proposition that high temperature are most effective at killing lots of pathogens, I surmise that traditional American tumble dryers are probably the best at killing off anything that may be left on laundered clothes. "

 

No offence meant, and with all do respect, this debate between commercial/industrial laundries and domestic is moot. Especially as it relates to healthcare laundry.

 

By their nature of their business laundry from hospitals or other healthcare related are going to contain linens mildly to grossly soiled with blood, feces, and other bodily fluids. This along with various pathogens.  It is also known that depending upon end user of linens (elderly, very young/infants, those with compromised immunity systems, etc...) certain said pathogens that survive the laundering processing could prove dangerous or even fatal.

 

Best practices have long been established to deal with the risk of transmission of disease via soiled healthcare linen. These standards received a boost after HIV/AIDS came upon the scene causing renewed focus not just upon patients but workers coming into contact with soiled linen.

 

Unless someone at home is routinely laundering textiles heavily soiled with blood, feces or whatever there is little to worry about from whatever is "growing" in a washing machine, top or side loading.

 

Have said this before and it is worth repeating, if washing machines and or dryers in domestic use were capable of transmitting serious diseases you'd have seen vast outbreaks by now; but you haven't have you?

 

Yes, when someone is ill in the home, elderly, an infant or other special situation that laundry can pose an issue. Advice now is the same as it has been for ages; consult one's physician, a professional nurse, or other healthcare professional for advice.

 

Think about it; for years hundreds of housewives and mothers laundered cloth diapers in top loading washing machines (both automatic and semi), and yet you didn't see any correlation between increased illness and or mortality within said households.

 

Commercial and or industrial  laundries by nature of their business (mingling of various linens/textiles from many sources into one wash load), have long been required by local statues and or best practice standards to take steps to ensure proper sanitation. Hence the often aggressive laundering process that involves very high temperatures over several cycles, heavy use of bleach (chlorine), and even many changes of water.

 

Tunnel washing machines by nature of design "can" cause infection of laundry. This is likely more true of bottom flow washers that use counter-flow water direction.  However many new designs use "top transfer" and or even systems that basically treat the washing as if it moved through a succession of pony washers.

 

There are also tunnel washers certified to meet various EU standards for disinfection. That is one, two or more compartments will heat water to temps at or > 170F, and hold for required time to satisfy the standard.

 

Yes, there probably are all sorts of nasty things growing in a domestic washing machine. But then again so is it likely to be the same on toilet seats, shower curtains, various surfaces in the W.C., inside dishwashers, on the bed linen slept on last night and so forth.

 

Each time a human being makes wind it expels air laden with at least e coli and other "gut" bacteria. Yet you don't see persons rushing to change their undergarments and clothing each time they break wind do you? Studies have shown most shower curtains are grossly contaminated with all sorts of pathogens (mainly e coli but others as well), yet you come into contact with said shower curtain each time you bathe, and worse are naked with wet skin at the time. Again you don't hear of people keeling over in the hundreds do you?

http://www.laundryandcleaningnews.c...or-has-specific-laundry-requirements-4708445/
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/24/science/q-a-germs-in-the-laundry.html
 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1932823/
 

https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/hospital/laundry/laundry.html
 

 
 
On washing bulky air-filled items

I frequently wash feather doonas (duvets) and pillows in my top loader. The secret is to get the water pulled through the material into the stuffing. It takes a little extra work, but my system works just fine. All my doonas are singles, I don't like the pull and tug with king sized ones; what's on my side of the bed is mine or my partner has to come over and try to get it off me.

Anyway, I fill my washer half way with warm water and dissolve some detergent. Then I stop the machine and push in the donna or (two) pillows to get them thoroughly submerged and wet. I let it soak for a while without agitation. To extract the air I turn the dial to spin so that the detergent water gets pulled right through the item(s). When that is done all the air will have been pulled out of the duvet (doona) and it's reduced in size by three quarters of its original volume. I then let the machine fill with hot water and fresh detergent and allow it go through its chosen cycle and, voila, clean feather down bedding. After that it goes straight into my SQ dryer and comes out all, fluffy, fresh and warm.

I have washed these air-filled, big, floaty, feather down quilts in front loaders at work. From what could be observe, there is no major reduction in the size of the item until after the first spin pulls out all the air. Usually I have to run two cycles for when I wash duvets at work, because they don't have a pre-wash option.

The same principle applies with quilted, nylon winter coats. They get washed on gentle cycle, but first the air has to come out. Again, I let them soak in the washer in warm, soapy water before I spin them out and refill the machine to let them wash. It works just fine.[this post was last edited: 4/7/2017-20:41]
 
Laundress, I absolutely respect the fact that you are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to all things laundry.

However, after skimming through much of the material that you have linked, there still is no clear and established proof that top loading washing machines are singularly or primarily responsible for major disease outbreaks in commercial settings such as motels and residential aged care places. Or that they are inadequate for these environments; or that we need to worry about using top loaders in laundromats. This being contrary to industry body claims that front loaders provide a superior alternative to top loaders and therefore they enforce a standard that is largely driven by pecuniary interest than actual facts.
 
That is what am saying.

First of all you won't find top loading washing machines with central beaters in commercial/industrial laundries. Laundromats are another story but even there they have been vanishing for decades in favor of H-axis washing machines.

What have been attempting to say the number of disease outbreaks directly traced to domestic washing machines is nearly nil. Commercial or industrial laundries are another matter, and even then that would depend upon what sort of washing is routinely processed.

What happens to laundry after it is washed/processed is another matter. The two recent outbreaks of fungal infections in USA hospitals came from linen not properly stored and or transported after cleaning, not from the laundering process.

As for H-axis washing machines vs. top loading with a central beater; well, yes the former are rather superior to the latter in terms of commercial laundries and or even for healthcare/care home linens. Again you don't see top loading washing machines being used in such settings much if at all, and there are good reasons.

First and foremost top loading washing machines cannot or do not have heaters. This makes temperature of wash and or rinse waters totally dependent upon what comes out of the taps. Since the minimum recommended water temp for dealing with germs (E Coli) is around 165F, you just aren't going to get that in a top loader. Well suppose it is possible by having the boilers cranked up and using circulators, but then you are talking about temp of water will still decrease upon contact with washing.

Then there are front loaders designed to deal with hospital/healthcare laundry called "sluice" washers. http://www.laundryserv.co.uk/blog/posts/05-06-2014/do-you-need-a-sluice-cycle

Even h-axis washing machines not strictly marketed as sluice washing machines, can be set to do multiple high level pre-rinses.
 
Absolutely

Of course you wouldn't find vertical axis washers in large laundry operations. The design doesn't lend itself to washing and rinsing commercial volumes of laundry that are processed by tons rather than a few pounds, by the very nature of that design. Not only is the engineering of such a machine impractical and too costly, but the concept of a vertical axis top loader that could wash a ton of linen is irrational. Nor is that the premise of my previous posts. I was always referring to commercial situations that generate regular wash loads which can be laundered in a household sized machine by one person and without the need for mechanical aids to shift the laundry from washer to dryer.

Top loaders did have heaters in the past. Not in America, but here in Australia and in the UK. Also, LG currently offers a heater in one of its top loaders. And, yes, it is possible to have a dedicated water heater with a higher hot water temperature for laundry. This is the case at some of the places that I work at. They also have a sluice washer for heavily soiled linen before these are then dispatched to the commercial laundry. Thus their linen are actually washed twice.[this post was last edited: 4/7/2017-22:55]
 
Front load convert here

Well since buying the F&P front loader4-5 months ago, I'm sold on front loaders.
Since using this one , I have noticed very little linting, very little wear and tear on my new work shirts and the stain removal does seem superior to the old LG TL.
I believe some front loaders have an issue with insufficient rinsing, but my F&P uses a reasonable amount of water during rinses and has an extra rinse which can be used if needed.
As for long cycles, I really only use the 59 minute everyday cycle anyway and it is sufficient to get the job done.
On balance I couldn't see myself changing back to top loaders.
 
John

<span style="font-size: 12pt; color: #ff0000;">"Ok...ok...!!! Yes, I am about to do something which I have never done before....yes I am going to try a Front Load washer and compare the results</span> "

<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Did you see our webmasters post in length about the LG front loader?  He decided to give it a test.  Reply #70, your post TL or FL</span>

 
There was a comment about front loaders taking much more time than TL. This is true to a degree, but that can be compensated for by choosing a FL with Delay Start and having one load out of the way when one gets up on laundry day. Additionally, modern FL machines have considerably more capacity than traditional TL, which reduces the number of loads.

There was a comment that one's laundry day can be finished much more quickly with a TL. The reality for me is that I can have my laundry completed in 2.5 hours with a FL, whereas my TL water saving laundry setup took 4.5 hours. There are a number of reasons for this. First, delay start gets me a load ahead before I even wake up - I do my worst (longest) load first. Second, my TL machines had much less capacity - now instead of having to break my darks into two loads, they can be done in one load. Third, due to linting in my TL I would have to do my husband's work shirts/hoodies separate from his jeans. With my FL all can be done in a single load. What used to be at least 5 loads is now 3.

Another consideration is water usage. It is a non-issue for some, but not for all (though perhaps it should be?). I have a well, septic, and whole house water softener, so the less water I can use, the better. When I was using TL machines, I was practicing reusing wash and (partially) rinse water between a wringer, TL and Hoover twin tub, but let me tell you...it was quite a spectacle. The FL makes things so much simpler for me, and I can catch up on other chores between loads, even with hanging laundry to dry. All in all, a FL with delay start and on-board water heater just streamlines everything and does it efficiently. I have also seen a couple HE top loaders that worked great too.

There was a comment about an LG Tromm not rinsing well. I am not noticing this with my LG True Balance.

Though I was apprehensive about going back to a FL machine after two FLers that did not perform well, I am pleased with my LG and would not go back to a traditional TL machine as a daily driver. It takes a lot of effort to save my water in my small laundry space, there's too much lint, and they generally are not as good at extraction. Just my experience, though.
 

Similar threads

mark_wpduet
Rinsing on OLD fashioned Top Load washers
Replies
7
Views
135
helicaldrive
H
S
Where can any be found?
Replies
0
Views
32
schaicho24
S
launderess
Evolution of H-Axis Washing Machines From Semi to Fully Automatic
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
3K
me
M
kalanikaau1
Picture of the day...
Replies
4
Views
94
kalanikaau1
kalanikaau1
W
When did Maytag start to go bad?
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
2K
phillymatt53
P

Latest posts

Back
Top