Tub Capacities

[MaytagA710]

I am very curious how each manufacturers tubs stacked up against each other in water capacity, clothing capacity, and weight capacity.

For instance:

Maytag's large capacity tub holds 76 litres or 19 gallons of water, 18lbs of clothes. On a mixed load I can fit four long sleeve shirts (sweaters, but thin fabric), one t-shirt, three pairs of 32x34 jeans, and one polo shirt. On a load of towels, I can fit eight towels.

Maytag's standard capacity tub holds 64 litres or 16 gallons of water, 12 pound capacity?. For a mixed load I can fit three long sleeve shirts (thin sweater like fabric), two 32x34 jeans, and two t-shirts. For towels, I can fit five towels and a hand towel.

The Kenmore BD portable I have holds 41 litres or 11 gallons of water, 5-6lbs of clothes. On a mixed load I fit one paid or 32x34 jeans, three long sleeve shirts (thin sweater like fabric), and one t-shirt. I can only fit three towels and one hand towel.

What are the capacities for other brands like GE, Kenmore/WP, Westinghouse, Norge, Frigidiare, etc...?

 

[70series]

Well, Kenmore and Whirlpool I am sure will parallel each other in terms of tub capacity, since they had the same size baskets. Through the 1960s the standard capacity ran from 12 pounds in earlier standard models, to 14 pounds in later ones, but the tub size had not changed, so augmentations in the pressure switch that triggers agitation may have been why this was so, but I digress. Later on the standard tub size enlarged in diameter, but ever so slightly, so there may have been an increase in capacity due to that. I have no clue as to the gallon usage however. The large capacity models were 18 pounders at least from 1967 when the first large capacity models debuted until about 1981, when the large tub size was decreased slightly. Again, the gallon usage evades me. I am not sure how these changes affected the size load that Kenmore/Whirlpool was able to handle, but typically they were as said above...12 to 14lbs for standard, and 18 for the large capacity.

Others will chime in on this I am sure.

Have a good one,
James

 

[scrubflex]

I actually measured the amount of water per water level load and maximum usable water for a 'super large' load with my Maytag 712 wash tub. It is 23 gallons which is just about (3/8") topping the ribbed vanes.

 

[kenmore71]

The "rated" gallon capacity of the Matyag machines through the end of the *12 series (about 1991 or so IIRC) was 19 gallons for the "large" tubs and 16 gallons for the "standard" tubs. WP/KM machines of the late 50s, 60s and 70s were all rated at 18 gallons until the early to mid-70s when the "Large capacity" machines made their debut on certain models.

Here is an amusing chart produced by Maytag sometime in the late 1960s or early 1970s talking about "usable" washing capacity of various machines. While I am a great fan of the Maytag product, I would never consider cramming a 15# load into a 19 gallon Maytag tub and expecting decent results as this ad seems to sugvgest can be done!

 

[arbilab]

When you think about it, who actually WEIGHS washloads? So "pounds" is pretty useless as a figure of merit. So is cubic feet--we don't even know for sure that the volume occupied by the agitator has been subtracted.

Hi-Fi manufacturers used to DOUBLE their continuous power ratings and call it 'peak' which was good for several microseconds before the power supply saturated. The Feds eventually came down on them. They haven't done that on laundry equipment.

Industrial/institutional machinery like Wascomat, Milnor, Unimac still rate their machines in pounds and they're probably pretty accurate. But I've been in an institutional laundry and THEY don't weigh their loads either.

 

[frigilux]

The owner's manual for our 1960 all-pushbutton Model 80 Kenmore stated the machine filled with 18 gallons of water at the HI setting, which was suggested for loads of 8-to-10 pounds. The LO setting provided a very splashy, tub-light shattering 11 gallons.

I agree with what others have stated in this thread: The weight of a load isn't as important as its volume when loading a washer. Fill the tub loosely to the top, then stop.

 

[MaytagA710]

Weight

When I first started coming to this website, I never understood the measurement of weighing the clothes. Laundry day is coming up soon, and since I don't have a Westinghouse Weigh-to-save model, I'm going to break out the scale! I agree with everyone in that clothes weight isn't a true measurement of a washers capacity.

 

[tomturbomatic]

The thought of a deep tub Maytag washing as large a load as a big tub Norge makes me laugh. Maytag's clain about washing more laundry per gallon of water and per ounce of detergent completely disregards the Westinghouse front loader. CU, much to their discredit, also neglected reporting on the WH FL in their tests for many years after their 1964 report. It was only after the energy crisis was in full swing that they began testing them again and, at first, did not include them in the table with the top loaders so comparison of water usage was not as easy. CU's prejudice did a lot to discourage people from buying the WH FLs over the years.

 

[yogitunes]

Tom is right.....

bulk is more a factor rather than weight....but you can't actually measure bulk so to speak......and not that anyone ever follows the directions in the laundromat....but I think the best description would be either to fill the machine 2/3rds full, or to the top of the agitator vanes with loose DRY clothing....of course the machines were ST SpeedQueens.......

but seriously....a Maytag handling the biggest load out of all these machines....effectively.....not happenning....we know better

 

[MaytagA710]

Martin is right. Effectively clean? No. I can pack in nine towels and a hand towel, but will the washer properly/effectively clean the clothes? Not as well as it would if it was loosely, sparingly loaded with eight.

Lots searching on the forum has lead me to believe there is a general consensus about Maytag loading: Loose and sparingly loaded.

 

[macboy91si]

Use and Load

I really like the Maytag's that I have. Like anything that someone uses a lot, they get to know the machine. I know all of my machines very well and I can attest to the Maytag loading and capacity. It can be a fickle thing and literally one sock can stop the roll and results fade. Loosely to the top row of holes is a good index. These machines wash great when they are slightly underloaded, you love em or hate em. My roomie has a habit of overloading, and really he doesn't care, I don't see how he stands it. He throws socks in with the black work pants and anything that's not black ends up grey. I also find that the Maytag holds about as much in a good wash/turnover rate as my 24" DD Kenmore with the straight-vane. The capacity of the A502S is not comparable at all IMO. Between the solid fins and smaller tub, the usable capacity while going easy on the clothes isn't much more than my BD KM portable. Still it's a smooth machine and it will clean very well, probably the best CLEANING top-loader I have albeit capacity.

Of the machines currently in the laundry room, the big-tub GE seems to hold the most while still moving the load. The ramp agitator will still toss and roll the load long after the Maytag gives up but I've noticed that the Maytag will wash a cleaner load when loaded correctly. While the ramp seems to move the load well, it doesn't clean as well the Kenmore or the Maytag. The major downside to that machine is water consumption and our small hot water tank. I like it for all the accessories and it is a cool machine nonetheless.

The Asko/Merloni front loader is the best cleaning machine that I have, but not really relevant to this conversation. I will say though that I collected the grey socks of the roomie and ran them through the "heavy stains" cycle and was amazed. I used a little Tide w/Bleach and set to extra rinse, the heavy cycle heats to 140* and holds it and the socks came out bright white, he was amazed, that same feat would have taken several soaks in the Maytag and still would have required additives not to mention the water consumption.

 

[tomturbomatic]

And, it's not just the turnover. It's how well will the washer handle the dirt washed out of the load. When I got the auger agrivator for my 806 running the 50 cycle pulley, I could put lots of stuff in it so I did a huge load of dirty rags from cleaning old appliances. It washed and washed and washed some more with the load turning over and the water that drained out was dark gray. The water from the spin rinse was dark gray and the rinse water was dark gray. The books are right when they tell you that if the load is really dirty to downsize it because the water can carry away only so much dirt. The whole load had to be rewashed. I knew it was too much and too dirty for one wash, but it was a turnover test so essentially it had a prewash and a rinse and then another wash and 2 rinses to get the stuff clean, even though the agitator was turning stuff over. I doubt if the GE V-12 or the large capacity KA would have handled the amount of soil better even though they do use more water. My father used to teach that rinsing was as important as washing in the cleaning process. If you have a lot of dirt you are going to use more detergent and you are going to need an extra rinse to get rid of it. Because of allergies, we almost always double rinsed, because as we know, one deep rinse for a full load is marginal. Service men used to marvel at how our machines showed no corrosion or detergent buildup and said it must be the extra rinsing.

 

[electronicontrl]

Thank you Kenmore71 and others

I'm a fan of Maytag regardless of capacity. (Although I wonder how things would have turned out if Maytag would have invented the dual-action agitator). I've had people tell me "you can't wash any clothes in a Maytag" and I quickly retort "I wash plenty of clothes in mine".

 

[norgeway]

Norge!

The 20 pound Norges will wash much more than the Maytags,mainly because the Norges agitate so much faster,and are much more agressive, the Maytags are more gentle but dont turn the clothes overunless lightly loaded...To the Maytags credit, they last forever, are quiet, and, if loaded lightly, do a good job.The Norges are noisy, harder to work on and have more service problems, but..will still outwash most anything...IMHO!

 

[wayupnorth]

My Maytag LA 511 uses, according to the original book, (Approx.) per load is what it says, Reg. 40 gallons/151 liters or PP 59 gallons/223 liters on the Extra large setting. I usually add even more water on every load. Dont have to worry about water shortage here, as I live on a lake. But I have to pump waste up to a leach field. I want to put Gram's old Maytag wringer in my storage shed this spring , get a hand pump and a laundry sink and do all my wash there until it gets too cold like it is here now. The well water here is way too hard and the lake water is so much better. I will just put the drain out in the woods and nobody wiil know.

 

[arbilab]

If my control panel lit up I'd just feed it as much stuff as it could make move around and not argue about how much it weighed.

 

[whirlykenmore78]

commercial washer-extractor ratings

In my experience in commercial laundries I found a great discrepency between the capacity amongst manufacturers. The difference was as great as 5 queen sheets or 15 towels in some cases in a 50# washer. I found the Milnor,35#, Continental,125 and Wascomat50# machines to be the most capacious per rated capacity. I learned what really maters is cubic feet of drum space not pounds.

 

[lebron]

If anyone with a large capacity Kenmore or Whirlpool could make a video showing the comparison to a Maytag that would be cool.

 

[kenmore71]

IIRC, my mother's 1980-ish Kenmore Large capacity suds-saver machine used about 22 gallons of water for a full fill. I remember this because Kenmore had a rather ingenious feature that, when the machine was set to extra-large, would drain the machine to the main drain hose until the the pressure switch sensed that it had reached the "large" setting (which was c. 18 gallons). It would then engage the suds valve and drain the last 18 gallons into the laundry tub. Gordon or John can probably speak definitively on this.

The rational for this was that very few laundry tubs had a capacity of greater than 20 gallons. I remember very well pulling those 18 gallons of "medium" (110-115 degree) water after the first load of "hot" (140 degree water) sheets and adding more "hot" water to continue washing underwear and towels. The third "go" with this water would be work clothes.