unfairness

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

Help Support :

More volume gobble gook

More gobble gook:

"This 4.3 cu. ft. I.E.C. Equivalent Capacity* washer cleans 30 XL t-shirts in one load (*Equivalent volume per I.E.C. International Standard, 4th edition, based on 3.7 cu. ft. D.O.E. measurement)"

Note how that 3.7 number is about like my volume swag for my washer that has an IEC of 4.2..

I got Volume = (22*22)* ( 3.14/4) * 17 / (12*12*12) =3.7

Thus the IEC volume is a volume larger than the Physical volume. As an engineer this makes me want to tar and feather a few marketing & government spec writers.

 
22 Inch diameter baskets in 27" machines

This 22 inch diameter is in mid to early? 1960's Westinghouse FL washers too when units got 27" frames and had a horizontal tub.

Thus a swag/guess my seat of the pants first guess is a European 24" machine might have a basket 5 inches less in diameter; or 4" less with a more crafty design. ie a 1
17 or 18 inch basket diameters, ie 43 to 46 cm in my slide rule world.

QUESTION: Thus what is the inner basket diameter on your 24" frame machines? and depth too?
 
Answer...

My machine, which is rated at 6.5kg, has the following

- inner diameter - 45cm (17 3/4")
- inner depth - 34cm (13 1/2")

It should be noted, that there are greater capacity machines than mine with stated wash loads of up to 9kg that still sit in a standard width frame - they are deeper.
 
Gutless cars....waterless washers

They already tried that in the early to mid 80's and yeah, need I say more. You had Cadillac's weighing in at 4,200 pounds with a dinky, underpowered V-8 under the hood putting out an unbelieveable 120 horsepower. I think the 0-60 times were somewhere in the 20 second range. So since people would full throttle the thing just to get it moving, they would end up using large amounts of gas anyway. And the compact cars were just as slow, yeah you'd get on the highway and go forever on a gallon of gas, but you also prayed and begged that you could get the hell out of the way of a large semi rapidly approaching. The early 90's had great cars. Full size with V-8 power that was more than adequate that got over 25 MPG on the highway and at least 17 in town. Now when I see advertisements for a highpower V-6 engine that gets 25 MPG on the highway, and they make it seem like the best thing ever, I can't help but to laugh. I sit and think, "Just a few years ago they were advertising V-8 powered cars with those same numbers" Oh well, it makes no sense to me either. I don't forsee anymore gutless cars in the future, but waterless washers.....blah. I mean seriously, Earth is 75% water, if I remember correctly. I highly doubt we're going to totally run out anytime soon. Yeah most of it is salt water in the oceans, but I say, if they can make a pill to make your "manhood" erect, liquid filled pillows to enlarge breasts, and cellular telephones that can access anything from the internet, to the gas level in your car, then they can make a way to make ocean water usable. And that would be after our fresh water reserves are totally drained, and honestly, I don't forsee that happening either. This is getting pretty bad when we're pretty much getting told what kind of appliances we HAVE to use. I don't prefer front loading washers, especially after the reviews and posts I've seen about them, or washers that have a hot water setting, but will only allow a preset tempurature, with NO spray rinse between the wash and rinse! I know a few still do that but most don't seem to now.

And gasoline, I don't see any reason why it should be at the prices it is now, and why the hell we have to buy oil elsewhere when there is obscene amounts of it here we could be using. This place has gone to hell in a handbasket.
 
WATER SHOWER instead of washing stuff somewhat in Water

With many new FL washers, a light small load with the default settings has the actual water level below the clothes. During the wash cycle; the clothes are sprayed/tinkled on.

The clothes do not have any part sitting in contact with the horizontal water level. The water is in the tub; but it is BELOW the basket during the entire wash cycle at all times.

The washer tinkles on the clothes, the basket revolves up in the air; the actual water level is below the basket during the entire wash cycle.

Some folks here will swear that this is the greatest thing, and it really doesnt matter if 10 minutes into the wash that one half one's clothes are still bone dry.

The save the planet, water saving folks just probably hate it when folks like me press the "extra water button" so say 5 to 10 percent of the clothes are actually in contact with the horizontal water. ie the water level actually touches the basket. ie one has a few cups of visible water. ie part of the clothes with stain remover are in contact with an actual body of liquid.

Lord knows how evil it is to actually have clothes go "under water" during washing.

Because the default wash is tinkling; the washer has the basket move randomly up above the water level so after say 5 to 15 minutes that T-shirt with a grease spot (and spot remover) somehow gets tinkled on.

Here I have found that dirty stuff tends to get cleaner and spot remover works better if the clothes during part of the wash cycle come in contact with a liquid; ie the part went under water for a few seconds.

Maybe Police and lawmakers could pass laws to outlaw washers where the clothes "go underwater" for a few seconds, and just make all machines tinkle.

Or maybe non tinkle machines that have clothes "go under water" could be crushed by the Government.

Why not make the water level never touch the basket. One could just tinkle/spray for a few hours to drive downb the water usage.

3beltwesty++1-7-2011-17-32-46.jpg
 
The clothes do not have any part sitting in contact with the

You mean like when you have a shower instead of a bath?

Funny, I'm always just as clean out of the shower as out of the bath....

The majority of machines here fill into the drum, but the water level is not visible at the door when the machine is in operation.

Matt
 
Many spot removers have a time element involved

Your shower logic's flaw misses the time element:

The problem is there is NO quick shower right away in the washer like if one had an eye emergency and used an eye shower.

It is more like getting some bug spray in one's eyes and walking outside looking up in a fog, mist, or drizzle "HOPING" with time after 15 to 20 minutes one has a few drops in ones eyes to clean out the poison.

There is NO big shower, more like some whussy mini sprays every now and gobs of drum revolving such that a random shirt is full wet in 10 to 30 minutes, depending on luck. Thus treated spots bleed, dry, tend to set.

What I mean is that if one stops the wash cycle after 15 minutes and has 8 shirts; some are still bone dry; most are damp. The water level of the tub is below the basket. To save water, there is just wimpy sprays and random motion of the basket. Calling it a shower is a stretch, it is more like a spray of window cleaner a few times per minute. That is why the wash cycle is so long. There is no bath, no shower, ie just a mess of wimpy sprays like one is cleaning a monitor.

Thus here in the USA most of the grease spot removers like Shout, Spray in wash say to spot then wait 2 to 5 minutes; then wash immediately.

It just means that after 10 or 15 minutes if unlucky; that spot that was sprayed is still bone dry and the spot remover's effectiveness is ruined. ON the spot has lifted and now dried on the other part of the shirt. It means one has to rewash ones clothes again to get the spots out.

Thus here some shirts have this white spot where the oxidizer bleached the shirt too much; others have shirts that the spots did not come out all the way. ie a drop in performance to met the government specs.

****Pressing the "extra water button" means the clothes tend to get wetting quicker; since some are in contact with actual water in a tub.

If a lady dyes their hair and it has to be washed out in 5 minutes to get the color correct; it is washed in a tub of water or good shower in 5 minute; not a few wimpy hand sprays a few times each minute such that after 15 minutes one still has not contacted all the hair surfaces.

Maybe clothes in Europe are free and water costs more than inkjet ink.?:)

Here clothes have a cost, and pressing the "extra water button" or hacking into the washer's guts will be done to allow water to properly get to clothes in a timely basis to reduce spots on clothes.

Many spot removers have a time element involved. It is a process issue.

Thus the lay inexperienced designers have created a machine that saves more water; but fails in 1910 technology in the basics of stain setting; ie not letting a stain set by farting around getting water in contact with the stain in a timely matter. A housewife in 1910 understood this, the lame government spec writers today and designers do not.

If you really want to feel bad, my grandmothers washer In Detroit was water powered. There was no electric motor. The water pressure ran through a "water motor" that moved the clothes. These were made by Coffield in Dayton Ohio.

A COFFIELD POWER WASHER.

It was not until 1978 here until the house even had a water meter. Think of it like the internet, where most today have no data limits.

Maybe in a few years usage of data will be frowned on and every house is taxed 5 bucks per gig of data?

3beltwesty++1-7-2011-18-53-12.jpg
 
"It is more like getting some bug spray in one's eyes and walking outside looking up in a fog, mist, or drizzle "HOPING" with time after 15 to 20 minutes one has a few drops in ones eyes to clean out the poison."

3beltwesty: Seriously, I am going to comment in this thread but right now after reading your last post I am laughing so hard at what you wrote that I cannot type.
 
Crazy as this sounds but since all appliances have electronic controls that can fail or be dubious, I am beginning to wonder if companies are VERY slowly beginning to merge together (not that they are but in a way they might as well) and purposely stagnate innovation etc and that’s VERY Monopolistic.

Same thing is going on with cars since they all have the same features, options, and last but not least is the same body style and yes there are a few distinct differences but usually all have the same generic shape as well. The automakers might as well be “merging” together, stagnating innovation and styling, and simply DO NOT give people ANY sort of choice what they want anymore and again that’s what Monopolies do.
 
this his my opinion but wanted to share

this is my opinion this is my curent daily driver purchuse last yearbut if after 5 10 years it broke if i can convince my mom would go for something more vintine like this inglis set if still possible to find in use store markets in mint good condition ir a good direct drive like inglis royal100 that has a warm rinse and second rinse option last pic is a refrence

pierreandreply4-2022070911191608139_1.jpg

pierreandreply4-2022070911191608139_2.jpg

pierreandreply4-2022070911191608139_3.jpg

pierreandreply4-2022070911191608139_4.jpg

pierreandreply4-2022070911191608139_5.jpg

pierreandreply4-2022070911191608139_6.jpg
 

Latest posts

Back
Top