Did some digging and found this on facebook, from alliance indonesia facebook page. Thought id share, wash action looks anemic 
Video of new speed queen (ad)
- Thread starter infusor
- Start date
Help Support :
Man, we really do dig for stuff lol. Great find Infusor! 
I'll hold off on comments and let others decide first.
I'll hold off on comments and let others decide first.
I can't see since I don't have Facebook :-(
Ā
Ā
speedqueen
Well-known member
Ummm,
I really do like the new Maytag...
I really do like the new Maytag...
speedqueen
Well-known member
Facebook
I'm going to repost it to my YouTube account shortly.
I'm going to repost it to my YouTube account shortly.
Thx chetleham, i'm going to hold off on judgement just yet because everytine the clothes moved in the video the camera would focus on something else, the very first video i saw of the prototype frigidaire immersion care looked terrible but that actually wasn't a bad machine rollover wise compared to a new cabrio, in the background of the video on the jeans load you can hear the speed queen agitating pretty fast which the video did not show, the training video from kirk on youtube earlier did say washibilty was actually 8 percent better than the outgoing model, we will see.
Welcome.
I agree, the camera look could have been better. A good 10 minutes is needed to see how it really rolls over and washes. I have a feeling the motor does some serious acceleration on heavy loads which would really get things going. My guess is that the boency the tech talked about is also carried over into the wash- the machine will know how much is in there and thus how hard to agitate it.
I agree, the camera look could have been better. A good 10 minutes is needed to see how it really rolls over and washes. I have a feeling the motor does some serious acceleration on heavy loads which would really get things going. My guess is that the boency the tech talked about is also carried over into the wash- the machine will know how much is in there and thus how hard to agitate it.
speedqueen
Well-known member
YouTube
Here it is on YouTube, Appnut. (And for all others who don't have a FB account, I don't either but I downloaded it)
Here it is on YouTube, Appnut. (And for all others who don't have a FB account, I don't either but I downloaded it)
The wash action in the new 2018 Speed Queen looks pretty enemic. Speed Queen should not listen to the EPA/DOE, they should listen to the consumer and give them what they want.
Fake Wahing Machines (TM) is are only in 2018...
Fake Wahing Machines (TM) is are only in 2018...
Not listen
Is that even possible? I've always understood that the requirements were mandatory.
Is that even possible? I've always understood that the requirements were mandatory.
speedqueen
Well-known member
If SQ really wanted to, technically they could have taken the old 432 and made the Normal/Eco cycle a small fill w/ a minute of slow agitation (and the spray rinse) and it would have passed DOE standards whilst not damaging the machine too much.
speedqueen
Well-known member
This brings up a Question,
How can Maytag's new washer pass EPA/DOE regs?
How can Maytag's new washer pass EPA/DOE regs?
Thanks for finding and posting the video, Keith! Have been waiting to see what the new wash action looks like.
Food for thought: Remake the video using a 2017 SQ on the left and the 2018 SQ redesign on the right. Which machine'sĀ wash action would receive the panel's endorsement?
I think we know the answer to that question.
[this post was last edited: 12/10/2017-03:41]
Food for thought: Remake the video using a 2017 SQ on the left and the 2018 SQ redesign on the right. Which machine'sĀ wash action would receive the panel's endorsement?
I think we know the answer to that question.
[this post was last edited: 12/10/2017-03:41]
If SQ really wanted to...
They could have kept everything (trans, break, ect) and installed a variable speed motor like GE did:
This way they can do a slow spin to wet the clothes, then a controlled agitation on low water.
The more I think about this the more I am starting to feel iffy about the design choice. I mean other manufactures in the same position have done everything else besides an agi tub when faced with the same challenge.
In regard to the DOE regs, my best guess is that the other cycles can still do a deep fill. Honestly, had it not been for all these regs, I think transmissions would have been around much longer for many manufacturers.
They could have kept everything (trans, break, ect) and installed a variable speed motor like GE did:
This way they can do a slow spin to wet the clothes, then a controlled agitation on low water.
The more I think about this the more I am starting to feel iffy about the design choice. I mean other manufactures in the same position have done everything else besides an agi tub when faced with the same challenge.
In regard to the DOE regs, my best guess is that the other cycles can still do a deep fill. Honestly, had it not been for all these regs, I think transmissions would have been around much longer for many manufacturers.
The video gives too short of shots of the washers in use.Can't make a full judgement here-although from what little I could see #2 was better than #1.#1 was good at making "whipped Wash" as opposed to #2.I am guessing #2 is the new SQ Agitub machine.
I also feel SQ should say to heck with EPA and explain to them why EPA's regs aren't going to work in the real world and give consumers what they really want.A washer that washes in real loads of water!Ditch the agitub desing and stick with the traditional designs.And keep the mechanical control washers for those that prefer mechanical controls-and figure those could be less expensive.I just hope the new SQ electronic controls are "hardnened" against lightening and power surges-and use Mil Spec boards.For their price they should be!I can't always be around to remember to unplug electronic control machines when thunderstorms come.
I also feel SQ should say to heck with EPA and explain to them why EPA's regs aren't going to work in the real world and give consumers what they really want.A washer that washes in real loads of water!Ditch the agitub desing and stick with the traditional designs.And keep the mechanical control washers for those that prefer mechanical controls-and figure those could be less expensive.I just hope the new SQ electronic controls are "hardnened" against lightening and power surges-and use Mil Spec boards.For their price they should be!I can't always be around to remember to unplug electronic control machines when thunderstorms come.
mrb627
Well-known member
All Things Considered...
It certainly did outperform the whirlpool they put it up against. And I do think a top loader that operates at 43 decibels is huge. I just wonder how the cycles have changed from what we are accustomed to from speed queen.
Malcolm
It certainly did outperform the whirlpool they put it up against. And I do think a top loader that operates at 43 decibels is huge. I just wonder how the cycles have changed from what we are accustomed to from speed queen.
Malcolm
