vintage maytag washer

[oldwasherguy]

i have an automatic maytag washer that i have aquired that is in excellent condition but have no history or information on it.
i was hoping that someone would have the information on it here.i do have the serial number and that is the following: 344426bu and the model number is a206. on the inside it has a black agitator with a woven mesh lint filter. if anyone has any information/history on this machine i would greatly appreciate it if i could get it. i thankyou for your time.
don

 

[sudsmaster]

I *think* that washer would be from 1966.

Do you have any photos?

 

[goatfarmer]

A206 is a small capacity,2 speed washer.Your basic Maytag.

kennyGF

 

[oldwasherguy]

i dont have any way to take pictures right now, but i will soon. i collect many types of old appliances from the 1920s 30s 40s and 50s. i just recently started with the automatic washers. wringers have always interested me most,but now that the new automatics look so flimsy,i have really started to appreciate the vintage ones. i would eventually like to show all of my collection when i get a new camera.

 

[swestoyz]

A206 Specs

To add to Kenny's notes, per your serial, this machine was produced approx. September of 1966. Being that, It should have the early Powerfin agitator with the 54 OPM power unit/transmission - and knowing you have the mesh filter supports this theory. Enjoy!

 

[oldwasherguy]

thanks for the info guys. it will come in handy. don

 

[gansky1]

Notice the change in agitation speeds. The very first of these (non perm press models) had the black bakelite agitators which ran 54 OPM, as pre-'06 models did. This was only made for a few months before the power-fin agitator and faster stroke (63 OPM) was implemented in this and the 106 models.

I wonder why Maytag did this, perhaps an abundance of bakelite agitators and 54 OPM sector gears??

 

[jamman_98]

Where are you?

Oldwasher guy, where are you in sc??

Joe
jamman_98

 

[swestoyz]

Greg - I think you've got a good theory on that. I also think they were trying to market the small tub series as a set below the big tub with the faster speeds, and realized soon after that it wasn't working or being cost effective when they could be using the same parts through the entire line. Unless someone from the Maytag marketing/engineering dept comes along - it will just be another mystery!

Ben

 

[oldwasherguy]

right down the road

jamman 98,iam right down 78 in ladson.

 

[sudsmaster]

Greg,

It was my impression that it was the move from the helical transmission to the orbital transmission that resulted in the faster agitation speed. And that the powerfin agitators were for the slower (54 opm) agitation speed, as they came with the helical transmissions.

 

[westytoploader]

Hi Rich,

First of all congratulations on the new Maytag A606, and good luck on getting the other machine as well!!

According to the Maytag service manual/technical booklet Glenn has, the Orbital transmission was first introduced in 1989, but it still uses the Helical Drive pulley. So techically, it's still a Helical Drive machine even if it is Orbital.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the 54 OPM to 63 OPM switch Greg mentioned was still the old counterweighted transmission setup; the Orbital is an entirely different animal. Round transmission case with a short stroke and fast 160 OPM agitation on high speed (again, correct me if I'm wrong). In order to successfully make this change they had to introduce the PowerFlex agitator as well, since it had a narrower base. From what someone (I think it was either Greg or Tom) told me, the fast, short stroke combined with the narrow base on the PowerFlex was equivalent to the slow, long stroke with the PowerFin as far as cleaning and turnover were concerned. To me, however, that seems highly unlikely.

Hope this helps,
Austin

 

[sudsmaster]

Austin,

Thanks, I did get the A606S. It's now sitting in my garage, and I posted some photos in the A606S thread about it.

Thank also for the information about when the orbital transmission came into existence. Compared to 160 opm, a change from 54 to 63 is fairly negligible. And I can see why it's not advisable to try to replace a helical transmission with an orbital one... unless one is trying to crush grapes.