Wash times from brand to brand

[panthera]

no index to 60 minutes

Rich,
You are right, of course - the manufacturers can speed up or slow down the steps with gearing.
There is a problem with fixed step length gearing. Since the dial has to cover all the possible programs within one 360° turn, one doesn't want the duration of each step to be too short. Imagine a 15 second step...well, a spin of three minutes would take 180/15= 12 steps...obviously that would cut down on the space for other programs very fast. On the other hand, too long of a step also has its consequences. Somewhere around 180 seconds/step maximum the point is reached at which one can do a normal, permanent press and delicate program. Up that a bit, maybe a short "soak".
But by the time the 2nd rinses and pre-washes and and and are there...well, you can see why some makers just said, fine - if you want a longer wash or second rinse, just turn the dial back. Some even advertised this as a "special" feature - total control in your hands.
(I guess Microsoft copies everything, "it's not a bug, it's a feature" has to have come from those ads).
Electrolux in early Frigimore FLs just let the US timers run faster than in Europe - the 50/60Hz thing. That one got fixed pretty early on tho' - but was still true in 1997.

Some US makers did introduce variable pitch to their steps, this made it possible to add more cycles or adjust individual step lengths to better match needs. Those machines were expensive and complex relative to the standard US timers.

European timers used different systems to solve the problem. The simplest (cheap Candys in the 1960s and cheap Siemens) simply turned the timer motor (and agitation) off until a certain temperature (about 40°C)in the tub had been reached.
Candy even saved an adjustable thermostat by simply having an enormously long time span for each step. If you set the machine to do a 40° wash, the moment the temperature of 40° was reached, the time motor started up and the clothes had the shortest agitation period. If you chose 90°, the machine simply ran through several more steps. The heat rise from a given point was more or less linear and the machine could simply "anticipate" any given temperature based on the time lapsed.
Sorry that is not clearer.
The Siemens system did have an adustable thermostat, the motor started when the temperature was reached which you wanted and each load of clothes got the same length of agitation - you could chose more or less.
Bauknecht (before Whirlpool messed that up, too) used incredibly complex timers. Some had two motors, others had solenoids which swapped the timer step advance gear in and out permitting the machine to agitate back and forth during heating. AEG, Electrolux, etc. used various similar solutions.
Miele for years and years used a system which made "rapid stepping" through the cycle possible. Primitive solution to out of balance loads, but it worked.
Of course, with the introduction of reliable electronic timers, all these mechanical solutions are dying out.
Given the lousy reliability of the electronics in US washers and the very high reliability of mechanical US timers (only thing the Americans do better than the Europeans is mechanical timers), it is a form of built-in obsolescence. Oh, the electronic timers can be built to be reliable...Miele solved the problem in the 1980's as did others...

 

[sudsmaster]

Keven,

I can see the problem... especially with the impetus on the part of the manufacturers to offer additional cycles, which naturally might make the dial more crowded.

The US made Speed Queen front loader, the one with the internal heater, uses Candy (formerly Hoover)/Siemens system of stopping agitation while the heater is working.

US made electronic washer control panels seem to be getting better. Since both the main and motor controllers were replaced in my Neptune in 2003, the machine has been running more or less flawlessly. I was told that in both cases the replacements were upgraded versions. I suspect the motor failure damaged not only the controller, but also the main board. The machine still worked after the motor/controller were replaced, but would halt randomly in the middle of cycles with an error message. A new main controller fixed that issue, plus it had updated firmware that addressed some anomalies in the Favorites program editing.

One of these days I'm going to have to do a test run on the '71 piano key Lady Kenmore. Various keys can modify the timer function, such as extending the wash or adding a second rinse. The timer dial itself has little indication of what is happening, it's dependent upon the key selections.

 

[panthera]

weren't those

Random halts caused by electrostatic discharge across the controller board? I seem to recall better grounding and isolation put an end to that.
When you see things like no drain holes in the first Neptune boots or motor control boards with inadequate cooling you wonder if the engineers even once saw what we had been doing in Europe with FLs since the 1970's. I had a Philips "Vollwelle" electronically controlled machine from 1978 that had enough heat dissipation that the logic ran perfectly day in and day out for 25 years (and was still going when I gave it away).
It's not like the rules of mosfets and cmos technology were invented yesterday or 10 years ago or 20 or 30 or...
I never cease to be amazed just how backwards the US is technically compared to Europe. What's funny is how many folks in the US have not the slightest idea how far behind the country really is in telecommunications, robotics, logic controlled circuitry, avionics...even essentials like power distribution and automated control systems (think of the recent failure in the NY trains).

 

[launderess]

Front loaders have longer wash cycles due to the nature of their mechanical action. Lifting and dropping laundry against itself and or the wash tub is far gentler than thrashing it as most top loading washers do. Remember the four factors of good laundry: time, temperature, chemicals and mechanical action. An increase in one usually means a decrease in the others. Thus one can beat laundry to death for 10 minutes or toss it about for 15 minutes or more; in the end the result should be clean laundry. Of course this means the other variables must be in proper alignment as well.

One must also consider laundry detergents are streets ahead of what was available 50,40, 20 or even 10 years ago. Modern TOL detergents, especially liquids work faster in all temps of water and do a much better job than what our grandmother's used. Soap based detergents and or those relying heavily on washing soda,borax, etc need long mechanical action to beat the grime/dirt out of laundry. Today one can pretty much leave dirty laundry in a soaking only bath, and given enough time it will soak clean without much if any mechanical action at all.

L.

 

[sudsmaster]

Launderess,

I'll have to disagree with the statement that modern laundry detergents are "streets ahead" of what was available decades ago. That's because, decades ago, STPP and other complex phosphates were still added to laundry detergents, and STPP does a far better job at building, breaking, water softening, and anti-redeposition than the cocktail of chemicals used in modern detergents to try to duplicate that action. I would however agree that modern laundry detergents are much better than those that appeared without phosphates just after the bans went into effect. Those seemed merely to substitute more sodium carbonate to replace phosphate without adding the enzymes and other ingredients that sort of halfway replace phosphate's functions.

Keven,

The random halts did not occur until after the motor and its controller went out. So my conclusion is that an electrical surge from the motor somehow damaged the main controller board, resulting in the random halts. Or, perhaps, the new motor controller wasn't 100% compatible with the older main board. In any case, replacing both fixed the problem.

The only quirk that continues is that occasionally, when one pressed the pause buttong, the door won't unlock. This occurs perhaps 5% of the time. If the door doesn't unlock in 10 seconds, I just press the button again to "relock" it, and the press it a third time, at which is generall does a slight basket movement and unlocks the door. This seems to occur less frequently than before the main board was replaced, but it still happens. I have noticed that if I press the pause button while the drum is moving, the failure to unlock doesn't ever occur. Weird but every machine has its peculiarities, and this one is relatively minor.

 

[DADoES]

Rich, your keyboard LK has a traditional mechanical timer that differs very little from a non-keyboard models other than having the rod-and-cam mechanism to handle the pull/turn-to-stop/push feature. If the timer isn't clearly marked with the traditional array of wash time, spin, rinse, spin, etc. indications, that is just to make it appear more mysterious and automatic.

 

[gadgetgary]

The rule of thumb at one time...

Used to be one minute of mechanical action per pound of laundry....

 

[danemodsandy]

Yep!

"I'll have to disagree with the statement that modern laundry detergents are "streets ahead" of what was available decades ago."

I'd have to disagree, too. I was around in the 1950s and 1960s, before the phosphate ban. My grandmother was an Oxydol fan, and for excellent reason. That stuff was absolute death on dirt! And Tide was a completely different animal back then- very powerful and able to clean even kids' jeans and T-shirts without pretreatment.

Of course, the trade-off was pollution, and so I don't mind the reformulations that took place for that reason. But I well remember the dismay going around when the new phosphate-free stuff hit the shelves- "It doesn't CLEAN!" was the cry. Things got better, but it took awhile.

 

[kenwashesmonday]

panthera,

In the US we have temperature control, enzymes etc also. In my experience with front loaders, both residential and commercial types, both American and European brands, a top loader gets my filthy greasy work clothes much cleaner than any front loader that I've ever used. It's not even close. Front loaders are also troublesome with dyes bleeding since there is so little water in use.

Not trying to start, but you're constant condescending attitude towards top-loaders and talk of European laundry superiority is a little hard to take from here. Sometimes there is more than one good way.

Ken

 

[panthera]

Ken,

I don't mean to be condescending. Because I live between both cultures I have the opportunity to try things out and use things in both places.
I agree with you that there are many ways to effectively solve most problems.

 

[lederstiefel1]

modern detergents

All of you are right! No, really! It depends only on what will reach the target!
Thing is, that modern detergents really wash items clean when just soaked. My mom's washing-machine broke down last year and she had to wait until the new machine was delivered. During this time she washed the clothes in the bath-tub, just leaving them for 15 minutes soaking and gave them finally a short swaying in the suds - even collars became bright clean with Ariel in that way!
On the other hand the old washing-powders were better in washing in very short times, as just the contact with the detergents made the dirt loosen from the cloth. And still STPP is better in wash-performance than SaSil is as it not only breaks down the water-hardness but also is working as a washing-agent.
The problem with getting grimy and greasy items clean with FL is not because they are FL! The problem nowadays is that they use not sufficient water any more - old FL used 150-160 liters per load in the time before 1970 and had no problem at all with dirt - but today there's only a cup full left to do the job! And how could that work? There's enough chemistry in the machine to loosen, emulsify and disolve the dirt - but not enough water to keep it and to transport it! (Not to speak of the bad rinsing afterwards...) That's the problem today! My mate tried to boost it by adding more water to the cycle in his FL by pouring 10 liters more with a watering-can into the machine - and the effect was amazing! Much better washing and much better rinsing with the same amount of washing, detergent and in the same cycle! And last but not least - the washing was smoother, softer and more wrinkle-free than usual!
Ralf