Is there a post anywhere with the jargon used by members of this board?
If not should there be?
When did Maytag start to go bad?
- Thread starter whirlpool862
- Start date
If not should there be?
There is no sticky or header with common site acronyms.
However, I think it is worth a casual debate amongst members considering the amount of new users who come through.
I thought the dependable care machines were orbitals.
I don't need stupid wifi. Why do I need the fridge to do my shopping list when I can do it myself? Too many stupid idiots are just lazy as heck.
And they did the job well for years, even in the most extremely abusive conditions. Today's appliances DON'T even hold a candle to any of them.
And this is what really, really gets me. How I wish 90% of all washers sold in the past and today were dependable care.
The orbital was introduced with the 12 series if my memory serves me. Around 1986.
July, 1989
I remember how the orbitals sounded when they agitated. I believe you could hear the transmission whirring as it was happening.
This is why we don't let things go, especially after seeing the junky workmanship these products have. GE, I'm talking to you.
vacerator
Well-known member
The Maytag orbital was a heavy robust transmission looking similar to a Whirlpool belt drive mounted on the bottom of the tub. It's successor had only 5 moving parts, with a tapered tube ascending from the bottom mounting to a sort of automobile differential shaped gearcase.
To be honest I think the orbital was the most brilliant transmission design ever. As you said 5 moving parts with each being maximized in the best way possible.
phillymatt53
Well-known member
Then how come the orbital has such a short stroke?
Seems to me that would hinder turnover due to lack of agitation.
The fast short stroke, coupled with the load sensor agitator was a far better agitation than the long stroke, dragged the clothes to death and tear them apart agitation of the older machines
The sharp square fins of the power fin agitators would literally grab a shirt and yank it back-and-forth, straining the fibers, if you watch the short quick stroke of a direct drive machine or the Maytag orbital transmission or even a GE filter flow, which had a short fast stroke, you can see the superiority of turning over a load of clothing without damaging it as much.
Of course, all of this is ridiculous to argue about if you’re looking for the best type of washing machine, you’re gonna buy a tumbling front load type machine where the clothing is not damaged by the agitation.
John L
The sharp square fins of the power fin agitators would literally grab a shirt and yank it back-and-forth, straining the fibers, if you watch the short quick stroke of a direct drive machine or the Maytag orbital transmission or even a GE filter flow, which had a short fast stroke, you can see the superiority of turning over a load of clothing without damaging it as much.
Of course, all of this is ridiculous to argue about if you’re looking for the best type of washing machine, you’re gonna buy a tumbling front load type machine where the clothing is not damaged by the agitation.
John L
phillymatt53
Well-known member
I've never had an issue with my A482 machine damaging my clothes, or anything put inside it.
And of course, I don't stuff it overfilled either, and use the water level for the load that allows plenty of movement and turnover.
As for the agitator, it don't see anything sharp on the fins that would be harmful to clothes.
Similar threads
