Whirlpool Seven Rinses?
- Thread starter johnrk
- Start date
Help Support :
agiflow2
My old eyes can't tell whether it's 1955 or 1956 at the bottom of that ad, but the closest Consumer Reports I have to that date is August, 1958. The Sears and its twin the Whirlpool washer rated in the second tier behind the Maytag and two Frigidaires. Boy, this was indeed a cool time for automatic washers because each brand (and its badge-engineered clones) were distinctively different.
Fortunately, back then they stated how much hot water and total water was used. True, the Sears/Whirlpool washers used the most total at 37.5 but then the GE was at 37. the lowest total water was of course 26, 27 and 28 for the front loaders made by Philco-Bendix. Speed Queen was at 36.5, Maytag at 32, and the little Frigidaires were at only 28.5 but they apparently had a smaller tub. So, if these Whirlpool washers had those "seven rinses" they didn't seem to use an inordinate amount of water.
The other interesting point to me in the ratings was that it stated, "Improper care of the lint filter could result in filter falling into tub while machine is operating. On this model, at the end of the cycle, a buzzer sounds and the washer lid opens automatically."
Do you know how that washer lid opened? I mean, was it just spring loaded and some kind of tab or finger allowed it to pop open? Or was it somehow motorized?
My old eyes can't tell whether it's 1955 or 1956 at the bottom of that ad, but the closest Consumer Reports I have to that date is August, 1958. The Sears and its twin the Whirlpool washer rated in the second tier behind the Maytag and two Frigidaires. Boy, this was indeed a cool time for automatic washers because each brand (and its badge-engineered clones) were distinctively different.
Fortunately, back then they stated how much hot water and total water was used. True, the Sears/Whirlpool washers used the most total at 37.5 but then the GE was at 37. the lowest total water was of course 26, 27 and 28 for the front loaders made by Philco-Bendix. Speed Queen was at 36.5, Maytag at 32, and the little Frigidaires were at only 28.5 but they apparently had a smaller tub. So, if these Whirlpool washers had those "seven rinses" they didn't seem to use an inordinate amount of water.
The other interesting point to me in the ratings was that it stated, "Improper care of the lint filter could result in filter falling into tub while machine is operating. On this model, at the end of the cycle, a buzzer sounds and the washer lid opens automatically."
Do you know how that washer lid opened? I mean, was it just spring loaded and some kind of tab or finger allowed it to pop open? Or was it somehow motorized?
the washers lid was held closed by a latch that was controlled by the emblem located on the front of the machine. You pushed the emblem to release the lid which was spring-loaded. When the machine shut off a buzzer would sound and the latch would release the lid and it would pop open.
Seven rinses...
Were exactly as agiflow described - spray rinses plus deep rinse totalling 7.
Is this the 54 model? I have the 56 which also has a push-button lid release; it is a spring-loaded mechanism on mine however there were some Whirlpool washers with a solenoid- operated lid release. I have never been sure if they were the earlier or later models. Either way, the lid release button lights up - bonus!
Were exactly as agiflow described - spray rinses plus deep rinse totalling 7.
Is this the 54 model? I have the 56 which also has a push-button lid release; it is a spring-loaded mechanism on mine however there were some Whirlpool washers with a solenoid- operated lid release. I have never been sure if they were the earlier or later models. Either way, the lid release button lights up - bonus!
But I question how effective the spray rinses and deep rinse were given Whirlpool/Kenmore washer notoriously suds locked with loads containing lots of towels and heavy cottons. And the suds lock residue went into the deep rinse.
appnut
How low-sudsing were the detergents claiming it back then, like Dash? Would they qualify as HE by today's standards? I know my mama used Rinso Blue when I was very small, on her old Bendix horizontal. When she got her Frigidaire in '63 she switched to Tide and used it the rest of her life.
How low-sudsing were the detergents claiming it back then, like Dash? Would they qualify as HE by today's standards? I know my mama used Rinso Blue when I was very small, on her old Bendix horizontal. When she got her Frigidaire in '63 she switched to Tide and used it the rest of her life.
From what I remember of my family's first automatic..a 63 Kenmore 600 series...i remember the suds coming back in through the bottom of the basket when filling for rinse. Then again my mother was very liberal with the Tide detergent of the day.
I can also remember one time when I was 2 or 3 my mother trying to scoop the suds out with a little black frying pan because there was a big suds cake... the things you remember LOL.
I can also remember one time when I was 2 or 3 my mother trying to scoop the suds out with a little black frying pan because there was a big suds cake... the things you remember LOL.
toploader55
Well-known member
Oooooooo....
Bob....
You potentially opened a can of worms !!!
Bob....
You potentially opened a can of worms !!!
I always figured back in the day that Tide was the best detergent because it provided a 2nd wash during the rinse in the '62 Whirly, LOL.
You could suds lock any machine with All or Dash if you dumped enough in.
The Whirly-Kenmore's were very prone to suds lock as Bob has mentioned. You needed all seven of those rinses and sometimes more! If you lived in a soft water area you became pretty good at dosing unless you wanted your laundry to reek of detergent residue.
The Whirly-Kenmore's were very prone to suds lock as Bob has mentioned. You needed all seven of those rinses and sometimes more! If you lived in a soft water area you became pretty good at dosing unless you wanted your laundry to reek of detergent residue.
speedqueen
Well-known member
Suds-Lock
A suds-lock is when the suds between the spin basket and the outer tub are sufficient enough to cause the machine to never reach full operating spin speed.
Suds have more surface area and friction than most people think. WP was prone to the effect because the distance between the tubs was so little especially when compared to something like a GE FilterFlo.
A suds-lock is when the suds between the spin basket and the outer tub are sufficient enough to cause the machine to never reach full operating spin speed.
Suds have more surface area and friction than most people think. WP was prone to the effect because the distance between the tubs was so little especially when compared to something like a GE FilterFlo.
I think the year said 1956 on this ad. Unless there was a more deluxe version of the Imperial... I thought the 56 Imperias looked like the ones turquoisdude has in Canada? This looks like maybe a 1955 machine?
In any case these were some of the best looking Whirlpool's ever made IMO. For me this style and the 58 timeliness were Whirlpool's most beautiful machines.
In any case these were some of the best looking Whirlpool's ever made IMO. For me this style and the 58 timeliness were Whirlpool's most beautiful machines.
Suds lock can also interfere with draining if a vapor-lock occurs in the tub outlet/pump manifold. The '62 would often do that during the post-wash spin, causing the spray rinses to collect, not drain, and drag-down the spin further.
And the perforated tubs actually increase the propensity for the suds lock situation to form and build by whipping more air into the froth between the tubs. Neighbors who got a 58 LK just before we got ours had to replace the motor after one year because of the Tide causing this problem. After that they switched to ALL for no more "cloggy" suds. I have had a Maytag suds lock, too, with liquid detergent when I first tried them. Interestingly, it was doing OK before the spray rinse started.
Through the fifties,sixties and seventies I either observed or used a lot of Whirly/Kenmore machines. They all suds-locked. ESPECIALLY with a load of towels or other heavy items. There were plenty of times I would go to remove laundry at the end of a cycle and there was still residue foam on the clothes from the suds-lock during the final spin. Since most of the phosphated detergents of that era were VERY high-sudsing you had to develop a keen eye towards dosing the detergent if you expected good rinse performance.
IMO SOAP created the worst kind of suds-lock (in soft to medium hard water areas) as the bubbles were very fine and dense and hard to break down. I saw many a Whirly-Kenmore choke half to death on Ivory Snow or Lux Flakes. Of course, so did everything else except maybe a Unimatic.
IMO SOAP created the worst kind of suds-lock (in soft to medium hard water areas) as the bubbles were very fine and dense and hard to break down. I saw many a Whirly-Kenmore choke half to death on Ivory Snow or Lux Flakes. Of course, so did everything else except maybe a Unimatic.
