Who's That Lady?

[oldskool]

Congratulations

That is one extremely nice machine!

What type of agitator does it have? The turnover and movement of the items being washed is impressive.

John

 

[swestoyz]

Beautiful, just beautiful! Love it Paul. Congrats again!

Ben

 

[mickeyd]

"A thing of beauty is a joy forever!" The Buddha ~ L

I love it and love how the the vid shows the supreme agility and economy of the Rotoflex with its so slim, stream-lined structure. Bet it yields another pound or two of room for laundry. I so envy and delight in your Lady with the Flex, all the lights, and the fine clear-lacquered fingernails--for me, the most beautiful of all the Ladies K.

Wish I lived next door: we could trade our Ladies back and forth.

Everyone says you can turn a screw to lower the LOW. I've left mine, and it's the level I most use. Always get a kick out of the irony that the factory set low is so high on our machines, while on the new machines the high is so low-- ah the contrariness of life; it never ends! ;'D

Thanks, Turquoise Man.

 

[frigilux]

The Buddha----you're a riot, mickeyd!

Wow, so that really is the factory-set low water level. I wonder why so high? Is it right above the top row of tub holes? Were they trying to avoid splashing?

My mom always ran a Rinse & Spin cycle at the end of wash day to clear out any traces of detergent and bleach. She'd use the low (or 'LO' on our machine) water level and water would splash everywhere, frequently popping the interior's light bulb. Same thing used to happen during the suds return. Eventually, the Sears repairman (who was a frequent visitor to our Model 80) put a foil shield in front of the bulb, which blocked the light and ruined the effect.

I always made sure there were several extra appliance bulbs in the house, LOL.

 

[mickeyd]

LOW WL: Was shocked the first time, waiting, waiting, waitin

Infinite water level, my foot! You mean pretty high to very high. And even better, there are a ton of little dots on the slider between low and hi, each dot giving you about another CUP of water. LOL.

Maybe they figured if you're spending the bucks for the Lady, what do you care how much water you're using; and in mine, with the mega-finned super Rotoswirl, there would be less chance of damage to fabrics with high levels of low water, (chuckle).

I think John told me something about this, but I can't remember, Gene. I'll ask him again.

 

[lebron]

wow

OMG that is an absolutely beautiful Lady Kenmore. Congratulations. I could spend hours and hours playing with this machine.

 

[gansky1]

One of the prettiest LK's, and in turquoise! I knew you had this washer but it's spectacular, such good condition.

I've noticed how high my low setting in the '67 70 series, too. I prefer the high level to be just under the tub cover, full load washing! The Roto-Flex is one of my favorite Kenmore agitators.

 

[combo52]

1965 LKM Washer

WOW it looks great Paul, glad you can finely have some clean lint free clothing, LOL.

 

WP & KM used a fairly high minimum water level because it is not only too splashy if the level was any lower but you really can't effectively wash a load of clothing with a smaller amount of water, remember all WPs & KMs were still standard capacity tubs at this point in time and the wash basket was not all that deep to begin with.

 

[kenmoreguy64]

On KMs and WP - minimum water levels

I read something very recently which really surprised me. In literature that Kenmore prepared as a service familiarization document to the field repair guys on upcoming new models, there was mention that water levels had been adjusted on certain models. I always thought they were the same for all the standard tubs, but apparently not.

This was a 1967 or 1968 document, I don't recall exactly. It was pointed out that models equipped with certain agitators had their levels adjusted by one-inch either in minimum or maximum, or both. This pertained only to Roto-Flex or Vari-Flex equipped models, but I want to verify that before I say for sure. I do know for sure that the straight-vane and Roto-Swirl equipped machines did not get the adjusted levels.

Our 1961 Kenmore 70 with the original Roto-Swirl filled somewhere I'd guess about 2/3 full on the LO setting. Well below the start of the ramps on the agitator, which always was fun to watch as the suds ramped up and down. As John says, these baskets aren't all that deep, so some of the much lower settings that were common in the 1979 and later models (the "Energy-Saver" notated models) would not have been seen in the 1960s.

I'll have to see where I got that document, it may have been an ephemera offering.

Gordon

 

[kenmoreguy64]

Oh my gosh, pardon me Paul...

I was really enjoying the water levels discussion and I failed to mention how great the machine looks!

It looks pristine, and it surely landed softly into your collection. Great job on the bearing re-do - looks like its just truckin' along, BD style.

We do need to find you that dryer! Congrats on a great re-do!

Gordon

 

[mickeyd]

I do know for sure that I have a 1963 Turquoise Lady Kenmore with a Super Roto-Swirl whose LO water level identically matches Paul's. Although the vintage Kenmores I've enjoyed always filled rather high on the LO, this one is way over the top, so to speak.

The Keyboard Lady K I enjoyed for 2 years at the Fleckenschteen filled on LO to the typical 2/3's level reported by other members. It had a Vari-Flex agitator. I'm sticking to the theory of less chance of damage to fabrics as an explanation for this oddity in water levels till we learn otherwise.

It also interesting, Paul, that our cycles and lid scripts are identical except for the extra slow on your woolens and position of the 2 PP cycles.

By the way, I hadn't heard "Whose That lady,"in years and now it's happily back in my head. ;' D . So Thank You.

 

[mickeyd]

OOPS: WHO'S

Snooze ~ LOL

 

[pulltostart]

Paul,

Would this help?

 

lawrence

Pardon Our Interruption...

 

[turquoisedude]

Thanks Lawrence! Unfortunately someone beat me to it... dang!!

 

[kenmoreguy64]

More on water levels...

I am not sure why I didn't think of this earlier, but most of the owner's manuals I've been collecting for the early through late 1960s Kenmores mention in the controls section how much water is going to be provided with each fill level on the water level switch when the machine has a selectable switch.

LO is usually 11 gallons, MEDIUM being 14 gallons, and HI being 18 gallons. This was so nearly universal in these various manuals that I considered that a common setting in all the 29-inch standard capacity machines until I saw that Kenmore service letter to the field. Machines that had only one level filled to 18 gallons. Machines that had two were usually 11 and 18 gallon settings. Machines that were infinite were selectable anywhere between 11 and 18 gallons. See a trend there?

In 1978/1979 max fill dropped to 17 gallons, probably to tweak the rating on the yellow energy guide. The other settings didn't change.

Being that the tub is full at 18 gallons, which I think is about an inch below the rim on the inside of the wash basket, an 11-gallon LO setting would would be pretty much right at the 2/3 full mark.

One thing I've noticed, and we found it out first-hand with Andy's beautiful '66 Lady Kenmore at the April Wash-In - his level switch, set to the lowest of LO, had the tub 3/4 full or more and still going, and we started to be concerned that the machine would overflow. It didn't, but obviously the switch was not functioning properly. I think after several fills and tweaking of the switch, it was working better. We decided that after a long period of non-use, it had become in-accurate or 'stuck'. I've had the opposite happen, where machines fail to fill all the way, and as time goes on, they fill several inches lower than they did originally.

G

 

[kenmoreguy64]

I found the document I was referring to above, and I'm going to correct a couple things I mentioned. First, its in the 1968 publication for 1969 and 1970 Kenmores, not the earlier models. Also, I think I have a better understanding now why Andy's machine may have filled so high as well...we thought it was a bad pressure switch, but now it seeem not!

Being that this is one of Robert's ephemera documents, I won't quote it in too much detail and thus spoil the fun if people want to purchase it, but it quotes that the water level revision is for models equipped with the Vari-Flex agitator. Max fill is raised from 11" to 12.25". That is more than a ten percent increase.

It goes on to state that all models which specify the Vari-Flex have a LO water level of 8", and those that specify the Roto-Flex have a 9" LO level.

A nine-inch LO water level on a Roto-Flex is only two inches below the max fill of 11-inches. Very interesting!! There is obviously much less variation in these machines than the more evenly spaced 11, 14, and 18 gallon fills.

I always wondered what the reasons where behind the demise of the Roto-Flex afer only four or five years, but this may provide some logical insight.

Gordon

 

[autowasherfreak]

<span style="font-size: large; font-family: comic sans ms,sans-serif;">Those old WP/KM belt drive machines, were very quiet. I find their sounds quit relaxing. </span>

 

<span style="font-size: large; font-family: comic sans ms,sans-serif;">PS:  She's beautiful </span>

<span style="font-size: large; font-family: comic sans ms,sans-serif;">
</span>

 

[frigilux]

Thanks for tracking down the documentation concerning the revamped water levels for Kenmores, Gordon, and thanks for sharing your Kenmore expertise.

I was so used to 1959-1960 water levels that I was taken aback when I saw the water level I knew as medium (or "halfway between LO and HI" as our manual stated) being referred to as low.

It's true: You learn something new everyday.[this post was last edited: 2/20/2013-07:33]

 

[turquoisedude]

Update on the Lady's performance

Not long after the Lady Kenmore moved to the Ogden Laundry, I observed some weirdness with the permanent press cycle. At the cool-down phase of the cycle, the machine just stopped on me. I used another cycle selection to complete the load of clothes but I was not amused. I didn't rush into any immediate repairs ('cause we all know how much I like to jump to conclusions... LOL). I studied the literature I have on the machine and it seemed to me that the 'stall' was because the washer should have been letting in cold water. I tested that theory with the 'cold wash' button - I saw right away that there was no water flowing. I feared that there was yet another issue with the fill valve (I had lots of fun with that in my attempts to keep the original valve intact). Well, I let this all percolate for a few weeks and today, after managing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with the GE Combo last week, I decided it would be worth a careful look.
First thing I did was to test the cold solenoid by powering it with a direct AC cord. Damn thing worked... So I figured the next logical thing to test was the wiring.
And there it was - right in my face... When I first got the washer, I had noticed there were two leads in the console that were not connected to anything. I foolishly assumed these were in place for a suds-saver (not on this particular machine). Well, we all know what happens when we assume, right?
I had forgotten that I have a schematic wiring diagram for this machine. When I checked it, one of the wires was for the cold solenoid and the other for the fabric softener dispenser solenoid. Reconnecting them to timer took me about 5 seconds. After that, I had my cold water flowing again. YAY!
Now, I need to test the full permanent-press cycle. This Lady's about to be "married" to a Baltimore Beau, so she HAS to be perfect, right??

 

[turquoisedude]

Yay - it worked!

Over the weekend, I did not one, but two loads of permant-press items to try out the latest 'tweaks. I was thrilled to find that the cold solenoid kicked in when it should have AND the fabric softener dispenser fired at the right time!
I will definitely have to make a video of the 'cool down' phase of the wash cycle - my now-dead 66 Inglis had that feature and I forgot how neat it was. Stay tuned!