Why are Top Loaders Cheaper than Front Loaders?

[qualin]

OK, Maybe it's a dumb question, but this has been bugging me.

Why are top loaders cheaper than front loaders even though top loaders are more mechanically complicated?

Is it just because they're more commonly built and built in bigger numbers? (Supply over demand)

A friend of mine has noticed that front loaders have come down in price.

Back in 2004, what I noticed:
BOL TL = About $300
TOL TL = About $800
BOL FL = About $1200
TOL FL = About $2500

Today:
BOL Conventional TL = About $300 (Regency/Inglis/Amana)
BOL Impeller TL = About $800
TOL Impeller TL = About $1200
BOL FL = About $600 (Inglis branded)
TOL FL = About $2500 (Miele branded)

So.. why is that?

My thought is the sheer amount of electronics you see in Modern machines may have something to do with it and heavily influence the price.

Opinions? Flames? etc?

 

[DirectDriveDave]

I'm thinking it's because when you open up a basic TL, it is much simpler inside, like the inside of a WP direct drive or any of the Maytag TL washers. Less was required to build them.

This is all just a guess.

 

[pierreandreply4]

well for me in my case a top load washer is easyer for me to load and unload when it comes to washing clothes and there is also the fact that topload washers are easyer to start set the dial to the desired wash time pull the timer knob and voila and the wash time of a top loader is shorter than the wash time on a fl and the model in the picture when my duet set breaks will be the model that i will buy as a daily driver as well.

 

[pierreandreply4]

Also what influce the price is the cycles or option featured

this all depends on the cycles or options offered on a washer thake as an exemple this topload maytag bravo washer, and here are the options and cycles it offers but for me in my case i do not see the use of a sanitize cycle.

Dependable Performance

Capacity: 4.5 cu. ft. I.E.C.*
Smooth Balance™ Suspension System with Superior Vibration Control (SVC)
PowerWash™ Cycle
Sensi-Care™ Wash System with IntelliClean™ impeller
QuietSeries™ 300 sound package
Add a Garment Indicator
Extra Rinse option
Whites Cycle
Cycles: 13
Auto Start-Up Electronic Controls

Dependable Performance
Maytag® Commercial Technology (MCT)
Every Maytag® washer features long-lasting, commercial-grade components for your home. MCT components found in Bravos® washers include the wash basket, drive system bearings and motor capacity. These durable components assure a long and dependable life for the product.

Smooth Balance™ Suspension System with Superior Vibration Control (SVC)
A reliable magnetic direct drive system, dual balance rings, four spring dampers and advanced balancing software—these washers operate smoothly. Vibration is minimized, making it ideal for upper-floor installation.

Power Wash Cycle
Extra cleaning action and a deep rinse tackles your dirtiest loads

Dependable Design
4.5 cu. ft. I.E.C.* Capacity
Easily handles large loads—With an unsurpassed 4.5 cu. ft. I.E.C.* capacity, this Bravos® washer is our largest washer ever.

Dependable Efficiency
ENERGY STAR® Qualified
Our most efficient top-load washers. They use 70% less water and 67% less energy than conventional top-loading washers.(*may depend on the area you are as each have diffrents water norme)

*Equivalent volume per I.E.C. International Standard, 4th Ed., based on 4.0 cu. ft. DOE measurement.

Dependable Durability

10-Year Limited Warranty on wash basket and motor
Maytag Commercial Technology (MCT)
Wide Opening Lid with SmoothClose™ Hinge
Stainless Steel wash basket
Commercial capacity, direct-drive infinite speed motor
Zinc-coated, tuned leveling legs
Commercial-grade glass window

Dependable Efficiency

ENERGY STAR® Qualified
MaxExtract™ Extended Spin Option
Automatic detergent, bleach and fabric softener dispensers

*Equivalent volume per I.E.C. International Standard, 4th Ed., based on 4.0 cu. ft. DOE measurement.

but me in my case i am sticking to a classic top load washer with agitator like the inglis washer pictures in my last post.

 

[laundromat]

I think that there are many reasons for the front loaders being a bit more including the cost of retooling the many factories and assembly lines used to manufacture them. Remember, front loaders were not that popular in the U.S. due to companies like P&G trying to brainwash all of us that suds get your clothes clean. their marketing proved that when their ads for products like Tide advertised saying "Oceans of suds" on their packages.Suds in front loaders retard (slow down) the washing process (tumbling) and can break the washers.So, by the 1960's,early 1970's,Westinghouse was the only brand of front loading washers available in the U.S. however, there were many more being made overseas and they were the most popular style in Europe, Asia, and the far east.because of that, most of the "bugs" they had were fixed and many companies there gained sales as well as popularity.Because of that and WCI being dethroned by Electrolux who built a brand new factory in '95 solely for their new front loaders,the competitors also retooled their lines bringing their own version out. I predicted this way back in the early 80's. I think john and Tom remember me talking about it back then. I actually had written a long letter to Frigidaire telling them to reintroduce the front loaders Westinghouse made. Six years later, the new ones arrived and the rest is all history. The companies like Whirlpool, Maytag and GE had to retool or open new factories to meet the demand and now they all have their own versions of their new products.They used that to increase the profit claiming it was more expensive to make them.I don't see how a machine with fewer parts, no transmission and cheaper,plastic parts can be justifiably more expensive to make.

I,myself, have noticed just recently that U.S. detergents like Tide, Gain, and Wisk that are not HE don't make half the bubbles or suds they did a year ago. I wonder if anyone here has noticed that. I deliberately poured 2 measuring cups of Tide with Bleach in my Miele and got almost no suds.has P&G finally given up on high sudzing detergents? Lets only hope.

 

[tomturbomatic]

Anything costs more when it is a new product. When top loaders first came out, Bendix was able to say that their machines cost less and they did because they were already an old & relatively simple design compared to a top loader and the company was not trying to pay back borrowed money for investments in design and tooling up to build the washer. Unfortunately, they had made their wad and sat back on their butts and did not keep the machine competetive mainly because the AVCO folks were not interested in maintaining a line of appliances when they discovered that vastly greater amounts of money could be made far more easily in the defense industry. Over time, the volume of production drove down the cost of top loaders, just like it does most everything else. So you look at the costs involved in designing a new FL and, if you are Maytag, redesigning many of the flaws out of the original design or, if you are Whirlpool, finding a place in Europe or later, Mexico where labor is cheaper and transportation distances and costs are lower to build the machines to import, or if you are GE, finding a place in China to build the models you don't just buy and rebadge from someone else. If you are WCI and can't find a hole with your finger in it, you go to Italy for help and wind up with a machine where one of the bolts that holds the tub weights in place will punch through the expensive timer if the tub lurches hard while going into spin. With foreign production, you have staggering transportation costs and the exchange rate to worry about, but because trade agreements made it possible, you don't have to pay American workers salaries or benefits and, if you are really lucky and find a third world or desperate second world place to build them, you don't have to worry about safety or pollution. If you are other manufacturers in Asia, you have to buy these machines and copy the design and fight patent infringement lawsuits. The electronics are the cheapest part to make; not necessarily the most durable, but comparatively, the cheapest.

The nice thing for US corporations, until very recently, is that most of the money made in selling these machines goes to the important people who control the wealth in the corporation. It does not get "soiled" or diminished by being recirculated through factory workers' hands. So history repeats itself. Just as at the beginning of the laundering industry in this country at the end of the 19th century, once again Asians play a large part of our laundering; not all Chinese by any means and not by hand, but Asians nonetheless through the equipment.

 

[hoover1100]

Why are Top Loaders Cheaper than Front Loaders?

'cos front loaders are better?

*ducks and runs!*

 

[launderess]

Historically H-Axis Washers Have Always Cost More

Than top loading versions.

The R&D that goes into designing a water tight system that not only can keep the water and clothing inside a horizontal drum, then various safety,protection, stablisation systems and so forth. Even with say only 11lbs of dry laundry once wet you've got quite potential mass there suspended on that central bearing and the machine must last severaldaily duty cycles over a decent amount of time (in theory) to give customer satisfaction.

Top loading washers basically have a tub and central beater.Aside from the seals neath the agitator to keep water from leaking you have a pretty basic machine.

Will give you as designs settled into customer demand Europe went one way and the USA another. So after awhile since manufacturers on each side of the pond were by and large producing only one type of machine, economies of scale took over.

Expensive as some think domestic front loaders are, price even the smallest commercial/laundromat unit, they are *quite* dear. However such machines are designed to withstand heavy use/abuse and can be totally serviced including torn down and rebuilt.

 

[launderess]

And Another Thing

For at least American washer makers there were few ways of designing early front loader that got around Bendix's patents. Appliance makers must have figured "why bother" with all that extra costs and put their R&D into taking top loading washers to new heights.

From the simple wringer washers the USA saw a huge variety of top loading washers including "odd" designs such as the Frigidare "Jet Action" thumpers to the wiggle disk of Philco-Bendix

 

[arbilab]

I could have got a near-TOL TL and new dryer for what I paid for a BOL FL. Neptune was even more, more troublesome, and my FL policy is "no window, no sale".

Even when Westinghouse FLs had a transmission they were no more expensive than a GE TL and cheaper IINM than a Frigidaire TL. FL suspensions are a little more complex but suspension is only one system, doesn't justify doubling the price of the product.

Other than that, both have motors, pumps, valves, controls (electronic or clockwork), cabinets, bearings, tubs.

So why ARE FLs more expensive? Because they can be? AKA, "market forces"?

 

[brummybear]

UK and US cost of front loders and top loders

I just did a totaly unscientific comparason on Amazon US and Amazon UK your front loders are about the same price here in the UK. But the American top loaders available here cost a lot moor.

 

[pierreandreply4]

for anyone s' infos a top load cleans better than a fron

for one thing a top load washer wash better than a front load washer since for one thing the clothes are submerge in water and agitated with sends the detergent in the fiber of the clothes i am going off topic for a sec but i have a 95 year old aunt in my family that has a top load washer this model to be precise brand inglis liberator and she knows nothing of electronics or computer so trying to teach her on using a front load washer or one of these newer top load washers with electronic controls she would not even understand since she knows nothing of computers well back to the topic at hand me i know for 1 thing is when my actual set breaks i will be buying as a daily driver the model i pictured in my Post# 555894, Reply# 2 with the matching dryer and do not forget that the choice of a washer depends on the person using it and for my family i am the 1 doing the washing.

 

[qualin]

Thanks for the input everyone. I've had my questions answered.

 

[haxisfan]

Still in time to have my say?

Hi qualin...

I know you had your question answered, I hope I'm still allowed to put in my 5p worth.

Apart from all the other potential reasons already mentioned on this thread, marketing, existence of suspension system, etc, my contribution to this is about the involvement of more labour required to build a front loader and the need for more advanced engineering in order to achieve gravity management. Immagine what would happen if you decided to lean your top loader on its side and let it operate against gravity. Hence stronger supporting system for a heavy laod of wet clothes being lifted and dropped in a tumble fashion.

To get an idea of how sturdy a front load structure must be, try to spin the drum by hand with a full load of soaked clothes (If you have a front loader) and see how heavy this is... that's how hard your front loader works... and it does it for hours!

Enough from me... see ya ;-)

 

[qualin]

Thanks Hax. You do bring up a very good point. The suspension system in a top loader is quite different than a front loader and for that I could see some additional cost there.

My parents old GE Filter-Flo actually just used a pulley system which held the outer tub in place with cables tied to springs. Every front loader I've seen either uses shocks or springs.

One thing I will say is that the one thing I've noticed is that top loaders typically come with a 1/3 HP motor, but top loaders come with 1 HP motors. That says something right there.

 

[haxisfan]

Thanx Qualin!

I'm happy you're answered, you made my comment fit in with the rest ;-)

I'm not up on HP in relation to electric motors... but I guess '1' means higher power compared to 1/3? Yet, I can think of good reasons for putting a powerful motor in a TL too... immagine those users who overload them (although it's a no no), they're still going to need some good power to move the agitator through the clothes!

By contrast an overloaded FL might even require less power to turn and keep turning as the weight of the clothes is all lumped up equally... and tumble action would be very reduced: perhaps the hardest situation would be with a 3/4 drum of clothes (or less) and 1/3 drum of water as the tumble action would require quite some strength to occur (and it's the most effective cleaningwise).

That's why you Americans build massive front loaders... in order to allow enough space for clothes to wash in the shortest possible time.

Laters.

 

[qualin]

Hi Hax.

Yeah, there certainly is a different design philosophy with European vs American Front Loaders.

I can certainly tell you that judging by the sizes of European washers, Europeans would tend to do lots of small loads as needed, probably just before starting lunch or dinner...

Whereas Americans just let the laundry pile up and when there's nothing to wear, they jam as much as they can into the machine and want to do as few loads as possible to get the washing done ASAP.

Not to mention, the fascination with stuffing King Sized Comforters into their machine without having to go to a Laundromat or Dry Cleaner...

I can tell you that growing up in a family of five, my father wished we could have afforded one of those gigantic 50 lb bolt down washers you see at the Laundromat. Yes, I admit, we were lazy.. Laundry would pile up to waist high levels in the laundry chute. (It was about a 3 feet wide and about 12 feet high.) By the time we finally got around to it, it was pretty much an all day affair.

I know... I know... we should have done it more frequently, but I ended up taking charge of the laundry and between school, studying and doing things that teenagers do as they're growing up, laundry was near the bottom of my priorities.

Getting back on topic... I kind of wonder though, what kinds of compromises are made when you have a washer which has a tub which is 5.0 cu.ft in size, but the washers at the laundromat with the same tub size have a cabinet size which is nearly double what the home washer is! (Does that make sense?)

 

[haxisfan]

I'm getting changed as I type this message

I see where you're coming from in what you're saying... that would make me a true European for sure! Yes... I often find myself hopping on one leg trying to get out of my clothes while my index finger prepares to press the start button on the washer! You got it... a pair of trousers and a shirt are good enough for me to have a load!

Perhaps I can accept that as a general statement but it's not really that simple. Yes it might apply to me... but from what I've seen so far... each person around here seems to have their own laundry habits! I'm not even consistent with it myself... you might sometimes find me doing umpteen micro loads and other times, all of a sudden, stuffing the washer silly as I realize that the wash hamper got fuller than expected... ouch... heavy... help!

Still, my washer wouldn't pair with an oversized American FL even when run at its fullest: naturally that means infinite wash times, which I don't personally mind cos' when I run into this kind of situation, I set the washer the night before to run a couple of hours before I get up.

Having said that... I feel that the real reason for having bigger FLs in the States is due the the fact that you folks are used to the quicker wash times of a TL, so your FLs must be bigger to accomodate the same quantity of laundry and return peak results in the shortest possible time (which would still be longer compared to a TL). I am sure there are other reasons... and this is the beauty of these many cultural exchanges made possible by this forum ;-)

Now I managed to derail totally: I didn't mean to sabotage this thread... too badly

 

[launderess]

Standard 5kg/11lb Front Load Washers

Were long seen by a majority of American consumers as "too small" for their purposes.

Malber, Miele, Bosch, Asko, Equator et al all had limited sucess selling units and none really achieved any deep market share equal to say Whirlpool or Maytag.

The long cycle times plus *small* capacity simply turned Americans off. Mind you as most of us know and those Americans who tried found out you can fit quite allot into a 5kg machine, still the washers lost points. Even Consumer Reports often dinged such machines because they didn't hold as much as a top loader.

European and UK housewives long ago adapted to doing the wash daily or as often as required to keep up with demand. Also the small size of 5kg washers allow for installation in kitchens and other areas. This is a boon to those living in tight quarters that often made up many UK/European homes without dedicated laundry areas.

American housewives OTHO have still clung to the washdays of their grand or great grandmothers. That is the stuff is saved up for a week or so and one big wash day is set aside to get the thing out of the way. For that you need washing machines able to hold large amounts of laundry and or very quick cycles; that is right up top loader's street. This why you see all the various designs of "HE" top loading washing machines.

From what one understand uber-sized front loaders do not sell well in the UK/EU, consumers don't see the need.