Re: Real washing machines
- From: micky <NONONOmisc07@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:31:59 -0500
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:28:57 +0000 (UTC), Jules Richardson
<jules.richardsonnewsmoo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 09:51:24 -0500, Don Phillipson wrote:
"Art Todesco" <actodesco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:jg6a8u$3fv$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We've pretty much had it with our HE front loader. It's a GE and that
may be part of the problem. But it is a piece of junk, only 2 1/2
years old and of course, made in China. It doesn't clean well, it
doesn't rinse well and it takes forever . . . I am looking for an old
fashioned top loader that actually uses a tub full of water to wash
cloths ....
It seems we usually get what we pay for . . . Discriminating people
usually prefer European-designed front loaders which wash better than
common US designs partly because they wash longer (typically 40 min. and
20 min. respectively.)
I grew up in the UK; front-loaders were normal - top-loaders pretty much
disappeared back in the '70s. The front-loaders always seemed to do what
they needed to do - they didn't leak, didn't smell funny, they were
quiet, and they got stuff clean...
In Pennsylvania, my mother bought a front loader in 1946 or 47. When
we moved in 1957, she bought a top loader, a Whirlpool, very similar
to the Kenmore/Whirlpool that was bought for my house in 1979
However, warm-water washes were typical - I was quite surprised when I
moved to the US and most folk were just washing with cold water using
antique-looking (to my eyes) top-loaders. I wonder if the temperature
makes a huge difference to seal life, and keeping internals clean so they
don't smell etc., and that's the root cause of problems with US machines
(rather than poor build or design)
I thought the reason was to save money heating the water. Used to be
soap and detergents wouldn't dissolve in cold water.
US front-loaders seem outrageously expensive in comparison to European
ones, though; I think last time I looked the cost after currency
conversion was about 50% more to buy a machine in the US that
(supposedly) does just the same job as one from Europe (this was
comparing basic models rather than stuff like Miele). So "you get what
you pay for" is perhaps a little misleading, because manufacturers in the
US *should* be able to build a functional product for a lot less.
You're right about load times though I think - I do recall UK machines
taking somewhere around the time that you suggest (certainly somewhere
between 30 minutes and an hour for a full load). In the older days it was
common practice to load the machine at night and have it on a timer so
that it would run at night on cheap electricity (but when electronic
timers became common, not all machines would allow pre-setting of
controls, or they'd power up OK but need a 'start' button manually poking
before they'd start washing)
Personally we've got an old Kenmore top-loader which cost me $50 and runs
a load or two per day, and which I'll keep running until the supply of
spare parts dries up (not likely to happen for a few decades, I expect) -
it does what it needs to do. Uses a lot of water, of course, but I'm on a
private well, so the only 'hit' is the (minor) cost of running the well
pump.
cheers
Jules
.
- References:
- Real washing machines
- From: Art Todesco
- Re: Real washing machines
- From: Don Phillipson
- Re: Real washing machines
- From: Jules Richardson
- Real washing machines
- Prev by Date: Re: OT US foriegn policy, Ron Paul and terrorism.
- Next by Date: Re: What is UNDER flagstones on concrete? How do you keep the tops level? (Pictures)
- Previous by thread: Re: Real washing machines
- Next by thread: Re: Real washing machines
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
