Front loading washers - any good?

Page 2 of 2  


Had aMaytag for 20 years, used 40 gallons. per load,good service, but hard on the septic tank, in an area that is all clay. Bought a Bosch, 1140 spin, uses 13 gallon a load. Does a great job, quiet,and the dryer works less. I should have bought one years ago!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ashton Crusher wrote:

Do front loaders go "BANG, BANG, BANG" when they spin dry?
--
<<//--------------------\>>
Van Chocstraw
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:50:49 -0500, Van Chocstraw

sometimes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I would think that a front loader with a horizontal tub would always be out of balance for spinning since gravity pulls all the cloths to the bottom.
--
<<//--------------------\>>
Van Chocstraw
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Van Chocstraw wrote:

they start out very slow. (they are a dc variable speed motor) then they slowly go faster and faster. If they are out of balance, they stop an start the process over. Self balancing. They will only spin as fast as the balance dictates. i've seen our start over two or three times, then it gets it distributed evenly and spins like a mother!
(whirlpool duet) no problems in 3 years so far. We love them.
steve
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes, the front loaders can be more expensive to buy and repair. Top loaders use less water and more gentle on clothes. Your choice. My super-capacity top-load washer is still going strong after 17 years, repaired once with a $4 part.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Mistaken.FRONT loaders use less water and are easier on clothes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:58:05 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

My Fisher & Paykel top loader uses the same or less water than a front loader, and is gentle on clothes. It also spins the clothes almost completely dry. It's not a function of whether its a top loader or a front loader. The F&P costs about half what a front loader of similar capacity would cost, and doesn't have seal and mold problems. It also uses regular soap, at about half the dose used in a "conventional" top loader.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:04:58 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

how do they get it to use so little water?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ashton Crusher wrote:

A conventional top loader fills the basket with enough water to completely submerge the load. A front loader needs only enough water to saturate the load. During the slow speed wash cycle, only a portion of the load is submerged at a given time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob wrote:

My daughter has an LG front-loader - about 3 yrs. old? It is so quiet, you can hardly hear it even in the same room. It holds an amazing amount of clothing per load. She loves it. When you turn it on, the panel looks like a space ship - you can play Star Wars whilst you do laundry :o)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:

IMHO, unless you have several kids and do a dozen loads a week, they fail the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) test. They cost a lot more, most of them require special soap, and judging from the threads on here they are a lot fussier and more expensive to repair. The only saving is in water usage, which in this part of the country is not a major concern. And how long do they last? Around here, top loaders often last 20 years or more, even under heavy use. And speaking personally, I hate bending over that far to pull heavy wet laundry out of the tub.
But if the Warm Fuzzy Green feeling is important to you, and your budget can stand the extra up front cost, go for it. My sister down in NC has one, and likes it. Not sure what brand, but it looks expensive. (my entry level top loader cost ~$350, as a point of comparison)
-- aem sends...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
aemeijers wrote:

Big concern in Florida, California, Las Vegas and much of SW, at least. Less water would seem to equate to less detergent, as well. Haven't studied it. Hubby is dead set against f.l., so hopeless here :o)

From recent experience with appliances, I would not expect more than 5 years for anything. YMMV.

Higher than my old clunker of a dryer with door on wrong side :o)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Haven't had a chance to read all the posts to this thread, but here's what I know from personal experience.
Yes, on average new front-load washers have a reputation for needing repairs greater than top-loaders, but that is due to some manufacturers skewing the trend heavily with their lousy reputations. Research your purchase carefully, and buy a model made by a reputable manufacturer with a history of reliability. That will vary within a brand line, even. In our last house we had a near-top-of-the-line Kenmore front-loader we spent $900 on, and it was an absolute top- notch washer...best I've ever owned. My brother-in-law's roommate/ landlord bought the entry-level Kenmore front-loader, and that thing was broken more often than it worked.
When my wife and I go to replace our current washer (came with the house we just bought, a crap-nasty cheap Kenmore) we will probably look at the same model we used to have, or at one of the European companies who have been making front-loaders there for years.
Which is point 2: look to either one of the European companies that has been doing this for a while, or (surprisingly) Samsung, which (IIRC) has a pretty good reputation from Consumer Reports and other consumer eval groups.
Point 3: a front-loader is not as much a money-saving choice as it is an environmental choice. Yes, front-loaders use much less water than a top-loader - approx. 1/4 of the water (8 gals. for front-load vs. 32 gals. for top-load), and the drum has a higher spin speed, thus wringing out the clothes better, which means it takes about half the drying time (rough guesstimate from my own experience). You use less water; you use less gas or electricity (or the coal/oil/gas that was used to generate the electricity). You also put less water into your municipality's treatment system, reducing our society's use of potable water and the costs involved there.
Point 4: your clothes will last longer - front-loaders are much less damaging to your clothes than top-loaders. I've noticed a definite change in some of my less-stress-able shirts since we moved and ended up with a top-load washer.
HTH!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.