Front loading washers - any good?

[Van Chocstraw]

Do front loaders go "BANG, BANG, BANG" when they spin dry?

[Phisherman]

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.

[clare]

sometimes.

[clare]

Mistaken.FRONT loaders use less water and are easier on clothes.

[salty]

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.

[Van Chocstraw]

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.

[Steve Barker]

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

[Kyle]

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!

[Ashton Crusher]

how do they get it to use so little water?

[Bob]

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.

[norminn]

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)

[aemeijers]

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...

[norminn]

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)

[stan]

We used a front loader in the Middle East. Found it used very little water, had limited capacity, and also took a longer time to wash each load. Result was that a couple would probably have to wash clothes every night or at very least each couple of days, probably five loads a week?

Whereas here (North America) we wash one or two large loads per week, including towels etc. for two people. And some loads can be washed in cold or lukewarm water.

We had one front gasket door leak in some 3 years. The washer IIRC was Italian made. Controls were a little too complicated; IMO.

We also found that the European style dryers were inadequate and were not supplied with our accommodation anyway. Outside (well everywhere!) it was very dusty. So over there we bought a North American style 230 volt (full size) dryer and vented it outside. That and the low air humidity meant that clothes dried pretty quickly.

Presumably North American 'front loaders' have more capacity?

Back here: Have to agree the old style North American (Sears, Kenmore etc.) washers (and dryers) are pretty robust and reliable. For example We are still using the first and only one 'automatic' washer that we have bought, since 1960. Purchasing it around the mid/early 1970s when our original agitator washer with a wringer failed. Even when we used a well water supply (now on municipal water supply) we had no problems.

The current washer has had timer switch work twice (Pitted contacts! Repaired by self. A replacement timer would have cost about $70) and was also fitted with the tub out of a another discarded washer, some six years ago, when it started to leak! It will probably last another four of five years by look of it? For a total life with say, four repairs in approx. 40 years. BTW do recall replacing one washer belt some 10 years ago! And one dryer belt some 15-20 years ago.

We have a couple of dryers; the one have been currently using for last

5 to 6 years cost a dozen beer, provided we took it away promptly that day! I hope the gentleman and his wife who gave it to me have had as good a service from the 'new washer/dryer set' they were having delivered, as we have!

With so many used appliances available at present and based on what we found with the front loader it is unlikely we will be changing anything for quite a while. We estimate our washer plus dryer annual costs (not including electricity etc.) to be of the order of; Capital/amortization costs, less than $1000/40 =3D $25 year. Self maintenance (Keep used parts on hand btw) Maybe $250/40 =3D $5 per year Total somewhere around less than $40 per year. Over 40 years.