Suggested Appliance Replacement Periods

Page 2 of 2  
wrote:

Going on the 18 year of using a Panasonic vacuum cleaner, used twice a week. Replaced the belt one time and repaired a tool holder. The Whirlpool microwave lasted 13 years with daily use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I have a 10-year-old hoover self-propelled. It was never quite the same after I changed the belt, but it keeps on getting it done. It was a gift, I wouldn't have paid that much for one myself.
I replaced a 25-year-old microwave that I got from my parents just a while back. It was a Panasonic, and I think I hurt it by running it without food for a minute. I bought another Panasonic, this one has true variable power settings. So far, I like it as much as the old one, and it was a lot lighter to move.
I don't get breaking vaccuum cleaners. Our last one was about eight, and the only thing that died was a spring clip thing that held up the bag. Steel wire made a nice substitute.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chris Hill wrote:

Almost every 'broken' vacuum cleaner I ever had apart just needed to be degunked and lubed and put back together. Some uprights have a real bad design, and they get hairballs in places not immediately obvious by pulling the bag out. I have smoked the motor on a couple vacs over the years (one shop and one floor sweeper), but that was from sucking up the wrong things. Most household vacs are designed as throw-aways these days. Even my new baby ShopVac is all plastic- no leaving it out in shed over the winter. Before my mother retired to a non-110v area and gave me her upright, my previous vac was a 40+ year old fireplug style one with a cloth bag. Still sucked fine, but all the fittings were falling apart, and I was tired of blacksmithing and duct tape. I gave it away in a yard sale.
My Samsung micro, that I have written about on here before, dates from 81 or 82, and still works fine. It isn't the primary any more, since the one over the stove is more powerful, but it is sometimes nice to have 2. (Hot soup and hot sandwich at the same time, etc.)
-- aem sends...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 09:23:07 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools

    My suggestion, when they fail and the cost of repair is more than it is worth, or when the estimated energy savings over the expected remaining life is sufficient to make it worth while
    Remember that an appliance that is close to the estimated life for an appliance is much like mine. I have had cancer many times in the last 45 yeras, but since I am now 60+ years old, my expected life is now higher than the national average because I have already avoided dying in those first 60 years.
    An old appliance approaching the average life of that kind of appliance is likely to live well past that average, it must in order to keep the average because of all those that previously died.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote

That isnt viable, because they are worth so little when hardly anyone repairs much anymore.
A better test is to compare the cost of repair with the cost of replacement, and the cost of replacement varys significantly. Some replace with another new appliance, others replace with dirt cheap used appliances instead.
And its impossible to put a value on the time wasted when appliances fail, so much harder to decide what is appropriate when the cost of the repair is getting on towards the cost of the new replacement.
Hardly anyone is silly enough to repair a VCR nowdays even if they still use them.
In spades with stuff like PC DVD drives etc and phones and cellphones.

No it isnt any higher than that of other 60+ year olds, significantly lower in fact.
And you dont get that effect with appliances anyway.

Utterly mangled all over again. And that is irrelevant to the chance of it failing anyway.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 07:35:42 +1100, "Rod Speed"

    A VCR no, a washing machine yes.
...

    Carefully re-read my message, hopefully you will understand why you were wrong.

    Once you understand what I wrote, I hope you will be able to understand why it does apple to appliances.

    I would disagree. I take it you don't have much experience in statistical analysis?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote

Most dont repair waching machines anymore.
And what its worth is irrelevant anyway. What matters is what the replacement costs compared with what the repair costs.

No point, it stays pig ignorant shit no matter how often its reread.

No I'm not.

No it doesnt.

Your problem.

Guess which silly little prat has just got egg all over its silly little face, yet again.
The risk of an older appliance failing has absolutely NOTHING to do with how long its lasted so far compared with the average.
Thats as silly as claiming that the risk of a particular coin toss result varys with the result you have got so far. It doesnt.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:21:20 +1100, "Rod Speed"

    I doubt if that is true today. A year or so ago maybe. In either case it is foolish economics.

Oh I would differ, but maybe on this part our differences are more semantics than anything else. I am not going to repair a five dollar toy even if it would only cost two dollars where I would be likely to repair a 500 dollar toy even if it cost 200 dollars. Of course with many items the new toy may well be an upgraded version with better features, where a new washer is not likely to be any different than the old on.

If you don't understand it, how can you suggest it is a pig?

Sorry to hear that. Those who refuse to consider that they may be wrong will never know that they are right, they will just believe it.

Yea, you don't understand statistical analysis.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote

More fool you.

Irrelevant.
Your problem.

Nope, nothing like it.

Like I said, what matters is what the replacement costs, not what the dead one is worth repaired.

Irrelevant to what was being discussed there.

And when I do understand it...

Never said it was a pig.

Your problem. You could always burst into tears or something.

And those who realise that they arent wrong on a particular issue know they arent wrong on that issue.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
Anyone who knows anything about that can see that I do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 13:56:31 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

After reading Consumer Reports, I'm surprised the recommended "replace" rather than "repair" recommendation. I've repaired a washing machine, dishwasher, range well past its recommended replacement period. Lots of parts available online for DIYs makes it easy. Sometimes replacement will give you a better energy-featured product.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HOGWASH!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.minibite.com/america/malone.htm
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.