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!
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.
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.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:58:05 -0500, email@example.com 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
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.
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
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)
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)
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.
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.