Quick wash on a washing machine.

[ARW]

I only bought my washing machine because it did a quick wash (14 to 18 minutes depending on what spin I tell the machine to do)

Are Which talking bollocks?

[Andy Burns]

ARW wrote

"Quick washes are only really suited to laundry that doesn't have any tough stains or lingering smells"

Well duh!

[Richard]

Probably. I doubt anyone says that their washing needs another wash after the short one. If it does, the items are obviously too soiled for the short wash which could be a problem for those who lack common sense. Nothing stopping you doing a follow-up spin after the wash has finished if drying is a problem.

[Chris Bartram]

Simple, innit? If something is really manky, putting it in a quick wash is a waste of time.

[ARW]

And washing the same clothes for 3 hours on an eco wash is going to be cleaner?

[David]

A part of that is the assumption that it will take more energy to dry in a tumble drier.

If you are not dirty smelly people (or you just don't care) and dry clothes on a rack or outdoors then I reckon a quick was is usually fine.

Depends very much on the clothes, as well.

We tend to wear "performance" clothing which is designed to dry quickly (not that we ford many raging tropical rivers most weeks).

Cheers

Dave R

[Andrew Gabriel]

No. This isn't new - it's been the case since 1980 if not earlier.

"Quick cycles on washing machines may not be as green or financially prudent as previously thought"

Who was it that thought they were? The instructions for my 1985 Hotpoint (which died a few years ago) makes it very clear that the quick washes are not as economic.

They are a compromise when you need something washed quickly, and not as thoroughly nor as economically.

[Max Demian]

I wash my bedclothes using the "super quick" wash at 40° but with rinse hold, then spin at 1600 RPM. Total time about 50 minutes. Then I hang it on an airer - it's ready to put back on the bed by early afternoon.

Not as quick as the OP, but, I recall, launderette machines took 20-25 minutes (small machines) to do a whole week's load, so it must be possible.

[Bill Wright]

I use a quick wash then hang absorbent items up in the utility room for

24 hours, then tumble.

Bill

[Robin]

I would support Which? on this one.

As regards the cost if you tumble dry, one of the indicators of my achieving true boring old fartdom was not just wondering if an 11 minute spin was worthwhile but sticking a container under the outlet to see what comes out in the last few minutes.

As regards cleaning, we don't find a really quick, low temp wash gets rid of under-arm odours in shirts etc which have been sweaty. But that could of course be another indicator of old fartdom :(

[Tim Watts]

I think it's more likely a case of Which surveyed users are thick.

A "Quick" washes are for the shirt and trousers that have only seen the office and a train journey that you need in a hurry and similar.

If you stick in mouldy crud on a 20 min wash and act surprised when it's not very clean, well...

At least you get a choice - unlike "water saving bogs" that end up needing 2 flushes to clear a log...

I don't care what the so called experts say: Darks 60C, whites 40C, towels 90C which keeps the machine unsmelly...

After all, the machine is doing the work, I usually don't care how long it takes and a few pence/week difference or whatever is so utterly irrelevant...

[Steve Walker]

Ours is 24 minutes, but if I reduce the temperature by 10°C, it goes up to 30 minutes! I assume it is compensating for reduced efficiency of the washing powder/liquid at lower temps.

I noticed that the article refers to a normal washing time being 2-1/2 hours and newer machines being 3 hours, what use is that? Ours is 54 minutes (with hot fill) - which is ideal when the kids come home from school having got something on their blazers, jumpers, ties or PE tops (the logoed items that we refuse to pay for more than one each of). They can eat, do their homework, do their own thing for a while and the sub-one-hour standard wash means that they don't have to change, but can wait 'til bed time to give all their school kit a wash ready for the next day.

Why on earth should the length of the wash make any difference to the tuble drying time? Our machine lets you select the spin speed and when spinning at the same speed and the same amount of water will be left in the clothes. The faster spin takes no longer, it just spins faster.

It often is more than adequate. Especially, if like us, you tend to wash clothes more frequently than necessary. There is no real need for me to have a fresh tee-shirt each day when I come home from work and change into one for only 5 hours, but that is what we tend to do.

SteveW

[Richard]

Hmmm... 1980. Now 2018.

Notice the use of "may not be" instead of a definite "are not"?

[PeterC]

Mine's John Lewis-branded 8kg. machine and is actually AEG (the booklet for AEG is OK for the JL). Cotton 30 is about 3h 05 but the Qick button gives 2h 3. and 3 rinses (AEG is pragmatic: Cotton 60 & 40 for EU spec.: proper Cotton washes for adequate water. Undocumented is Quick+Quuick that shortens it to 1h 16 (I would guess 2 rinses) with an extra Rinse adding 10 min. ISTR that there are v. short washes - just enough to annoy the muck - but I've never used one.

[Dex]

Part of the reason Which said it was was if you use a tumble dryer to dry your clothes it will take longer.

[spuorgelgoog]

Don't you mean whites 60C, darks 40C?

Owain

[Michael Kilpatrick]

The first couple of lines of the BBC news articles leads me to infer that people are using the quick wash when it's not appropriate and therefore requiring additional washes and ultimately consuming more water and energy as a result.

I guess ARW and I may not be so vain as to want to put something in the wash multiple times to ensure that it's gleaming, and in that respect it makes ARW environmentally friendly, perhaps? And he's clever enough to know when a short wash will do or when it won't?

Far from talking bollocks, the article perhaps fails to put the blame on stupid people who don't know when to use a full wash and when to use a quick wash?

It's inherently obvious that *if* a quick wash suffices for the clothes in question, it's twice as energy-efficient as the typical standard wash.

I also don't understand the bit about "tumble dryers". Yes, if you use one to dry your clothes it will cost you more and consume unnecessary energy. But that is independent of whether you've used a quick wash or not. Is the implication that *most* quick washes are being done in conjunction with tumble drying *in order* to get something washed and dried in haste, or not?

If not, using a machine which is a combined washer/dryer but only using the wash cycle does not consume more energy.

Michael

[Huge]

No surprise there. Like so much of this "eco" bollocks, it's poorly thought through and designed. My favourite example being "water saving" toilets that you have to flush 3 times to make the turds go away.

[Tim Watts]

No - our darks tend to include the underwear by and large, so I'd rather cook them. Whites tend to include delicates and lightly soiled - but I guess that's just us...

[Andy Burns]

If the "quick" wash does a less intensive spin, the clothes will be left wetter and tumble drying will take longer, costing more.