DIYbanter - View Single Post - Service life of a high-efficiency refrigerator?

mike

wrote:
On Sep 18, 5:11 am, mike wrote:
wrote:
On Sep 17, 3:09 pm, mike wrote:
wrote:
On Sep 16, 8:21 pm, wrote:
On Sep 16, 8:16 am, wrote:
On Sep 14, 8:49 pm, wrote:
On Sep 14, 6:41 pm, mike wrote:
My refrigerator is 36 years old. Still going strong, but
if you believe published efficiency numbers, it's costing
me a hundred bux a year more than it would for a new one.
Payback calculations depend on your assumptions for the
time value of money and inflation in energy cost. Just looking
at the cash flow, the break even point is 7 years or so.
Looks marginal, but let's save the planet. Off
I went to look at refrigerators.
While chatting with the guy at Sears, he "disclosed" that
the smaller compressors run much longer at higher pressure
and they only
last 6 to 7 years. If true, that negates all the savings.
Is there any relevant data relating to service life of the
newer, high-efficiency home refrigerators?
mike
No it is not really true that the new ones are not lasting as
long, in fact I have seen some studies that say they may be lasting
longer.
It should also be said that sometimes the estimated savings
are ... a little generous. There have also been some changes on how
they compute them over the years and different brands are sometimes
difficult to compare as they are not using the same yard stick. That
said, chances are you will likely save money buying a new high
efficiency one over some time, maybe 5-10 years. They are big users
of electricity.
I was just researching this myself and was ready to buy a new one,
but I have put it off as we may be moving across country in the not
too distant future so I have put it off for now.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I recently replaced a 23 year old Frigidaire 24 CFT side by side with
a new Kitchenaid 25 cft side by side. Prior to doing it, I went to
the DOE Energy Star website where they have a savings calculator
tool. You can put in the make and model of your current unit, energy
cost per KWH, etc, and it will give an estimate of the savings. For
mine it had the yearly cost to run it at over $300 vs the new one at
$90, for a substantial savings. Being skeptical, I used a kilowatt
meter to measure the old one for a couple days and then again on the
new one. The old one was actually only using about $185 a year vs
$90 for the new one. So, the Energy Star numbers we're spot on for
the new one, but way off for the old one. Bottom line, the new one
is using around $95 a year less in energy.
Still a decent savings, but way off from what the DOE would lead you
to believe and if you're doing cost justification, $95 a year is a big
difference from $210. Which leads me to wonder what the Energy Star
calculator is based on. Perhaps they are assuming door seals that are
leaking badly and God only knows what else to make the numbers come
out skewed.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You can take a look at Consumer Reports at the library. They
recently (as I recall) published information on what Energy Start and
other numbers mean and how they are changing. With reading.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
they very first high efficency fridges were horrible, compressors
failedv a lot.
the manufacturers are doing much better now, if your still concerned
get a extended warranty
Extended warranties are EXPENSIVE.
They are SHORT, typically 5 years or less.
Tha's a LONG way from the 36 years I have on my currently still-working
fridge.
And there's this disturbing paragraph in the warranty:
In the event that a repair part becomes unavailable during the term of
this Contract, Electrolux Warranty Corporation shall be excused from
performance hereunder, and will refund 100% of the purchase price of the
current Service Contract.
That says, "if it costs more to fix than you paid for the warranty, and
we choose not to fix it, we'll refund the cost of the warranty."
No, clearly in plain English, it doesn't say that at all.
I'm confused. You disagree, then repeat what I said???

I don;t see why you're confused. I made it clear that I agree that
extended warranties are usually not a good deal for the consumer. I
disagreed with you saying that the contract excerpt which you posted
says that the warranty company can just choose to not fix something
because it costs too much. In plain English, it does not say that.
It says if the necessary part is no longer available, then they won't
fix it and will refund all your warranty money.

You don't have any recourse if they CLAIM the part is unavailable.

Sure you do. Find out if the part is indeed still available. Easy
to do. If it is, then have a regular repair service get the part and
fix it. When they won't pay it, you have two choices. If the
cost of the repair is less than the amount of the refund and you feel
like you are ahead, then do nothing. If the cost of the repair is
more than the amount refunded, then send the bill to the warranty
company. When they refuse to pay it, take them to small claims for a
slam dunk case. Also report them to state/local consumer affairs
authorities.

Parts that fail frequently WILL become unavailable when they run out of
them and decide to discontinue production of the high-failure part...
not necessarily in that order.

Nonsense. Parts typically get discontinued over time due to
declining volume for the part because what they go into is rapidly
dwindling. Parts that fail frequently are exactly the parts that
manufacturers want to keep making and selling, because there is huge
margin in appliance parts. In all my life, I've never seen a
suitable replacement part be discontinued in the 5 year period of an
extended warranty for an appliance like you are talking about. If
there is some extraordinary failure rate or safety issue with some
part, I've always seen some alternate part available during the
reasonable life of a product. For example, door seals are a frequent
failure on refrigerators and I can still order those for a 23 year old
Frigidaire refrigerator. Or a few years ago, the thermal fuse on my
Insinkerator hot water dispenser blew out. The unit was only a
couple years old. The replacement part was a totally different
design, but a direct replacement.

If the damn things were reliable, they'd still have the 5-year warranty.
You only shorten the warranty period if you're losing money on it.

It says if

the part beomes unavailable, they refund 100% of the money you paid
for the service contract. I'm no fan of extended service contracts,
but trying to distort some contract to make it look like it says
something different isn't honest.
They don't fix it. They don't replace it. They don't give your money back.
They just say, "oops, here's your warranty cost back...bend over...sorry
for any inconvenience."
They make money on the warranty if it doesn't fail. And they revoke the
warranty if it does fail. Where do I get a job like that?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You're telling me what usually happens.
That's great if it happens to me.
I'm telling you that the wording of the warranty neuters it and
is unacceptable.

Most warranties have wording like, "If we can't fix it, we'll replace it
with an equivalent unit."

This one is more like your car insurance company telling you...
"Well, you know that guy you crushed with your car...there are no
replacement
parts for his missing legs...here's the $200 you paid us for the
liability policy...sorry for any inconvenience. Please call this
number to purchase a new policy"