How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Consumers like front-loaders because they save water and energy - and
get your clothes really clean. But many front-loading washers have
this annoying odor problem.

"Putrid, nasty, permeates the whole laundry room and basement," says
Dennis Hanson, who owns a front-loader.

Rae Lembersky, who also owns a front-loader, has the same problem.

So does Teresa Muench - and KOMO News was there when she got her first
look at the smelly bacteria growing inside her washer.

"Black gooey, smelly, slimy stuff," she says.

"It's definitely all around the tub, a little bit here and there,"
says a repairman who came to look at the problem.

For Rae Lembersky the smell was more than annoying. Because of a
medical condition, she needs to be very careful about contaminants in
her house.

"And it just gives me the willies," she says. "It's like 'eeech,'
cause I don't like the thought of mold."

"Imagine that you're in one of those movies where there's a swamp
monster, and it's that kind of swampy kind of musty sort of yucky
smell," she added.

Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300.

And this is a machine that was cleaned with and run with bleach and
hot water.

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

To find out what's causing the problem, KOMO News turned to Consumer
Reports. They've had so many complaints about smelly front-loaders the
editors now warn readers about it. ...

END EXCERPT

On Nov 2, 4:14*pm, mike wrote:
How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Consumers like front-loaders because they save water and energy - and
get your clothes really clean. But many front-loading washers have
this annoying odor problem.

"Putrid, nasty, permeates the whole laundry room and basement," says
Dennis Hanson, who owns a front-loader.

Rae Lembersky, who also owns a front-loader, has the same problem.

So does Teresa Muench - and KOMO News was there when she got her first
look at the smelly bacteria growing inside her washer.

"Black gooey, smelly, slimy stuff," she says.

"It's definitely all around the tub, a little bit here and there,"
says a repairman who came to look at the problem.

For Rae Lembersky the smell was more than annoying. Because of a
medical condition, she needs to be very careful about contaminants in
her house.

"And it just gives me the willies," she says. "It's like 'eeech,'
cause I don't like the thought of mold."

"Imagine that you're in one of those movies where there's a swamp
monster, and it's that kind of swampy kind of musty sort of yucky
smell," she added.

Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300.

And this is a machine that was cleaned with and run with bleach and
hot water.

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

To find out what's causing the problem, KOMO News turned to Consumer
Reports. They've had so many complaints about smelly front-loaders the
editors now warn readers about it. ...

END EXCERPT

"It's a problem for all front-loaders"

So here's the issue - when I see something in an article that I know
is not true, especially one written in "panic prose", I have to
discount the entire article.

I have a front loader, I don't have mold, so "It's a problem for all
front-loaders" is simply not true. My laundry doesn't stink either.

"Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and
replace the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300."

I wonder how often he plans on doing that...

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:14:30 -0800, mike wrote:
How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

Well, if it's such an issue it makes me ask the question - what the heck
are they doing with the USA ones that they aren't doing in models for
other countries where front-loaders have been the norm for decades?
Front-loaders do seem to be relatively "new tech" to North America (until
I moved over here I hadn't seen a top-loader* in over 20 years), but it's
not like they're new to the planet and I've never known front-loading
machines have anything like the problems mentioned.

* I'm not knocking them, though. I like the fact they're easily
repairable, the spares availability is high - and from a usage point of
view that you can add stuff after the machine's already running.

So - design fault in US designs? Different usage pattern to
other countries (often cold-water washes rather than hot, maybe)?
Different location (lots more machines in basements in the US I bet; maybe
they take longer to dry out)? Different formulation for the detergent used
in the US compared to other countries?

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

No, it's most definitely not.

curious...

cheers

Jules

On Nov 2, 1:56*pm, "Jon Danniken"
wrote:
mike wrote:

Maybe he was using a mild hyperbole. *For example, maybe he meant to
indicate that it's a common problem for all models in general, not
that it's currently affecting 100% of units.

Maybe next time you should post your *own* **** instead of parroting
something you read somewhere else.

Kids these days!

Jon

And if I posted it in my own words, another jackass would say "How do
you know? Where's your evidence?" I can't please all the jackasses
all the time. Maybe next time.

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:46:26 -0800, mike wrote:

On Nov 2, 1:37Â*pm, Jules
wrote:


"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

No, it's most definitely not.

Maybe he was using a mild hyperbole. For example, maybe he meant to
indicate that it's a common problem for all models in general, not
that it's currently affecting 100% of units.

Hmm, maybe. The article just sounds odd, because surely if the picture was
as bad as claimed then there'd be recalls everywhere, scrapping of entire
product lines as not being fit for purpose etc. and to my knowledge that's
not happening. I don't have experience of *US* front-loaders, but 30-odd
years of owning (and knowing people with) front-loaders overseas, and I've
never seen anything like what's claimed, which makes it even more puzzling.

Like any rubber seals that get wet I've seen machines develop a few
spots here and there, but nothing remotely like "permeates the whole
laundry room and basement" or "It's definitely all around the tub".

Maybe the article really means "It's a problem for all front-loaders owned
by the people who wrote in when asked 'do you have a bacteria problem with
your front-loading machine'", which is perhaps more believable - but
even then the comments all seem rather sensationalist to me... :-)

It'd be interesting to get a few more actual facts behind the story,
anyway.

cheers

Jules

"Jim Elbrecht" wrote in message
...
Jules wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:14:30 -0800, mike wrote:
-snip-
"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

No, it's most definitely not.


Yeah, Wiseman isn't so wise on that count. I *hate* our front
loader-- but I can't say it literally stinks.

I also don't think it gets clothes any cleaner than our 25 yr old
Whirlpool top loader did. [and more importantly, that's one of the few
things my wife and I agree on]

It *might* save water. But it also won't take nearly a large a load
as our old machine- so we do more loads.


And, you can't dye fabric in a front loader since you must agitate the dye
in hot water in the machine before adding the fabric. You can't open a front
loader when there's water in it. This might not be a problem for most
people, but I dye fabric at least once a week for my business.

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:30:20 -0600, Jules wrote:
It'd be interesting to get a few more actual facts behind the story,
anyway.

On the back of that, the whole article seems to be he

http://www.komonews.com/news/consumer/68408867.html

.... there's a little bit more beyond what the OP quoted.

Most of that Consumer Reports place mentioned is a pay site, but I did
spot some useful info on the forums (which are freely accessible):

http://forums.consumerreports.org/n/...washers&tid=12

(watch for URL wrapping across lines)

I've never heard of the leaving the door open thing before, but there does
look to be lots of other relevant advice there - and it all starts to
"smell" like a user problem :-) (and down to unfamiliarity with the
tech rather than inherent problems with the machines themselves).

I've no vested interest in top-loaders - IME they do cost less to run,
run quieter and are kinder to clothes than top-loaders, but they also
can't be opened mid-cycle, spares cost more, and failures of door seals
can get messy :-) (power cuts are a PITA too because clothes have to just
sit there until the power comes back on). Apples and oranges...

Front-loaders also seem to be *extremely* over-priced in the US (30%
or more) from what I've seen, so I suspect folk are being screwed by the
manufacturers right now and will be for a few years to come until they
lower prices in line with overseas markets.

cheers

Jules

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:06:23 -0600, Jules
wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:30:20 -0600, Jules wrote:
It'd be interesting to get a few more actual facts behind the story,
anyway.

On the back of that, the whole article seems to be he

http://www.komonews.com/news/consumer/68408867.html

... there's a little bit more beyond what the OP quoted.

Most of that Consumer Reports place mentioned is a pay site, but I did
spot some useful info on the forums (which are freely accessible):

http://forums.consumerreports.org/n/...washers&tid=12

(watch for URL wrapping across lines)

I've never heard of the leaving the door open thing before, but there does
look to be lots of other relevant advice there - and it all starts to
"smell" like a user problem :-) (and down to unfamiliarity with the
tech rather than inherent problems with the machines themselves).

I've no vested interest in top-loaders - IME they do cost less to run,
run quieter and are kinder to clothes than top-loaders, but they also
can't be opened mid-cycle, spares cost more, and failures of door seals
can get messy :-) (power cuts are a PITA too because clothes have to just
sit there until the power comes back on). Apples and oranges...

Front-loaders also seem to be *extremely* over-priced in the US (30%
or more) from what I've seen, so I suspect folk are being screwed by the
manufacturers right now and will be for a few years to come until they
lower prices in line with overseas markets.

cheers

Jules

My vote is for the Fisher & Paykel top loader. It has all the
advantages of the front loader without the price. It uses half the
normal amount of soap, and doesn't require "special" soap like many
front loaders. It uses a lot less water than a normal top loader, and
has the super fast spin cycle like a front loader so the clothes are
almost dry when you take them out. That saves even more money, because
the dryer doesn't have to run nearly as long to dry them. All of the
functions except draining are accomplished by one computer controlled
direct drive motor that needs no gears, belts or transmissions.

My Fisher & Paykel finally needed repair after about 10 years of daily
use. The separate pump for the drain function developed a slight leak
that soaked and corroded its motor. Got a new motor at the appliance
store for $79. You don't even need any tools to replace it. Tip the
washer on it's front, twist and pull the old pump out. Just push in
and twist to install the new pump. 10 minutes, if that, and I was back
in business.

On Nov 2, 5:08*pm, Jim Elbrecht wrote:

It *might* save water. * But it also won't take nearly a large a load
as our old machine- so we do more loads.

One of the main advantages of front loaders is that they wash larger
loads per cu. ft., like, 30% larger.

You can literally "stuff" a front loader. If you can cram a comforter
in there, chances are it'll wash, as opposed to a top loader where
it'll just get wet, soapy, and won't rinse for squat.

Commercial machines are measured by load capacity in pounds. I don't
know why consumer-grade machines are rated by cu. ft.
-----

- gpsman

On Nov 2, 3:14*pm, mike wrote:
How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Consumers like front-loaders because they save water and energy - and
get your clothes really clean. But many front-loading washers have
this annoying odor problem.

"Putrid, nasty, permeates the whole laundry room and basement," says
Dennis Hanson, who owns a front-loader.

Rae Lembersky, who also owns a front-loader, has the same problem.

So does Teresa Muench - and KOMO News was there when she got her first
look at the smelly bacteria growing inside her washer.

"Black gooey, smelly, slimy stuff," she says.

"It's definitely all around the tub, a little bit here and there,"
says a repairman who came to look at the problem.

For Rae Lembersky the smell was more than annoying. Because of a
medical condition, she needs to be very careful about contaminants in
her house.

"And it just gives me the willies," she says. "It's like 'eeech,'
cause I don't like the thought of mold."

"Imagine that you're in one of those movies where there's a swamp
monster, and it's that kind of swampy kind of musty sort of yucky
smell," she added.

Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300.

And this is a machine that was cleaned with and run with bleach and
hot water.

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

To find out what's causing the problem, KOMO News turned to Consumer
Reports. They've had so many complaints about smelly front-loaders the
editors now warn readers about it. ...

END EXCERPT

When we first got our front loader (Neptune) I did notice a slight
odor, like light mildew. We started adding a little baking soda to
each load and it went away never to return. It has already payed for
itself in propane, between the hot water and the dryer, washing
clothes with my old setup was my second biggest user, after heating
the house. We have had it for about 5 years & would replace it with
another in a heartbeat. though the Fisher & Paykel top loader looks
interesting if it will do the big stuff. We regularly do our king size
comforters & it handles them with ease.

On Nov 2, 5:08*pm, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
Jules wrote:
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:14:30 -0800, mike wrote:
-snip-
"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

No, it's most definitely not.

Yeah, Wiseman isn't so wise on that count. * I *hate* our front
loader-- but I can't say it literally stinks.

I also don't think it gets clothes any cleaner than our 25 yr old
Whirlpool top loader did. [and more importantly, that's one of the few
things my wife and I agree on]

It *might* save water. * But it also won't take nearly a large a load
as our old machine- so we do more loads.

Jim

"It *might* save water. But it also won't take nearly a large a
load as our old machine- so we do more loads."


I like to hear what you are comparing. It's a common understanding
that most front loaders take comparable sized - or larger - loads as
top loaders.

I found this at:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/cons...ts/alt070.shtm

"Typically, front-loaders use less water — from one-third to one-half
the amount that top-loaders require"

Therefore you'd have to be doing 2 - 3 times as many loads to not be
saving water. I be very suprised to hear that your front loader only
fits half the amount of clothes as your old top loader - unless of
course if you went from some kind of super-ginormous top loader to a
mini apartment sized front loader.

You do know that you can fill a front loader all the way to the top of
the drum right?

On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:29:11 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Nov 2, 4:14?pm, mike wrote:
How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Consumers like front-loaders because they save water and energy - and
get your clothes really clean. But many front-loading washers have
this annoying odor problem.

"Putrid, nasty, permeates the whole laundry room and basement," says
Dennis Hanson, who owns a front-loader.

Rae Lembersky, who also owns a front-loader, has the same problem.

So does Teresa Muench - and KOMO News was there when she got her first
look at the smelly bacteria growing inside her washer.

"Black gooey, smelly, slimy stuff," she says.

"It's definitely all around the tub, a little bit here and there,"
says a repairman who came to look at the problem.

For Rae Lembersky the smell was more than annoying. Because of a
medical condition, she needs to be very careful about contaminants in
her house.

"And it just gives me the willies," she says. "It's like 'eeech,'
cause I don't like the thought of mold."

"Imagine that you're in one of those movies where there's a swamp
monster, and it's that kind of swampy kind of musty sort of yucky
smell," she added.

Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300.

And this is a machine that was cleaned with and run with bleach and
hot water.

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

To find out what's causing the problem, KOMO News turned to Consumer
Reports. They've had so many complaints about smelly front-loaders the
editors now warn readers about it. ...

END EXCERPT

"It's a problem for all front-loaders"

So here's the issue - when I see something in an article that I know
is not true, especially one written in "panic prose", I have to
discount the entire article.

I have a front loader, I don't have mold, so "It's a problem for all
front-loaders" is simply not true. My laundry doesn't stink either.

I have one too. 3 friends of mine have them too. I've been using
them at laundromats for 40 years. Never once seen mold on any of them.

On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:00:37 -0500, h wrote:

.... you can't dye fabric in a front loader since you must agitate the dye
in hot water in the machine before adding the fabric. You can't open a front
loader when there's water in it. This might not be a problem for most
....

bull****. They don't fill to the level of the door.

On Nov 3, 12:53*am, AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 18:00:37 -0500, h wrote:

... you can't dye fabric in a front loader since you must agitate the dyein hot water in the machine before adding the fabric. You can't open a front
loader when there's water in it. This might not be a problem for most

...

bull****. *They don't fill to the level of the door.

Maybe true, so little water not up to the door.
But the front loader we used in during last few years in Middle East
had a timer circuit that prevented the door from being opened.
One 'work around' when one found it necessary to add something
additional to the load was to unplug the machine and wait until the
machine allowed the door to open.
Add the item/s close the door and plug in. The timer switch would
reset and away it would go. Thorough wash, rather slow and loads were
smaller. Our living unit did not have a dryer and too dusty to dry
outside! We added a large full size US made dryer afterwards and
vented it outside; several front loader washes, plus anything hand
washed and bung it into the dryer!
But have to agree that the top loader much more suitable for dying.
But then I can recall dying stuff in big saucepan on top of a gas
stove, and stirring it with a wooden stick!
At end of WWII my Dad modified and then dyed dark brown a pair of
khaki ex-army pants that he wore for years as senior mathematics
master at school. He did a good job on them too!

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:19:36 -0500, salty wrote:
My vote is for the Fisher & Paykel top loader.
[snippage]


Thanks for that - I'll definitely keep that in mind (I remember Fisher &
Paykel being big in NZ and highly rated, too).

I'm not really sold on any particular technology (we're on a private well
so it doesn't really matter so much how much the machine uses and spits
out again) but I think it'll be a few years before our existing top-loader
becomes uneconomical to maintain....

It has all the
advantages of the front loader without the price.

I think the F-L prices will come down once people realise that they're
being screwed.

the dryer doesn't have to run nearly as long to dry them.

It's not a combined washer/drier* is it? I must say I don't like those
much - I've known a few folk who've had them and they seem much more prone
to failure than individual units.

* although I don't remember ever seeing a top-loading drier, so presumably
not.

cheers

Jules

mike wrote:
How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Long long ago in a far off laundry room I had a new top loader that
smelled after it sat for days, sometimes a week unused. I ran it with a
hell of a lot of chlorine bleach then always left the lid open often
emptying it. It never smelled again. I can however see oneself
bruising their knees on the open door of a front loader.

DerbyDad03 wrote:

You do know that you can fill a front loader all the way to the top of
the drum right?

Yes I know. On my old washer I adjusted the load size sensor so it
filled as high as it could without overflowing (it takes one overflow to
learn the limit). All three load sizes then used more water but I very
seldom did small loads. On my current washer that adjustment doesn't
work as well, so if doing a load larger then it is supposed to handle,
I'll hold the "load size" knob between medium and super and let it fill
as high as it can without overflowing. Again, it takes on overflow to
know it's limit. Has always worked great for me.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:17:15 -0500, salty wrote:
FL machines are not new. My aunt had one in the 1950's. They will
always have premium prices. I just feel that the F&P at half the price
of a typical FL is as good or better.

Yeah, top-loaders will always be cheaper - but I've seen a lot of
front-loaders for sale at the $800-$1000 mark even though they run to the
equivalent of $400-$600 in other countries. I don't know if US
manufacturers are trying to do the right thing and build US ones locally
and hence there are high start-up costs, or if they're building 'em all
in China nad puttting a high mark-up on the tag because people are
prepared to pay it.

Either way I think they'll drop a few hundred bucks in the next few years
as they become more accepted here.

* although I don't remember ever seeing a top-loading drier, so
presumably not.

Fisher & Paykel has a top loading Dryer, too! Makes transferring clothes
from the washer a lot easier.

I can imagine.

That's one braindead thing I've found about most front-loaders; they
don't let you choose* which side you want the door hinges on - and the
drier and washer hinges are usually on the same side for a given set by
the same manufacturer, so there's always a door getting in the way when
you just want to transfer clothes across.

* either at ordering time, or just by drilling the necessary mount
points for either so that a repairman or DIYer could order any
necessary release cables etc. and do the job "in the field".

"Jules" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:30:20 -0600, Jules wrote:
It'd be interesting to get a few more actual facts behind the story,
anyway.

On the back of that, the whole article seems to be he

http://www.komonews.com/news/consumer/68408867.html

... there's a little bit more beyond what the OP quoted.

Most of that Consumer Reports place mentioned is a pay site, but I did
spot some useful info on the forums (which are freely accessible):

http://forums.consumerreports.org/n/...washers&tid=12

(watch for URL wrapping across lines)

I've never heard of the leaving the door open thing before, but there does
look to be lots of other relevant advice there - and it all starts to
"smell" like a user problem :-) (and down to unfamiliarity with the
tech rather than inherent problems with the machines themselves).

I've no vested interest in top-loaders - IME they do cost less to run,
run quieter and are kinder to clothes than top-loaders, but they also
can't be opened mid-cycle, spares cost more, and failures of door seals
can get messy :-) (power cuts are a PITA too because clothes have to just
sit there until the power comes back on). Apples and oranges...

Front-loaders also seem to be *extremely* over-priced in the US (30%
or more) from what I've seen, so I suspect folk are being screwed by the
manufacturers right now and will be for a few years to come until they
lower prices in line with overseas markets.

Consumers Reports reviewed front loaders a while back. iirc, Frigidaire was
top rated, at about half the price of kenmore, LG, etc.

Front loaders, compared to traditional top loaders, are extraordinary
money/resource savers, from every point of view -- seals notwithstanding.
I overpaid for a Miele, and thought it was defective, it uses so little
water -- I'd be surprised if it used 5 gal. A top-loader can use 80 gal,
and flood out septic systems.
I didn't find out about CR's Frigidaire review until after I bought the
Miele.... of course.

A major part of the FL economy, as someone alluded to, is the spin cycle,
which leaves the clothes near-dry, drastically reducing the drying time --
1/2 to 1/4 -- which is the major consumption of raw energy in the
laundering process.
--
EA


cheers

Jules

"Panic Prose" -- a keeper!!

Who originated that phrase?

"Panic Narrative"?? All these cop/chase/rescue videos, where every effing
moment verges on catastrophe -- effing Stacy Keach's new vocation,
apparently, after jail/coke rehab.

Really, so tedious after a while.

--
EA


"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
...
On Nov 2, 4:14 pm, mike wrote:
How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Consumers like front-loaders because they save water and energy - and
get your clothes really clean. But many front-loading washers have
this annoying odor problem.

"Putrid, nasty, permeates the whole laundry room and basement," says
Dennis Hanson, who owns a front-loader.

Rae Lembersky, who also owns a front-loader, has the same problem.

So does Teresa Muench - and KOMO News was there when she got her first
look at the smelly bacteria growing inside her washer.

"Black gooey, smelly, slimy stuff," she says.

"It's definitely all around the tub, a little bit here and there,"
says a repairman who came to look at the problem.

For Rae Lembersky the smell was more than annoying. Because of a
medical condition, she needs to be very careful about contaminants in
her house.

"And it just gives me the willies," she says. "It's like 'eeech,'
cause I don't like the thought of mold."

"Imagine that you're in one of those movies where there's a swamp
monster, and it's that kind of swampy kind of musty sort of yucky
smell," she added.

Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300.

And this is a machine that was cleaned with and run with bleach and
hot water.

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

To find out what's causing the problem, KOMO News turned to Consumer
Reports. They've had so many complaints about smelly front-loaders the
editors now warn readers about it. ...

END EXCERPT

"It's a problem for all front-loaders"

So here's the issue - when I see something in an article that I know
is not true, especially one written in "panic prose", I have to
discount the entire article.

I have a front loader, I don't have mold, so "It's a problem for all
front-loaders" is simply not true. My laundry doesn't stink either.

"Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and
replace the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300."

I wonder how often he plans on doing that...

On Nov 3, 10:06*am, Tony wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:

You do know that you can fill a front loader all the way to the top of
the drum right?

Yes I know. *On my old washer I adjusted the load size sensor so it
filled as high as it could without overflowing (it takes one overflow to
learn the limit). *All three load sizes then used more water but I very
seldom did small loads. *On my current washer that adjustment doesn't
work as well, so if doing a load larger then it is supposed to handle,
I'll hold the "load size" knob between medium and super and let it fill
as high as it can without overflowing. *Again, it takes on overflow to
know it's limit. *Has always worked great for me.

Not that it matters, but my question wasn't for you...it was for Jim
who claimed his front loader did smaller loads than his top loader.

Anyway, my washer is next to my utility sink. I keep a 4' length of
garden hose with a spray nozzle near the sink for washing coolers, the
dogs, etc.

When we had a top loader and I wanted to overfill it, I just ran more
water into it from the hose. Yes, I had to be there for the rinse
cycle also, but that was rarely an issue.

P.S. The short garden hose also goes camping with us. You can fill the
5 gallon water containers while they're on the ground instead of
trying to hold them up under the gushing output of the campground
spigots.

On Nov 3, 11:15*am, "Existential Angst"
wrote:
"Panic Prose" -- a keeper!!

Who originated that phrase?

"Panic Narrative"?? * All these cop/chase/rescue videos, where every effing
moment verges on catastrophe -- effing Stacy Keach's new vocation,
apparently, after jail/coke rehab.

Really, so tedious after a while.

--
EA

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

...
On Nov 2, 4:14 pm, mike wrote:





How would you like to pay top dollar for a new washing machine - only
to have it stink up your laundry room?

It's happening to lots of people who have a front-loading washer. KOMO
News Problem Solver Herb Weisbaum spent the last few weeks trying to
find out what's causing this smelly problem.

Consumers like front-loaders because they save water and energy - and
get your clothes really clean. But many front-loading washers have
this annoying odor problem.

"Putrid, nasty, permeates the whole laundry room and basement," says
Dennis Hanson, who owns a front-loader.

Rae Lembersky, who also owns a front-loader, has the same problem.

So does Teresa Muench - and KOMO News was there when she got her first
look at the smelly bacteria growing inside her washer.

"Black gooey, smelly, slimy stuff," she says.

"It's definitely all around the tub, a little bit here and there,"
says a repairman who came to look at the problem.

For Rae Lembersky the smell was more than annoying. Because of a
medical condition, she needs to be very careful about contaminants in
her house.

"And it just gives me the willies," she says. "It's like 'eeech,'
cause I don't like the thought of mold."

"Imagine that you're in one of those movies where there's a swamp
monster, and it's that kind of swampy kind of musty sort of yucky
smell," she added.

Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300.

And this is a machine that was cleaned with and run with bleach and
hot water.

"It's a problem for all front-loaders," Wiseman said.

To find out what's causing the problem, KOMO News turned to Consumer
Reports. They've had so many complaints about smelly front-loaders the
editors now warn readers about it. ...

END EXCERPT

"It's a problem for all front-loaders"

So here's the issue - when I see something in an article that I know
is not true, especially one written in "panic prose", I have to
discount the entire article.

I have a front loader, I don't have mold, so "It's a problem for all
front-loaders" is simply not true. My laundry doesn't stink either.

"Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and
replace the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300."

I wonder how often he plans on doing that...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

""Panic Prose" -- a keeper!! Who originated that phrase?"

As far as I know, it was me.

At least I can say that I've never heard it before so if somebody has
used it before me, I didn't willfully steal it.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:15:45 -0800, DerbyDad03 wrote:
P.S. The short garden hose also goes camping with us. You can fill the
5 gallon water containers while they're on the ground instead of
trying to hold them up under the gushing output of the campground
spigots.

Heck, that one triggered a memory of doing that at campsites when I was
aged around 7 or 8. Good tip, as it was a right pain in the butt (I used
to return with as much water on me as I got in the container I think :-)

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:29:11 -0800, DerbyDad03 wrote:
"It's a problem for all front-loaders"

So here's the issue - when I see something in an article that I know
is not true, especially one written in "panic prose", I have to
discount the entire article.

I start to suspect that the guy who wrote it was paid a handsome amount
for writing exactly what he did, to be honest.

"Desperate for relief, Rae hired Scott Wiseman to remove and replace
the disgusting rubber gasket. It cost $300."

I wonder how often he plans on doing that...

The gaskets seem to run to about $100, so maybe he'll learn to do it
himself and then he can do it three times as often.

On Nov 3, 3:46*pm, Jules
wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:15:45 -0800, DerbyDad03 wrote:
P.S. The short garden hose also goes camping with us. You can fill the
5 gallon water containers while they're on the ground instead of
trying to hold them up under the gushing output of the campground
spigots.

Heck, that one triggered a memory of doing that at campsites when I was
aged around 7 or 8. Good tip, as it was a right pain in the butt (I used
to return with as much water on me as I got in the container I think :-)

You could carry 5 gallons of water when you were 7?

Were you the school yard bully or the protector of all things meeker?

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:17:06 -0800, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Heck, that one triggered a memory of doing that at campsites when I was
aged around 7 or 8. Good tip, as it was a right pain in the butt (I used
to return with as much water on me as I got in the container I think :-)

You could carry 5 gallons of water when you were 7?

Yeah, just, with both hands...

These were Imperial (not US) gallons, so 50 pounds, which was about the
same as a standard sack of potatoes, and we used to be able to move them
around on the farm (just for the sake of trying, not because we were told
to - funny the crap you see adults doing and try and emulate as a kid)

I'd never really thought about it being anything special before. Maybe it
was just one of those mind over matter things... :-)

Were you the school yard bully or the protector of all things meeker?

No, I was usually the one bending the rules, or getting in trouble when I
got found out ;-)

Y'know I think I only ever got in a real fight once, and we both came out
about even. Other than that, never got myself beaten up and never did any
beating up either...

cheers

Jules

On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:55:37 -0800 (PST), DerbyDad03
wrote:
-snip-

It *might* save water. * But it also won't take nearly a large a load
as our old machine- so we do more loads.

Jim

"It *might* save water. But it also won't take nearly a large a
load as our old machine- so we do more loads."


I like to hear what you are comparing. It's a common understanding
that most front loaders take comparable sized - or larger - loads as
top loaders.

My old one was a Whirlpool LSR7133KQO. My frontloader is a
Frigidaire 6000 or 7000 series. I can't get to the washer- and though
I have an ownersguide, a repair manual, an operating manual, and 3
other pdf's on my computer- the best I can do on a model is "6000 &
7000".

My comparison of load size is because I do the 'dump and wash'. The
old washer could take my entire large hamper in a single gulp. I
have to drag all the clothes up out of the hamper and into the door of
the front loader. If the hamper is more than 3/4 full I can't cram
all those clothes in there no matter what I do.

I found this at:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/cons...ts/alt070.shtm

"Typically, front-loaders use less water — from one-third to one-half
the amount that top-loaders require"

Therefore you'd have to be doing 2 - 3 times as many loads to not be
saving water. I be very suprised to hear that your front loader only
fits half the amount of clothes as your old top loader - unless of
course if you went from some kind of super-ginormous top loader to a
mini apartment sized front loader.

They both take up the same space- Actually the front loader takes up
more because I put it on a pedestal to try to save some back-aches.


You do know that you can fill a front loader all the way to the top of
the drum right?

If I was a little more agile I'd stomp the clothes down-- trust me, I
fill it.

Jim

On Nov 3, 5:04*pm, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:55:37 -0800 (PST), wrote:

-snip-



It *might* save water. * But it also won't take nearly a large a load
as our old machine- so we do more loads.

Jim

"It *might* save water. * But it also won't take nearly a large a
load as our old machine- so we do more loads."

I like to hear what you are comparing. It's a common understanding
that most front loaders take comparable sized - or larger - loads as
top loaders.

My old one was a Whirlpool LSR7133KQO. * My frontloader is a
Frigidaire 6000 or 7000 series. *I can't get to the washer- and though
I have an ownersguide, a repair manual, an operating manual, and 3
other pdf's on my computer- the best I can do on a model is "6000 &
7000".

I have a Frigidaire GLTF2940ES, 3.5 cu ft capacity. It's my
understanding that that's a true 3.5 cu ft since there is no agitator,
as opposed to a 3.5 top loader where the agitator volume is not
subtracted from the capacity specs.


My comparison of load size is because I do the 'dump and wash'. *The
old washer could take my entire large hamper in a single gulp. * * I
have to drag all the clothes up out of the hamper and into the door of
the front loader. * If the hamper is more than 3/4 full I can't cram
all those clothes in there no matter what I do.



I found this at:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/cons...ts/alt070.shtm

"Typically, front-loaders use less water — from one-third to one-half
the amount that top-loaders require"

Therefore you'd have to be doing 2 - 3 times as many loads to not be
saving water. I be very surprised to hear that your front loader only
fits half the amount of clothes as your old top loader - unless of
course if you went from some kind of super-ginormous top loader to a
mini apartment sized front loader.

They both take up the same space- Actually the front loader takes up
more because I put it on a pedestal to try to save some back-aches.


But that doesn't address my comment. Unless you are doing 2 - 3 times
the number of loads as before you have to be saving water since each
load uses 1/3 to 1/2 less.

In fact, since you said earlier "If the hamper is more than 3/4
full..." which means that you're doing roughly 4 loads for every 3
that you used to do. At 1/3 to 1/2 the water savings per load, you are
definitely saving water.

You do know that you can fill a front loader all the way to the top of
the drum right?

If I was a little more agile I'd stomp the clothes down-- trust me, I
fill it.

Now that's a sight I'd like to see! :-)

Jim