On Jun 8, 9:16*am, Art Todesco wrote:
On 6/7/2012 9:21 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:



On Jun 7, 8:27 am, Art *wrote:
On 6/7/2012 7:31 AM, Doug wrote:

On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 13:05:49 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
* *wrote:

On Jun 6, 12:26 pm, "
* *wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 07:02:06 -0700 (PDT), * *wrote:
On Jun 4, 5:14 am, * *wrote:
Anyone have some real data on actual differences in drying times between
these types of washers?

We have owned front loaders for about 1-1/2 years after 40 years with
top loaders. *My guess is the front loaders use more time to wash and
dry but I cannot quantify. *The new machines have timer displays that
estimate wash/dry time when you start a load and then they count
down. *But we have noticed, especially with the dryer, that,
sometimes, *the last part of a load counts down much quicker than the
estimate. *In other words, the last 15 minutes might only take 8-10
minutes.

We have also noticed that when the dryer stops, it is done. *No
throwing a towel or sweatshirt back in to finish. *Wash and dry
quality is better than the older machines - but they were older.

I prefer most clothes come out a bit on the damp side. *Permanent pressed
clothes hang out better if they're hung up a tad damp. *This causes some
variance in how dry other things in the wash are.

One thing for certain. *The top load washer uses less water and
combined they use less energy. *After two month it was pretty clear
that our water and electric bills were lower. *There isn't much
variance in use because it is wife and I and we are retired.

As others have commented, you're comparing old-tech top-loaders to
front-loaders. *Some newer top loaders do a pretty good job of spinning water
out of clothes.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ron's comments in the paragraph that you responded to last was that
front loaders use less water. He didn't appear to compare spin speeds
or water extraction capabilities, at least not in that last paragraph.

How do the new top loaders compare to front loaders as far as water
usage? Do they use as much as the older top loaders or considerably
less?

I know that there is at least one top loader with a horizontal drum,
which would compare to a front loaders from a water usage perspective,
but my question is about the "normal" new top loaders.

My 3.5 yr old Whirlpool top loader has a sensor that detects how much
water to use based on your load. *I think it uses a lot less water
than the top loaders of say 10 plus years ago but I have no stats to
back that up right now.

In my case, using less water is not a good thing. *My GE front loader
uses very little water, but leave so much soap in the clothes, that I
itch when wearing them. *As I've said earlier in this long thread, I now
wash a load with the extra rinse and then do a complete 2nd wash (no
soap, except what comes out of the clothes) with extra rinse and even
with that, sometimes there is soap residue. *I think it happens when one
piece of clothes gets tangled in another, which happens a lot with this
machine.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you using HE detergent in the proper amounts?

Do you see lots of white foam when doing the initial wash?

I re-rinsed loads every now and then if I think they've sat too long
and have partially dried and I never get any soap residue.

Yes to the HE and always use the lowest amount. *Also, stuff just
doesn't come as clean as in our old top loader. *We use cloth napkins,
which of course, get grease on them. *It never comes out with this
machine. *We have taken to manually scrubbing with a bar of Fels-Naptha
soap, just like out parents used to do, and then putting them in the
washer. *This takes out the grease.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, it certainly sounds like your washer is the issue...or your
water.

I wouldn't swear off all front loaders based on your experience since
we're not hearing any similar complaints, at least not in this thread.

Having a washer that was not rinsing out the soap *and* not properly
cleaning the items is something I'd have trouble living with. With all
of the pre-cleaning plus having to re-wash/re-rinse the loads, any
advantage of a front loader (other than the higher spin speeds) is
basically eliminated.

If I had to go through all of that work the first thing I would have
done is contacted the manufacturer. If I didn't get satisfaction, I'd
put the washer on Craigslist and try something different. I know that
they are expensive and you'd never get your full money back, but that
kind of inconvenience is just not worth it.

I'd have to ask him the spelling. But, it sounds like no tracable relation.
Real shame, the guy in Rochester is a very nice guy. You'd do well to be
related to him. Or, he's missing out on a chance to be related to you?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Art Todesco" wrote in message
...
You any relation to Ron Todesco, from Rochester, NY? Used to be appliance
repair and sales guy. I may have spelled his name wrong.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org

Don't know Ron. Most Todescos spell it Tedesco or the plural, Tedeschi.
Actually, in Italian it means German, FWIW .... not much.

On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 20:05:03 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Jun 4, 9:19*pm, "Tomsic" wrote:
"Don Wiss" wrote in message

...

On Mon, 04 Jun 2012, Vic Smith wrote:

I can't say anything about front loaders, but some top-loaders can
have very high spin rates. *I have one, a GE. with an "extra spin"
option.
The knob has been set to that from day one.
And it spins like crazy.
So if you ever find your statistics, make sure you're not comparing
apples and oranges.

Yes. It would be hard to make a comparison. My front loader has a button
for extended spin. And then I have a choice of five spin speeds, plus no
spin. I max it out to minimize my drying time.

Don.www.donwiss.com(e-mail link at home page bottom).

Our front loader, now 9 years old, senses the load before it decides on a
spin speed. *I suppose that's to avoid damage to the machine. *Anyway, the
clothes come out fairly dry most of the time; but sometimes lage loads with
heavy fabrics are not well wrung out. *I usually remove the driest part of
the load and then have it spin again. *Compared to the previous *top loaders
that we've had, the front loader is faster, quieter, uses much less water
and detergent and overall does a better cleaning job.

Tomsic

I can fill my front loader to the top with stuff like shirts, socks
and a towel or two without any problem.

However, if I stuff it full of towels and/or blankets, it won't spin
fast enough to even get the water out of the tub. I'll agree that the
machine is protecting itself by not spinning the really heavy, water
logged loads.

My daughter came home from college last week and loaded up the machine
with a bunch of her towels and blankets. An hour later she sent me a
text, panicked that she had broken the washer since everything was
still really wet when the cycle was finished.

I had her take out half the load, set the machine on Drain and Spin,
and it cranked right up to 1100 RPM.


I wonder if that's what's going on with my sisters Whirlpool. When we
visit and use it what we consider a normal load that we would put in
our top loader comes out very damp in her front loader. Next time we
are there I'll have to try spin it in two separate batches.

O 20 year old washer... hope you can still get parts in the years to come
but at 3 loads a week, I don't blame you for keeping it. It should be
a no brainer with no water metered and .06 for electric. What state do
you pay just .06 for electricity? I thought Texas was the lowest or one
of them but here, I have to pay around 9 or more for electricity.

www.bchydro.com near Vancouver, Canada hydro electric

actually 6.8 cents lol

On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 06:40:47 -0500, "Doug" wrote:

On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 07:22:19 +0000 (UTC), mark
wrote:

Thanks for all the replies.

I think I will keep my 20 year old Inglis top loader. It's easy and
inexpensive to repair and the extra water extraction does not offer enough
savings. Water is not metered here so that is not an issue although I
conserve in other areas. Surprisingly, at 3 loads per week my estimated
electric cost for drying is only $25/year (.06/kwh) so there's not much to
save there.


20 year old washer... hope you can still get parts in the years to
come but at 3 loads a week, I don't blame you for keeping it. It
should be a no brainer with no water metered and .06 for electric.
What state do you pay just .06 for electricity? I thought Texas was
the lowest or one of them but here, I have to pay around 9 or more for
electricity.

Our rates (GA) are $.078/kWh ($.1065 750kWh) Summer and $.074/kWh ($.056
750kWh) Winter. Both plus $20 service charge.