Not DIY, but of the ngs I read, this is the one with the most people
who are clued-in to this kind of thing.

The washing machine looks like it might be on its last legs (I'm not
complaining, it was a reconditioned fifty-quid job three years ago)
and I'm looking at the possibility of buying a large-volume one.
There are two in particular that are under consideration.

One is the Whirlpool LSQ8033 - a top-loader, costing less than £400.
I know top-loaders are generally less efficient; I can't find
detailed energy information on this one - but it takes a load of 8.2
kg and is cheap for that size of load.

The other is the Whirlpool Dreamspace AWM9000. It's a front-loader,
costing about 60% more. Takes 9 kg. Rated AAA or ABB, depending on
where I look :-\

Now, the questions. How much is an energy-efficient model likely to
save me? We're paying 11.2p/kwh in electricity, water isn't metered.
With a bigger washer, that means fewer loads - currently with a 5ish
kg machine, we probably average about nine loads a week. Is it worth
paying the extra for the front-loader? I've used both kinds and have
a slight preference for the front-loading kind, but only slight.

I'm not married to the idea of a Whirlpool, btw - it's just these
seem the best available options. The only real criteria are large
volume and price - and that it can be delivered to Northern Ireland
without costing a fortune.

TIA

--
KVL

KVL wrote:
Not DIY, but of the ngs I read, this is the one with the most people
who are clued-in to this kind of thing.

The washing machine looks like it might be on its last legs (I'm not
complaining, it was a reconditioned fifty-quid job three years ago)
and I'm looking at the possibility of buying a large-volume one.
There are two in particular that are under consideration.

One is the Whirlpool LSQ8033 - a top-loader, costing less than £400.
I know top-loaders are generally less efficient; I can't find
detailed energy information on this one - but it takes a load of 8.2
kg and is cheap for that size of load.

The other is the Whirlpool Dreamspace AWM9000. It's a front-loader,
costing about 60% more. Takes 9 kg. Rated AAA or ABB, depending on
where I look :-\

Now, the questions. How much is an energy-efficient model likely to
save me? We're paying 11.2p/kwh in electricity, water isn't metered.
With a bigger washer, that means fewer loads - currently with a 5ish
kg machine, we probably average about nine loads a week. Is it worth
paying the extra for the front-loader? I've used both kinds and have
a slight preference for the front-loading kind, but only slight.

I'm not married to the idea of a Whirlpool, btw - it's just these
seem the best available options. The only real criteria are large
volume and price - and that it can be delivered to Northern Ireland
without costing a fortune.

TIA

Only thing I can add is stay away from traditional type top loaders,
they use many times as much water thus many times as much energy.



NT

On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:07:29 +0100, KVL wrote:

Not DIY, but of the ngs I read, this is the one with the most people
who are clued-in to this kind of thing.

The washing machine looks like it might be on its last legs (I'm not
complaining, it was a reconditioned fifty-quid job three years ago)
and I'm looking at the possibility of buying a large-volume one.
There are two in particular that are under consideration.

One is the Whirlpool LSQ8033 - a top-loader, costing less than £400.
I know top-loaders are generally less efficient; I can't find
detailed energy information on this one - but it takes a load of 8.2
kg and is cheap for that size of load.

The other is the Whirlpool Dreamspace AWM9000. It's a front-loader,
costing about 60% more. Takes 9 kg. Rated AAA or ABB, depending on
where I look :-\

Now, the questions. How much is an energy-efficient model likely to
save me? We're paying 11.2p/kwh in electricity, water isn't metered.
With a bigger washer, that means fewer loads - currently with a 5ish
kg machine, we probably average about nine loads a week. Is it worth
paying the extra for the front-loader? I've used both kinds and have
a slight preference for the front-loading kind, but only slight.

I'm not married to the idea of a Whirlpool, btw - it's just these
seem the best available options. The only real criteria are large
volume and price - and that it can be delivered to Northern Ireland
without costing a fortune.

Have a look at the Bosch Maxx range -- they take a larger load than
average for front loaders.

Mark

In article ,
says...
Have a look at the Bosch Maxx range -- they take a larger load than
average for front loaders.

It looks like only one of that range takes more than 6kg - the WBB
24759 Logixx 1200 - and it's no more energy-efficient than the
Whirlpool, and comes in at about £80 more.


--
KVL

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:31:45 +0100, KVL wrote:

In article ,
says...
Have a look at the Bosch Maxx range -- they take a larger load than
average for front loaders.

It looks like only one of that range takes more than 6kg - the WBB
24759 Logixx 1200 - and it's no more energy-efficient than the
Whirlpool, and comes in at about £80 more.

According to "Which?" magazine Bosch are a more reliable brand. If
this is really true then the extra could be worth it. We have an old
Bosch Maxx and it's never gone wrong despite being used every day for
many years (now where's that wood I need to touch now ;-)

Mark