Hi all,

Another washing machine question!

After a recent post and deciding top get a washing machine not a
washer/drier



I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!



I realise a 1400 spin will get clothes drier so should be better.



Can anyone advice mo on this please?

Mick.

In message , Mick.
wrote
I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!

Despite the hype, a machine that spins at 1400 rpm is unlikely to get
clothes significantly drier than one that spins at 1000 rpm. In my
experience with a couple of Hotpoint machines, the motor brushes and
main bearing wear out quicker on the faster spin machines.

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 12/06/2010 11:36, Mick. wrote:
Hi all,

Another washing machine question!

After a recent post and deciding top get a washing machine not a
washer/drier



I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!

I had a 1400 spin Bosch washing machine in my old flat. It's over 6
years old and still working. It was (and probably still is) very quiet.
I have a 1400 spin washing machine in my new house. I haven't noticed
any excessive noise but it's in the garage so noise is less of an issue
and it's less than a year old so I cannot comment on longevity.

If you get a 1400 spin and it's too noisy you have the option to turn it
down to 1200 when/if noise is a problem.

In article ,
Alan writes:
In message , Mick.
wrote
I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!

Despite the hype, a machine that spins at 1400 rpm is unlikely to get
clothes significantly drier than one that spins at 1000 rpm. In my

Actually, it makes an enormous difference - at 1400 RPM, the force
on the water during spinning is nearly doubled, as it's proportional
to the angular velocity squared. It's also proportional to the drum
radius (but only linearly so that's not such a significant factor).

In any case, all machines now have to carry a rating on how well the
spin works, so you can just look at that.

experience with a couple of Hotpoint machines, the motor brushes and
main bearing wear out quicker on the faster spin machines.

My 1400 RPM hotpoint is just about worn out now, after 25 years.
Can't really complain at that!

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:36:46 +0100, Mick. wrote:

Hi all,

Another washing machine question!

After a recent post and deciding top get a washing machine not a
washer/drier



I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!



I realise a 1400 spin will get clothes drier so should be better.



Can anyone advice mo on this please?

Mick.

We have a Hotpoint 1600 washer, on the programmes that suit the majority of
clothes, the maximum speed is only 800 anyway.

SteveW

On Jun 12, 2:21 pm, Steve Walker wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:36:46 +0100, Mick. wrote:
Hi all,

Another washing machine question!

After a recent post and deciding top get a washing machine not a
washer/drier

I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!

I realise a 1400 spin will get clothes drier so should be better.

Can anyone advice mo on this please?

Mick.

We have a Hotpoint 1600 washer, on the programmes that suit the majority of
clothes, the maximum speed is only 800 anyway.

indeed... don;t most fast spin washers "sense" how evenly the load is
distributed in the drum and only spin at max if all is within limits?
if so no Gtee that you'll get a full turbo spin everytime anyway...

Jim K

In article ,
Jim K writes:

indeed... don;t most fast spin washers "sense" how evenly the load is
distributed in the drum and only spin at max if all is within limits?

Certainly my 25 year old hotpoint does this.
When it's going to spin at 1400 (max), it has up to 3 goes at
distributing the clothes evenly around the drum. If it fails
on the third attempt, it still goes ahead with the spin, but
only at 1000 RPM.

if so no Gtee that you'll get a full turbo spin everytime anyway...

This hotpoint hardly ever fails to balance the load - probably
only a few times in 25 years.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

The difference between a 1400 spin and 1000 spin is more than you
might think. The other day a full mixed load of washing was spun at
1000. I then put it on a spin only cycle at 1400. Well over one litre
of water was ejected at 1400 which is a lot when you consider it had
already been in for 10 minute spin at 1000.


Dave

On Jun 12, 11:36*am, "Mick." wrote:
Hi all,

* * * * Another washing machine question!

After a recent post and deciding top get a washing machine not a
washer/drier

I have now been told by my family that a 1400 spin washer is nosier and
wears quicker than a 1400 spin one!

I realise a 1400 spin will get clothes drier so should be better.

Can anyone advice mo on this please?

Mick.

1400 vs 1000 makes a major difference to water content and dry time, I
definitely didnt need a drier with the 1400. But there are more
important questions with washing machines, and I'll second the advice
that you need to get a good quality machine before adding the more
minor luxury of 1400 spin.


NT

1400rpm spin should be considered standard if you have an electric
dryer.
The somewhat dryer clothes will directly reduce electrical drying cost
over many years.

Miele are very good, but parts are very expensive.
A Siemens/Bosch pump is circa £35, a Miele pump is circa £100-135. Now
you can argue the Miele is less likely to fail, but it is a relatively
common failure at 7-16yrs whatever the make. So I would suggest
shortlist those washing machines offering free 5yr warranty or free
10yr warranty, key being free rather than costly add-on insurance
which is grossly inflated compared to what the manufacturers can "self-
insure". Then consider carefully re 10yr Miele 5yr Siemens/Bosch/AEG/
Whatever.

Can take quite a bit of shopping around, remember modern washers are
mostly cold fill which may require a little plumbing work (cap off the
hot, 3/4" BSP cap with rubber washer as I recall).

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:25:03 -0700 (PDT), js.b1 wrote:

Can take quite a bit of shopping around,

That I think is the most important bit. Wander about the sheds and
"kick the tyres", some machines out there are really dadly designed.
They look, with smooth lines and curves but have nasty sharp pointy
bits of plastic just where your wrist will be putting stuff into the
detergent drawer. Others just don't feel solid, bits flex just that
little bit too much or simply wobble about.

We've just bought a new washing machine after a couple of "tyre
kicking" visits. Hotpoint WMD960 Ultima, 8kg, 1600 spin (IIRC).
During the wash cycle more noise comes from buttons etc clonking on
the glass and the muted clothes/water sloshing about than the drive.
The spin is also very quiet, you don't really notice it. Indeed if
the door latch didn't click quite loudly and the machine beep when
it's finished you wouldn't have the reminder that the spin on a
normal machine gives that it has reached that stage.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Jun 12, 10:25*pm, "js.b1" wrote:
1400rpm spin should be considered standard if you have an electric
dryer.
The somewhat dryer clothes will directly reduce electrical drying cost
over many years.

Yes, OTOH the faster spin machines cost more too. Unlses you go for a
not so good quality machine, which is a false economy. Have you
calculated the drying savings from the faster spin?


Miele are very good, but parts are very expensive.
A Siemens/Bosch pump is circa £35, a Miele pump is circa £100-135. Now
you can argue the Miele is less likely to fail, but it is a relatively
common failure at 7-16yrs whatever the make.

OTOH pumps are one part where there's not usually any need to fit the
same make. Not familiar with Miele innards, but most common makes one
can fit any of various makes of pump, and pumps can be had for not
much.


So I would suggest
shortlist those washing machines offering free 5yr warranty or free
10yr warranty, key being free rather than costly add-on insurance
which is grossly inflated compared to what the manufacturers can "self-
insure". Then consider carefully re 10yr Miele 5yr Siemens/Bosch/AEG/
Whatever.

Can take quite a bit of shopping around, remember modern washers are
mostly cold fill which may require a little plumbing work (cap off the
hot, 3/4" BSP cap with rubber washer as I recall).

should be no need

Bosch are a respectable middle ground, decent reliability and price
not excessive.


NT

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 00:38:00 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:25:03 -0700 (PDT), js.b1 wrote:

Can take quite a bit of shopping around,

That I think is the most important bit. Wander about the sheds and
"kick the tyres", some machines out there are really dadly designed.
They look, with smooth lines and curves but have nasty sharp pointy
bits of plastic just where your wrist will be putting stuff into the
detergent drawer. Others just don't feel solid, bits flex just that
little bit too much or simply wobble about.

It's worth spending time in John Lewis for this, as the people there
actually know about the goods for sale. In B&Q etc. the least unhelpful
ones are the cardboard cutouts!

We've just bought a new washing machine after a couple of "tyre
kicking" visits. Hotpoint WMD960 Ultima, 8kg, 1600 spin (IIRC).
During the wash cycle more noise comes from buttons etc clonking on
the glass and the muted clothes/water sloshing about than the drive.
The spin is also very quiet, you don't really notice it. Indeed if
the door latch didn't click quite loudly and the machine beep when
it's finished you wouldn't have the reminder that the spin on a
normal machine gives that it has reached that stage.

Is Hotpoint actually making good stuff nowadays?
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

On Jun 13, 8:35 am, PeterC wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 00:38:00 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:25:03 -0700 (PDT), js.b1 wrote:

Can take quite a bit of shopping around,

That I think is the most important bit. Wander about the sheds and
"kick the tyres", some machines out there are really dadly designed.
They look, with smooth lines and curves but have nasty sharp pointy
bits of plastic just where your wrist will be putting stuff into the
detergent drawer. Others just don't feel solid, bits flex just that
little bit too much or simply wobble about.

It's worth spending time in John Lewis for this, as the people there
actually know about the goods for sale. In B&Q etc. the least unhelpful
ones are the cardboard cutouts!

We've just bought a new washing machine after a couple of "tyre
kicking" visits. Hotpoint WMD960 Ultima, 8kg, 1600 spin (IIRC).
During the wash cycle more noise comes from buttons etc clonking on
the glass and the muted clothes/water sloshing about than the drive.
The spin is also very quiet, you don't really notice it. Indeed if
the door latch didn't click quite loudly and the machine beep when
it's finished you wouldn't have the reminder that the spin on a
normal machine gives that it has reached that stage.

Is Hotpoint actually making good stuff nowadays?
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.

shurely "is 'whoever owns the "hotpoint" marque' making good stuff?

cheers

Jim K

In message , PeterC
wrote

Is Hotpoint actually making good stuff nowadays?

And how many of the brands are actually owned by the same company and
made (assembled) in the same factories.

People often perceive that brand A is better than brand B for historic
reasons that are no longer valid. How often do you see someone
recommending a brand because they have had not trouble with a machine
for 10, 15, 20 or 25 years. A machine build today will have little in
common with one built 5 years ago.


--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 08:35:58 +0100, PeterC wrote:

Is Hotpoint actually making good stuff nowadays?

I'll let you know in 10 to 20 years... It's only a couple of months
old and hasn't gone bang yet. B-)

Previous Hotpoint stuff has been OK but as has been pointed out "past
performance is no indication of future reliabilty".

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Jun 13, 11:05*am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 08:35:58 +0100, PeterC wrote:
Is Hotpoint actually making good stuff nowadays?

I'll let you know in 10 to 20 years... It's only a couple of months
old and hasn't gone bang yet. *B-)

Previous Hotpoint stuff has been OK but as has been pointed out "past
performance is no indication of future reliabilty".


Drum bearings that dont last long enough, requiring repeat replacement
fi you have a family. Not a brand I'd buy.


NT

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:59:52 -0700 (PDT), NT
wrote:
On Jun 12, 10:25=A0pm, "js.b1" wrote:
1400rpm spin should be considered standard if you have an electric
dryer.
The somewhat dryer clothes will directly reduce electrical drying cost
over many years.

Yes, OTOH the faster spin machines cost more too. Unlses you go for a
not so good quality machine, which is a false economy. Have you
calculated the drying savings from the faster spin?


Miele are very good, but parts are very expensive.
A Siemens/Bosch pump is circa =A335, a Miele pump is circa =A3100-135. No=
w
you can argue the Miele is less likely to fail, but it is a relatively
common failure at 7-16yrs whatever the make.


Miele items are designed to last 20 years. Obviously, not all will
reach that age without problems, but they are *very much more
reliable* than cheaper makes.

In theory, when they go wrong, the replacement parts are more
expensive. But who cares about the price of parts when you are very
unlikely ever to need them?

On Jun 13, 11:51*am, Bruce wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:59:52 -0700 (PDT), NT
wrote:
On Jun 12, 10:25=A0pm, "js.b1" wrote:

Miele are very good, but parts are very expensive.
A Siemens/Bosch pump is circa =A335, a Miele pump is circa =A3100-135. No=
w
you can argue the Miele is less likely to fail, but it is a relatively
common failure at 7-16yrs whatever the make.

Miele items are designed to last 20 years. *Obviously, not all will
reach that age without problems, but they are *very much more
reliable* than cheaper makes. *

In theory, when they go wrong, the replacement parts are more
expensive. *But who cares about the price of parts when you are very
unlikely ever to need them?

Miele should last 20 yrs, Bosch should last over 10. Miele costs twice
as much, and parts several times as much. Money in the bank has some
value, and most people only have so much to play with. Etc - both
work.


NT

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 04:32:04 -0700 (PDT), NT
wrote:

On Jun 13, 11:51*am, Bruce wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:59:52 -0700 (PDT), NT
wrote:
On Jun 12, 10:25=A0pm, "js.b1" wrote:

Miele are very good, but parts are very expensive.
A Siemens/Bosch pump is circa =A335, a Miele pump is circa =A3100-135. No=
w
you can argue the Miele is less likely to fail, but it is a relatively
common failure at 7-16yrs whatever the make.

Miele items are designed to last 20 years. *Obviously, not all will
reach that age without problems, but they are *very much more
reliable* than cheaper makes. *

In theory, when they go wrong, the replacement parts are more
expensive. *But who cares about the price of parts when you are very
unlikely ever to need them?

Miele should last 20 yrs, Bosch should last over 10. Miele costs twice
as much, and parts several times as much. Money in the bank has some
value, and most people only have so much to play with. Etc - both
work.


I would like to see comprehensive evidence to support your claim that
Miele costs twice as much as Bosch. There are plenty of Bosch items
priced very similarly to comparable Miele items.

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery at work here. That's
often to be found when people think they "cannot afford" good quality,
and buy cheap junk instead. They then spend a lot of time claiming
that the cheap junk they bought is just as good as a high quality item
that, over its whole life, taking into account spares, repairs and
frequency of renewal, would actually have cost them *far less*.

I would like to see comprehensive evidence to support your claim that
Miele costs twice as much as Bosch. There are plenty of Bosch items
priced very similarly to comparable Miele items.

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery at work here. That's
often to be found when people think they "cannot afford" good quality,
and buy cheap junk instead. They then spend a lot of time claiming
that the cheap junk they bought is just as good as a high quality item
that, over its whole life, taking into account spares, repairs and
frequency of renewal, would actually have cost them *far less*.


We went from the cheapest Servis to a Miele recently, mainly because of
the 10 year guarantee. I doubt it will save us money really, but there
are other considerations e.g. how little washing powder it requires.
Using half the recommended dose on the packet, we were getting "excess
detergent" messages, and needed to reduce it further. Even at this
level, the machine is full of suds, so I can only imagine it disperses
the stuff more efficiently. And that stuff isn't cheap

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:20:29 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:
I would like to see comprehensive evidence to support your claim that
Miele costs twice as much as Bosch. There are plenty of Bosch items
priced very similarly to comparable Miele items.

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery at work here. That's
often to be found when people think they "cannot afford" good quality,
and buy cheap junk instead. They then spend a lot of time claiming
that the cheap junk they bought is just as good as a high quality item
that, over its whole life, taking into account spares, repairs and
frequency of renewal, would actually have cost them *far less*.


We went from the cheapest Servis to a Miele recently, mainly because of
the 10 year guarantee. I doubt it will save us money really, but there
are other considerations e.g. how little washing powder it requires.
Using half the recommended dose on the packet, we were getting "excess
detergent" messages, and needed to reduce it further. Even at this
level, the machine is full of suds, so I can only imagine it disperses
the stuff more efficiently. And that stuff isn't cheap


It will use less energy, less water, less detergent and possibly less
fabric softener. In its 20 year life it may need attention once or
twice. Meanwhile, those who bought cheaper will find their machines
need more energy, more water, more detergent and more frequent
attention. In the 20 year life of the Miele they are likely to need
replacing once or twice.

Work out the total cost of the Miele and the cheap washer over the
total 20 year period and the Miele will be substantially cheaper. Even
if you discount the costs in the later years to bring them to today's
value, the Miele will still be substantially cheaper.

Add to that the fact that it will be significantly quieter when new,
and stay significantly quieter, than the noisy cheap machine that will
get noisier and noisier.

In a flat, terraced or semi-detached house your Miele can be used at
night because it is whisper quiet. To use a cheap washing machine at
night, you need to live in a detached house, and just imagine how much
more that would cost! ;-)

Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:20:29 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:
I would like to see comprehensive evidence to support your claim that
Miele costs twice as much as Bosch. There are plenty of Bosch items
priced very similarly to comparable Miele items.

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery at work here. That's
often to be found when people think they "cannot afford" good quality,
and buy cheap junk instead. They then spend a lot of time claiming
that the cheap junk they bought is just as good as a high quality item
that, over its whole life, taking into account spares, repairs and
frequency of renewal, would actually have cost them *far less*.

We went from the cheapest Servis to a Miele recently, mainly because of
the 10 year guarantee. I doubt it will save us money really, but there
are other considerations e.g. how little washing powder it requires.
Using half the recommended dose on the packet, we were getting "excess
detergent" messages, and needed to reduce it further. Even at this
level, the machine is full of suds, so I can only imagine it disperses
the stuff more efficiently. And that stuff isn't cheap


It will use less energy, less water, less detergent and possibly less
fabric softener. In its 20 year life it may need attention once or
twice. Meanwhile, those who bought cheaper will find their machines
need more energy, more water, more detergent and more frequent
attention. In the 20 year life of the Miele they are likely to need
replacing once or twice.

Work out the total cost of the Miele and the cheap washer over the
total 20 year period and the Miele will be substantially cheaper. Even
if you discount the costs in the later years to bring them to today's
value, the Miele will still be substantially cheaper.

Add to that the fact that it will be significantly quieter when new,
and stay significantly quieter, than the noisy cheap machine that will
get noisier and noisier.

In a flat, terraced or semi-detached house your Miele can be used at
night because it is whisper quiet. To use a cheap washing machine at
night, you need to live in a detached house, and just imagine how much
more that would cost! ;-)



I hope you're right. I sacrificed 2 weeks in Greece for the bloody thing

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:20:29 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:
I would like to see comprehensive evidence to support your claim that
Miele costs twice as much as Bosch. There are plenty of Bosch items
priced very similarly to comparable Miele items.

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery at work here. That's
often to be found when people think they "cannot afford" good quality,
and buy cheap junk instead. They then spend a lot of time claiming
that the cheap junk they bought is just as good as a high quality item
that, over its whole life, taking into account spares, repairs and
frequency of renewal, would actually have cost them *far less*.


We went from the cheapest Servis to a Miele recently, mainly because of
the 10 year guarantee. I doubt it will save us money really, but there
are other considerations e.g. how little washing powder it requires.
Using half the recommended dose on the packet, we were getting "excess
detergent" messages, and needed to reduce it further. Even at this
level, the machine is full of suds, so I can only imagine it disperses
the stuff more efficiently. And that stuff isn't cheap


It will use less energy, less water, less detergent and possibly less
fabric softener. In its 20 year life it may need attention once or
twice. Meanwhile, those who bought cheaper will find their machines
need more energy, more water, more detergent and more frequent
attention. In the 20 year life of the Miele they are likely to need
replacing once or twice.

Work out the total cost of the Miele and the cheap washer over the
total 20 year period and the Miele will be substantially cheaper. Even
if you discount the costs in the later years to bring them to today's
value, the Miele will still be substantially cheaper.

Rubbish, I bet my samsung washer dryer works out much cheaper than a miele
washer dryer.

Add to that the fact that it will be significantly quieter when new,
and stay significantly quieter, than the noisy cheap machine that will
get noisier and noisier.

The noisiest thing about mine is the water inlet.



In a flat, terraced or semi-detached house your Miele can be used at
night because it is whisper quiet. To use a cheap washing machine at
night, you need to live in a detached house, and just imagine how much
more that would cost! ;-)

You shouldn't really leave washer or dishwasher unattended as there are
failure modes that can be dangerous.

On Jun 13, 12:40*pm, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 04:32:04 -0700 (PDT), NT
wrote:



On Jun 13, 11:51*am, Bruce wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:59:52 -0700 (PDT), NT
wrote:
On Jun 12, 10:25=A0pm, "js.b1" wrote:

Miele are very good, but parts are very expensive.
A Siemens/Bosch pump is circa =A335, a Miele pump is circa =A3100-135. No=
w
you can argue the Miele is less likely to fail, but it is a relatively
common failure at 7-16yrs whatever the make.

Miele items are designed to last 20 years. *Obviously, not all will
reach that age without problems, but they are *very much more
reliable* than cheaper makes. *

In theory, when they go wrong, the replacement parts are more
expensive. *But who cares about the price of parts when you are very
unlikely ever to need them?

Miele should last 20 yrs, Bosch should last over 10. Miele costs twice
as much, and parts several times as much. Money in the bank has some
value, and most people only have so much to play with. Etc - both
work.

I would like to see comprehensive evidence to support your claim that
Miele costs twice as much as Bosch. *There are plenty of Bosch items
priced very similarly to comparable Miele items.

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery at work here. *That's
often to be found when people think they "cannot afford" good quality,
and buy cheap junk instead. *They then spend a lot of time claiming
that the cheap junk they bought is just as good as a high quality item
that, over its whole life, taking into account spares, repairs and
frequency of renewal, would actually have cost them *far less*.

If you want to offer figures and sound arguments, great, but the
pseudopsychology is a bit foolish.

The reality is that none of us have presented a full set of figures,
making economic comparisons just rough guesses. And its likely each of
us makes varying assumptions for those comparisons, and we value the
other points differently, so 'one is better than the other' arguments
are fairly tenuous.


NT

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:50:26 -0700 (PDT), NT wrote:

... we value the other points differently, so 'one is better than the
other' arguments are fairly tenuous.

Quite so. We looked at Miele but they simply didn't meet the required
specification on wash capacity and spin speeds. Also we weren't
impressed by the user interface and general build quality, probably
the detergent draw (most brands were let down by the detergent draw).
The much increased cost and possible benefit of the warranty didn't
balance, to us, against the missing desired features.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:20:29 +0100, stuart noble wrote:

how little washing powder it requires. Using half the recommended dose
on the packet, we were getting "excess detergent" messages, and needed
to reduce it further.

You've made the mistake of believing the doseage that the packet
says. I don't think we have *ever* used what it says, it's far to
much unless you are in a hard water area and have *really* dirty
clothes, as in just come in from diging foundation trenches by hand
in the pouring rain after changing the oil on the car and having used
engine oil spurt out all over you.

Think about it the detergent maker isn't going to "under sell" how
much you need a) it will reduce how much they sell b) runs the risk
that a wash will be less than perfect and customer switching brand.

For our powder packet minimum recomended dose is 25ml/kg with minimal
dirt & sof****er. Our normal wash is probably 5kg so we should be
using 125ml, we use 50 without any problems...

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...

8

For our powder packet minimum recomended dose is 25ml/kg with minimal
dirt & sof****er. Our normal wash is probably 5kg so we should be
using 125ml, we use 50 without any problems...

Same here, I haven't put in the recommend dose for years in any machine I
have used.
They all work with half a dose or less.
If the cloths are really bad a "prewash" on quick wash works far better than
using more detergent.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:41:09 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

We looked at Miele but they simply didn't meet the required
specification on wash capacity and spin speeds. Also we weren't
impressed by the user interface and general build quality


The only "build quality" that matters is that which you cannot see.

Cheaper makes will always dress up their products with features that
might appear attractive but aren't necessary - it's how they sell
them. Spin speeds are something of an urban myth. What matters is
results - how dry the clothes are.

As with cars, cheap brands often sell well because of the "free" bells
and whistles that come with them. But the basic product quality isn't
there, and that matters more than anything.

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:41:09 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

We looked at Miele but they simply didn't meet the required
specification on wash capacity and spin speeds. Also we weren't
impressed by the user interface and general build quality


The only "build quality" that matters is that which you cannot see.

Cheaper makes will always dress up their products with features that
might appear attractive but aren't necessary - it's how they sell
them. Spin speeds are something of an urban myth. What matters is
results - how dry the clothes are.

As with cars, cheap brands often sell well because of the "free" bells
and whistles that come with them. But the basic product quality isn't
there, and that matters more than anything.

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)

Hmmm!
What's in a washer? ..

Main motor
pump
drum
bearings
a few valves
a controller
bits of bent metal
plastic.

Which bits cost three times as much in a miele than in a Hotpoint?

Bruce wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:41:09 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
We looked at Miele but they simply didn't meet the required
specification on wash capacity and spin speeds. Also we weren't
impressed by the user interface and general build quality


The only "build quality" that matters is that which you cannot see.

Cheaper makes will always dress up their products with features that
might appear attractive but aren't necessary - it's how they sell
them. Spin speeds are something of an urban myth. What matters is
results - how dry the clothes are.

As with cars, cheap brands often sell well because of the "free" bells
and whistles that come with them. But the basic product quality isn't
there, and that matters more than anything.

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)



And those who have spent big money will always try to justify it, to
themselves, and others.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:30:02 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:
Bruce wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:41:09 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
We looked at Miele but they simply didn't meet the required
specification on wash capacity and spin speeds. Also we weren't
impressed by the user interface and general build quality


The only "build quality" that matters is that which you cannot see.

Cheaper makes will always dress up their products with features that
might appear attractive but aren't necessary - it's how they sell
them. Spin speeds are something of an urban myth. What matters is
results - how dry the clothes are.

As with cars, cheap brands often sell well because of the "free" bells
and whistles that come with them. But the basic product quality isn't
there, and that matters more than anything.

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)



And those who have spent big money will always try to justify it, to
themselves, and others.


Come on, Stuart, we're not talking about "big money" here. Big money
is a £1,000,000+ house, a Bentley on the driveway and a yacht.

Here, we're talking about household appliances costing just a few
hundred pounds. We're talking about people on average incomes
deciding what would be the wisest way to spend their limited
disposable income.

We're talking about spending a little more for quality that lasts 20
years rather than buying some cheap, fundamentally unreliable junk
that won't last half that long, on the basis of it having some
superficially attractive features that hide its poor quality
components and cheap manufacture.

Personally, I live a frugal lifestyle through necessity. But being
frugal doesn't mean being cheap. Quality items that last cost only
slightly more to buy. Over their lifetimes, they cost an awful lot
less to own than cheap, unreliable junk.

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:30:02 +0100, stuart noble
wrote:
Bruce wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:41:09 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
We looked at Miele but they simply didn't meet the required
specification on wash capacity and spin speeds. Also we weren't
impressed by the user interface and general build quality


The only "build quality" that matters is that which you cannot see.

Cheaper makes will always dress up their products with features that
might appear attractive but aren't necessary - it's how they sell
them. Spin speeds are something of an urban myth. What matters is
results - how dry the clothes are.

As with cars, cheap brands often sell well because of the "free" bells
and whistles that come with them. But the basic product quality isn't
there, and that matters more than anything.

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)



And those who have spent big money will always try to justify it, to
themselves, and others.


Come on, Stuart, we're not talking about "big money" here. Big money
is a £1,000,000+ house, a Bentley on the driveway and a yacht.

Here, we're talking about household appliances costing just a few
hundred pounds. We're talking about people on average incomes
deciding what would be the wisest way to spend their limited
disposable income.

We're talking about spending a little more for quality that lasts 20
years rather than buying some cheap, fundamentally unreliable junk
that won't last half that long, on the basis of it having some
superficially attractive features that hide its poor quality
components and cheap manufacture.

Personally, I live a frugal lifestyle through necessity. But being
frugal doesn't mean being cheap. Quality items that last cost only
slightly more to buy. Over their lifetimes, they cost an awful lot
less to own than cheap, unreliable junk.


Three times the price is not slightly more.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:09:13 +0100, Bruce wrote:

Spin speeds are something of an urban myth. What matters is results -
how dry the clothes are.

Well all I can say is that clothes come out after a 1600 spin an
awful lot dryer than they did out of any of the older machines we
have had.. Those would have had peak spin speeds of 1000 or 1200 rpm.

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)

You haven't read what I wrote. The Meile's didn't meet capacity and
spin requirments as laid down by the main machine operator (SWMBO'd).
If the specs and build quality of the bits that mattered to the
specifier had been close we might have sprung the extra cash but they
were miles away.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:25:42 +0100, Bruce wrote:

We're talking about spending a little more for quality that lasts 20
years rather than buying some cheap, fundamentally unreliable junk
that won't last half that long,

cough The last washing machine to be disposed of here was a 25 year
old Zanusi. It had never had anything done to it, no I tell a lie we
replaced the plastic filter unit, once. It was disposed of 'cause it
had got very noisey on spin as the drum mountings had gone soggy and
it would walk around the kitchen.

Previous to that was 15 year old Hotpoint washer/dryer.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 12 June, 14:07, (Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

Actually, it makes an enormous difference - at 1400 RPM, the force
on the water during spinning is nearly doubled,

For the same drum diameter.

As the cost to make a machine is more closely proportional to the
"drying power" than the speed alone, you may find that your hyper-
speed drier was achieved most simply and cheaply by also shrinking the
drum a little. This puts up the rated speed in the adverts, but
doesn't make it any better at drying.

There's also the most significant issue, that any recent machine is
actually running at a variable speed, limited by vibration. Unless
it's well enough constructed to permit this top speed to be
maintained, it's unlikely to be running anywhere near that fast in
practice. Put a tacho on it and surprise yourself (or if it's a
Hotpoint, merely confirm your worst suspicions).

Re build quality, if this is the new "designer streamlined" Miele
without the orange button & simple dials then the drawer does feel a
bit tacky. I had a chance to play with the older W613 and "designer"
version (which tends to be £50 less). Some parts that used to be metal
are now plastic, the counterweights that used to be cast iron are
concrete, the drum looks different.

Miele have tarted around with their vacuum cleaners too, but the old
models did have a bit TOO clunky vacuum-end connectors. The latest
S2210 (if that is the right code) is nicely lightweight, mainly
through elimination of metal parts, the plastic appears identical. The
downside is the superlight Miele put the tools on the hose, a dumb
idea - but countered by the tiny case actually not holding the old
3.5L FJM bag but the larger 5.0L GN so economics are improved. The
latest bags have 1 less per box (4 rather than 5 or 5 rather than 6)
so the larger bag is distinctly beneficial.

I still say buy a machine with 5yr warranty, put the £400 saving over
a 10yr warranty Miele in just about any fund - chances are you will
not need to touch it until year 7 by which point it has a 50:50 chance
of being about £300-800. At that point a) you will probably need to
buy the Miele because everything will be scrap or b) devaluation will
mean you will only be able to afford a manual tub & mangle for that
money. Miele 5yr could be had for £449 May 2008, afterwards it hit
£649 which as I recall is too close to the 10yr version (£829 last I
looked).

If you buy a washer dryer, and have the space, buy 2 of them - sods
law applies of course :-)

In message , Bruce
wrote

Of course those who simply cannot afford a better quality product will
always find a hundred reasons to diss the brand. ;-)

But there is a price point where the "quality" is more than adequate and
paying twice as much doesn't get you twice the quality.

I'm sure some people would spend hundreds on a Russ Andrews "Hi Fi"
digital connection cable where the rest of us would spend a fiver at CPC
on something that does the same job

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In message , Bruce
wrote

Cheaper makes will always dress up their products with features that
might appear attractive but aren't necessary - it's how they sell
them.

Hmmm
Miele W3985WPS
6 kg capacity honeycomb drum with LED lighting
Only £1500!

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Jun 14, 3:06*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:25:42 +0100, Bruce wrote:
We're talking about spending a little more for quality that lasts 20
years rather than buying some cheap, fundamentally unreliable junk
that won't last half that long,

cough The last washing machine to be disposed of here was a 25 year
old Zanusi. It had never had anything done to it, no I tell a lie we
replaced the plastic filter unit, once. It was disposed of 'cause it
had got very noisey on spin as the drum mountings had gone soggy and
it would walk around the kitchen.

Previous to that was 15 year old Hotpoint washer/dryer.

Some last, but the odds arent in their favour. Its average life we can
realistically compare.


NT