The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/11/15 10:30, Capitol wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article m,
dennis@home wrote:

On 04/11/2015 10:33, Capitol wrote:

IMO no cold
fill machine can ever work well. The laws of diffusion say so.

Do you care to explain what you mean by that?

Well he can't, can he. Because like WeatherLawyer he doesn't know his
arse from a hole in the ground.

Try learning some physics Tim. I'm not here to teach you.

Well thank god for that.

Since the laws of diffusion are completely irrelevant in a washing
machine that tumbles stuff around.


I take you did engineering and not physics?

On 05/11/2015 10:30, Capitol wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article m,
dennis@home wrote:

On 04/11/2015 10:33, Capitol wrote:

IMO no cold
fill machine can ever work well. The laws of diffusion say so.

Do you care to explain what you mean by that?

Well he can't, can he. Because like WeatherLawyer he doesn't know his
arse from a hole in the ground.

Try learning some physics Tim. I'm not here to teach you.

Well you had better explain it to me then, since my physics is very
good, and yet I have no idea what you are saying either!

Secondly, this is a forum intended for learning; that is what most of us
are all her to do. However it requires those that can answer questions,
share their knowledge. If you can't be bothered, let us know so we can
kill file you and move on.

Back to the topic at hand:

ISTM that what is going to affect wash quality is water/detergent
contact time, agitation, and temperature profile during the wash cycle.
All of those can be controlled with a cold fill machine as well (and in
some cases better) than can be achieved by a dual fill machine.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 11/5/2015 5:38 PM, pamela wrote:
Some time back it was the Americans who had cold-only fills and lower
temperature washes than Europe. Maybe that's changed now.

Few, if any US washers have ever had cold-only fills.

On 2015-11-03 20:42, Capitol wrote:

I missed that one, but the 60 degree cycle time of 205 minutes
is totally unacceptable.

Getting washing machine manufacturers to quote really long cycle times is
just another way the EU is improving our lives. If you haven't had to buy
a WM for some years you will be surprised at how long the cycle times are
these days. To achieve low energy figures required by the EU the machines
have very long, low energy cycles.

However, you may well find that there are options for faster, higher
energy cycles. For example, a WM I bought early last year offers cotton
cycle options from 1hr 6' to 3hr 25'.



--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 23:22 3 Nov 2015, Chris French wrote:

In message ,
Capitol writes
Tim+ wrote:
wrote:

You are regurgitating someone else's opinion as fact. Cold fill
washing machines only work properly with bio powders. Go away and
do some research. If I am prepared to pay for the product it should
be readily available, not all us want to use washboards!


The only time we've used a US washing machine it's performance was
very unimpressive.


Date?

Was staying with relatives in Canada in 2011.

I was unimpressed with the washing performance of their washing
machine, compared to ours. Which was a top loading US style machine,
presumably the same sort of thing. Don't know the age of the machine
though.

Back to the UK, why would a cold fill only machine only work well with
bio powders? I use both bio and non bio powders in ours and they both
work well.- They take cold water and heat it up, as opposed to using
some hot water as well and then heating that up.. True they heat the
water at a speed that enables the enzymes to work first (if it is a
hot wash program). But hot and cold fill machines will do the same
thing, it's just that they will use some hot water to raise the wash
water temp.

I imagne there is some crossed logic here. A low temperature wash (most
likely filled by a cold supply) works better with bio powders. That
doesn't mean a cold fill needs bio powders - as stated.

I would imagine that even H&C fill machines don't use hot water on the
cooler wash programs. Probably only using hot water to fill on the 60+
programs. But they will still start off cool and then heat up, mostly
using the hot fill water to raise the water temp higher later on in
the wash I expect.

Some time back it was the Americans who had cold-only fills

I don’t believe that

and lower
temperature washes than Europe. Maybe that's changed now.

On 06/11/15 00:11, Graham Nye wrote:
On 2015-11-03 20:42, Capitol wrote:

I missed that one, but the 60 degree cycle time of 205 minutes
is totally unacceptable.

Getting washing machine manufacturers to quote really long cycle times is
just another way the EU is improving our lives. If you haven't had to buy
a WM for some years you will be surprised at how long the cycle times are
these days. To achieve low energy figures required by the EU the machines
have very long, low energy cycles.

However, you may well find that there are options for faster, higher
energy cycles. For example, a WM I bought early last year offers cotton
cycle options from 1hr 6' to 3hr 25'.




Miele is 1:30 to 3:mumble

Interestingly, Miele, whilst complying with the lower energy settings,
seem to offer "defeat" devices for all the settings. I can wash at 90C
with extra rinses and extra water if I want.

On 05/11/2015 16:23, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Capitol
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/11/15 10:30, Capitol wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:

Well he can't, can he. Because like WeatherLawyer he doesn't know his
arse from a hole in the ground.

Try learning some physics Tim. I'm not here to teach you.

Well thank god for that.

Since the laws of diffusion are completely irrelevant in a washing
machine that tumbles stuff around.

I take you did engineering and not physics?

He may have done, but he is still correct. Diffusion plays almost no
part in the cleaning of stuff in a washing machine. It is the thrashing
about of the clothes in the drum that allows solvent to act on the dirt.

The surfactants help get oils and fats into a stable suspension but
there is precious little diffusion going on with so much agitation.

No I did physics. I await your comments on the relevance of diffusion.
Get on with it.

You are arguing with an irrational crank Tim.

Don't hold your breath waiting for a coherent answer!

There might be a tiny improvement in warm water solubility for some
water soluble muck and rubbish having been in warm water for longer, but
scalding hot water will fix some organic stains into the fabric.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Forget all this washing machine nonsense and get a "Magic Ali Baba basket".
We have one and its fantastic.

I throw in my soiled clothes and they reappear laundered and neatly folded
in the wardrobe or drawer!

Don't ask me how it works it just does:-)

Mike

Muddymike wrote:
Forget all this washing machine nonsense and get a "Magic Ali Baba basket".
We have one and its fantastic.

I throw in my soiled clothes and they reappear laundered and neatly folded
in the wardrobe or drawer!

Don't ask me how it works it just does:-)

Mike


But is it cold fill only or hot and cold? ;-)

Tim

On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:53:32 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Muddymike
wrote:

Forget all this washing machine nonsense and get a "Magic Ali Baba
basket".
We have one and its fantastic.

I throw in my soiled clothes and they reappear laundered and neatly
folded in the wardrobe or drawer!

Don't ask me how it works it just does:-)

Probably made of sapient pearwood and with hundreds of little legs.

I'm guessing Muddymike is either married or living at home with his mum
rather than a denizen of "DiscWorld"(tm).


--
Johnny B Good

On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:53:32 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , Muddymike
wrote:

Forget all this washing machine nonsense and get a "Magic Ali Baba
basket".
We have one and its fantastic.

I throw in my soiled clothes and they reappear laundered and neatly
folded in the wardrobe or drawer!

Don't ask me how it works it just does:-)

Probably made of sapient pearwood and with hundreds of little legs.

I'm guessing Muddymike is either married or living at home with his mum
rather than a denizen of "DiscWorld"(tm).



That's an interesting observation.

It obviously has to have females around to function as I did notice when
STWNFI went away for a week it backed up to a point that led me to believe
it had stopped working. Only to self repair after her return...

Mike

On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 09:17:54 -0000, Muddymike wrote:

Forget all this washing machine nonsense and get a "Magic Ali Baba basket".
We have one and its fantastic.

I throw in my soiled clothes and they reappear laundered and neatly folded
in the wardrobe or drawer!

Don't ask me how it works it just does:-)

Mike

I tried that - bloody basket's got lotsaholes!
You obviously have the model with just one hole at the top and two at the
bottom.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On 06/11/2015 08:01, Tim Watts wrote:

Interestingly, Miele, whilst complying with the lower energy settings,
seem to offer "defeat" devices for all the settings.

The must be using the same software supplier as VW.


--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In article , S Viemeister
writes
On 11/4/2015 11:51 AM, Capitol wrote:
Martin Bonner wrote:
Re US machines: do they typically run at 120V or 240V? If the former,
that might be one of the reasons for hot-fill. (It's hard to get more
than 13-16A through a plug+socket, and 16A at 120V takes a long time
to heat anything - same reason boiling-water taps are more popular in
the US.)

Normally 240v

No.
US _dryers_ are normally 240v. Washers are normally 120v.
Perhaps commercial machines are different, but US home washers are
generally _not_ 240v.

What's the max power they can normally support at 120v?
--
bert

On 06/11/15 20:10, bert wrote:
In article , S Viemeister
writes
On 11/4/2015 11:51 AM, Capitol wrote:
Martin Bonner wrote:
Re US machines: do they typically run at 120V or 240V? If the former,
that might be one of the reasons for hot-fill. (It's hard to get more
than 13-16A through a plug+socket, and 16A at 120V takes a long time
to heat anything - same reason boiling-water taps are more popular in
the US.)

Normally 240v

No.
US _dryers_ are normally 240v. Washers are normally 120v.
Perhaps commercial machines are different, but US home washers are
generally _not_ 240v.

What's the max power they can normally support at 120v?
15A seems to be a general rating for a circuit.

so 1.8KW more or less.


--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 11/6/2015 5:08 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
wrote:
US _dryers_ are normally 240v. Washers are normally 120v.
Perhaps commercial machines are different, but US home washers are
generally _not_ 240v.

AISB, mine was 240V. OTOH, it was a combo so a single machine with
separate washer and dryer.

Yes, the combos can be 240v, but free-standing washers are generally 120v.

The dryer was a bit unimaginative. Sometimes I spent 20 mins untying
the sheet it had knotted up with the pillow cases and duvet cover
inside.

I assume it didn't periodically reverse direction?

In article ,
Capitol writes:
So why does the US market use hot and cold fill machines? You
are regurgitating someone else's opinion as fact. Cold fill washing
machines only work properly with bio powders. Go away and do some
research. If I am prepared to pay for the product it should be readily
available, not all us want to use washboards!

European washing detergents have been enzyme based for 40 years,
and these need low temperature fill.

US washing detergents are still mosly soap powder because they
haven't considered energy efficiency until much more recently.
Still large use of top-loaders which require lots of water, and
the machines mostly can't heat the water themselves, because
the larger quantity and lower power available from electrical
outlets just doesn't work out. Front loaders have been appearing
in the US over the last 10 years.

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

On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 22:08:55 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

The dryer was a bit unimaginative. Sometimes I spent 20 mins untying the
sheet it had knotted up with the pillow cases and duvet cover inside.

Last week, son (who is a chef) washed his whites and aprons. One apron
had one of the tapes trapped in the door. It came out as a heavy rope
that is still stuck, I believe!

In message , Muddymike
writes
Forget all this washing machine nonsense and get a "Magic Ali Baba
basket".
We have one and its fantastic.

I throw in my soiled clothes and they reappear laundered and neatly
folded in the wardrobe or drawer!

It obviously has to have females around to function as I did notice
when STWNFI went away for a week it backed up to a point that led me to
believe it had stopped working. Only to self repair after her return...

Wifey says that would be funny if it wasn't so sick :-)
--
Graeme, it made me laugh, though

On 03/11/15 17:46, Capitol wrote:
I do
not know of any modern washing machine which works properly. The wash is
crap due to lack of water and the rinse totally inadequate for the same
reason.

Absolute ********, just like everything else you've said in this thread.
My Miele washes and rinses perfectly every time, with plenty of water if
I choose.

On 03/11/15 20:42, Capitol wrote:
IMO the
spin speed is also too high for reliability.

What utter ********

On 06/11/15 08:01, Tim Watts wrote:

Interestingly, Miele, whilst complying with the lower energy settings,
seem to offer "defeat" devices for all the settings. I can wash at 90C
with extra rinses and extra water if I want.

Indeed, I press the "Water plus" button on every wash.

On 10/11/15 01:41, pcb1962 wrote:
On 06/11/15 08:01, Tim Watts wrote:

Interestingly, Miele, whilst complying with the lower energy settings,
seem to offer "defeat" devices for all the settings. I can wash at 90C
with extra rinses and extra water if I want.

Indeed, I press the "Water plus" button on every wash.

There's a programmable setting that makes it remember the last set of
options - IIRC it includes the Water Plus option.

pcb1962 wrote:
On 03/11/15 17:46, Capitol wrote:
I do
not know of any modern washing machine which works properly. The wash is
crap due to lack of water and the rinse totally inadequate for the same
reason.

Absolute ********, just like everything else you've said in this thread.
My Miele washes and rinses perfectly every time, with plenty of water
if I choose.
Not what Which found.

On 10/11/15 11:55, Huge wrote:
On 2015-11-10, Capitol wrote:
pcb1962 wrote:
On 03/11/15 17:46, Capitol wrote:
I do
not know of any modern washing machine which works properly. The wash is
crap due to lack of water and the rinse totally inadequate for the same
reason.

Absolute ********, just like everything else you've said in this thread.
My Miele washes and rinses perfectly every time, with plenty of water
if I choose.
Not what Which found.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

"Which" is arsewipe.


+1000


--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 10/11/15 13:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/11/15 11:55, Huge wrote:
On 2015-11-10, Capitol wrote:
pcb1962 wrote:
On 03/11/15 17:46, Capitol wrote:
I do
not know of any modern washing machine which works properly. The
wash is
crap due to lack of water and the rinse totally inadequate for the
same
reason.

Absolute ********, just like everything else you've said in this
thread.
My Miele washes and rinses perfectly every time, with plenty of water
if I choose.
Not what Which found.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahahahahahahahahahahaha.


"Which" is arsewipe.


+1000



Yep.

You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
"Which" is arsewipe.


+1000



Yep.

You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

Right. So just who would you trust for a washing machine performance
assessment?

--
*Thank you. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 10/11/15 15:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
"Which" is arsewipe.


+1000



Yep.

You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

Right. So just who would you trust for a washing machine performance
assessment?


Anything except Which.

Amazon, Reevoo and similar for user reviews (some of which can be quite
detailed). Amazon I like because they let you go back and add edits, so
you do sometimes get a bit of long term feedback too.

On 10/11/2015 14:37, Tim Watts wrote:

You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

+1

Have you noticed how the dpreviews can suck you in to wanting something
more expensive?

Read the review a camera that you are thinking of buying and they will
compare the features/performance with another camera, say brand B.

Thinking that Brand B may be a alternative to consider you then read the
review for that camera and find that it may have a slightly better set
of features or performance BUT at the same time they compare the
features/performance with another camera - brand C.

By the time you have read the fourth or fifth review you check the price
of the alternative camera and find it cost 2x or 3x the price of the one
you were first considering.



--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

Right. So just who would you trust for a washing machine performance
assessment?


Anything except Which.

Amazon, Reevoo and similar for user reviews (some of which can be quite
detailed). Amazon I like because they let you go back and add edits, so
you do sometimes get a bit of long term feedback too.

Not sure I'd trust buyer reviews of that sort.

It's a long time since I subscribed to Which, but when I did I was never
disappointed with getting their best buy for something like a washing
machine. Cameras and Hi-Fi etc are such a personal thing you'd tend to
look at specialist mag for those. But even then I'd doubt you'd always
agree with it.

--
*WHOSE CRUEL IDEA WAS IT FOR THE WORD 'LISP' TO HAVE 'S' IN IT?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 10/11/15 18:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

Right. So just who would you trust for a washing machine performance
assessment?


Anything except Which.

Amazon, Reevoo and similar for user reviews (some of which can be quite
detailed). Amazon I like because they let you go back and add edits, so
you do sometimes get a bit of long term feedback too.

Not sure I'd trust buyer reviews of that sort.

I've always Amazon have been *extremely* useful if you get a reasonable
number. Sure, there's the odd shrill, but it's fairly rare.

When I've "take a chance" against a couple of reviews having warnings,
on occasion I've experienced the same mode of failure.

Generally I try to stick with 90+% 5 star and almost zero 1,2 stars and
I've very rarely been disappointed. Best thing that ever happened to
retail...

I wish there was something equivalent for trades...

It's a long time since I subscribed to Which, but when I did I was never
disappointed with getting their best buy for something like a washing
machine. Cameras and Hi-Fi etc are such a personal thing you'd tend to
look at specialist mag for those. But even then I'd doubt you'd always
agree with it.


I did a trial about 15 years back (after getting used to Internet mobo
reviews) and was less than impressed. They seemed to get the thing out
the box and spend an hour with it. No extreme testing, no engineering
opinion of "this looks well made, this not so, there's a flumblewidget
which is good..."

It was good when there was no alternative (80s) but, perhaps my
expectations are higher, but they do not seem to be really testing the
products. I'll allow perhaps they've got better recently?

On 10/11/15 16:01, Tim Watts wrote:
On 10/11/15 15:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
"Which" is arsewipe.


+1000



Yep.

You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which review
to know how lightweight they are.

Right. So just who would you trust for a washing machine performance
assessment?


Anything except Which.

Amazon, Reevoo and similar for user reviews (some of which can be quite
detailed). Amazon I like because they let you go back and add edits, so
you do sometimes get a bit of long term feedback too.

Actually I trusted people here who all said 'its expensive, but its the
dogs ********' when I got a Miele.

I also go by reviews in e.g. amazon, esp. negative ones.

Like today nearly all the reviews of a particular TV pointed out how
crap the internal speak3ers were. Ok if using with an external amp, but
I didnt want to..so crossed off my list.


--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 10/11/15 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I also go by reviews in e.g. amazon, esp. negative ones.

Like today nearly all the reviews of a particular TV pointed out how
crap the internal speak3ers were. Ok if using with an external amp, but
I didnt want to..so crossed off my list.



Yes - the negative ones are often telling - but sometimes, as you say,
it may be a point that doesn't matter (and you get the odd couple that
didn;t read the description and are complaining it's too
big/small/wide/noisy etc.

On 10/11/15 19:12, Tim Watts wrote:
On 10/11/15 18:22, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
You only have to read a camera review on dpreview.com and a Which
review
to know how lightweight they are.

Right. So just who would you trust for a washing machine performance
assessment?


Anything except Which.

Amazon, Reevoo and similar for user reviews (some of which can be quite
detailed). Amazon I like because they let you go back and add edits, so
you do sometimes get a bit of long term feedback too.

Not sure I'd trust buyer reviews of that sort.

I've always Amazon have been *extremely* useful if you get a reasonable
number. Sure, there's the odd shrill, but it's fairly rare.

ITYM shill.

....

It was good when there was no alternative (80s)

It was better than nothing.

but, perhaps my
expectations are higher, but they do not seem to be really testing the
products. I'll allow perhaps they've got better recently?

I neither know nor care. Internet gives you direct user feedback.

I get asked questions about stuff Ive bought like 'will this video card
fit in my PC' and I feel happy to be able to say yes... or... no..whatever.

Internet is far far better than 'which'

Even including terminal idiots like harry, who is a renewable
shill/spiv, this NG is far far better equipped to evaluate household
goods than any magazine with a PFY reporter taking bribes on the side.


--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 10/11/2015 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Like today nearly all the reviews of a particular TV pointed out how
crap the internal speak3ers were. Ok if using with an external amp, but
I didnt want to..so crossed off my list.

You are going to crossing off a lot of TVs

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

In article , Tim Watts
writes
On 10/11/15 01:41, pcb1962 wrote:
On 06/11/15 08:01, Tim Watts wrote:

Interestingly, Miele, whilst complying with the lower energy settings,
seem to offer "defeat" devices for all the settings. I can wash at 90C
with extra rinses and extra water if I want.

Indeed, I press the "Water plus" button on every wash.

There's a programmable setting that makes it remember the last set of
options - IIRC it includes the Water Plus option.
Well we're in the process of looking for a new washing machine and I'm
tearing my hair out.
The approach seems to be "We've decided that you want to save energy.
Therefore we will offer you loads of programs none of which will allow
you to do what you actually want to do but whatever we have chosen that
you might want to do you can be sure we have optimised it to save you
energy thus preventing you from doing what it was you might think you
wanted to do."

No I don't give a **** how much energy the f***** thing uses - it's
negligible. I want to choose whatever temperature I want when I want and
I want the maximum spin speed when I choose to get the f****** clothes
dry!!! Bloody EU directives/regulations etc. all over it.
--
bert

On 10/11/15 20:46, alan_m wrote:
On 10/11/2015 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Like today nearly all the reviews of a particular TV pointed out how
crap the internal speak3ers were. Ok if using with an external amp, but
I didnt want to..so crossed off my list.

You are going to crossing off a lot of TVs

No, these were apparently - even by TV standards - appallingly bad.


--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On 10/11/15 20:56, bert wrote:

Well we're in the process of looking for a new washing machine and I'm
tearing my hair out.
The approach seems to be "We've decided that you want to save energy.
Therefore we will offer you loads of programs none of which will allow
you to do what you actually want to do but whatever we have chosen that
you might want to do you can be sure we have optimised it to save you
energy thus preventing you from doing what it was you might think you
wanted to do."

My dishwasher has about 4 programmes.

The washing machine about 20! I use cottons 40,60,90 and woollens. And
maybe delicates. And the last 2 probably only differ in spin or no spin.

I agree - 3 knobs would be simpler - temp, spin and wash type.

No I don't give a **** how much energy the f***** thing uses - it's
negligible. I want to choose whatever temperature I want when I want and
I want the maximum spin speed when I choose to get the f****** clothes
dry!!! Bloody EU directives/regulations etc. all over it.

Miele...

Despite having 20 odd programmes, it does not compromise on water or
wash, so ultimately I'm happy. And it takes on plenty of water for
rinsing too (probably because I've set all the software options up to max!)

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
It's a long time since I subscribed to Which, but when I did I was
never disappointed with getting their best buy for something like a
washing machine. Cameras and Hi-Fi etc are such a personal thing you'd
tend to look at specialist mag for those. But even then I'd doubt
you'd always agree with it.


I did a trial about 15 years back (after getting used to Internet mobo
reviews) and was less than impressed. They seemed to get the thing out
the box and spend an hour with it. No extreme testing, no engineering
opinion of "this looks well made, this not so, there's a flumblewidget
which is good..."

I'd not expect them to pull apart every single item they test. And as
regard long term, they used member feedback long before it was used by
sellers. But of course Which haters didn't like that either, if it
disagreed with their views.

It was good when there was no alternative (80s) but, perhaps my
expectations are higher, but they do not seem to be really testing the
products. I'll allow perhaps they've got better recently?

Dunno.

What seemed to be the norm was people hating Which for not giving a
product they owned and liked 100%

Can't remember anyone complaining about buying a 'best buy' then finding
it rubbish.

--
*You! Off my planet!

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Like today nearly all the reviews of a particular TV pointed out how
crap the internal speak3ers were. Ok if using with an external amp, but
I didnt want to..so crossed off my list.

I very much doubt you'll find any new TV with even half decent sound via
its internal speakers. Merely adequate for those who don't much care.

--
*I'm not as think as you drunk I am.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.