If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by AZ Nomad on November 2, 2009, 10:53 pm
... 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
...
bullshit. They don't fill to the level of the door.
|
|
Posted by terry on November 3, 2009, 8:27 am
> ... 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 fro=
nt
> >loader when there's water in it. This might not be a problem for most
> ...
> bullshit. =A0They 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!
|
|
Posted by gpsman on November 2, 2009, 6:43 pm
> It *might* save water. =A0 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
|
|
Posted by DerbyDad03 on November 2, 2009, 8:55 pm
> >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. =A0 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. =A0 But it also won't take nearly a large a load
> as our old machine- so we do more loads.
> Jim
re: "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/consumer/alerts/alt070.shtm
"Typically, front-loaders use less water =97 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?
|
|
Posted by Tony on November 3, 2009, 10:06 am
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.
|
Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Front loading washers - any good? | February 25, 2009, 11:55 pm |
| Whirlpool Top-Loading Direct Drive Washers | February 13, 2007, 1:22 pm |
| Desperate for front-loading, top-loading washer advice | August 20, 2005, 9:44 pm |
| score! | February 3, 2008, 10:24 am |
| Score: Grandfather clock | November 16, 2009, 9:13 am |
| Mice...should we start keeping score? | November 7, 2006, 8:58 am |
| Point in Home Despot's favor (score now 16,489 to 10) | December 12, 2006, 1:15 pm |
| Front loading washing machines | August 11, 2005, 10:40 pm |
| Problem with GE profile top loading washer | February 20, 2009, 12:20 pm |
| Re: What brand top loading washer is most reliable | February 20, 2009, 1:53 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
>loader when there's water in it. This might not be a problem for most