Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MrCertainly t1_j6cd1ty wrote

Reply to comment by RollingThunderPants in My baby is home; hit the scratch & dent jackpot. by buoyantgem

Full agreement. It's boogeyman bullshit, and they should get slapped in the face with a trout for peddling such fearmongering fucking lies.

I've used a Maytag-variant washer *my entire life. * like since I was a kid, and now I am on my own, I own a kirkland rebranded maytag. All center agitation. Old school mechanical kind.

I have clothes in my normal cycle that I've been wearing for the better part of 25 years. Some of the elastic has gone bad, and I absolutely have worn a few of the cheaper tshirts thin. But nothing unexpected for a 25 year old shirt worn about once every 2 weeks.

You know what is rough on clothes? These new front loaders that try to wash three pairs of jeans with two cups of water.

1

munchkin1911 t1_j6d5snf wrote

I didn't downvote you, but these 'new' frontloaders have been standard where I'm from since before I was born, and in my experience work just fine, however these top loaders seem extremely big maybe you can't build a frontloader as big as a top loader without it going to shit.

5

felafrom t1_j6cwbqi wrote

So somehow you're salty about high efficiency washers?

I feel like slapping you in the face with a trout because you don't provide any proven data to back up your claim either.

God damn the irony of your comment.

4

Thertrius t1_j6exhil wrote

So you’re saying that they made a more gentle version in 2015 that washes less effectively because their old one wasn’t getting frequent reviews where impact on clothing was an issue?

And you cite “efficiency” like it’s the deathblow to all other models yet speed Queen are undeniably less efficient if your efficiency metric is related to use of electricity or water than say a top model Miele front loader.

Your efficiency metric is “time” and probably excludes the work taken to “pre-treat” stains because the speed Queen is less efficient at stain removal than more modern configurations.

There is no doubt they are built for longevity and quick cycles however to say that they are the only thing that matter in an “efficiency” claim is ludicrous enough that I want to slap your salty face with a trout

0

MrCertainly t1_j6dcli7 wrote

I'm a rando on the internet. You want evidence, go fucking get it yourself. I am not beholden to your needs.

−4