6 ms·

What I would like to know is why the America average wash cycle requires around 40 gallons (151L) of water [1], when my machine in Europe uses around 13 gallons

What I would like to know is why the America average wash cycle requires around 40 gallons (151L) of water [1], when my machine in Europe uses around 13 gallons (50L) and a 10 year old one uses 22 gallons (84L). [1] https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/06/08/new-california-water-law-restrictions-shower-laundry/ https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/06/08/new-california-wa...

ComputerGuru 7y ago
The USA is slowly moving to front-loading washers. The top loaders were water hogs.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Like currently moving to front loaders? Top loaders were once common in the UK, but I don't think I've seen one since the seventies, maybe eighties.
  - arethuza 7y ago
    Last time I saw a top-loading washing machine was 1988 in a student flat!
  - kube-system 7y ago
    Yes, currently. Right now it’s probably around 50/50. There are still many people who prefer the lower price and familiar design.
  - pansa2 7y ago
    Top loaders are still common in Australia and New Zealand. They’re terrible, but they are cheaper than front loaders and are what many people are used to.
    - teruakohatu 7y ago
      They are great for people like me who remember to put something in something just after I start running it.
      - raducu 7y ago
        I can pause my front loader and add laundry, I'm not sure how the machine does it, perhaps I cannot add just whenever I want -- depending on the wash cycle, but I've never had the problem of not being able to pause the washing and add new laundry that I forgot.
        ComputerGuru 7y ago
        Front loaders are extremely water efficient, there’s not much water in there and when you use the pause feature it can drain away enough water should that be necessary to make it safe to open, but mainly it just gives the clothes and liquid a chance to tumble to the bottom as they’d all spill right out otherwise and (then release the lock to make actually opening the door possible). By contrast, top loaders don’t even have a lock and don’t need a pause feature. There is usually a trigger switch to detect when the lid is open to stop the agitation for safety reasons, but there is no mechanical lockout and no delay: you can just open the lid.
- sparkling 7y ago
  Comfortable to use tho
- sjg007 7y ago
  The problem with front loaders are that the rubber gaskets get moldy. You can get lower water use top losers now.
  - Symbiote 7y ago
    If possible, just leave the door and detergent drawer open.
    - ComputerGuru 7y ago
      +1 for also mentioning the detergent drawer. That thing is a breeding ground, I believe many molds thrive off of detergents.
    - sjg007 7y ago
      I mean, yes, but it is just annoying to have to do that.
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    Ours has a cleaning cycle we run about once a month that sanitizes the machine. I've been adding a recommended cleaner with it, but I think even that is unneeded.
  - rsynnott 7y ago
    I've never actually had this happen in 35 years (I live in a front loader country, and have never used a top loader). I'm not sure if there's something different about American front-loaders, or if it's just some difference in usage practices. Or it could be use of liquid detergents, which seem to be more common in the US. My washing machine's manual specifically warns not to use liquid or pod detergents, and they lead to internal buildup.
- Sharlin 7y ago
  I was confused by this and the sibling comment, but apparently "top-loader" in the US sense means a type where the drum's spin axis is vertical – which I didn't even know existed before this thread. "Top-loader" around here (Northern Europe at least) means a design where the spin axis is horizontal but you load and unload the machine from the top, via a hatch on the side of the drum. Because the drum is oriented the same way as in a front-loader, water usage should be equal.
- thrower123 7y ago
  Unfortunately a cheap front-loader only lasts about 3-5 years under normal usage, whereas the equivalent top-loader tends to last twice as long. I have no idea why that should be the case, but I've seen that too many times to discount it. Washing machines are in a weird place where they are expensive to replace, but parts and labor to fix them when they break is almost, if not more expensive.
kube-system 7y ago
My front-loader in the US uses about the same as yours. Top loaders were popular in the US for a long time, and they generally fill all the way up.
- majewsky 7y ago
  > Top loaders [...] generally fill all the way up. I have a top loader (a Whirlpool from 2011) and it most definitely doesn't fill "all the way up". It uses as little water as a modern front loader and also adjusts the water level based on fill level.
  - kube-system 7y ago
    I should have used past tense. I have heard the newer high efficiency ones don’t fill up all the way, but the older and cheaper models I had absolutely did.
    - derekp7 7y ago
      Every old model I've used had a water level selector. Small, medium and large. Even going back 50 years. Now the modern washers don't trust you to make the proper selection, and often don't get your clothes completely wet.
      - SECProto 7y ago
        To supplement your anecdata: having used many an old top loader, they do have different fill levels - varying from "small" filling halfway up the drum to "large" as high as it can go. As an individual, even using the "small" setting uses a huge amount of water - no way to wash a few pairs of socks or whatever other small loads you might have. I've never had an issue with modern front loaders not getting my clothes wet. They are much better at spinning them dry at the end, though.
      - kube-system 7y ago
        Right, and all of those low-efficiency units had to cover the clothes in water because they only agitated horizontally. Whereas my front loader agitates vertically and lifts the clothes in and out of a smaller amount of water.
syshum 7y ago
Because we like our clothes to actually get clean
- asynch8 7y ago
  wasting water does not get your stuff 'more clean'
- thomasahle 7y ago
  You probably have to cite some studies on this, if you want to convince anyone that more water is required.
unishark 7y ago
> What I would like to know is why the America average wash cycle requires around 40 gallons (151L) of water [1] Your source does not call this the average, but the upper limit. Washing machines have a range of sizes you can set them at ranging from small to "super-max". Also a range of durations depending on how many cycles and how much washing is needed. You'd need to relate it to how much laundry gets washed per gallon. Also, some parts of the US are semi-tropical and even swamp. Not every state is as worried about conserving water.

ComputerGuru 7y ago

The USA is slowly moving to front-loading washers. The top loaders were water hogs.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Like currently moving to front loaders? Top loaders were once common in the UK, but I don't think I've seen one since the seventies, maybe eighties.
- arethuza 7y ago
  Last time I saw a top-loading washing machine was 1988 in a student flat!
- kube-system 7y ago
  Yes, currently. Right now it’s probably around 50/50. There are still many people who prefer the lower price and familiar design.
- pansa2 7y ago
  Top loaders are still common in Australia and New Zealand. They’re terrible, but they are cheaper than front loaders and are what many people are used to.
  - teruakohatu 7y ago
    They are great for people like me who remember to put something in something just after I start running it.
    - raducu 7y ago
      I can pause my front loader and add laundry, I'm not sure how the machine does it, perhaps I cannot add just whenever I want -- depending on the wash cycle, but I've never had the problem of not being able to pause the washing and add new laundry that I forgot.
      - ComputerGuru 7y ago
        Front loaders are extremely water efficient, there’s not much water in there and when you use the pause feature it can drain away enough water should that be necessary to make it safe to open, but mainly it just gives the clothes and liquid a chance to tumble to the bottom as they’d all spill right out otherwise and (then release the lock to make actually opening the door possible). By contrast, top loaders don’t even have a lock and don’t need a pause feature. There is usually a trigger switch to detect when the lid is open to stop the agitation for safety reasons, but there is no mechanical lockout and no delay: you can just open the lid.
sparkling 7y ago
Comfortable to use tho
sjg007 7y ago
The problem with front loaders are that the rubber gaskets get moldy. You can get lower water use top losers now.
- Symbiote 7y ago
  If possible, just leave the door and detergent drawer open.
  - ComputerGuru 7y ago
    +1 for also mentioning the detergent drawer. That thing is a breeding ground, I believe many molds thrive off of detergents.
  - sjg007 7y ago
    I mean, yes, but it is just annoying to have to do that.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  Ours has a cleaning cycle we run about once a month that sanitizes the machine. I've been adding a recommended cleaner with it, but I think even that is unneeded.
- rsynnott 7y ago
  I've never actually had this happen in 35 years (I live in a front loader country, and have never used a top loader). I'm not sure if there's something different about American front-loaders, or if it's just some difference in usage practices. Or it could be use of liquid detergents, which seem to be more common in the US. My washing machine's manual specifically warns not to use liquid or pod detergents, and they lead to internal buildup.
Sharlin 7y ago
I was confused by this and the sibling comment, but apparently "top-loader" in the US sense means a type where the drum's spin axis is vertical – which I didn't even know existed before this thread. "Top-loader" around here (Northern Europe at least) means a design where the spin axis is horizontal but you load and unload the machine from the top, via a hatch on the side of the drum. Because the drum is oriented the same way as in a front-loader, water usage should be equal.
thrower123 7y ago
Unfortunately a cheap front-loader only lasts about 3-5 years under normal usage, whereas the equivalent top-loader tends to last twice as long. I have no idea why that should be the case, but I've seen that too many times to discount it. Washing machines are in a weird place where they are expensive to replace, but parts and labor to fix them when they break is almost, if not more expensive.

kube-system 7y ago

My front-loader in the US uses about the same as yours. Top loaders were popular in the US for a long time, and they generally fill all the way up.

majewsky 7y ago
> Top loaders [...] generally fill all the way up. I have a top loader (a Whirlpool from 2011) and it most definitely doesn't fill "all the way up". It uses as little water as a modern front loader and also adjusts the water level based on fill level.
- kube-system 7y ago
  I should have used past tense. I have heard the newer high efficiency ones don’t fill up all the way, but the older and cheaper models I had absolutely did.
  - derekp7 7y ago
    Every old model I've used had a water level selector. Small, medium and large. Even going back 50 years. Now the modern washers don't trust you to make the proper selection, and often don't get your clothes completely wet.
    - SECProto 7y ago
      To supplement your anecdata: having used many an old top loader, they do have different fill levels - varying from "small" filling halfway up the drum to "large" as high as it can go. As an individual, even using the "small" setting uses a huge amount of water - no way to wash a few pairs of socks or whatever other small loads you might have. I've never had an issue with modern front loaders not getting my clothes wet. They are much better at spinning them dry at the end, though.
    - kube-system 7y ago
      Right, and all of those low-efficiency units had to cover the clothes in water because they only agitated horizontally. Whereas my front loader agitates vertically and lifts the clothes in and out of a smaller amount of water.

syshum 7y ago

Because we like our clothes to actually get clean

asynch8 7y ago
wasting water does not get your stuff 'more clean'
thomasahle 7y ago
You probably have to cite some studies on this, if you want to convince anyone that more water is required.

unishark 7y ago

> What I would like to know is why the America average wash cycle requires around 40 gallons (151L) of water [1] Your source does not call this the average, but the upper limit. Washing machines have a range of sizes you can set them at ranging from small to "super-max". Also a range of durations depending on how many cycles and how much washing is needed. You'd need to relate it to how much laundry gets washed per gallon. Also, some parts of the US are semi-tropical and even swamp. Not every state is as worried about conserving water.