2 ms·
To play the Devil's advocate, this might just be survival bias manifesting. The old top loader might have accidentally had top 0.0001 quality (tighter-than-aver
by nsajko 3y ago
To play the Devil's advocate, this might just be survival bias manifesting. The old top loader might have accidentally had top 0.0001 quality (tighter-than-average tolerances, etc).
- bombcar 3y agoNah, it broke "about" as often as the others (making allowances for complications and design differences), it's just that when it broke, it was fixable for a reasonable amount because there was no computer board in it. A similar but later top loader that I had died almost the same way, but required an entire control board replacement similar to the front loader; too expensive to bother with. (Now an enterprising person could likely have repaired the control board itself, but that's beyond my "remove and swap" competencies.)