3 ms·

Speedqueen washers and dryers are simple and made in the US. Built like tanks. Double the cost of the cheap imports though.

Der_Einzige 3y ago
Big note on this - Only the top loaders are available in the old-school "ultra-reliable" version that I think many want. Top loaders are more rough on clothes than front loaders. Many reputable repair techs claim that LG makes very solid and reliable front loaders which are more gentle on clothes than the speed queen front loaders. I was dead set on a speed queen top loader and then my wife started showing me this stuff (specifically detailed tests showing speed queens top loaders being rough on clothes)
- samsolomon 3y ago
  FWIW, we've had an LG front-loader for the last 5 years and have had zero issues. They do have a wifi capability to notify, but we've never connected them or felt the need to. If we moved, I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one.
- throwaway09223 3y ago
  I've used both a top loader (currently a speed queen) and a front loader washer each for more than a decade. I have many t-shirts that are 20+ years old. Any wear from the washer seems negligible in comparison to the wear from actually wearing the clothes. There's no discernible difference. But there's a HUGE difference in terms of ability to clean. If I'm out doing yardwork and I have a pair of jeans with deep mud stains on the knees the old style top loader agitators can clean them just fine. The front loaders cannot no matter how many times I run them through. I end up having to scrub the jeans between my knuckles in the laundry sink - moderate agitation breaks up the mud and it rinses out easily. I suspect a lot of this "agitators are rough" nonsense comes from modern washers that don't use a sufficient amount of water. But the SQ has a setting to use the normal amount of water so it's a non-issue. Most analysis I've seen (eg: from Consumer Reports) refuses to consider top loaders with normal water usage settings -- the data is basically invalid. A lot of Consumer Reports analysis has this type of problem where the entire study is built on a false premise. Front loaders might be fine if your clothes never get dirty and only need occasional light rinsing. They're really terrible for actually cleaning dirt.
  - amluto 3y ago
    The LG front loaders are very good at cleaning clothing. Wirecutter has done actual tests, and they seem to perform nearly as well as top loaders with agitators, but they don’t damage clothing anywhere near as much. My experience matches — mine cleans even better than the top-loader-with-agitator than I remember as a kid, and it’s much much better than the crappy commercial coin-operated top-loader I used to use. (They do try to minimize water usage, which means that if you have the water soluble sort of mess on the laundry, you may need to select a “heavy soil” mode or add something wet and heavy to the load. The former takes two straightforward button presses, although LG sadly seems to have switched to capacitive “buttons” on newer models.) Also, the speed wash cycle is genuinely fast and seems to work fine. edit: What do you mean top loaders with normal water usage? Most top loaders want as much water is needed to cover the clothing. They gain nothing except longer cycle time if you use more water, and they don’t get clothing clean if you use too little.
    - throwaway09223 3y ago
      I've used the LG frontloaders. They are not effective at removing muddy stains. They simply can't do the job. Wirecutter doesn't publish their methodology, but every "tester" who has focuses on questionable metrics -- such as testing stain types that don't require agitation to remove. In my experience most people who are happy with them don't have very dirty clothing to begin with. Regarding normal water usage: It is not true that washers "gain nothing" by using more water. More water protects clothing under agitation and aids in removing dirt. From the SQ manual: "Wash delicate items usually washed by hand on this cycle. A full tub of water is recommended (even for small loads) to allow the delicate items to move freely through the water. More water helps reduce fabric wear, wrinkling, and provides for a clean wash." https://speedqueen.com/au/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2019/01/AWNA62-BLACK-USER-GUIDE-AWNA62SN305AW01.pdf https://speedqueen.com/au/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2019/0... This is the precise issue: 1) Regulators required low-water modes 2) Low water modes clean less effectively and are rougher on clothes 3) Front loaders are designed to work with low water loads, but still don't clean well 3) All modern washers are now terrible, except models that intentionally skirt regulations - such as SQ High-water agitation is the best by far. The only drawback is increased water use - which is insignificant. The entire issue is a result of bad washer regulations.
cereal_cable 3y ago
We bought a Maytag set because it's capacity was larger than the Speed queens. I've never been more angry at a company. We threw in the towel and junked them they were so bad. Literally couldn't give them away bad. Apparently everyone I knew either already knew or trusted my experience so I couldn't unload them. Now, we have speed queens and I no longer am using buckets to fill our washing machine, don't have to babysit it, it doesn't randomly jump in the air suddenly as it's gotten out of balance for the 4th time in the day. I would never willingly wish that upon someone.

Der_Einzige 3y ago

Big note on this - Only the top loaders are available in the old-school "ultra-reliable" version that I think many want. Top loaders are more rough on clothes than front loaders. Many reputable repair techs claim that LG makes very solid and reliable front loaders which are more gentle on clothes than the speed queen front loaders. I was dead set on a speed queen top loader and then my wife started showing me this stuff (specifically detailed tests showing speed queens top loaders being rough on clothes)

samsolomon 3y ago
FWIW, we've had an LG front-loader for the last 5 years and have had zero issues. They do have a wifi capability to notify, but we've never connected them or felt the need to. If we moved, I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one.
throwaway09223 3y ago
I've used both a top loader (currently a speed queen) and a front loader washer each for more than a decade. I have many t-shirts that are 20+ years old. Any wear from the washer seems negligible in comparison to the wear from actually wearing the clothes. There's no discernible difference. But there's a HUGE difference in terms of ability to clean. If I'm out doing yardwork and I have a pair of jeans with deep mud stains on the knees the old style top loader agitators can clean them just fine. The front loaders cannot no matter how many times I run them through. I end up having to scrub the jeans between my knuckles in the laundry sink - moderate agitation breaks up the mud and it rinses out easily. I suspect a lot of this "agitators are rough" nonsense comes from modern washers that don't use a sufficient amount of water. But the SQ has a setting to use the normal amount of water so it's a non-issue. Most analysis I've seen (eg: from Consumer Reports) refuses to consider top loaders with normal water usage settings -- the data is basically invalid. A lot of Consumer Reports analysis has this type of problem where the entire study is built on a false premise. Front loaders might be fine if your clothes never get dirty and only need occasional light rinsing. They're really terrible for actually cleaning dirt.
- amluto 3y ago
  The LG front loaders are very good at cleaning clothing. Wirecutter has done actual tests, and they seem to perform nearly as well as top loaders with agitators, but they don’t damage clothing anywhere near as much. My experience matches — mine cleans even better than the top-loader-with-agitator than I remember as a kid, and it’s much much better than the crappy commercial coin-operated top-loader I used to use. (They do try to minimize water usage, which means that if you have the water soluble sort of mess on the laundry, you may need to select a “heavy soil” mode or add something wet and heavy to the load. The former takes two straightforward button presses, although LG sadly seems to have switched to capacitive “buttons” on newer models.) Also, the speed wash cycle is genuinely fast and seems to work fine. edit: What do you mean top loaders with normal water usage? Most top loaders want as much water is needed to cover the clothing. They gain nothing except longer cycle time if you use more water, and they don’t get clothing clean if you use too little.
  - throwaway09223 3y ago
    I've used the LG frontloaders. They are not effective at removing muddy stains. They simply can't do the job. Wirecutter doesn't publish their methodology, but every "tester" who has focuses on questionable metrics -- such as testing stain types that don't require agitation to remove. In my experience most people who are happy with them don't have very dirty clothing to begin with. Regarding normal water usage: It is not true that washers "gain nothing" by using more water. More water protects clothing under agitation and aids in removing dirt. From the SQ manual: "Wash delicate items usually washed by hand on this cycle. A full tub of water is recommended (even for small loads) to allow the delicate items to move freely through the water. More water helps reduce fabric wear, wrinkling, and provides for a clean wash." https://speedqueen.com/au/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2019/01/AWNA62-BLACK-USER-GUIDE-AWNA62SN305AW01.pdf https://speedqueen.com/au/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2019/0... This is the precise issue: 1) Regulators required low-water modes 2) Low water modes clean less effectively and are rougher on clothes 3) Front loaders are designed to work with low water loads, but still don't clean well 3) All modern washers are now terrible, except models that intentionally skirt regulations - such as SQ High-water agitation is the best by far. The only drawback is increased water use - which is insignificant. The entire issue is a result of bad washer regulations.

cereal_cable 3y ago

We bought a Maytag set because it's capacity was larger than the Speed queens. I've never been more angry at a company. We threw in the towel and junked them they were so bad. Literally couldn't give them away bad. Apparently everyone I knew either already knew or trusted my experience so I couldn't unload them. Now, we have speed queens and I no longer am using buckets to fill our washing machine, don't have to babysit it, it doesn't randomly jump in the air suddenly as it's gotten out of balance for the 4th time in the day. I would never willingly wish that upon someone.