# Front loaders vs. Top loaders



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

Front loader washers. What is everyone's take on them that have made the switch over to them ? Happy or somewhere in between ?

We have had top loader washing machines for 24 years now. When we moved in to our present home with it's goofy width utility room, we had to buy the stacked washer / dryer setup. 

I am* NOT feeling the love* for this front loader washing machine at all. 

As I am now for the first time ever, having to take my 40 or so car maintenance micro fiber towels, to a laundromat to wash them. Sucks to be me I reckon. :smile:


----------



## chandler48 (Jun 5, 2017)

We had an ancient Maytag Neptune front loader until it died, and it did a great job. They were full sized though. I bought a top loader without the tall impeller on sale to replace it, and it works good, too. We have a stacked Maytag in our rental cabin and it is the boss. Get the stuff in the door to where it closes and it will wash it.

I can't imagine you getting away with washing shop towels in your household washer. I would be drawn, quartered and strewn amongst the hungry coyotes if I did that.


----------



## Druidia (Oct 9, 2011)

Front loader Speed Queen!

More versatile - excellent for washing pillows, throw pillows, duvets, puffy coats, heavy coats, rugs.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

chandler48 said:


> We had an ancient Maytag Neptune front loader until it died, and it did a great job. They were full sized though. I bought a top loader without the tall impeller on sale to replace it, and it works good, too. We have a stacked Maytag in our rental cabin and it is the boss. Get the stuff in the door to where it closes and it will wash it.
> 
> I can't imagine you getting away with washing shop towels in your household washer. I would be drawn, quartered and strewn amongst the hungry coyotes if I did that.



After the first load of microfibers towels I ran in our front loader, my wife about croaked. She opened up the washer door and found car cleaning "dust" packed around the door gasket. I never had that problem with my MF towel's being put in our top loaders. 

PLUS, my wife wants to "baby" this top loader, geez. " Stop, she tells me, you are overloading it ! just as I load it like I did our top loaders. 

She is running the machine to death, with what I call HALF loads of laundry for a good ole' top loader. What a wimpy washer.


----------



## CaptTom (Dec 31, 2017)

First off, today's front-loaders are NOT yesterday's top-loaders.

Front loaders should actually wash better with a large enough load to get some good agitation going. Old ones you could pack totally full and they'd clean great. New ones maybe not quite so much, but you should be able to get a full load. Smaller loads may or may not come out OK.

The other issue with any new washer is that they strive to be energy-efficient. I suspect that, to achieve an "Energy Star" rating (or whatever) they have simply switched the controls. the "Normal" setting is what used to be the "lightly soiled" setting. Less water, and no hot water.

On ours, the clothes barely get wet on the normal setting. We ONLY use the heavy-duty setting. This uses hot water for the wash cycle, and enough to actually get the clothes clean. It takes a lot longer but we're pretty happy with the results.

To "baby" a front loader, keep it dry. The big problem is mildew. We wipe down the gaskets (inside the folds and out) and leave the door open after every use. If it has a clean-out, check it regularly. You might have to look in the manual, they're sometimes hidden.


----------



## chandler48 (Jun 5, 2017)

> She is running the machine to death


Yeah the top loaders don't do the large loads, and without the agitator, you have to position the clothes open around the center. It works fine and only uses the water needed as opposed to the older top loaders which used 20 gallons per cycle  I still prefer front loaders. Stuff it and forget it........except for the MF towels. I'll pass on that.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

CaptTom said:


> First off, today's front-loaders are NOT yesterday's top-loaders.
> 
> Front loaders should actually wash better with a large enough load to get some good agitation going. Old ones you could pack totally full and they'd clean great. New ones maybe not quite so much, but you should be able to get a full load. Smaller loads may or may not come out OK.
> 
> ...


All true. I did find the washer drain filter on the bottom left of the machine and I clean it every 3 months. We keep the detergent tray and the door cracked open, to "air" it out to slow the mildew. 

I agree about the energy savings over the top loaders. But still, our front loader cannot get close to cleaning my work project clothes, like our old top loader could. We have to "spot clean" spray them before putting them in the washer. 

I have come up with a way to expand our crappy sized utility room to accept side by side top loaders, just need the spare $$$ to do so. Other than the lower performance of the TL washer, when these two TL machines die...I do not want to pay the extra higher costs of these TL's again. My wife and I both, want the top loader machines again. JMO


----------



## Guap0_ (Dec 2, 2017)

Greg, I use commercial front loaders in the laundromat. Tell you wife that they can be stuffed to the max. It doesn't hurt them. Keep the door opened when not in use.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

I am not sure GuapO, seems like the laundomats commercial units can choke down a lot more than our residential grade Samsung could. 

Plus, I am not starting any more "war of the wits" with my wife, as I lost the last battle with her.... with me being short on ammo.


----------



## Guap0_ (Dec 2, 2017)

Greg, LOL. you're probably right about the difference between commercial & residential & about the war of wits.


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

CaptTom said:


> First off, today's front-loaders are NOT yesterday's top-loaders.
> 
> Front loaders should actually wash better with a large enough load to get some good agitation going. Old ones you could pack totally full and they'd clean great. New ones maybe not quite so much, but you should be able to get a full load. Smaller loads may or may not come out OK.
> 
> ...


In other words, if you bypass the energy efficient BS you might be able to get your clothes clean. I'd love to see any data that makes your claim that top loaders don't clean as well. Total BS. I had a top of the line Samsung and it did well until the main board died. Couldn't buy a new one anymore, a whopping 8 years old, so I ditched it and got a top loader Speed Queen. It washes in half the time. Uses more water but that's OK for here. I water poor areas it might be more of an issue. But the clothes come out better, how could they not? They sit in a tub of water and get agitated very well. The SQ is essentially a commercial machine with no coin slots. USA made too! For a stacked setup there isn't much of a choice though.


----------



## CaptTom (Dec 31, 2017)

JasperST said:


> In other words, if you bypass the energy efficient BS you might be able to get your clothes clean.


Correct. Surprisingly enough, the whole REASON I bought a washer was to get my clothes clean, not minimize my water use. How odd.



JasperST said:


> I'd love to see any data that makes your claim that top loaders don't clean as well. Total BS.


You won't get any hard data from me. I always preferred top loaders, and I suspect that's what I'll buy when this front loader dies.

I wouldn't go so far as calling BS though. I actually once ran a laundromat. I do know a thing or two about washers.

There are good ones, and bad ones. Most of the old-style, commercial front loaders were fantastic at getting a LOT of clothes really clean. It took a lot of water, and a lot of energy to do so. Many top-loaders are pretty good, too.

Nowadays everything is built to be as cheap, light and energy-efficient as possible. These all compromise their cleaning ability. They are overly complicated with electronic brains, fashionable lighting and a dizzying array of controls. These do nothing to improve reliability.

I wish I'd kept the first top-loader I bought (cheaply) 37 years ago when I bought my house. I'm sure it would still run fine. I probably replaced just about every part on that thing at one time or another, and it just kept on going. It ran on a mechanical timer, no computer. I think the controls were two dials. It cleaned great!


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

CaptTom said:


> Correct. Surprisingly enough, the whole REASON I bought a washer was to get my clothes clean, not minimize my water use. How odd.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If your top loader wasn't getting clothes clean there was a problem. You don't have to have the cheapest machine, the Speed Queen was about twice to money and they give you a 10 year warranty on the drive train. It has an old school set of basic controls and timer. One does not have to have all the complications if they don't want to. However, I couldn't find it locally.


----------



## DanS26 (Oct 25, 2012)

We have a Maytag Neptune.....about one of the first ones made. I've replaced many parts including tub bearings, wax motors, pumps, flow mixer, etc......but we love the machine. The best feature about front loaders is that they are easier on clothes. The tumbling action seems to be gentler on clothing than stand up agitator on top loaders.

My wife would not let me put any "barn clothes" in her Maytag....no mud, no oil or grease, no manure, no shop rags, etc. So I went out and bought the cheapest top load Hotpoint I could find and installed it in the wash room. Now we are both happy.....plus we have a back up machine for that old Maytag.......but I might have to run a few gallons of bleach through it if she ever wanted to wash her stuff in it.


----------



## NotYerUncleBob2 (Dec 29, 2017)

Had a top loader from Sears I think, it came with the house. It worked ok, but it used a ton of water, was harsh on clothes, and by the end was starting to do weird things intermittently like not rinsing out the soap. 
We replaced the washer and dryer with a set of Whirlpool Duet a few years back and they've been great. Full loads of work clothes come out spotless. Uses way less water. The spin makes the clothes almost dry so you're using much less time and energy in the dryer. Much quieter and when they're done they just play a pleasant little tune instead of the "WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!" that made you think a missile was about to blow up your house. 
Extremely happy with the modern front loaders and no interest in ever getting a top loader again.


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

NotYerUncleBob2 said:


> Had a top loader from Sears I think, it came with the house. It worked ok, but it used a ton of water, was harsh on clothes, and by the end was starting to do weird things intermittently like not rinsing out the soap.
> We replaced the washer and dryer with a set of Whirlpool Duet a few years back and they've been great. Full loads of work clothes come out spotless. Uses way less water. The spin makes the clothes almost dry so you're using much less time and energy in the dryer. Much quieter and when they're done they just play a pleasant little tune instead of the "WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!" that made you think a missile was about to blow up your house.
> Extremely happy with the modern front loaders and no interest in ever getting a top loader again.


Except you are comparing a top of the line front loader with an old low end top loader that had a problem. I don't miss my tunes or the bucking bronco routine when the anti-vibration went out on the fancy Samsung.


----------



## Dave Sal (Dec 20, 2012)

Had a Kenmore Elite front loader for about five years. It barely used any water, spun the clothes almost dry, but didn't clean well at all. Clothes didn't come out smelling fresh. My wife hated it and put up with it but we finally decided enough was enough and got a SpeedQueen top loader. It was about $850, which was almost $400 cheaper than the Kenmore front loader last February. It uses as much water as I want and gets the clothes clean and fresh. I'm all for saving water but not at the expense of clothes that don't come clean. Love the SpeedQueen.


----------



## NotYerUncleBob2 (Dec 29, 2017)

JasperST said:


> Except you are comparing a top of the line front loader with an old low end top loader that had a problem. I don't miss my tunes or the bucking bronco routine when the anti-vibration went out on the fancy Samsung.


Not exactly. The Kenmore top loader that came with the house was top of the line when it came out and worked as it was supposed to until the problems developed toward the end. It was ok, but never great. The Whirlpool is probably mid range, but still a really nice washer. I've been really impressed with it. I'd say our clothes are cleaner with the Whirlpool front loader and they're not taking the beating from the agitator like they were in the top loader. No missing buttons or anything like that anymore. 
I haven't heard anything great about the Samsung washers. They make a nice 4k TV, but I didn't buy the Samsung washer after finding out about them not making parts for ones that were only a few years old.


----------



## MTN REMODEL LLC (Sep 11, 2010)

We recently got rid of our 30+ year old Whilpool TL.... it was a beast that would not quit.

We did go with Samsung FL that works ok, considering the kids are gone and I've pretty well slowed down with really dirty clothes....

BUT, I was reading on the internet (in regard to the Samsung unit), and there are a couple of tricks to have it use more water.

Have not needed to try them yet, but as I recall one had to do with adjusting some internal controls and the other advised wetting all the clothes first, as apparently water fill is somewhat a function of the weight of the clothes.

And I had to build some decking/stand for my wife, as fishing clothes out of that unit was quite a choir/job.

Plus, I've heard the longevity of these new units sucks at 8-10 years.

I guess I'd go get a good TL if we were to do it again.

Good luck

EDIT: They are alot quiter, and I'm sure use alot less energy.... and I did dump some drywall work clothes in it, and I was the one cleaning it out.

Pro's and cons....???? IDK


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

NotYerUncleBob2 said:


> Not exactly. The Kenmore top loader that came with the house was top of the line when it came out and worked as it was supposed to until the problems developed toward the end. It was ok, but never great. The Whirlpool is probably mid range, but still a really nice washer. I've been really impressed with it. I'd say our clothes are cleaner with the Whirlpool front loader and they're not taking the beating from the agitator like they were in the top loader. No missing buttons or anything like that anymore.
> I haven't heard anything great about the Samsung washers. They make a nice 4k TV, but I didn't buy the Samsung washer after finding out about them not making parts for ones that were only a few years old.


Buy what you want but your story shifts to make your point. Now the top loader was top of the line and the front loader only midrange. Anyone that claims a top of the line top loader didn't get clothes clean if full of crap.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

Hey guys, take it easy on each other please. We are not comparing who has the best classic Corvette or welder here.... my OP is about *washing machines* :smile:


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> Hey guys, take it easy on each other please. We are not comparing who has the best classic Corvette or welder here.... my OP is about *washing machines* :smile:


You missed the point then. They each have pluses and minuses. But when someone makes false claims they could and should get called on it. Or is this a snowflake safe space?


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

JasperST said:


> Buy what you want but your story shifts to make your point. Now the top loader was top of the line and the front loader only midrange. Anyone that claims a top of the line top loader didn't get clothes clean if full of crap.


No snowflake here, just an old guy that tries to be civil when responding to the opposing viewpoints of others. Instead of telling someone they are full of sht ...


Maybe try this... has no clue. Or, needs to get better informed. 



People react adversely to offensive dialogue and then threads get closed. I am enjoying reading the replies to my thread here pro or con, as I am learning something from every reply.


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> No snowflake here, just an old guy that tries to be civil when responding to the opposing viewpoints of others. Instead of telling someone they are full of sht ...
> .


Anyone that tells me I'm wrong and says a top of the line top loading washing machine can't get clothes as clean as a middle range front loader is full of crap. That's my viewpoint. If that bothers you then skip my posts.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

JasperST said:


> Anyone that tells me I'm wrong and says a top of the line top loading washing machine can't get clothes as clean as a middle range front loader is full of crap. That's my viewpoint. If that bothers you then skip my posts.


I am* not disagreeing *with your opinion on TL's vs FL's washers, as I have already stated mine early on and we agree. 

I don't put people on ignore, as I believe all posters regardless of their grammar used, have something to contribute that I may learn from them. 

I will repeat, I just don't want my thread being closed from a flame war breaking out. Not yet anyway. 

Now, let us move on... as this dead horse has had enough lashes. Thanks, Greg


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> I am* not disagreeing *with your opinion on TL's vs FL's washers, as I have already stated mine early on and we agree.
> 
> I don't put people on ignore, as I believe all posters regardless of their grammar used, have something to contribute that I may learn from them.
> 
> ...


You're the only one that saw a flame war. If someone tells me I'm wrong and gives a phony example I'll call them on it. If you are that sensitive why post a thread?


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

JasperST said:


> You're the only one that saw a flame war. If someone tells me I'm wrong and gives a phony example I'll call them on it. If you are that sensitive why post a thread? Jesus!



Aw, look at what you made me do now....:crying::crying::crying::crying: I hope your happy now. Sniff...sniff...snuffle. 


So does anyone think with the supposed popularity of today's front loader's, will the top loaders just be phased out...or improved to keep competing ?


----------



## JasperST (Sep 7, 2012)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> Aw, look at what you made me do now....:crying::crying::crying::crying: I hope your happy now. Sniff...sniff...snuffle.
> 
> 
> So does anyone think with the supposed popularity of today's front loader's, will the top loaders just be phased out...or improved to keep competing ?


Like I said, yes. I had a top of the line front loader and now I have a basic top loader and it does better in half the time. If you are in a water poor area front loaders are for you. OK?


----------



## DanS26 (Oct 25, 2012)

I can't answer your question since I don't have a crystal ball, but the market will eventually name the winner.

But I do know this.....when I recently researched to find a low to mid range top load machine, I found out that the EPA (or whoever) has determined that we consumers are using too much hot water in our washing machines. They have rigged most new machines to be stingy on the amount of hot water mix on fill. You may ask for hot water but you only get luke warm.......except for the bottom of the line Hotpoint.

I need hot water and lots of it to wash my "barn clothes"....so I got the Hotpoint and then I also connected the hot and cold water hoses to the hot water faucet. Please don't tell the environmental police what I've done.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

Ah yes, the hypocrisy of the "water management". Our washers get starved of the needed water to get our clothes clean, and we get stuck with flushing our toilets twice, with our water saver 1.6 gallon or less...toilet tanks. 

All while the water device companies design huge "rain " shower heads and six shower head custom showers. .. that just entice people to run their showers longer. Yep, sure makes sense to me. :icon_rolleyes:JMO


----------



## mark sr (Jun 13, 2017)

Maybe I'm just old school but I prefer the top loaders. We bought a new washer several yrs ago - it's an energy/water saver. It saves water by not filling as high so even though it has the same size tub, we have to wash smaller loads if we want them clean. The energy savings comes from it stopping and resting, letting the clothes soak. I'm fine with that as that is what I used to do manually with my work clothes.

Some things do improve over time. We have two 1.6 commodes, the old one has to be flushed twice fairly often but the new one has always flushed well the first time.


----------



## Gregsoldtruck79 (Dec 21, 2017)

I recently installed the newer American Standard 4414A commodes in our home. How they have handled the problem flushes with their 1.6 gallon tanks is, they really oversized the flapper and water outlet opening from the tank to the bowl. These things "gulp" the flush water quickly. Very seldom now, do we get clogs. I am VERY pleased with them.


----------



## DanS26 (Oct 25, 2012)

Gregsoldtruck79 said:


> I recently installed the newer American Standard 4414A commodes in our home. How they have handled the problem flushes with their 1.6 gallon tanks is, they really oversized the flapper and water outlet opening from the tank to the bowl. These things "gulp" the flush water quickly. Very seldom now, do we get clogs. I am VERY pleased with them.


I don't know how we got from top loaders to front loaders.....but now we're talking about bottom loaders...:vs_laugh::vs_laugh::vs_laugh:

Greg may I suggest you look into Washlets for those new commodes? After a trip to Japan last year we became enamored with the Washlet devices. Never thought I'd say this...but those devices changed our lives much for the better.


----------



## NotYerUncleBob2 (Dec 29, 2017)

JasperST said:


> Buy what you want but your story shifts to make your point. Now the top loader was top of the line and the front loader only midrange. Anyone that claims a top of the line top loader didn't get clothes clean if full of crap.


Geez, I head out to the mountains for the week and miss all the fun! 
Like I said, the old top loader did ok, but not great. It was considered a high end model when it came out, but I'm sure the new top loaders would make it look like the old machine that it was. I guess you missed that in all your rage over someone not agreeing with your opinion. 
The front loader does better than the old machine, but I shouldn't be surprised by that since it also takes about two to three times as long to do a load of laundry. The other benefits are what tip the scale for me... quieter, gentler on the clothes, uses less water, spins to nearly dry so I don't have to run the dryer as long, and it gives me some nice counter space above it.
If I got a new industrial top loader it might be better at cleaning the clothes, might not, but I'm just not interested in one after having a good front loader. If I had a crappy front loader I might think otherwise, but the Duet is a good machine doing a good job so I'm happy with it. ...and not full of crap.


----------

