Advice for a top load washing machine (Fisher-Paykel or West

[Peter]

I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)

Fisher-Paykel has Smart Drive which supposed to be gentle on clothes,
also Direct Drive means less mechanical parts to break down. It also
has auto-out-of-balance-correction, auto-lint-disposal, and a max spin
speed at 1000 rpm. The MW512 (Pride) is the lower end of its
counter-part GW512 (Excellence).

On the other hand, the Westinghouse one has slightly higher capacity,
delay start (not important for me), prewash/custom/favourite programs,
temperature sensing and time display. It also features a see-through
window, the LT609SA is better than its counter-part LT608SA.

Both machines have 2-star energy rating and AAAA water rating. Which
is a better machine out of these two? I've heard both good and bad
things about Fisher-Paykel, but hardly anything about Westinghouse
(fridges yes, but not washers).

There're heaps of used Fisher-Paykel on eBay, I also saw lots of
re-conditioned Fisher-Paykel on the paper. Is it because they're
popular and have a large market share? Or simply because they're no
good and problematic?

I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks.

 

Peter wrote:

I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)
]

Hi Pete. I don't know about Westinghouse, but I've owned a F&P 6.5 kg.
smart drive for about 4.5 years. Absolutely NO problems at all, but I
have heard of plenty on the net. Just wondering when my turn will come.

I think that they are very hard on clothes, towels etc. fray along the
edges, I think this is because of the sudden reversal of the adgitator,
if you use the gentle wash, it seems to be better, but then high speed
spin is not available.
I have made up my mind that if it dies I will replace it with a front
loader.
Cheer's, Ian Sutherland.

 

[eltan]

Visit ur local library for Choice magazine or access online, the magazine
just did a review & test of washing machine 2-3months ago.

I think their best buy is LG.


"Peter" <p19010101@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c48d0aae.0501230342.2faa7ad0@posting.google.com...

I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)

Fisher-Paykel has Smart Drive which supposed to be gentle on clothes,
also Direct Drive means less mechanical parts to break down. It also
has auto-out-of-balance-correction, auto-lint-disposal, and a max spin
speed at 1000 rpm. The MW512 (Pride) is the lower end of its
counter-part GW512 (Excellence).

On the other hand, the Westinghouse one has slightly higher capacity,
delay start (not important for me), prewash/custom/favourite programs,
temperature sensing and time display. It also features a see-through
window, the LT609SA is better than its counter-part LT608SA.

Both machines have 2-star energy rating and AAAA water rating. Which
is a better machine out of these two? I've heard both good and bad
things about Fisher-Paykel, but hardly anything about Westinghouse
(fridges yes, but not washers).

There're heaps of used Fisher-Paykel on eBay, I also saw lots of
re-conditioned Fisher-Paykel on the paper. Is it because they're
popular and have a large market share? Or simply because they're no
good and problematic?

I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks.

 

[Mark Hathaway]

Yep, many a horror story regarding the Fisher and Paykel. Mine developed
shorted turns in the stepper motor, killed the driver stage and the power
supply, was 4 years old.

I was close to building my own drvierstage and writing new microprocessor
code and hunting down the shorted turns, water pump bearings were about dead
too (unsealed, wtf are they thinking, it's a damp area), but found a 9kg
commercial whirlpool for 150 bucks. Only problem is its so damned wide
doesn't fit in the washer space.


Build quality on the F&P is very cheap, you can do better
Mark



<zsutherland_oz@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106483256.105389.34690@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

Peter wrote:
I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)
]

Hi Pete. I don't know about Westinghouse, but I've owned a F&P 6.5 kg.
smart drive for about 4.5 years. Absolutely NO problems at all, but I
have heard of plenty on the net. Just wondering when my turn will come.

I think that they are very hard on clothes, towels etc. fray along the
edges, I think this is because of the sudden reversal of the adgitator,
if you use the gentle wash, it seems to be better, but then high speed
spin is not available.
I have made up my mind that if it dies I will replace it with a front
loader.
Cheer's, Ian Sutherland.

 

[khangu@gmail.com]

Seriously, don't rule out front loaders because of cost. Unless you
need a large capacity front loader, some could be had for not much more
than $600. Just shop around.

I remember sone LGs were down there in that price range. They are much
more efficient, using both energy and water. The wash cycles are a lot
longer though.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. I knew about the test report, but $11.95 for
3-day online access is a bit steep. What I didn't know is that Choice
magazine is available from my local library, so I went there this
afternoon had a quick look. Now I know where to go next time I need to
buy household appliances.

It's good to know that both machines are in the "what to buy" list. For
the benefit of others, following machines are recommended (from
September 2004 issue):

Small (up to 5.5 kg) RRP
---------------------------
Miele W828 F $1799
Whirlpool AWM5100 F $782*
Fisher-Paykel MW511 T $599
Hoover 500MD T $649
Simpson 36S550L T $699*

Medium (6 to 7 kg) RRP
---------------------------
Miele W1986 F $2999
Whirlpool AWM8121 F $968*
Westinghouse LT609S T $799
Hoover 600MD T $749*

Large (7.5 kg or more) RRP
---------------------------
LG WD-1019BD F $1999
Fisher-Paykel IW812 T $1099*

F = Front Loader
T = Top Loader
* = Best Buy

The full report includes a comprehensive feature comparison table,
check it out. The Fisher & Paykel MW511 is superceded by MW512, they're
practically the same except that MW512 has AAAA water rating thanks to
the added Eco option (MW511 is AA rated).

I've heard that Westinghouse washers are rebadge of LG, is it true? It
appears that Westinghouse, Simpson, Hoover, and possibly few other
brand names are now distributed by Electrolux.

Anyway, the report concludes that both machines are in the same league,
one employs direct drive technology while the other has higher
capacity. Fisher & Paykel's banner says "parts not there, can't fail",
but to me it means "parts not there, can't repair". I will go ahead
with the Westinghouse machine.

Peter


eltan wrote:

Visit ur local library for Choice magazine or access online, the
magazine
just did a review & test of washing machine 2-3months ago.

I think their best buy is LG.


"Peter" <p19010101@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c48d0aae.0501230342.2faa7ad0@posting.google.com...
I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't
really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)

Fisher-Paykel has Smart Drive which supposed to be gentle on
clothes,
also Direct Drive means less mechanical parts to break down. It
also
has auto-out-of-balance-correction, auto-lint-disposal, and a max
spin
speed at 1000 rpm. The MW512 (Pride) is the lower end of its
counter-part GW512 (Excellence).

On the other hand, the Westinghouse one has slightly higher
capacity,
delay start (not important for me), prewash/custom/favourite
programs,
temperature sensing and time display. It also features a
see-through
window, the LT609SA is better than its counter-part LT608SA.

Both machines have 2-star energy rating and AAAA water rating.
Which
is a better machine out of these two? I've heard both good and bad
things about Fisher-Paykel, but hardly anything about Westinghouse
(fridges yes, but not washers).

There're heaps of used Fisher-Paykel on eBay, I also saw lots of
re-conditioned Fisher-Paykel on the paper. Is it because they're
popular and have a large market share? Or simply because they're no
good and problematic?

I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks.

 

Thanks for the advice. Yes, I've seen front loader for under $600. In
fact, Retravision has the Whirlpool WF665 for $550 (cash price), but
it's a very basic machine. The Whirlpool AWM5100 is the best buy 5.5 kg
washer according to Choice, it retails for $782 (probably can be had
for $650 or so).

I know the benefits of front loaders, primarily they use less water and
electricity (it'll take years to pay off), but they also require
expensive low sud powders. Gentleness is the major selling point of
front loaders, but the wash cycle typically double the time required by
top loaders.

Some people may want to stack a dryer on top of the washer to save
space, but then most dryers come with wall mount brackets anyway. It
takes more affort to load/unload a front loader, people having back
problems best to stay away from it.

I'm not against of front loaders, I'll buy one if it's within my reach.
Just that I don't believe any front loader is better than top loaders.

 

[David Sauer]

On 24 Jan 2005 01:20:00 -0800, p19010101@yahoo.com wrote:

Medium (6 to 7 kg) RRP
---------------------------
Miele W1986 F $2999
Whirlpool AWM8121 F $968*
Westinghouse LT609S T $799
Hoover 600MD T $749*

^^ I recently picked up the Hoover 700LD for $650

It's a 7l model as compared to the 6l as priced above, however the LD
and MD suffix make me think mines a light duty and the other above is
medium duty?

It's a bare basics washer which IMO means less stuff to go wrong. The
last washer I had was 29 years old and in thee last 5 years need a
replacement water solenoid for $50, a new belt for a few bucks from
super cheap and then the motor finally died. Replacement was only $130
but too much trouble.

 

[David Clayton]

On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 02:01 -0800, p19010101@yahoo.com wrote:

Thanks for the advice. Yes, I've seen front loader for under $600. In
fact, Retravision has the Whirlpool WF665 for $550 (cash price), but
it's a very basic machine. The Whirlpool AWM5100 is the best buy 5.5 kg
washer according to Choice, it retails for $782 (probably can be had
for $650 or so).

I know the benefits of front loaders, primarily they use less water and
electricity (it'll take years to pay off), but they also require
expensive low sud powders.
........

They "require" nothing of the sort, many of us use standard powders with
little discernible difference in performance. All you have to do is use
less powder, and if necessary slightly extend the wash cycle to
compensate (although this may not be necessary.

Since the cost of washing powder (according to Choice, a few years ago,
if I remember correctly) makes up the vast majority of the yearly cost
of doing the washing, anything which reduces that must be a good thing.

--
Regards, David.

David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
(Remove the "XYZ." to reply)

Dilbert's words of wisdom #18: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you
down to their level then beat you with experience.

 

[Joerg]

Hello Peter,

We had both and will not buy a top loader again. Just my personal
opinion. The main difference we saw was that shirt collars wore faster
in the top loader. Roughed edges etc., can't wear them to biz or church
anymore. So did other stuff, some of it quite expensive. That, actually,
is to me the major cost factor because a decent shirt runs north of $35.

I'd gladly take longer cycles for the gentleness of a front loader.
Also, I'd insist on a stainless steel drum. On some others the slightest
ding in the enamel can cause mysterious rust spots on clothes.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[KLR]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 07:37:40 +1100, David Clayton
<dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com> wrote:

On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 02:01 -0800, p19010101@yahoo.com wrote:
Thanks for the advice. Yes, I've seen front loader for under $600. In
fact, Retravision has the Whirlpool WF665 for $550 (cash price), but
it's a very basic machine. The Whirlpool AWM5100 is the best buy 5.5 kg
washer according to Choice, it retails for $782 (probably can be had
for $650 or so).

I know the benefits of front loaders, primarily they use less water and
electricity (it'll take years to pay off), but they also require
expensive low sud powders.
.......
They "require" nothing of the sort, many of us use standard powders with
little discernible difference in performance. All you have to do is use
less powder, and if necessary slightly extend the wash cycle to
compensate (although this may not be necessary.

Since the cost of washing powder (according to Choice, a few years ago,
if I remember correctly) makes up the vast majority of the yearly cost
of doing the washing, anything which reduces that must be a good thing.

Agreed. I have used same (inexpensive - but not "no frills") powder
with my front loader as with the previous F & P smart drive. Both of
us agree that the cleanliness of all clothes is much better with the
front loader. (Bosch Maxx 1000). Also I find that the clothes seem
to last a lot longer too.


It does however take longer to perform the wash cycle

Front loader only uses a fraction of the water too, (quoted 7L per
wash cycle in this case) and even though the cost per litre mightnt be
that much per KL,

1> Over time - the costs do add up
2> We are having major water shortages in this country, and unless we
do make some effort to reduce usage by even small amounts where
possible, then we either face the consequences of having little to
waste, or governments will do it for us (or tax the hell out of us to
cover it)

The unit does heat its own water internally (has only got cold water
inlet hose) so power cost may be higher since you arent using off peak
hot water anymore, but as a positive, it can maintain optimum water
temperature throughout the entire wash, which may improve the action
of the washing powder too.

 

[eltan]

If & when I buy, I try to get "product of Aust".

<p19010101@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106558400.902752.55030@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Thanks for the suggestion. I knew about the test report, but $11.95 for
3-day online access is a bit steep. What I didn't know is that Choice
magazine is available from my local library, so I went there this
afternoon had a quick look. Now I know where to go next time I need to
buy household appliances.

It's good to know that both machines are in the "what to buy" list. For
the benefit of others, following machines are recommended (from
September 2004 issue):

Small (up to 5.5 kg) RRP
---------------------------
Miele W828 F $1799
Whirlpool AWM5100 F $782*
Fisher-Paykel MW511 T $599
Hoover 500MD T $649
Simpson 36S550L T $699*

Medium (6 to 7 kg) RRP
---------------------------
Miele W1986 F $2999
Whirlpool AWM8121 F $968*
Westinghouse LT609S T $799
Hoover 600MD T $749*

Large (7.5 kg or more) RRP
---------------------------
LG WD-1019BD F $1999
Fisher-Paykel IW812 T $1099*

F = Front Loader
T = Top Loader
* = Best Buy

The full report includes a comprehensive feature comparison table,
check it out. The Fisher & Paykel MW511 is superceded by MW512, they're
practically the same except that MW512 has AAAA water rating thanks to
the added Eco option (MW511 is AA rated).

I've heard that Westinghouse washers are rebadge of LG, is it true? It
appears that Westinghouse, Simpson, Hoover, and possibly few other
brand names are now distributed by Electrolux.

Anyway, the report concludes that both machines are in the same league,
one employs direct drive technology while the other has higher
capacity. Fisher & Paykel's banner says "parts not there, can't fail",
but to me it means "parts not there, can't repair". I will go ahead
with the Westinghouse machine.

Peter


eltan wrote:
Visit ur local library for Choice magazine or access online, the
magazine
just did a review & test of washing machine 2-3months ago.

I think their best buy is LG.


"Peter" <p19010101@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c48d0aae.0501230342.2faa7ad0@posting.google.com...
I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't
really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)

Fisher-Paykel has Smart Drive which supposed to be gentle on
clothes,
also Direct Drive means less mechanical parts to break down. It
also
has auto-out-of-balance-correction, auto-lint-disposal, and a max
spin
speed at 1000 rpm. The MW512 (Pride) is the lower end of its
counter-part GW512 (Excellence).

On the other hand, the Westinghouse one has slightly higher
capacity,
delay start (not important for me), prewash/custom/favourite
programs,
temperature sensing and time display. It also features a
see-through
window, the LT609SA is better than its counter-part LT608SA.

Both machines have 2-star energy rating and AAAA water rating.
Which
is a better machine out of these two? I've heard both good and bad
things about Fisher-Paykel, but hardly anything about Westinghouse
(fridges yes, but not washers).

There're heaps of used Fisher-Paykel on eBay, I also saw lots of
re-conditioned Fisher-Paykel on the paper. Is it because they're
popular and have a large market share? Or simply because they're no
good and problematic?

I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks.

 

I think LD rather stands for Large Duty, following is Hoover's current
models:

500MD (5.0 kg)
550MD (5.5 kg)
600MD (6.0 kg)
700LD (7.0 kg)
750LD (7.5 kg)
800RLD (8.0 kg with rotary controls)
800ELD (8.0 kg with electronic controls)

6 kg and below is Medium Duty, anything above is Large Duty, just a
wild guess. RRP is there for reference, it's the Recommended Rip-off
Price, no one pay for that anyway. From my observation, a realistic
price should be at least $200 below the RRP. For instance, the
Fisher-Paykel MW512 "retails" for $729, you can easily find a deal
below $550. Same things goes for the Westinghouse LT609S, it can be had
for under $600 instead of $799.

 

[Rod Speed]

"KLR" <kenreed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:he4bv0ta51g8rpfnsf428o8avjc5d3024i@4ax.com...

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 07:37:40 +1100, David Clayton
dcstar@XYZ.myrealbox.com> wrote:

On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 02:01 -0800, p19010101@yahoo.com wrote:
Thanks for the advice. Yes, I've seen front loader for under $600. In
fact, Retravision has the Whirlpool WF665 for $550 (cash price), but
it's a very basic machine. The Whirlpool AWM5100 is the best buy 5.5 kg
washer according to Choice, it retails for $782 (probably can be had
for $650 or so).

I know the benefits of front loaders, primarily they use less water and
electricity (it'll take years to pay off), but they also require
expensive low sud powders.
.......
They "require" nothing of the sort, many of us use standard powders with
little discernible difference in performance. All you have to do is use
less powder, and if necessary slightly extend the wash cycle to
compensate (although this may not be necessary.

Since the cost of washing powder (according to Choice, a few years ago,
if I remember correctly) makes up the vast majority of the yearly cost
of doing the washing, anything which reduces that must be a good thing.


Agreed. I have used same (inexpensive - but not "no frills") powder
with my front loader as with the previous F & P smart drive. Both of
us agree that the cleanliness of all clothes is much better with the
front loader. (Bosch Maxx 1000). Also I find that the clothes seem
to last a lot longer too.


It does however take longer to perform the wash cycle

Front loader only uses a fraction of the water too, (quoted 7L per
wash cycle in this case) and even though the cost per litre mightnt be
that much per KL,

1> Over time - the costs do add up
2> We are having major water shortages in this country, and unless we
do make some effort to reduce usage by even small amounts where
possible, then we either face the consequences of having little to waste,
or governments will do it for us (or tax the hell out of us to cover it)

Thats completely silly. Makes a hell of a lot more sense
to save much more water in other areas by using the roof
drainage on the garden etc and not bothering with lawns etc.

The unit does heat its own water internally (has only
got cold water inlet hose) so power cost may be higher
since you arent using off peak hot water anymore,

No maybe about it. I personally wash everything but the
absolute worst like greasy overalls etc in cold water.

but as a positive, it can maintain optimum
water temperature throughout the entire wash,

There is no such animal as optimum water temp.

which may improve the action of the washing powder too.

Nope. Hot water certainly dissolves it better, but there
is no optimum in the sense that it can be too hot.

 

[Mitchell McCreath]

I Bought one MW 503.
Lasted 6 years. (single person, wash once a week)
Repaired twice Cost $400.
3rd time I threw it out.

bought a Whirlpool 'commercial quality' 6Kg for about $700.

It works well...... (so far)


regards,
Mitchell

 

[Walter Plinge]

"Peter" <p19010101@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c48d0aae.0501230342.2faa7ad0@posting.google.com...

I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)

Went through this exercise 9 months ago and went for the F&P, despite knowng
its reputation for unreliability (some posters at aus.electronics were
unimpressed). Direct drive and the spin speed were what sold us. It also
auto-balances itself and doesn't walk around the floor like our commercial
Hoover did. Very rarely have a load go out of balance these days. The
Hoover always did it.

Choice tests aren't worth much - don't look at long-term reliability. I
dson't think many people take Choice all that seriously these days - it's
long had a reputation for being anti-business, excessively greeny and lefty.

Front-loading: Didn't consider, notwithstanding a couple of advantages.
Disadvantages are too great:

1. Have to bend down low to load/unload

2. Double the wash time. With a family of 4 adults we want to bang the wash
thruugh ASAP, not stand around for the morning waiting for a load to finish.

4. Can't add a sock or errant pair of undies once it's started.

5. Despite what others say, they use a lot of water.

 

[Stephen Oakes]

"Walter Plinge" <walterplinge@optusnet.com.au> wrote...

Choice tests aren't worth much - don't look at long-term reliability. I
dson't think many people take Choice all that seriously these days - it's
long had a reputation for being anti-business, excessively greeny and
lefty.

!!!

That's a pretty big statement. Just because they don't pander to big
business doesn't necessarily mean they are "lefty" (whatever that means) or
"greeny" (even more ridiculous). Maybe it just means they're actually
independent?

Personally I think they have a good reputation. They actually do long-term
tests, although it's difficult to simulate that properly. They document
their stuff. If you don't like it, you have the option of making an
informed opinion about it.

Do people take them "all that seriously" these days? You might be right
there. Most people seem to prefer to believe commercial advertising over
critical analysis, for some reason.

--
Stephen Oakes

 

[Peter]

Thanks for all the inputs, I went for the Westinghouse LT609SA, $575
delivered and I reckon that's an unbeatable price.


p19010101@yahoo.com (Peter) wrote in message news:<c48d0aae.0501230342.2faa7ad0@posting.google.com>...

I'm in the market for a new top loader on a budget, so I can't really
afford fancy european makes nor decent front loaders. Anyway, I'm
tossing between these two, both can be had for under $600:

1) Fisher-Paykel MW512 (5.5 kg)
2) Westinghouse LT609SA (6 kg)

Fisher-Paykel has Smart Drive which supposed to be gentle on clothes,
also Direct Drive means less mechanical parts to break down. It also
has auto-out-of-balance-correction, auto-lint-disposal, and a max spin
speed at 1000 rpm. The MW512 (Pride) is the lower end of its
counter-part GW512 (Excellence).

On the other hand, the Westinghouse one has slightly higher capacity,
delay start (not important for me), prewash/custom/favourite programs,
temperature sensing and time display. It also features a see-through
window, the LT609SA is better than its counter-part LT608SA.

Both machines have 2-star energy rating and AAAA water rating. Which
is a better machine out of these two? I've heard both good and bad
things about Fisher-Paykel, but hardly anything about Westinghouse
(fridges yes, but not washers).

There're heaps of used Fisher-Paykel on eBay, I also saw lots of
re-conditioned Fisher-Paykel on the paper. Is it because they're
popular and have a large market share? Or simply because they're no
good and problematic?

I'd appreciate your comments. Thanks.