Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site shark.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!shark!hutch
From: hutch@shark.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.consumers
Subject: Re: Washers and Dryers
Message-ID: <980@shark.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-Aug-84 14:44:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: shark.980
Posted: Mon Aug 13 14:44:19 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Aug-84 00:36:17 EDT
References: <1220@vax2.fluke.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 33

< are YOU puzzled by dingy whites and drab colors? >

| I feel that Consumers Reports is biased too far towards reliablility
| and not enough toward features and practicality particularly with
| regard to their recommendation of Maytag.  My folks bought a Maytag
| about 5 years ago, and even though it has been very reliable, I have
| been unimpressed.  It has a very short wash cycle, poor agitation, and
| few water level, temperature, and cycle options.  This was the top
| rated washer by Consumers Reports in that year.
| 
| Craig V. Johnson

Last time I read a Consumer Reports study of washers, it took into
account not only reliability but several other factors including
features and practicality.

They studied how well the washers worked on "standard" dirt using a
range of detergents and cleaners, in hard and soft water, using hot and
cold, and so on.  They included electrical consumption.  They included
little things like "how easily can I lose socks in this machine".  They
included how well the washer "mixed" clothes, in other words whether
and how often clothes moved from next to the agitator to outside and
from top to bottom.

I think I recall that they commented that Maytag had some differences
in its cycle, but that the clothes came out acceptably clean.  They
seem to scoff at unnecessary complications; they might have found the
number of temp, level, and cycle options sufficient for average use.

I primarily use CR as an indicator of what to avoid rather than what
is necessarily the "best" buy.

Hutch