We have found out that washing too many clothes in one load can actually wear the washer out faster than washing more lighter loads because of less weight that the agitator is pushing around. We have had our washer since 1987 washing clothes with less clothes in them. When doing the wash, we try not to overload the washer.
2006-12-26 12:39:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sparkles 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
If you're using a top loader, then less is better. When you stuff that machine full, the agitator can't turn the clothes around in the tub. It's basically a soak job that you're getting. They may turn the clothes a few times, but that's it. Solution, is to get onto a front load machine. Much larger capacity, no agitator, tumble wash always working the detergent and water through the clothes. Mass Energy Star gives people who buy a front load machine $100. Check your area for a similar program.
Hope this salesman was of some help
2006-12-26 21:04:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by EZ Wider 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
In my opinion if I were to buy a new washer today I would look for one of the huge ones that washes very large loads and has many wash cycles to choose from. I have 5 children so doing more laundry in each load would be an advantage. I love the "triple loader" style if for some reason I need to go to the laundromat. If the washer is made for very large loads it should work well doing so. I have a regular size washer right now and I find it washes better if I don't overload it. This allows for the water and detergent to get into all the clothes. I hope I was able to answer your question as you wished. Happy New Year.
2006-12-26 20:42:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by RaLoh 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
More loads with less clothes - your clothes will seem/smell better with less in it - you'll use less detergent per load too. Especially if you live somewhere that you have a well or limited water supply, it helps a ton to have smaller loads. Mine takes a large capacity, but I only wash medium sizes loads and it makes the soap go further, plus it's less of a stress on the dryer with a smaller load to dry and stuff comes out more wrinkle free that way as well.
The cons - it takes longer, but in the long run with the lighter load on the dryer, the ironing is easier.
2006-12-26 20:37:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by Catmmo 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well, in my experience, a large load of clothes has messed up a washing machine all by itself, but smaller loads at least avoid that danger. And you're going to use the machine over and over again, regardless of the size of the load. So, since it would be a stress on the machine to wash more times, but it would also be an acute stress to wash larger loads each time you do, I would avoid the one that can definitely mess up the machine all by itself: larger loads.
2006-12-26 20:41:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by swylie2000 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
My thought is more loads w/less clothes. Too much clothing seems like it would be too stressful on the machine. Unless of course you have a commercial grade washer!!! Besides I think if you jam it too full with clothes they don't get as clean.
Best of Luck in what you decide!! Ã
2006-12-26 20:42:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by CluelessOne 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
All modern washing machines are designed to give around 10 years trouble free service under 'normal' use, which means following the manufacturer's guidelines for loading the things. If you use it pretty close to what's recommended, you'll have good luck with it, so read the instructions.
2006-12-26 20:40:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dorothy and Toto 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Smaller loads will not only extend the life of your washer, but your laundry will be much cleaner. Smaller loads will also allow you to be more selective with each wash --keeping the whites, delicates and colored clothes separated.
2006-12-26 20:50:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Less clothes more loads
2006-12-26 20:37:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by rickkritcher 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Definitely more clothes, less loads. Even if it is a wash (he, he), the nod goes to less loads because of the decreased time spent loading, measuring, waiting, etc...
2006-12-26 20:44:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋