The advantages - electric / water consumption savings / durabilities / good after sales service / and spare parts easily available.
2007-02-09 16:43:50 · 2 answers · asked by jjshri ram 3 in Consumer Electronics ➔ Cell Phones & Plans
Top loaders use more water (and have to move more water weight) than front loaders do. They also can't spin as fast in the spin cycle without jumping all over the place. Generally you use half the water and half the electricity with a front loader that you would with a top loader. Any machine built after 2004 - top or front loader- will have a smaller motor to comply with the government's 2004 energy standard compliance. The truth is, NOBODY knows how long these are going to last because there is no long term data on them yet so they can only make predictions based on short term repair records. I tend to trust the Whirlpool and Bosch brands more because they've been at it longer. An engineering mistake cost Maytag a class action suit that almost bankrupted the company 'til Whirlpool bailed 'em out last year. I bought one in November ( closeout Samsung) and had good luck with it, but I took the extended warrantee even though CR recommends against it. If anything goes wrong for 5 years they have to come in and fix it.
2007-02-09 17:15:25 · answer #1 · answered by awesome_possum 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Front loading is less water usage and better washing of clothes. But the service and spare parts are a matter of brand and manufacturer's choice. But front loading is definitely the way to go to save money.
2007-02-09 16:53:59 · answer #2 · answered by Big C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋