The loads keep on spinning in the Consumer Reports washing-machine lab

The folks who test and rate washing machines for Consumer Reports have been doing a ton of laundry. Make that almost two tons over the past five months, as they measure the cleaning performance, water and energy efficiency, and other criteria of the machines in our continuously updated ratings of front-loaders and top-loaders (available to subscribers).

Among the washing machines we've recently covered for our Inside Consumer Tests Labs posts are the:

• Maytag MVWC6ES, which determines how much water is needed for a load;

• Estate ETW4400W, Whirlpool Cabrio WTW6500W, and Whirlpool Duet Sport WFW8400T, all of which proved tough on laundry;

• LG WM2010C[W], a real mover and shaker;

• Frigidaire FTW3014K[W], which automatically advances a load from the soak or prewash cycle to the wash and extra rinse cycles;

• LG SteamWasher WM2801H[W]A, which can hold a whopping 21 pounds of laundry; and

• Whirlpool Duet Steam WFW9750W[W] and Duet Sport WFW9150W[W] and Maytag Performance Series MHWE950W[W], which are designed to prevent laundry from developing an odor in case you've left it sitting in the washer.

As the testing continues for our February 2010 report on washing machines, we'd like you to tell us what you love and hate about your washer, speak about the features that matter most to you or seem superfluous, inform us of which cycles and detergent you use, and describe your dream machine. Leave your detailed comments below.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: Check out our free buyer's guides to washing machines and dryers and find the best laundry detergent. If you're in the market for new laundry appliances, learn about the $300 million State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program, aka cash for clunkers for appliances.

Inside Consumer Reports Tests Labs: New front-loading washing machines from Whirlpool and Maytag

Reviews of the Whirlpool Duet Steam WFW9750W[W] and Duet Sport WFW9150W[W] and Maytag Performance Series MHWE950W[W]

What's the biggest laundry-related gripe Americans have? The musty smell that befouls clothes left to sit in the washing machine after washing is the top "unmet consumer concern in the laundry room," according to a Whirlpool Corporation survey.

To address the odor problem, Whirlpool has equipped some of its front-loaders with low-energy fans to circulate air and also programmed the machines to tumble periodically. As part of the testing for our continuously updated ratings of front-loading and top-loading washing machines (available to subscribers), we recently reviewed three washing machines* with these odor-fighting features.

Note that none of the loads we washed in any machine had an odor, either when the cycle ended or even after the load sat for hours. Further, there were no odors evident for these tested models regardless of whether the odor-fighting feature was turned on or off, so we cannot report on the claimed odor-preventing ability of these machines. Whirlpool is careful to indicate that these features do not remove an odor but can help prevent one from forming. Our experts suggest that some odors could be from residual soil and bacteria in the clothing or the machine that under the right temperature and moisture conditions are able to propagate.

The Whirlpool Duet Steam WFW9750W[W], $1,300 (shown), has what the manufacturer calls FanFresh, which is designed to prevent odors by circulating air with a fan and tumbling wet laundry every 15 minutes for up to 10 hours. This front-loader did an excellent job overall in our tests. It proved very good at our washing, gentleness, vibration, and water-extraction tests. The WFW9750W[W] also aced our energy- and water-efficiency tests, has a large, 21-pound capacity and was relatively quiet over its 65-minute normal cycle. Its NightQuiet option reduces noise by using a lower spin speed, though this mode also slightly reduces the amount of water extracted from loads.

The Whirlpool Duet Sport WFW9150W[W], $700, has an option, called TumbleFresh, that circulates clothes every 15 minutes for up to six hours. This front-loader, with a sizable, 18-pound capacity, performed very good overall. It aced our gentleness, energy- and water-efficiency tests and was very good at extracting water and in the vibration tests but was only mediocre in our washing tests. It also proved relatively noisy over its 55-minute normal cycle.

The Maytag Performance Series MHWE950W[W], $1,300, is made by Whirlpool and is basically the same machine as the Whirlpool Duet Steam WFW9750W[W], with a similar 21-pound capacity. Its Fresh Hold option tumbles wet laundry every 15 minutes for up to 10 hours and uses a fan to circulate air. The MHWE950W[W] was top-notch overall and excelled in our tests for energy and water efficiency and extracting water. It earned very good scores for washing, gentleness, and vibration. This model operates relatively quietly over its 65-minute normal cycle; its "quiet" option slows the spin speed to dampen noise, though this mode slightly reduces the water extracted from clothes.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential reading: If you need new laundry equipment, check out our free buyer's guide to washers and buying advice for dryers. If you're in the market for new appliances, stay up on the news related to the $300 million State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program, also known as cash for clunkers for appliances.

*We purchased these appliances from the manufacturer before they were available in stores; we will confirm the test results below on versions that we buy at retail.

Want to start a debate? Bring up the subject of drying laundry on clotheslines

Health-care reform is an important and hotly debated national issue these days. While certainly not as pressing as health care, the subject of hanging laundry out to dry is something many people seem just as passionate about.

Consider the comments to our June 2009 post "Are Clotheslines Making a Comeback? 'Right-to-Dry Movement' Promotes Their Use" and those in response to The New York Times' recent engaging online debate "Rethinking Laundry in the 21st Century."

Right-to-dry-ers tout clotheslines and the like as tried-and-true energy savers that leave laundry smelling great. Some folks are skeptical about the practice, wondering whether line drying will leave their clothes feeling crunchy and questioning the added time it might take to dry their laundry. Those opposed to clotheslines feel they muck up their neighborhoods.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the average American household uses about 11,000 kilowatt hours of electricity annually, with the typical electric clothes dryer consuming about 900 kWh—around what the average washing machine uses and slightly less than a typical refrigerator does.

If you're not ready to dry your laundry on a clothesline or on racks, follow these steps to cut back on dryer-related energy use:
• Use an automatic cycle for drying. This cycle will call on the dryer's moisture sensor, which automatically turns off the machine when the laundry is done. The sensor will work even if you select the less or more dry option.
• Remove the lint from the filter after every load. Built-up lint can reduce air circulation and make your dryer run longer. What's more, lint can clog the dryer vent, where it poses a significant fire hazard.
• Dry lightweight laundry in one load and heavier items, like towels and jeans, in another.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: Give us your thoughts on clotheslines and line drying by posting a comment below. And if you're in the market for new laundry or other appliances, read about the U.S. Department of Energy's $300 million State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program, otherwise known as cash for clunkers for appliances.

Vintage Consumer Reports: Steam irons didn't impress in October 1951

"The introduction of the first home steam-electric iron a few years ago was greeted with considerable fanfare, and the fervent hope, among iron-tired housewives that here, at last, was a good answer to their ironing problems."—Consumer Reports, October 1951

Those first-generation steam irons didn't impress. Manufacturers made bold claims, but the irons ran out of steam and clothes still had to be dampened before ironing, according to our 1951 test results. Even worse, for the October 1951 report, nine of 11 steam irons were judged Not Acceptable, eight presented burn or scald hazards, and the soleplate melted and the thermostat failed on the Silex (shown). Talk about ironing problems.

In our latest tests of 26 steam irons, cordless irons, and steam generators, which will appear in the January 2010 issue of Consumer Reports, things got heated when we ironed 482 shirts, 54 linen tablecloths, and 81 napkins, but no meltdowns occurred. We tested and found some terrific irons that delivered a crisp look, had plenty of steam, and handled easily.

Safety is always a concern when ironing, and most of the newly tested models have a safety feature that shuts off the iron within minutes if you leave it upright and usually less than a minute if you leave it facedown.

One thing has remained the same since 1951: the price of a couple of models in the ratings. That Silex that melted cost $20 in 1951, as does the recession-busting Black & Decker Steam Advantage F1060, one of the highest-rated models in our new tests. (According to the federal government's inflation calculator, $20 in 1951 is worth more than $166 today.)—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential reading: Check our free buyer's guide to irons and look for our newly updated ratings later this week. If you're in a nostalgic mood, read our other Vintage Consumer Reports items.

Inside Consumer Reports Test Labs: Latest washing-machine reviews

Tests of the Frigidaire Affinity FAFW3511K[W] and LG SteamWasher WM2801H[W]A front-loaders and GE Profile WPRE8150K[WT] and Speed Queen AWN542 top-loaders

Four washers, four price tags, and a mountain of laundry. Our experts washed 265 pounds of laundry to find out just how well the Frigidaire Affinity FAFW3511K[W], LG SteamWasher WM2801H[W]A, GE Profile WPRE8150K[WT] HE, Speed Queen AWN542 perform. Once again, they found that spending more doesn't guarantee you'll get a better washer. Here are the details:

At $700, the Frigidaire Affinity FAFW3511K[W] is one of the lower-priced front-loaders in our continuously updated ratings of front-loading and top-loading washing machines (available to subscribers). But unlike most front-loaders we test, which are very good or excellent at washing, this Frigidaire was mediocre. It does have a short cycle time, 50 minutes compared with 65 to 105 minutes for other front-loaders.

This washer scored a very good overall, as it aced our energy- and water-efficiency tests, excelled in extracting water, and notched a very good score for gentleness. The stainless-steel tub holds 17 pounds of laundry, earning it an excellent in capacity. While the FAFW3511K[W] earned a very good in our vibration tests, you might not want this machine adjacent to main living areas, as it's relatively noisy.

LG touts that its $1,200 LG SteamWasher WM2801H[W]A front-loader (shown) offers "ultra capacity." Indeed, the stainless-steel tub on this front-loader holds 21 pounds, giving it an excellent score for capacity. Overall, it's a very good washer, performing very good in our washing and vibration tests and excelling in our extraction and energy- and water-efficiency tests. Cycle time is 100 minutes, and while that longer cycle time could lead to frayed fabrics, this LG scored very good in gentleness. It is a relatively noisy appliance, however. Features include a steam function designed to refresh garments and reduce wrinkles.

You won't find an agitator in the $650 GE Profile WPRE8150K[WT] high-efficiency top-loader, which allows this washer to hold 16 pounds of laundry, more than most conventional top-loaders. The WPRE8150K[WT] was very good overall and provides very good washing. Typical of HE washers, it uses less water over its 50-minute cycle because it fills only partly. It aced our water-efficiency tests but was mediocre in our tests for gentleness, noise, energy efficiency, and extraction. Features include a stainless-steel tub, a sensor that determines how much water is needed, and second-rinse and extended-spin cycles.

Conventional top-loaders, in which a tall center post like an agitator swirls the laundry, are the least expensive type of washing machine but tend to perform less impressively as a group. The Speed Queen AWN542 costs $800, more than twice the price of some conventional top-loaders, and was just good overall, ranking near the bottom of our ratings. The AWN542 was mediocre in washing, energy and water efficiency, extraction, and noise, though it did excel in our vibration test. Its stainless-steel tub holds 12 pounds of laundry, earning it only a fair in capacity.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential reading: Check out or free buyer’s guides to washers and dryers and find the best laundry detergent to use. If you're in the market for new, more-efficient appliances, read our FAQ on the $300 million State Energy Efficient Appliance Rebate Program, aka cash for clunkers for appliances.

Inside Consumer Reports Test Labs: The LG WM2010C[W] front-loading washer is a real mover and shaker

Because front-loading washing machines spin so rapidly—up to 1,200 revolutions per minute—and their drums rotate on a horizontal axis, the vibration and noise these machines produce can be a nuisance for users, especially when a front-loader is used near main living areas or on a second floor in a home.

Our testers have seen plenty of front-loaders that produce a lot of vibration and noise, though no front-loader has ever actually moved from its spot during our vibration testing. Until now. In a recent vibration test on a wood floor, the $550 LG WM2010C[W] front-loader turned on an angle and moved forward about three inches when it had an 8-pound evenly distributed load. And when we repeated the test with a 1-pound unbalanced load, the LG again slid forward several inches.

LG offers a solution with the “SpinSense” function, which the manufacturer says “can be used to help reduce or eliminate vibrations, especially on wood floor installations.” When our testers turned on the SpinSense mode, the WM2010C[W] didn’t vibrate and stayed put. The trade-off is that the machine extracted about 20 percent less water from the load. In practical terms, that means more time and energy are required to dry a load.

On the performance front, this LG front-loader delivered only good cleaning, unusual for front-loading machines, which typically get a very good or excellent score in our tests. The WM2010C[W] does offers excellent capacity, with a claimed capacity of 3.5-cubic-foot in its stainless-steel wash basket. It was gentle on laundry and excelled in energy- and water efficiency, though, again, if you use the SpinSense function you’ll use more energy drying. Cycle time is 90 minutes, and the model is stackable and includes a child lock.

While this LG is inexpensive for a front-loader—many cost $1,000 and up—other models, including the Frigidaire Gallery GLTF2940F, $650, deliver better washing performance without the vibration concerns. See our continuously updated ratings (available to subscribers) for more details on this and dozens of other washers.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: Check out our free buyer’s guides to washing machines and dryers, our latest report on laundry detergents, and our advice for placing laundry rooms near living spaces.

By the Numbers: Washing machine capacities grow, but efficiency rises

9 percent

Amount the capacity of the average washing machine sold today has grown since 2000, according to the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. Despite that larger capacity, today’s average washer consumes 64 percent less energy than those sold nine years ago. Consider the Energy Star-qualified GE WBVH5300K[WW], covered recently in this Inside Consumer Reports Test Labs post. This $700 front-loader aced our energy- and water-efficiency tests and cleaned capably and quickly (cycle time was a brisk 69 minutes). e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: Use our free buyer's guide to washing machines and buyer's guide to dryers for expert advice on buying these laundry appliances. Get your clothes cleaner with the best performers from our latest report on laundry detergents. And read these tips for setting up a laundry room near living space.

Inside Consumer Reports Test Labs: New washer reviews—Estate ETW4400W, Whirlpool Cabrio WTW6500W, Whirlpool Duet Sport WFW8400T

Our latest ongoing tests of washing machines included three very different washers yet they had two things in common: All are made by Whirlpool and, more notable, they were tough on our test loads. See our newly updated ratings (available to subscribers) for more details on these and dozens of other top- and front-loading models and use our free buyer's guide to washing machines for more expert advice.

Check out our July 24 post on three other recently tested washers. And look for more Inside Consumer Reports Tests Labs posts on washers, dishwashers, and vacuums in the coming weeks as we continue to test models on a rolling basis, providing you with information on the latest innovations and the newest models to hit showrooms.

The Estate ETW4400W[Q] top-loader, $330 (right in the photo), merited the lowest gentleness score of these machines—a poor—causing fabrics to fray. The Estate's overall washing performance was very good—impressive considering that most conventional top-loaders we see tend to be mediocre at washing. Cycle time was 48 minutes, comparable to other top-loaders with agitators. And while this machine offers very good capacity—it has a claimed capacity of 3.2 cubic feet in its porcelain wash basket—it was only good in our energy- and water-efficiency tests.

We also tested the Whirlpool Cabrio WTW6500W[W], $750 (left in the photo), a high-efficiency top-loader with Energy Star qualification. It lacks a center-post agitator and its cycle time of 62 minutes isn't unusually long but still managed to cause some wear and tear on the loads we cleaned, scoring only a fair in gentleness. This Whirlpool aced the water-efficiency tests but was just good in the energy-efficiency tests. It has a claimed 5.0-cubic-foot stainless-steel wash basket and provides 14 different automatic cycles.

Front-loaders typically offer superior cleaning performance and efficiency at a price of $750 and up. The Energy Star-qualified Whirlpool Duet Sport WFW8400T[W] delivers top washing performance and water efficiency; at $750, it costs somewhat  less than many other front-loaders. Its claimed 3.7-cubic-foot stainless-steel wash basket holds an impressive 18 pounds of laundry, and its 102-minute cycle time is longer than most, which probably accounted for its fair gentleness score.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: If you're replacing your dryer along with your washer, check out our free buyer's guide to dryers. And get your clothes cleaner by using the best performers from our latest report on laundry detergents.

Inside Consumer Reports Test Labs: $700 GE WBVH5300K front-loader heads up the latest models added to ratings

You can easily pay $1,000-plus for the added performance and efficiency of a front-loading washing machine. At just $700, GE's new Energy Star-qualified WBVH5300K (shown below), costs no more than many top-loading washers (we tested the white WBVH5300K[WW] model). And in our latest, ongoing tests show, it washed capably and quickly.

Cycle time was a relatively brisk 69 minutes instead of the 100 minutes or longer we're seeing for many machines as manufacturers try to wring out more energy savings and meet tougher federal energy-use standards and Energy Star qualifications. (Load times typically stretch out as efficiency requirements toughen.)

Besides saving you time, shorter cycles tend to be easier on clothes. The GE was impressive in our gentleness tests and aced our energy- and water-efficiency tests. A plus for big loads: Its excellent score for capacity bears out the manufacturer's king-size claims for its stainless-steel tub.

Our newly updated ratings (available to subscribers) also include a pricey new front-loader with a steam-cleaning feature and a low-priced top-loader that's not a standout when it comes to efficiency. Also check out our latest report on washers and watch the video buying guide (above).

The $1,200 front-loading Whirlpool Duet Steam WFM9550W performed well overall (we tested the white WFM9550W[W] model). Its cycle time is about 98 minutes per 8-pound load, longer than the BVH5300K's 69 minutes.

The steam feature adds to the price of this washer. While past tests have revealed that steam settings helped do a better job removing stains, we've also found that the best washers did well without it.

This Whirlpool also has a TumbleFresh option that, claims the manufacturer, will keep clothes fresh with intermittent tumbling after the cycle completes, helping reduce odor-causing bacteria while preventing wrinkles. We did not test that feature. In our ratings you'll find models that clean better, use less energy, and cost less.

Unlike most conventional top-loaders, the $550 Maytag MVWC6ES determines how much water is needed to do a load (we tested the white MVWC6ES[W] model). While this Maytag proved very good overall with excellent washing performance, it earned a poor energy-efficiency score despite its Energy Star qualification. We also found this Maytag tough on clothes.—Kimberly Janeway | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: Our free buyer's guide to washing machines offers lots of helpful tips. If you're replacing your dryer too, check out our buyer's guide to dryers. And get your clothes cleaner by using the best performers from our latest report on laundry detergents.

Manufacturers look to settle the issue of vibrating washers

The Beach Boys famously sang about good vibrations, but when it comes to washing machines, there's nothing good about vibrations. Not only do washers that vibrate too much make a racket but they can also cause structural damage in your home. Sound unlikely? Check out the discussion about washing machines and vibration in our laundry appliances forum.

Vibration is a bigger issue with front-loaders than it is with top-loaders, since front-loading machines spin more rapidly than top-loading models. Also, their drums rotate on a horizontal axis, meaning vibrating energy is transferred perpendicular to the floor (up and down); with a top-loader, the drum spins on a vertical axis, so the vibrations are moving along the plane of the floor contained within the washer.

Information on vibration appears in the troubleshooting guides from most manufacturer. Their standard advice is to check that the washer's leveling feet are in firm contact with the floor and to ensure proper load size and distribution. (One way to do this is to add a few towels to balance the load.)

Minimizing vibration has become a selling point for manufacturers. Samsung touts its patented Vibration Reduction Technology, Whirlpool plays up a six-point suspension system, and at this year's Kitchen/Bath Industry Show & Conference, LG featured the WM3001HWA Ultra-Capacity SteamWasher front-loader running through a full cycle while perched atop four wineglasses (shown).

Our engineers have developed a way to test vibration. It involves placing each washer on a simulated floor hooked up to a triaxial accelerometer. This sophisticated sensor measures three properties of vibration—acceleration, amplitude, and velocity—as the washer cycles through two eight-pound loads.

While every top-loader scored an excellent for vibration in our last test, results varied widely for front-loaders. Several models, including the Samsung WF448AA and the Whirlpool Duet Steam WFW9600T, scored a very good, making them suitable for laundry rooms in main living areas, in particular second floors. But others, like the Maytag 5000 Series, earned only a fair, so they should be installed on a concrete slab, say in the basement or garage. Check out the vibration scores in our ratings of washing machines (available to subscribers).

An after market for antivibration products has sprung up. One of the latest is VibeAway, an antivibration pad made from recycled-tire rubber ($24.50 for a set of four). Recesses in the top of the pads keep the washer's feet from slipping, claims manufacturer B Green Innovations, Inc. (Watch a video of a vibrating washer on the VibeAway Web site.) Good Vibrations and Shake Away Vibration Isolation Pads promise similar results.

We haven't tested any antivibration pads, but some posters to our appliances forums have given them positive reviews.—Daniel DiClerico | e-mail | Twitter | Forums | Facebook

Essential information: Read our latest report on washers and dryers (available to subscribers).