Thread

Whirlpool Washer Transmission Repair (2007)

35 points · 57 comments · userbinator

Loading the complete thread in the background. This saved snapshot is available now. Refresh

aidenn0 · 1790006871 · focus · HN ↗
I got a 503; maybe hugged to death?
<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20260117044133/https://k0lee.com/2007/01/whirlpool-washer-transmission-repair/" rel="nofollow">https://web.archive.org/web/20260117044133/https://k0lee.com...
SoftTalker · 1790008298 · focus · HN ↗
I have fixed a couple of washing machines and other appliances over the years. It's satisfying although likely not money-saving unless you don't put a value on your time. But I like working on mechanical things so it's closer to a hobby for me.
1. stronglikedan · 1790013709 · focus · HN ↗
  [delayed]
  1. 000000000001 · 1790018243 · focus · HN ↗
    Just wanted to chime in and inform you that Kenmore isn't a Kenmore, they never made anything just bought them and slapped a label on them. The first 3 digits denotes the manufacturer. I.E. 110 is Whirlpool, there are lists online to reference.
2. toast0 · 1790014674 · focus · HN ↗
  Laundry repair costs a lot around here. Repair people certainly put a value on their time. It does take a while to get the machines apart and back together, but if you have a good idea of the part that needs replacing, it's not too bad to do many things.
  1. SoftTalker · 1790022755 · focus · HN ↗
    Repair service will replace the subassembly that has failed. In TFA that would be the entire transmission. Very few would disassemble it further to replace only the actual failed part.
    So you're paying for a new transmission, plus labor and service call fee. This easily could exceed the value of the washer, and certainly would have many people thinking "I'll just replace it."
3. analog31 · 1790019557 · focus · HN ↗
  I've repaired all kinds of stuff in my house, including appliances. Calling someone to fix something could cost me more time than fixing it myself. Also, I can time-shift when I do it myself, for instance working during hours when I'm unlikely to get paid to do something.
  An example is bike repair. If something breaks, getting it fixed would mean driving it to the shop and back again. Doing it on my own terms and schedule, I can fix it at night, often in a few minutes. If it needs a part, I ride a spare bike until the part arrives.
  I decide on a case by case basis. I don't change the oil in my car because I can drop it off on my way to work, and in that case, I am getting paid while the car is being serviced. Also, some kinds of work involve more tools and space than I want to own. And mess.
  The home furnace, in the middle of winter while my elderly parents are vising... yeah call the guy.
Liftyee · 1790008940 · focus · HN ↗
It surprises me how the US loves their top-loading washers. Here in the UK, there isn't the complex (though interesting) "transmission": the drum has fins to act as both agitator and spin-dryer. This means it's just a boring belt drive between motor and drum (or direct drive, for newer machines.)
1. emmelaich · 1790009359 · focus · HN ↗
  Top loaders are higher capacity and cost less. And open air drying is preferable to machine drying.
  1. aidenn0 · 1790009706 · focus · HN ↗
    Top loaders also act as spin dryers...
    olyjohn · 1790010327 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    gmac · 1790013617 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    userbinator · 1790037459 · focus · HN ↗
    They use more water because they do a much better job at cleaning than side-loaders, especially the new "high efficiency" ones that seem to barely work. Just look at all the complaints online.
    and thus they also have to use a lot more energy to heat it.
    Most if not all top-loaders don't heat the water.
    aidenn0 · 1790117091 · focus · HN ↗
    >> and thus they also have to use a lot more energy to heat it.
    > Most if not all top-loaders don't heat the water.
    That's a bit pedantic, since on warm and hot cycles the water-heater will use energy to heat the water.
    brudgers · 1790091689 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
2. aidenn0 · 1790010034 · focus · HN ↗
  Mainly it's just everybody grew up using top-loaders, though it's also easier to get clothes in and out of a top-loader than a front (unless you have a huge machine).
  I've used a front-loader now for years and the only thing I really miss from my top-loader is that I could just leave the lid open for it to dry out. The door of the front-loader is perennially in the way if you leave it wide open, so we have to prop it open to prevent mildew.
  1. jacquesm · 1790010175 · focus · HN ↗
    It works well but takes up more space because you can't stack washer/dryer, in Europe apartments and houses are a bit smaller so if you can save a square meter then that's good.
    ssl-3 · 1790013736 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
    notpushkin · 1790015697 · focus · HN ↗
    An apartment I’ve rented in Vietnam had a top-loader with a drying program. I think it put a stream of (cold) air through the clothes while spinning somehow, and IIRC the clothes were not completely dry at the end, but definitely closer than just after a spin. (I think if they’ve added a dehumidifier to the process it would work just as well as a standalone dryer!)
    Animats · 1790018152 · focus · HN ↗
    Makes sense in Vietnam's climate.
  2. ssl-3 · 1790011420 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
  3. wing-_-nuts · 1790015663 · focus · HN ↗
    I dunno why anyone would want a front loader. If the seal fails, you have water on your floor. If the machine fails during the wash cycle, again, no way to easily get your clothes out without getting water on the floor. If a top loader fails, neither of these things can happen.
    ProfessorLayton · 1790016203 · focus · HN ↗
    Got a new LG washer, but some clothing item with a metal button got stuck between the seal and tore a bit of it off, causing leaks. A new seal from LG isn't too expensive, about ~$70, however, it requires the entire front and top of the machine to be removed, so it's not a cheap operation (When hiring someone to fix it).
    I don't think I'd ever pick a top loader still, but front loading machines do seem to fail in more annoying ways.
    surfaceofthesun · 1790019302 · focus · HN ↗
    Given the choice between a front loader or top loader without an agitator, the front loader wins easily. They use less water and do a much better job cleaning.
    I will note that the locking mechanism on my LG is quite strong. I tried to get past the safety lock (for high-temp washes) but couldn't get in. And in the case of catastrophic failure, you'll have much less water (and weight) to deal with vs the top load.
    bpfrh · 1790020389 · focus · HN ↗
    I think the idea is that most people have more space vertically than horizontally and like to stack appliances, e.g. washer on the bottom, dryer on top
    hagbard_c · 1790024184 · focus · HN ↗
    Seals rarely fail, this is not a realistic problem. The water level during wash is mostly lower than the seal, only during rinse cycles does it reach above the seal. If the machine fails for some reason during a cycle it can be drained through a drain hose which uses nothing more than gravity.
    Front loaders use less water and with that less energy (which mostly goes into heating water), are less likely to tear clothes, have higher spin cycle speeds (1400 to 1600 rpm vs. 600-800 for top loaders) and can be (and often are) stacked.
    Why would anyone want a top loader? What is the advantage other than the supposedly greater ease of loading which is negated by putting the front loader on a pedestal? I see no advantages, only disadvantages. It is not as if we never had the choice between these types as I remember them from the laundromat some 55 years ago. They were phased out, most likely for the reasons stated above.
    invalidator · 1790024517 · focus · HN ↗
    Front loaders clean better, with less wear and tear on your clothes, using less water.
    userbinator · 1790037285 · focus · HN ↗
    clean better
    No
    with less wear and tear on your clothes
    Yes, but then they're still dirtier.
    using less water
    Yes
    In other words, they're so gentle they barely clean lightly-soiled clothes, and that's why they also use much less water; forget about heavy soiling or thicker textiles. For true cleaning, you need a top-loader that submerges them in detergent water and actually forces it through the materials with an agitator.
    RASBR89 · 1790061911 · focus · HN ↗
    I’m not sure you can even buy top loaders in the uk.
    Front loaders can go into kitchens which is usually where washing machine is located. They can be ‘built into’ cupboards etc.
    Mines in my garage and I have a separate drier which sits on top of the washing machine..
    So it’s probably largely space and location concerns.
  4. notpushkin · 1790016084 · focus · HN ↗
    One thing I love about top-loaders is that if you’ve found a piece of laundry you forgot, you can just throw it in mid-cycle. Not necessarily ideal but hey.
    buildsjets · 1790016991 · focus · HN ↗
    Every side-loader I've ever owned also has this ability.
    onlypassingthru · 1790018212 · focus · HN ↗
    Does the water know to stay inside the drum when you open the door?
    buildsjets · 1790021203 · focus · HN ↗
    Since gravity continues to act in a downward direction, yes, the water stays pooled at the bottom of the drum and does not teleport upwards and outwards.
    RASBR89 · 1790061987 · focus · HN ↗
    The drum stops rotating while cycled is paused
    userbinator · 1790018241 · focus · HN ↗
    How do you do that without the water spilling out? Or do you mean waiting it to drain, opening it, and then refilling?
    buildsjets · 1790021119 · focus · HN ↗
    The water level in a front loading washing machine is lower than the door seal. The seal only contains splashing water from the agitation. You hit the "pause" button, it stops agitating and unlocks the door, you throw your skidmarks in the washer, you close the door and press "start".
    notpushkin · 1790018664 · focus · HN ↗
    The older ones usually make you wait for a minute or two before the door is unlocked. I have one in my current apartment that doesn’t do that, but I’ve tried it a couple times and it does spill some water when you open it.
    With top-loaders, you don’t even have to pause, the lid is always open; and the water stays inside, obviously.
    buildsjets · 1790021462 · focus · HN ↗
    With both my 2006 Whirlpool front loader (trash) and 2022 LG front loader (excellent), the duration from when you press the "pause" button to when the agitator stops and the door unlocks is approximately one second. No water is spilled.
    notpushkin · 1790021847 · focus · HN ↗
    Noted, thanks!
3. chiffre01 · 1790010205 · focus · HN ↗
  It's my understanding that top loaders are less prone to breakdowns.
  1. stronglikedan · 1790013754 · focus · HN ↗
    [delayed]
  2. hedgehog · 1790013938 · focus · HN ↗
    The primary failure I've observed in washing machines that get a lot of use is the drain pumps which are probably similarly (un)reliable across designs (we only have front loaders so not sure).
    wpm · 1790018354 · focus · HN ↗
    Clutches can wear out too, everything will still work but the washer won't really agitate well.
    hedgehog · 1790181809 · focus · HN ↗
    Probably true, I don't think any of our machines have clutch.
    electroweak · 1790706214 · focus · HN ↗
    I've had to replace the pump on a cheap amana NFW7200TW. Being a cheaper model it does not have a coin trap and the thin plastic vanes shattered. The pump had two part numbers, one a Samsung and another a Whirlpool (?). The point that may be interesting here is that when I asked at the part store for the whirlpool p/n they brought me the box at one price, and when I asked for the Samsung one they brought me the exact same box at a price almost $30 less. I didnt know they did SKUs like that, nor do I know how they account for it.
  3. electroweak · 1790013987 · focus · HN ↗
    I can agree: my parents bought a top loader and dryer in 1975 ('Made in Newton Iowa") which was used a few times a week for 30 years and now once a week for the last 21, as far as I know without repair. Now held by a family member they look like the day they were delivered, due to the porcelain enamel used instead of the painted metal that disintegrated on my second front loader. I've managed to repair my 3 front loaders through an average of about 8yrs each, so far. I've joked with my wife that if I see the washer by the side of the road I'll carry it home on my back.
4. ssl-3 · 1790010669 · focus · HN ↗
  We have those types here in the States, too. They're very common. We even have several different domestic manufacturers of them to pick from.
  (As an aside: I don't throw rocks at your house.)
5. xattt · 1790015046 · focus · HN ↗
  [delayed]
  1. userbinator · 1790018655 · focus · HN ↗
    I suspect it's due to the amount of water they use (or lack thereof) which leaves a lot more residue along the drain path, along with the horizontal drum that tends to trap rising water vapour attempting to escape. Leaving the lid on a top-loader open after use is natural; the water evaporates upwards, and they use enough water to wash themselves clean too (at least the older models do.)
  2. surfaceofthesun · 1790019840 · focus · HN ↗
    I wish these machines would just stay slightly open when off. I leave mine open when it's not in use and haven't had an issue. If it makes you feel any better, our cats have never gone inside the washer. They're much more interested in sneaking behind the machine.
    I will note that when I forget and leave clothes after a wash for more than a day, they do get a slight mildew smell. The same thing happens with the top loader at my in-laws. Another wash gets rid of it in both cases.
    aidenn0 · 1790117370 · focus · HN ↗
    > I will note that when I forget and leave clothes after a wash for more than a day, they do get a slight mildew smell. The same thing happens with the top loader at my in-laws. Another wash gets rid of it in both cases.
    "More than a day?" It's about 3 hours for me. If I leave it more than a day, I need to run a load with bleach to get rid of the smell. Maybe I just have a terrible front-loader.
6. brudgers · 1790019587 · focus · HN ↗
  [delayed]
7. userbinator · 1790019718 · focus · HN ↗
  They're cheap, effective, reliable, very easy to service[1], and parts are also readily available. I'd only choose a side-loader if I was extremely squeezed for space and water.
  [1] There are multiple YouTube videos of these machines being completely disassembled very quickly, as well as repairs.
fragmede · 1790017596 · focus · HN ↗
Have people discovered putting the washing machine into the walk-in closet where your clothes actually live as a life hack yet?
1. pavel_lishin · 1790021007 · focus · HN ↗
  Only works if your walk-in closet has hot and cold water taps, as well as a drain.
FLeXMurphy · 1790024392 · focus · HN ↗
Part-time appliance fixer-upper here. I've done a few brands.
One thing with the newer models, especially Samsungs and the like, is they started using potting compounds to cover their circuit boards, making simple fixes like replacing a voltage regulator or a capacitor essentially impossible. Yes, you can dig through the thing, but you're likely to slice through a trace if you don't slice your hand first. I unfortunately have a stack of these and I don't know what to do with them. [1]
Slightly older models, mid to late 2010s and earlier, are often easier to deal with because their circuitry is based more on simple analog controls for which a replacement part is not only widely available, but is cheap and can sometimes be improvised if needed, than on digital boards. I'm thinking of fridges which use a rheostat for the thermostat control. If one was so inclined and could absolutely not find a replacement, a bespoke resistor could be used instead.
If someone does want to get into this sort of thing, get something that already has a service manual + plenty of youtube videos. "Spare Parts" companies have tons of videos on how to do things, but they usually stop at probing and debugging circuit boards. You have service manuals that -do- contain, on the rare occasion, the schematics. But it's best to go with appliances that have incredibly simple, analog and discrete component systems rather than a plethora of digital ICs and processors.
[1] Highly unlikely here, maybe in China, there could develop a second-hand black market where de-potted control boards are highly sought after due to their repairability, but it's a cyberpunk kind of dream at this point.
auxym · 1790080696 · focus · HN ↗
I had a very similar washer I think, from the 90s, and it eventually started exhibiting the exact same symptom (sometime in 2020 during the COVID crisis). I followed the same process and the blog author, but when I opened the transmission, the problem was immediately apparent: the large "spin gear" was plastic and was completely worn down, the teeth did not engage at all anymore with its driving gear.
Unfortunately, I found Maytag did not sell any separate parts for the transmission, only the whole transmission, for somewhere around 300$, which was more than the 25-ish years old washer was worth to me. People frequently bash manufacturers for using plastic parts like, as a mechanical engineer, I think there may be valid reasons for the design choice, but knowing the part is subject to wear, it should absolutely be made available as a spare.
I ended buying a new washer, from a very limited selection of models that were available in the summer of 2020 shortage of just about everything. I gave away the old one for free, the guy who picked it up needed the motor to repair another machine, I hope he was able to use the parts to keep it running for a long time.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.