[hocuspocus]

I'm specifically talking about top-of-the-line LG and Samsung eco-friendly washers. Check out their specs if you don't believe me, I had one of these. 4 hours at 40C and nearly 5 hours at 60C. It never bothered me though.

Edit: here's an example: http://www.lg.com/uk/washing-machines/lg-FH4A8TDN2#

- 60°C full load 297 minutes

- 60°C partial load 244 minutes

- 40°C partial load 239 minutes

[glogla]

The washers also sometimes lie about how long will something take. Mine claims 40 almost full liad will take 3 and half hours, then twenty minutes later it claims two and half hours remaining and then it finishes hour later.

I have no idea why it does that.

[noja]

It adjusts the time to the load.

[c12]

My bosh front loader does a 40°C cotton wash in just under 5 hours, or if I switch it to a 40°C mixed load it does the same content in 60 minutes, or 40 minutes if I tell it to consume more water and electricity.

I have no idea what the difference between the cotton and the mixed load settings is, but I usually do the shorter cycle if I have a lot of loads to do.

[DanBC]

But you're not comparing like for like. The machine you list also has a "turbo wash" (heavily promoted on the link you provide that only takes one hour. That's an eco mode full load.

And for the comparison to be correct you need to compare an eco mode quick wash - normally a light load.

[hocuspocus]

> But you're not comparing like for like.

I'm trying to. The standardized annual power consumption that is advertised on the energy rating is only accurate if you use the default settings for 40 and 60°C cotton cycles. And that is effectively 4 hours at 40°C for a partial load. I saw the advertised "turbowash" cycle, however while it's supposed to be energy efficient, you have to take LG's word for it.

In the US, while models differ in size, if you look at a similar price range and load capacity, you'll see that numbers used for the energy rating are pretty similar (around 100 kWh or less). But, to my knowledge, the default cycles are fairly short. Sadly neither Samsung nor LG seem to publish cycle length in their manuals.

[jdietrich]

It's dieselgate for washing machines.

Slow wash cycles are more efficient. Loosening the dirt by soaking means that less agitation is required. Manufacturers cheat the mandatory efficiency tests by making the default cycle very slow, but offering faster cycle settings. My washing machine takes nearly four hours for a standard cotton cycle, but has a "speed perfect" button that reduces the wash time to under an hour. I always use the fast setting.

[Reason077]

That's not really anything like dieselgate. Washing machines, I would hope, aren't emitting toxic gases that kill people.

It is, perhaps, a little deceptive if people believe their machines are more efficient than they really are on the commonly used cycles.

The way to solve this would be to improve the efficiency tests so that they test the efficiency of a fast cycle as well as an economy/long cycle.

[ams6110]

They use electricity, which in much of the world comes from coal, the burning of which emits toxic gases that kill people.

[Reason077]

It says "Turbowash: 59 minutes" on that link?

I guess if you're setting it running in the morning and then heading out for the day, 4-5 hours isn't a problem. But often I end up doing all the laundry on one day: clothes as well as towels, bed sheets, etc, in multiple loads, and don't want to be waiting around too long for each load to finish...