OT: What tangled lines we weave!



On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 19:55:08 -0600, Katra <[email protected]>
wrote:

>And your underthings will last much longer... Dryers are hell on elastic. :)
>
> K. (afellow line dryer for many years...)

You mentioned in another post you have a front load washer. When I researched them it was clear that
more wear comes from the washer. So I got a front loader. There is much less lint in the dryer
screen than with a top loader. The other culprit of clothes destruction is clogged or improperly
installed vent ducts. I installed a very short duct run. We never use anything above medium-low, and
it dries very fast. I had someone call me up and said the dryer was broke. It was taking 3 cycles to
get the clothes dry even though it was hot. I went over and pulled a bag of lint out of the vent and
it worked in 1 cycle again. I'm sure it was murder on the clothes and the gas bill. Luckily there
was no fire.

Gar
 
On 29 Dec 2003 08:08:26 -0800, [email protected] (Nancy
Dooley) wrote:

>Cats with their back claws intact can function just as well outdoors as a cat with claws on all
>four paws. They can run just as fast and climb just as well.
>
>I don't like delcawing, either, but one look at a friend's expensive wingback chair cured me. Some
>cats take well to substitute scratching items; some don't. If your cat won't use a scratch pad or
>scratch post, you'll have ruined furniture.

We took in a stray a few months ago. He was eating out of the dumpster. He was a filthy mess, but
cute and friendly as hell. But a scratcher.

He now has no claws. He sleeps on a bed or nice chair. Has all his shots and is chipped. He also has
all the food and water he wants, and gets an occasional treat. Loves getting stoned on catnip, and
is loved by all of us, including the other cat.

I'm sure if he can remember the days he was looking for food in a dumpster, he doesn't think twice
about his claws.

Gar
 
Gar wrote:

> You mentioned in another post you have a front load washer. When I researched them it was clear
> that more wear comes from the washer. So I got a front loader.

Just curious, what brand did you pick? I'm not in the market for a washer, but I was hoping when I
am to get a front loader. They are much more expensive, from casual observation.

> There is much less lint in the dryer screen than with a top loader. The other culprit of clothes
> destruction is clogged or improperly installed vent ducts. I installed a very short duct run. We
> never use anything above medium-low, and it dries very fast. I had someone call me up and said the
> dryer was broke. It was taking 3 cycles to get the clothes dry even though it was hot. I went over
> and pulled a bag of lint out of the vent and it worked in 1 cycle again. I'm sure it was murder on
> the clothes and the gas bill. Luckily there was no fire.

I frightened some poor heating cooling guy when he saw the setup I had with my dryer. I knew it was
bad, but I didn't know the flexible vent hose was squished.

nancy
 
Gar wrote:

> He now has no claws. He sleeps on a bed or nice chair. Has all his shots and is chipped. He also
> has all the food and water he wants, and gets an occasional treat. Loves getting stoned on catnip,
> and is loved by all of us, including the other cat.
>
> I'm sure if he can remember the days he was looking for food in a dumpster, he doesn't think twice
> about his claws.

I was as close as being in the vet's office with my cat to have her declawed. She destroyed my
furniture and my string cloth wallpaper, I couldn't take it anymore. Walked out of the vet's office
because the waiting was ridiculous. She stopped scratching anything but her post that day, isn't
that odd? Like she knew.

Anyway, she is sharing breakfast with me, fried taylor pork roll. Weird cat.

nancy
 
In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 19:55:08 -0600, Katra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >And your underthings will last much longer... Dryers are hell on elastic. :)
> >
> > K. (afellow line dryer for many years...)
>
> You mentioned in another post you have a front load washer. When I researched them it was clear
> that more wear comes from the washer. So I got a front loader. There is much less lint in the
> dryer screen than with a top loader.

That is a very interesting observation. :) Mom always had front loaders as she said that they got
clothes a lot cleaner. She hated top loaders and I noted that she was right. While we were on
various vacations and had to use top loaders and laundromats, the clothes got kinda dull. <shrugs>

> The other culprit of clothes destruction is clogged or improperly installed vent ducts. I
> installed a very short duct run. We never use anything above medium-low, and it dries very fast. I
> had someone call me up and said the dryer was broke. It was taking 3 cycles to get the clothes dry
> even though it was hot. I went over and pulled a bag of lint out of the vent and it worked in 1
> cycle again. I'm sure it was murder on the clothes and the gas bill. Luckily there was no fire.
>
> Gar

Sounds like you were lucky! I've heard of dryers causing house fires which is why you should _never_
ever leave one running and leave the house! And keep an extiguisher in the laundry room...

With my personal underthings, I hand wash them in the shower. <G> Nice, expensive satin undies are
one of the few things I do to pamper myself and with hand-washing, I only go thru about 6 pairs per
year at most and this way I always have clean ones. ;-)

K.

--
^ ^ Cat's Haven Hobby Farm ^ ^ [email protected] ^ ^
>,,< >,,< >,,<
 
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:16:11 -0500, Nancy Young
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Gar wrote:
>
>> You mentioned in another post you have a front load washer. When I researched them it was clear
>> that more wear comes from the washer. So I got a front loader.
>
>Just curious, what brand did you pick? I'm not in the market for a washer, but I was hoping when I
>am to get a front loader. They are much more expensive, from casual observation.

My decision was based on space requirements. Maytag stackables would not fit or that's what I'd have
gotten. I googled the hell out of the frigidaire and decided to get it. The reviews were just so-so,
but when Snot & Co. moved in we were spending at least one whole weekend day on laundry. When it was
just me it was fine to go a month. They are quite a bit more money, but I figured we'd pay for it in
a year since we were spending 30-40 bucks a week at the laundromat. (or as they say in Texass,
"washateria") <g>, and it was the only one that would fit. The set was about $1350, but has come
down, and is now made with different names on it. The Maytag was $1900. Shortly after I got these,
Maytag had a new model out that would fit. <grrrrr> The Maytags can't be used side-by-side though.
Mine can be used stacked, side by side, or built into a counter top with the steel tops removed.
We're planning on moving to the summer home full time as soon as we can. I'll build them in when we
move there. I've got a top loader there and we hate it.

I'm more than happy with these. White sox, kitchen towels, <--ob food ETC, come out cleaner without
bleach than with it in a top loader. That alone saves on wear. The "special" front loader detergent
is a scam. I use cheapo Costco detergent, but use about 1/3 as much. It's almost silent except in
spin mode. Uses 1/3 of the water. At 2.7 cu.ft, it holds a queen sized down comforter. You can't
compare size with top loaders. You pack them full without problems. Snot washes angora sweater in it
without problems.

Spending the extra cash on a front loader is far less extravagant than buying LaCruset or All-clad
cook ware. IMO. From what I understand it's hard to find a top loader in Europe. I think they might
be ahead of us there. There's quite a few euro brands on the market, but lots more money.

>I frightened some poor heating cooling guy when he saw the setup I had with my dryer. I knew it was
>bad, but I didn't know the flexible vent hose was squished.

LOL.. scarry **** nancy

Gar
 
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:23:23 -0500, Nancy Young
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Gar wrote:
>
>> He now has no claws. He sleeps on a bed or nice chair. Has all his shots and is chipped. He also
>> has all the food and water he wants, and gets an occasional treat. Loves getting stoned on
>> catnip, and is loved by all of us, including the other cat.
>>
>> I'm sure if he can remember the days he was looking for food in a dumpster, he doesn't think
>> twice about his claws.
>
>I was as close as being in the vet's office with my cat to have her declawed. She destroyed my
>furniture and my string cloth wallpaper, I couldn't take it anymore. Walked out of the vet's office
>because the waiting was ridiculous.

Must be a regional vet practice thingie. I made all the plans over the phone. It was about a week
before they could take him. They called the day before and reminded me about the no food or water
thing. I dropped him off in the morning and filled out 60 seconds of paperwork and verified that he
would pass all medical tests before I spend a fortune. They called in the pm to tell me he was
healthy and I could pick him up in the morning.

Almost 500 bucks later.

>She stopped scratching anything but her post that day, isn't that odd? Like she knew.

They know....... Be very very very scared. <g>

>Anyway, she is sharing breakfast with me, fried taylor pork roll. Weird cat.

Send that TPR over here. Don't waste it on a beast!!!!!!

Gar <-----not a cat lover, but enjoys intelligent life. Cows and pigs are food. Just my .02
<----OB food
 
In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:

<snipped>
> Gar <-----not a cat lover, but enjoys intelligent life. Cows and pigs are food. Just my .02
> <----OB food

So is Bambi. <winks>

K.

--
^ ^ Cat's Haven Hobby Farm ^ ^ [email protected] ^ ^
>,,< >,,< >,,<
 
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:16:11 -0500, Nancy Young
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Gar wrote:
>
> > You mentioned in another post you have a front load washer. When I researched them it was clear
> > that more wear comes from the washer. So I got a front loader.
>
> Just curious, what brand did you pick? I'm not in the market for a washer, but I was hoping when
> I am to get a front loader.

That's where I'm at too. The household concensus is that we'll get a frontload stack... the brand
remains undecided at this time. We have Whirlpool now - they take a long time to die.

> They are much more expensive, from casual observation.
>

They were unfashionable for years, remember supply & demand? Front loaders are easier on clothing
and use less water/detergent... so hopefully prices will come down by the time we need to buy.

Practice safe eating - always use condiments
 
In article <[email protected]>,
sf <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:16:11 -0500, Nancy Young <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Gar wrote:
> >
> > > You mentioned in another post you have a front load washer. When I researched them it was
> > > clear that more wear comes from the washer. So I got a front loader.
> >
> > Just curious, what brand did you pick? I'm not in the market for a washer, but I was hoping
> > when I am to get a front loader.
>
> That's where I'm at too. The household concensus is that we'll get a frontload stack... the brand
> remains undecided at this time. We have Whirlpool now - they take a long time to die.
>
> > They are much more expensive, from casual observation.
> >
>
> They were unfashionable for years, remember supply & demand? Front loaders are easier on clothing
> and use less water/detergent... so hopefully prices will come down by the time we need to buy.
>
>
>
> Practice safe eating - always use condiments

Our last one was a Frigidaire, and it lasted around 25 years with a few repairs before it became no
longer salvagable.

Well worth the money considering (from what I've heard anyway) that the average top loader lives
only 3 to 5 years?

K.

--
>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<
[email protected]>,,<http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&include=0&us-
erid=katra
 
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:27:59 -0600, Katra
<[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, sf <[email protected]> wrote:
>

> Our last one was a Frigidaire, and it lasted around 25 years with a few repairs before it became
> no longer salvagable.
>
> Well worth the money considering (from what I've heard anyway) that the average top loader lives
> only 3 to 5 years?
>
I'd like to say it's a sign of times past... my whirlpool washer lasted 25 or so years and it wasn't
a mechanical problem that did it in (the tub that got rust spots and sprang a leak), of course I
replaced it with another Whirlpool. The dryer is still going.

Only 3 to 5 years for "modern" appliences? Lord save us. Not at today's prices! Who can afford it?

Practice safe eating - always use condiments
 
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:15:07 -0600, Katra <[email protected]>
wrote:

>That is a very interesting observation. :) Mom always had front loaders as she said that they got
>clothes a lot cleaner. She hated top loaders and I noted that she was right. While we were on
>various vacations and had to use top loaders and laundromats, the clothes got kinda dull. <shrugs>

It took about one load to get spoiled. The difference is much greater than I expected. We I use the
top loader at the country house the clothes just don't seem clean.

>Sounds like you were lucky! I've heard of dryers causing house fires which is why you should
>_never_ ever leave one running and leave the house! And keep an extiguisher in the laundry room...

It wasn't my house. It was a friend. I would never had let it get to that point.

>With my personal underthings, I hand wash them in the shower. <G> Nice, expensive satin undies are
>one of the few things I do to pamper myself and with hand-washing, I only go thru about 6 pairs per
>year at most and this way I always have clean ones. ;-)

I don't wear satin undies, but it sure gets the **** stains out of cotton ones.

Firepants
 
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:03:01 GMT, sf <[email protected]> wrote:

>They were unfashionable for years, remember supply & demand?

Huh?

>Front loaders are easier on clothing and use less water/detergent... so hopefully prices will come
>down by the time we need to buy.

You were babbling about your knowledge of the value of a buck in another thread. Figure out how much
you spend on water and soap. Cut that by 66%. Then figure out what you spend cleaning things you
can't fit in that top loader. Then the delicate things you no longer have to take to the dry
cleaners. The intangibles like clothing life, cleaner cloths, less energy spent on drying because
the spin cycle is so much more efficient etc, etc. If you're as smart as you claim you'll find top
loaders a value even at the current prices.

Gar
 
In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:15:07 -0600, Katra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >That is a very interesting observation. :) Mom always had front loaders as she said that they
> >got clothes a lot cleaner. She hated top loaders and I noted that she was right. While we were on
> >various vacations and had to use top loaders and laundromats, the clothes got kinda dull.
> ><shrugs>
>
> It took about one load to get spoiled. The difference is much greater than I expected. We I use
> the top loader at the country house the clothes just don't seem clean.

Yup, AND, as you pointed out in your last post, you can fit some stuff in there that will NOT fit
into a top loader! One of my neighbors asked to borrow my washing machine to wash a comforter as it
would not fit into hers! :) She swept my entire house and sunroom to pay for the use. She
volunteered to do that of course. <G>

This is the same lady who's family I'm currently helping to support, so she never asks for anything
for free. She has her pride...... which is a good thing. I'm trying to help her get her GED, then
get herself a decent career by going to the local college for one of the health care degrees.

It's the only way that she will ever get out of the poverty rut she is in. <sigh>

>
> >Sounds like you were lucky! I've heard of dryers causing house fires which is why you should
> >_never_ ever leave one running and leave the house! And keep an extiguisher in the laundry
> >room...
>
> It wasn't my house. It was a friend. I would never had let it get to that point.

Ah, ok...

>
> >With my personal underthings, I hand wash them in the shower. <G> Nice, expensive satin undies
> >are one of the few things I do to pamper myself and with hand-washing, I only go thru about 6
> >pairs per year at most and this way I always have clean ones. ;-)
>
> I don't wear satin undies, but it sure gets the **** stains out of cotton ones.
>
> Firepants

ROFL! That was nasty. ;-) Do what my <enter non-specified relative here> did and just buy black dyed
cotton underwear. <G>

K.

--
>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<[email protected]>,,<
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&include=0&userid=katra
 
In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:03:01 GMT, sf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >They were unfashionable for years, remember supply & demand?
>
> Huh?
>
> >Front loaders are easier on clothing and use less water/detergent... so hopefully prices will
> >come down by the time we need to buy.
>
> You were babbling about your knowledge of the value of a buck in another thread. Figure out how
> much you spend on water and soap. Cut that by 66%. Then figure out what you spend cleaning things
> you can't fit in that top loader. Then the delicate things you no longer have to take to the dry
> cleaners. The intangibles like clothing life, cleaner cloths, less energy spent on drying because
> the spin cycle is so much more efficient etc, etc. If you're as smart as you claim you'll find top
> loaders a value even at the current prices.
>
> Gar

Top Loaders Gar? I think you meant to say Front Loaders. <G>

Fortunately, I think everyone knew that... ;-D

And I agree with all of your points. I still have some blouses that I had back in High School 20
years ago. Granted, I don't wear them that often, but the washing machine (front loader) has not
destroyed them.

And they are coming back into style. ;-)

Front loaders also live a lot longer than top loaders!

So, say, you replace a top loader ever 5 years for $300.00. That comes to $1,500.00. A really good
front loader costs $800.00, and our last one lasted 25 years with a few minor repairs. Dad did the
labor tho', and we had to replace one pump.

K.

--
>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<[email protected]>,,<
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&include=0&userid=katra
 
In article <[email protected]>,
sf <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:27:59 -0600, Katra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>, sf <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
>
> > Our last one was a Frigidaire, and it lasted around 25 years with a few repairs before it
> > became no longer salvagable.
> >
> > Well worth the money considering (from what I've heard anyway) that the average top loader
> > lives only 3 to 5 years?
> >
> I'd like to say it's a sign of times past... my whirlpool washer lasted 25 or so years and it
> wasn't a mechanical problem that did it in (the tub that got rust spots and sprang a leak), of
> course I replaced it with another Whirlpool. The dryer is still going.
>
> Only 3 to 5 years for "modern" appliences? Lord save us. Not at today's prices! Who can afford it?
>
>
> Practice safe eating - always use condiments

It probably is tho'. <sigh> I've never owned a top loader, just going by what I've heard from
neighbors. :)

I know that we have some old old old centrifuges at work that are over 20 years old, and the newer
ones last maybe 2 years under heavy use!!! It's disgusting. :p

Most medical equipment is replaced every 5 years, which was why I was so pleased to inherit that 20
year old 40 square ft. Hobart refrigerator. It still uses Freon and it's had 3 minor repairs, but
now holds a steady temp of 38 degrees. :) I got it from the lab I work at when they did a total
equipment replacement package!

Free. I just had to move it.

K.

--
>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<[email protected]>,,<
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&include=0&userid=katra
 
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:35:00 -0600, Katra <[email protected]>
wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:03:01 GMT, sf <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >They were unfashionable for years, remember supply & demand?
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>> >Front loaders are easier on clothing and use less water/detergent... so hopefully prices will
>> >come down by the time we need to buy.
>>
>> You were babbling about your knowledge of the value of a buck in another thread. Figure out how
>> much you spend on water and soap. Cut that by 66%. Then figure out what you spend cleaning things
>> you can't fit in that top loader. Then the delicate things you no longer have to take to the dry
>> cleaners. The intangibles like clothing life, cleaner cloths, less energy spent on drying because
>> the spin cycle is so much more efficient etc, etc. If you're as smart as you claim you'll find
>> top loaders a value even at the current prices.
>>
>> Gar
>
>Top Loaders Gar? I think you meant to say Front Loaders. <G>

Whoops!!!
 
In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:35:00 -0600, Katra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>, Gar <> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:03:01 GMT, sf <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >They were unfashionable for years, remember supply & demand?
> >>
> >> Huh?
> >>
> >> >Front loaders are easier on clothing and use less water/detergent... so hopefully prices will
> >> >come down by the time we need to buy.
> >>
> >> You were babbling about your knowledge of the value of a buck in another thread. Figure out how
> >> much you spend on water and soap. Cut that by 66%. Then figure out what you spend cleaning
> >> things you can't fit in that top loader. Then the delicate things you no longer have to take to
> >> the dry cleaners. The intangibles like clothing life, cleaner cloths, less energy spent on
> >> drying because the spin cycle is so much more efficient etc, etc. If you're as smart as you
> >> claim you'll find top loaders a value even at the current prices.
> >>
> >> Gar
> >
> >Top Loaders Gar? I think you meant to say Front Loaders. <G>
>
> Whoops!!!
>
>

Not as bad as my slip-up last night, typing in the wrong president... :-]

K.

--
>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<[email protected]>,,<
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&include=0&userid=katra
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back