You shouldn't compare it to an old Sub-Zero, you should compare it to a new
generation one. The energy consumption standards for fridges have been going
up, so that a fridge that is even a few years old will use more power than
the latest models. Prob. your new Viking, being one generation behind, was
comparable to your old SZ. If you had bought a new SZ or other current
model, your bill would have gone DOWN, not stayed the same.

The yellow energy sticker gives the annual operating cost so it's easy to
compare among models. If you are spending $3,000 plus for a fridge, I assume
saving $10/year on electricity is not the 1st thing on your mind anyway.


"JF" > wrote in message
...
> Gee. We've had a Viking fridge for over two years now and it's sure a lot
> better than our previous Sub-Zero. I haven't tested its efficiency lately,
> but we didn't see a surge in electrical costs since installing it....
>
>
> "Colin" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Avoid Viking fridge. Viking bought built-in fridge division of Amana
> > several years ago, and then found out why they sold it. They were having
> > REAL trouble meeting new government standards for efficiency. They had
> > to get two exemptions to stay in business while they worked on the
> > problems. They eventually passed, but just, and they still have the
> > worst efficiency in the industry. I would assume the wine coolers are
> > the same, as it's just a specialized fridge.
> >
> > The dishwashers are supposed to be pretty good.
> >
> > Colin
> >
> >
> >
> > Aileen wrote:
> > > Hi all:
> > > Wondering if anyone has experience with the Viking dish washer,
> > > refigerator and/or wine cooler. I would also love to hear about the 48
> > > vs 60" all gas ranges.
> > > Sincere thanks for any input , Aileen ( in frozen North )
> > >
> >
> >
>
>