Better low-flush toilets

Having just replaced a toilet for a friend yesterday, just wanted to plop in my observations here for those who might be looking to do the same.

The toilet being replaced was a low-flush one, not very old, but in a basement bath with a history of clogging problems. So my friend got a new low-flush unit which was supposed to be much better at disposing of waste. When I got a look at the tank I could see why: instead of the normal outlet and flapper, this one had a 4" opening, significantly larger. Which means that the water whooshes into the toilet a lot faster.

We'll see if it makes a difference.

I don't remember the make, but he got it at Home Despot, so I assume it's available pretty much anywhere.

One weird thing, though: instead of being at the bottom of the tank like you'd expect, the flapper sits a couple of inches up on an extension. This is obviously by design. Seems strange to leave that much water in the bottom of the tank; there must be some reason for this. (Hydrodynamics?)

Reply to
David Nebenzahl
Loading thread data ...

On 12/8/2010 11:12 AM I spake thus:

I got it; maybe they took old non-low-flush toilets and made 'em into low-flush ones by adding that extension?

Reply to
David Nebenzahl

So all the water doesn't run out of the flapper hence saving water?

Reply to
Akin Bohner

More likely it raises the hieght of the water drop to give it more energy. Tanks don't have to be as tall as they used to be as the volume is smaller, but would look funny if there were a gap. Pretty soon we'll be back to the old British style where the tank is mounted up at the ceiling.

In the meantime, if you are considering replacing your toilet, I highly recommend you pick up a copy of the latest Maximum Performance Test of low flow toilets here:

formatting link
Look for the link that says Publications / Free Publications and click on the MAP report.

Reply to
Robert Neville

My water-saver Glacier Bay uses a barrel flush. At the top of the tank there is half a barrel containing the flush water. When the handle is moved the barrel tips and water falls to the tank bottom. This increases the initial siphon backfill and overall flush performance.

This is very similar to the Glacier Bay flaperless.

formatting link

Reply to
Akin Bohner

More gravity working for you. Water height.

Got a Kohlar Cimmaron 1.28 here (literally). Beats the pants off my old toilet. Never clogs. Flushes super quick. Amazing.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff Thies

David Nebenzahl wrote in news:4cffdcfa$0$2419 $ snipped-for-privacy@news.adtechcomputers.com:

Or maybe the extension gives the water-column more velocity, since it must fall from a greater height?

Reply to
Tegger

On 12/8/2010 4:09 PM Tegger spake thus:

Yabbut ... 1-1/2 - 2"? Not much extra height there.

Maybe those old-timey "tank near the ceiling" toilets are the way to go here. (But with bigger pipes.)

Reply to
David Nebenzahl

Sounds like mine. American standard Champion 4.

I think this is it.

formatting link
After a year I threw away the plunger.

Reply to
Tony Miklos

David Nebenzahl wrote in news:4d0022b3$0$2405$ snipped-for-privacy@news.adtechcomputers.com:

Maybe...just enough? I'm guessing, here.

My brother had one of those in the early '70s. I'd never seen one before, and it looked really weird with the tank up near the ceiling and a long pull-chain. It did flush very well, though.

Reply to
Tegger

On 12/8/2010 4:35 PM Tony Miklos spake thus:

That's it! (I remember thinking seeing the box, "yeah, it's a real champ at accepting crap".)

Reply to
David Nebenzahl

One possible benefit is that the cold fill water mixes with the more tepid water reducing the likelihood of tank sweating.

Reply to
Bob

I recently installed a 1.28 gpf American Standard toilet. 3 inch flapper, large siphon hole. Flapper sits pretty much on the bottom of the tank.

It flushes great, but I've got a concern about what happens after the waste leaves the bowl.

We get roots in our pipes and end up with partial blockages and gurgling toilets once every year or so. $35 to rent a 100 foot snake clears the problem. The money is nothing, it's the pick-up, clean-up (yuck!) and drop off that's a pain.

Anyway, my concern is that with 20% less water moving waste through the pipe I'm going to get blockages sooner since things won't be moving along quite as quickly and could get caught sooner.

What I save on water will be dwarfed by what it'll cost to replace the sewer pipe to eliminate the problem.

Reply to
DerbyDad03

re: "It's the roots that's the problem, not the toilet"

err...no sh*t. (pun intended)

However, from a real life perspective, it really doesn't matter what's to blame. The point is that if 1.6 gallons move the stuff fast enough to move it past the roots but 1.28 gallons won't, my "partial blockages" might occur sooner.

In other words, if I'm willing to live with snaking the pipes every 18 months but not every 6 months, then using the 1.28 GPF toilet might require me to replace the sewer pipe. From that perspective, I'd be replacing the pipe because I replaced the toilet.

Reply to
DerbyDad03

I have the same root problems in two houses. I have used copper sulfate for years, uncertain whether it helps. CuS has gotten pricey. I'm going to try flushing a handful of (water softener) salt pellets every couple of weeks. Hope they will get caught in roots and remain active longer than the CuS that passes through quickly.

Replacing the pipe means opening the slab floors (and moving the furnace at one house). Big job.

Reply to
Bryce

Don't know if this would work, but it might be worth a try...

Hang, or drop, a cloth bag of those salt pellets in the tank. Some amount of them will dissolve with each flush, keeping the drain rather briney. If you have to replenish the bag every month, the technique would seem worthwhile - once a day, not so much.

Reply to
HeyBub

Wow - I think you have hit the nail on the head. I am going to have to see if I can modify one of our frequently used toilets to reduce the summer sweating.

Reply to
hrhofmann

Thanks! I may try that, with frequent peeks into the tank to see how the assortment of metal (brass, copper, steel) parts are coping with the new flavor.

After my earlier post, I realized it's CuSO4, not CuS. Sigh.

Reply to
Bryce

On 12/9/2010 2:09 PM hr(bob) snipped-for-privacy@att.net spake thus:

Oh, dear Gott: any civilization that devolves to the point of worrying about its toilet tanks sweating is surely circling the drain like the latter-day Roman Empire ...

Reply to
David Nebenzahl

just flush it twice. Or get an old 3.5gal toilet from a sale.

Reply to
Steve Barker

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.