View Full Version : Toto toilet confusion: Gwyneth gone? Double Cyclone vs G-Max?
03-01-2010, 06:52 AM
I'm ready to buy two new toilets, but I keep getting confused at every turn with Toto. I hope I can get help with a few questions...
I found the Gwyneth referenced on the forum, and when I Google it and look at it on sites which have it for sale, it seems to have most of the features I thought I wanted: ADA height, elongated, one piece sleek design (I'd prefer skirted, but this design is fine with me), Sanagloss. It has a Double Cyclone flush (more on that in a second). Seems good -- except I can't find it on the Toto site at all. Has it been discontinued? It looks very similar to the UltraMax II, which I saw in a showroom and see on the Toto site -- did Toto rename the Gwyneth to become the UltraMax II, or are these two different models?
Today, I just found the Carlyle II (http://www.terrylove.com/forums/showthread.php?35425-TOTO-MS614164CEFG-Carlyle-II-with-Double-Cyclone-and-Universal-Height)on the Toto web site. I guess I had previously overlooked this because I was focusing on 1.6 gallon flush models, and this is another 1.28 gallon Double Cyclone model. It has the ADA high, elongated, one piece design, skirted (yea!), but no Sanagloss. Is losing Sanagloss to get the skirted look I prefer a bad tradeoff, if I go with one of these 1.28 gallon models?
The flushing systems are my other source of confusion. Yesterday I visited two bath showrooms to see the different Toto models in person, which was helpful -- but I got conflicting information. At one place, the salesperson told me the Double Cyclone flushing system, as found on the UltraMax II, was Toto's best. I figured, okay, G-Max has probably been out there longer, so this is their new, improved system. Until I went to the second showroom, where the salesperson told me that she thought the G-Max was the best flushing toilet made. Arrrgghh! So is G-Max better, in part because it uses 1.6 gallons per flush, while Double Cyclone is how they got down to 1.28 gallons? Or is the Double Cyclone an improvement on G-Max because it washes the bowl better?
Thanks in advance for any help and advice!
Originally, TOTO had a one-piece and a two-piece Gwyneth
These are now:
MS604114CEFG, Ultramax II
CST454CEFG, Drake II
03-01-2010, 09:17 AM
The double-cyclone gives better bowl wash. The 1.28 vs 1.6 gallon flushing on the Totos is pretty close, I would opt for either depending on the style and what was available. All toilets will eventually be 1.28 or less. I seem to remember that the Gwyneth/Ultramax naming thing, but not sure of the details...I think they are the same thing. Just like Ford changed the 500 to a Taurus to keep the name recognition, I think Toto dropped the Gwyneth name.
03-01-2010, 11:40 AM
Yes they did changed it from the Gwyenth to the Ultramax II and the G-max is a 1.6 gpf and the E-max is 1.28 gpf.
Double Cyclone is the way it flushes in the bowl, better rim wash and no little holes undermeath to clog up.
Supreme II is now available and it is only available in the Sanagloss MS614164CEFG only black is not available in Sanagloss.
03-01-2010, 06:04 PM
Thanks for the replies so far!
I confirmed with Toto today that the Gwyneth was changed to the UltraMax II, as you both said. One confusion resolved! :)
Peanut9199, I see the Supreme II on Toto's web site, and the features seem identical to the UltraMax II: 1.28 gallon Double Cyclone flush, ADA height, 1-piece, Sanagloss. The photos *seem* virtually identical as well, except that the UltraMax II tank is slightly taller in the same shape profile. Is that the only difference between these two?
Likewise, The Carlyle II and Carolina II appear to have the same features -- 1.28 gallon Double Cyclone flush, ADA height, 1-piece, skirted, Sanagloss, identical water surface area. The pictures look very similar except that the tank on the Carlyle II is about 3" higher in the same shape profile. Is there anything other than this minor cosmetic difference between these two?
But I'm still confused about flushing systems. So if I understand it, G-Max was Toto's breakthrough with the 3" flush valve and 2-1/8" trapway , but exists only for only 1.6 gallon models, which are being phased out as the industry transitions to eventually being all 1.28 gallon models. The E-Max on all the "Eco" models is a re-engineered G-Max, still with the 3" flush valve and 2-1/8" trapway, for a 1.28 gallon flush. But all the "II" models have the Double Cyclone flushing system. Can someone tell me, does Double Cyclone still have the same 3" flush valve and trapway as the G- and E-Max models?
I guess I don't understand why they've got two different 1.28 gallon flushing systems, E-Max and Double Cyclone. Was E-Max the first-generation high efficiency solution to states mandating reduce water consumption, and Double Cyclone is a newer, second-generation system and eventually going to replace E-Max? Otherwise, how am I supposed to know how to choose between two toilets that look alike and otherwise have identical features but have these two different flushing systems? I would think most people would simply want "whatever gives the best overall flush", but there's no way I figure out how to know which of these is "better", and they have a bunch of models of each.
Sorry for all these questions, but I'm just trying to sort out the issues to make an well-informed choice. I only hope to replace these toilets once!
03-01-2010, 08:01 PM
The Gwyneth became either the Drake II, or the Ultramax II.
As far as which is better, the G-Max, Eco Flush, or Double Cyclone, there isn't that much difference.
They use the same trapway design, Similar 3" flush valve, similar fill valve.
The "Big" change, is in the rinse.
Double Cyclone has two rinse outlets, that are opposed and the water swings around the bowl.
The E and the S rinse, is more like a standard bowl, that has the rinse holes punched under the rim.
The water rinses straight down.
You can make an argument that any of these is "Best".
And for slightly different reasons.
After all, they are Toto toilets.
03-01-2010, 09:09 PM
You can make an argument that any of these is "Best". And for slightly different reasons.
Can I follow up and ask what those reasons might be? That is, if I could find the Double Cyclone "best" because of its wash of the bowl, why could I also find the E-Max or G-Max "best"? I'm just trying to understand what the relative advantages or disadvantages of one versus the other are, other than that they simply work differently. Is Double Cyclone better at cleaning the sides of the bowl but G-Max/E-Max better at moving a bigger/heavier load? I mean, if they were all really identical in doing their job, Toto wouldn't be manufacturing these three different lines of toilets; they'd pick one and ditch the others, right?
For example, the UltraMax II (Double Cyclone) and Eco UltraMax (E-Max) are both 1.28 gallon one-piece, ADA height, toilets with Sanigloss which look almost identical -- so why would I choose one versus the other? And since the original UltraMax (G-Max, 1.6 gallon) is still available, if water conservation is a not a deciding factor, is that a better choice because more water flushes better?
Again, thanks for any clarifications or guidance; I feel a decision is getting closer!
03-01-2010, 09:41 PM
I went through this same thought process a year ago. I really wanted the double cyclone bowl wash, but kept thinking that I was giving something up (like the "strength" of the flush, for example) if I got it. I can honestly say that the Ultramax II seems, to me, to have everything I was looking for - good bowl wash, strong flushing, Sanagloss, ADA height. I have 2 of this model in my house and would buy that model again if I ever needed another toilet.
03-02-2010, 12:37 PM
To flush a small amount of water you want the largest volume of water to be released at once.
That is why the 3" flush valve is better than a 2", the G-max and E-max both have that so does the "Power gravity" flush like the Ultimate.
Unlike the power gravit flush the G-max and E-max also has more water holding in the tank, this helps because more water more push, but these toilets do not empty all the water out of the tank giving you either a 1.6 or 1.28 gallon flush.
The new style toilets now have "Double Cyclone" flush because the other styles release the water in the bowl like a water fall but this does not clean the rim like the older style 3.5 gpf toilets and people have complained about this.
The newer styles are also giving "Comfort height", "Sanagloss" and "1.28gpf" as standard on the toilet.
The difference between the Carlyle and Carolina is the height only, the Caroline is used when you have a counter on top of the toilet and do not have the room.
03-02-2010, 09:02 PM
Peanut9199, I want to make sure I understand your last post. I understand that the 3" flush valve is superior to the older 2" models. But the G-Max (1.6 gpf), E-Max (1.28 gpf), and Double Cyclone (1.28 gpf) all have the 3" flush valve, right? If Double Cyclone cleans the rim and bowl better, with less water than the older G-Max, does that mean Double Cyclone is a <I>better</I> flush than G-Max, or basically <I>equivalent</I> to G-Max but with less water? And in either case, why would anyone want (and why would Toto continue to sell) the E-Max models, which use the same amount less water but lack the newer, cleaner flush of the Double Cyclone? All other features (height, Sanagloss, appearance) being equal, what reason would a consumer have for preferring an E-Max model over a Double Cyclone model?
Let me again ask the same questions with specific models. The UltraMax II (Double Cyclone, 1.28gpf), the Eco UltraMax (E-Max, 1.28gpf), and the original UltraMax (G-Max, 1.6gpf) all look virtually identical, come in ADA height and with Sanagloss. Does more water trump all, making the G-Max model best if you're willing to use more water? Does the Double Cyclone model have the best performance even though it uses less water? If there any advantage to the E-Max model?
03-03-2010, 12:36 AM
TOTO came out with the superior 3" flush valve over fifteen years ago.
The first time I saw one was in a designer showroom.
It was the most bizzare thing I had ever seen.
Now I sell them all week long.
3" is way better then 2"
At home, I have a 1.6 G-Max with Sanagloss
A 1.28 without Sanagloss
And a 1.28 douible cyclone with Sanagloss.
Both of the bowls with Sanagloss stay cleaner.
Performance is best on the 1.6 G-Max with Sanagloss.
But at the end of the day, it's pretty darn close.
For some, it's just picking something from the selection that you feel good about.
I do plan on moving things around again, might go with an Eco Soree in the main bath.
03-03-2010, 01:14 AM
Wow, I had no idea the larger flush valve had been on the market for so long!
Thanks for your thoughts on the relative performance to the toilets, Terry. Even if a manufacturer tells you something, it's more meaningful coming from users and better yet sellers/installers.
I just got an email response from a Toto customer service representative to the same basic questions I posted above. Her response is the first clear-cut one I've seen from Toto: "Our double cyclone flushing system is our best system. It is more powerful, even though it is a 1.28gpf, and it cleans the bowl better. G-max is a good system as well but our double cyclone is the best." Three sentences which help clarify a lot of my confusion. Now, I do realize this may be one customer service rep's opinion and not the official company line, but it makes sense if this is correct. Combined with the positive reports I've read here about the Double Cyclone models, I think that's the way I'll go. (Even though before I started this search, I was convinced I wanted a 1.6gpf toilet because I assumed they had to have an better flush with more water.)
The Carlyle II seems to offer all the features I want: contemporary style, one-piece construction, skirted design, ADA height, sanagloss, double cyclone. The clincher: it's quite a bit more expensive than all the other models I was looking at -- which is my guaranteed, sure-fire, works-every-time way to know I've found the product I'm looking for! ;)
Thanks to all who responded to my many questions. Hopefully this thread will help some others who may have similar questions in the future.
03-12-2010, 01:52 PM
The info in this thread is helpful, and I have one more question. My rough-in measures 11.25" and the tank/toilet is flush (no pun intended) againt the tiled wall. Do I need a 10" or 12"?
03-12-2010, 04:12 PM
The spec sheet shows 3/4" behind the toilet if the flange is at a standard position, so it would be tight against the wall. If you substituted the 10" unifit for the 12" one that comes with it, you'd have 2" behind the toilet. Your choice.
09-09-2011, 10:32 AM
GREAT thread, I just found it, and am going through the same decision making process. I did find that Consumer Reports didn't particularly like the double cyclone for their pretty severe tests, but my real world is large matter getting moved.
So... If you still get replies to you on this, could you give me a year later review on your double cyclone model?
09-09-2011, 11:12 AM
If you had been around this forum for awhile, you would know that CR is not a very respected journal by folks who know and sell Toto toilets. Every one of their previously recommended toilets has proven to be a flop in use.
09-09-2011, 12:32 PM
Consumer reports plugged the toilet first, and then showed that a plugged toilet wouldn't flush liquids.
They are either very stupid, or crooked.
I've been selling the Ultramax II for two years now, and they work great!
I have one in the main bathroom.
At least I stopped getting letters from CR's lawyers asking me as a plumber to quit writing about plumbing.
That was the dumbest thing I ever heard of.
Industry experts shouldn't write articles about their profession?
Who in the hell do these two desk jockeys think they are?
But hey, as a compromise, I told them I wouldn't give my opinion on peanut butter. That's all theirs.