Toilet Suggestions for Family of 5

[Bob Gall]

Hi guys,

I've been looking at toilets, as I bought a house built in the 70s and don't think the toilets have ever been swapped out, so I have concerns over the wax ring primarily and issues that can arise from older toilets. The toilet in the master bath sits lower, maybe because the round-in is a tight 12.5" (Edit: I have an extra 3/4" from my orig measurement as I didn't account for floor trimming, so 11 3/4" + 3/4") so I had concerns about options for toilet swap. The toilet flush is less than desirable, as it leaves an accumulation at the bottom of the bowl, due to a gurgling type flush. I'm not sure if it's flushing properly in general.
Pic Below:

https://app.box.com/s/tpkrlv8i0hh1llhxwm4jxajcckn98juv

The other toilet has a typical round-in of 13". It flushes much better, but it will get a beating as it will be used mostly by the kids and guests, so I'm concerned with the current low-flow and flushing power. But, haven't run into any problems with this one. The bathroom has a stench to it, like urine.

Pic below:

https://app.box.com/s/rzssaielilgw11hg6tkpzurc8lxz9ds9

Both toilets are rather close to the bath, not sure if that matters. But, I don't think I would get anything oversized because of that.

Any suggestions on what I should go with? I mainly concerned with the master bath toilet, but thought I should swap both at the same time. My budget is flexible given I want something solid that will last.

 

[Terry]

You could pick up a couple of the TOTO Entrada toilets.
The MaP rating on those is 1000 grams.
Way better than what you have for sure.

http://terrylove.biz/toilets/99-toto-cst244ef-entrada-toilet.html
Seattle area, but I'm sure you can find them locally too.

 

[Sponsor]

 

[Bob Gall]

Was leaning towards 1.60gpf

 

[TheUniversalDave1]

Get the Kohler Cimarron with Aquapiston. You won't regret it, they are excellent toilets. Much better than TOTO in my opinion.

 

[WJcandee]

Was leaning towards 1.60gpf

Well, in California today, you're going to need to buy 1.28gpf or less. The 1.28gpf Totos save the water without compromising the flush. Those of us who have both (like me) find there to be no noticeable difference in the flush quality between the two. I bought the 1.28gpf knowing that I could change the flapper in the toilet to put more water in the flush if I needed it. Turns out that it wasn't necessary at all. You will be amazed what the Entrada can swallow. The 1000g MAP rating, meaning its ability to swallow waste, is the top rating available. Turns out that the design of the toilet's trapway is the most important issue in how well it swallows waste, and Toto's trapway design, across all its toilets, is unsurpassed. The other manufacturers have slowly been playing catch up for years.

The Entrada is a nice size for your application, too. Even though the one Terry recommended has an elongated bowl, it's not going to seem "too big" in your application, and it's going to be a lot more comfortable for the males in the family than the round. It's also excellent-quality porcelain, with long-lasting innards, so it can hold up to the use of a family of five. It will also fit on both of the rough-ins you describe.

Also, if you get the 1.28gpf toilets like the Entrada, they qualify for a Watersense rebate in Thousand Oaks. One Hundred Dollars ($100) per toilet, up to 9 toilets, I believe. Check this link and click "Residential Device Rebates" to be sure. It's based on Zip Code, but I put in the address for the local Best Western and that's what I got. The Entrada is on the list because it is Watersense-qualified. Toto CST244EF. It's buried in there but it's in there. http://socalwatersmart.com/?page_id=5389

The Entrada uses the Toto GMax flush, like the long-time Toto favorite, the (Original) Drake. We have two of those. The Drake is an excellent toilet, but the newer Entrada will probably ultimately replace it as the favorite. Today, I would have bought the Entrada because I like its looks, but we love, love, love our Drakes. They replaced one old water-hog and one horrible Kohler low-flow that I took my wrath out on after removing. (It was an early-version low-flow and I just hated it, so the Drake was a welcome relief. I was turned-off towards low-flows because of that Kohler, but the Drake made me a believer; it was just lousy trapway design by Kohler that was the problem. The Toto folks had gone back to the drawing board for their low-flows and engineered an excellent toilet from the ground up.) Anyway, the Entrada flush should look like the Drake flush. The Drake flush should look something like this (ignore the noise on the video, it's a live room and my phone's mic made it sound way loud, which it isn't):

Here it is without the paper:

It doesn't look like it uses much water, but it will swallow anything as well as any toilet can.

 

[Bob Gall]

you mentioned a link, however, it didn't register on my end. Is this it http://socalwatersmart.com/?

Also, on the Estrada, it looks like the toilet bowl cover is completely flat, but wanted to confirm. Also, is there a particular wax ring I should get with it or just a standard one?

 

[Bob Gall]

Well, in California today, you're going to need to buy 1.28gpf or less. The 1.28gpf Totos save the water without compromising the flush. Those of us who have both (like me) find there to be no noticeable difference in the flush quality between the two. I bought the 1.28gpf knowing that I could change the flapper in the toilet to put more water in the flush if I needed it. Turns out that it wasn't necessary at all. You will be amazed what the Entrada can swallow. The 1000g MAP rating, meaning its ability to swallow waste, is the top rating available. Turns out that the design of the toilet's trapway is the most important issue in how well it swallows waste, and Toto's trapway design, across all its toilets, is unsurpassed. The other manufacturers have slowly been playing catch up for years.

The Entrada is a nice size for your application, too. Even though the one Terry recommended has an elongated bowl, it's not going to seem "too big" in your application, and it's going to be a lot more comfortable for the males in the family than the round. It's also excellent-quality porcelain, with long-lasting innards, so it can hold up to the use of a family of five. It will also fit on both of the rough-ins you describe.

Also, if you get the 1.28gpf toilets like the Entrada, they qualify for a Watersense rebate in Thousand Oaks. One Hundred Dollars ($100) per toilet, up to 9 toilets, I believe. Check this link and click "Residential Device Rebates" to be sure. It's based on Zip Code, but I put in the address for the local Best Western and that's what I got. The Entrada is on the list because it is Watersense-qualified. Toto CST244EF. It's buried in there but it's in there.

The Entrada uses the Toto GMax flush, like the long-time Toto favorite, the (Original) Drake. We have two of those. The Drake is an excellent toilet, but the newer Entrada will probably ultimately replace it as the favorite. Today, I would have bought the Entrada because I like its looks, but we love, love, love our Drakes. They replaced one old water-hog and one horrible Kohler low-flow that I took my wrath out on after removing. (It was an early-version low-flow and I just hated it, so the Drake was a welcome relief. I was turned-off towards low-flows because of that Kohler, but the Drake made me a believer; it was just lousy trapway design by Kohler that was the problem. The Toto folks had gone back to the drawing board for their low-flows and engineered an excellent toilet from the ground up.) Anyway, the Entrada flush should look like the Drake flush. The Drake flush should look something like this (ignore the noise on the video, it's a live room and my phone's mic made it sound way loud, which it isn't):

Here it is without the paper:

It doesn't look like it uses much water, but it will swallow anything as well as any toilet can.

you mentioned a link, however, it didn't register on my end. Is this it http://socalwatersmart.com/?

On the Entrada, it looks like the toilet bowl cover is completely flat, but wanted to confirm.

Also, is there a particular wax ring I should get with it or just a standard one? On retailer is suggesting the Fernco FTS-3 3 in. Wax Free Toilet Seal.

 

[Jadnashua]

FWIW, if a toilet moves at all, the wax ring seal is almost always compromised and can be a source of smells. But, a smell of urine is more often the result of young boys or old men and dribbles. This is especially true if they did not use caulk around the base of the toilet (code in many places) to prevent stuff from flowing underneath the bottom edges that can only be cleaned by removing the toilet and then resetting it.

Gurgles and slow flushing could have more than one reason - one of them is a potential toilet problem, but it could also be an issue with the drain line (slope, clog, or even something in the trapway of the toilet).

There are two components to clearing the bowl. A good, modern toilet can empty the bowl, but with the low volume flush, they tend to have either a smaller surface area, or shallower depth (or both), and that can leave more surface area to get 'skid marks'. Less water means those may not be cleared off as well. Toto (and some others) offer a smoother glaze that helps just like a recently waxed car - they call it SanaGlos. Combine that with one that uses their dual cyclone flushing system that uses two jets that cause the water to swirl around the bowl from the top, and you get about as good of a state of the art flushing system that's available today.

 

[WJcandee]

you mentioned a link, however, it didn't register on my end. Is this it http://socalwatersmart.com/?

Also, on the Estrada, it looks like the toilet bowl cover is completely flat, but wanted to confirm. Also, is there a particular wax ring I should get with it or just a standard one?

Sorry, yeah. http://socalwatersmart.com/?page_id=5389

I second Jim's comment about the urine smell. When you pull the old toilet, assuming that there are non-porous surfaces under there (i.e. tile instead of wood), give that area a good cleaning with something that will get the urine and stuff up, then put a nice bead of caulk all the way around the toilet once you have it in and secured (in some jurisdictions, they want you to leave the back uncaulked but caulk the rest). You can use one of those little finger tools to smooth off the nice big thick bead so it looks nice. This will keep any liquid on the floor from slipping under the toilet. Polyseamseal is what Terry recommends for that, and it works well.

As to the top of the Entrada [I thought at first that it was Estrada, too -- funny coincidence], the best I can describe is that it's flat-ish. Here's one of the photos from the site that illustrates that a little better than the stock Toto photo:

As to the wax ring, once you pull the toilet, you will be able to see whether the top of the flange is at or below the floor level, or whether it is above the finished floor. Code is to put the flange on top of the finished floor, so its top is well above the finished floor, but the realities of construction and coordinating the trades are such that often it is at or below floor level. If that's the case, just use a double-thick wax ring or, as Terry does, just stack two regular ones (either two without a plastic insert in them or one with as the top one and one without as the bottom). Also, Korky makes a waxless seal that works well, and it means that you don't need to change the wax if you need to pull or adjust the bowl when you're installing it or later. Also, I have used the Sani-Seal, which is stackable. I usually just use wax, but these products do have some advantages for DIY-ers because you don't have to worry that you have broken the seal if you twist or lift the toilet while installing it. Also, to prevent rocking, you can use plastic window shims at the back to make sure there is no rocking. You break off the excess plastic and caulk over them for a nice neat installation. There are some other good threads on here about toilet installation.

Also, here's the Entrada thread from our site. The guy from Canada who installed it says at the end that he really likes it. Had some guests in the place he installed it who had many kids with them who used lots of toilet paper and didn't clog it. https://terrylove.com/forums/index.php?threads/toto-entrada-cst244ef.53932/

 

[Plumbs Away]

Hi guys,

I've been looking at toilets, as I bought a house built in the 70s and don't think the toilets have ever been swapped out, so I have concerns over the wax ring primarily and issues that can arise from older toilets. The toilet in the master bath sits lower, maybe because the round-in is a tight 12.5" (Edit: I have an extra 3/4" from my orig measurement as I didn't account for floor trimming, so 11 3/4" + 3/4") so I had concerns about options for toilet swap. The toilet flush is less than desirable, as it leaves an accumulation at the bottom of the bowl, due to a gurgling type flush. I'm not sure if it's flushing properly in general.
Pic Below:

https://app.box.com/s/tpkrlv8i0hh1llhxwm4jxajcckn98juv

The other toilet has a typical round-in of 13". It flushes much better, but it will get a beating as it will be used mostly by the kids and guests, so I'm concerned with the current low-flow and flushing power. But, haven't run into any problems with this one. The bathroom has a stench to it, like urine.

Pic below:

https://app.box.com/s/rzssaielilgw11hg6tkpzurc8lxz9ds9

Both toilets are rather close to the bath, not sure if that matters. But, I don't think I would get anything oversized because of that.

Any suggestions on what I should go with? I mainly concerned with the master bath toilet, but thought I should swap both at the same time. My budget is flexible given I want something solid that will last.

As has been pointed out, California law permits only the sale of 1.28 GPF (or less) new toilets. The powers that be on this site push Toto like there's nothing to equal it. Toto is an excellent product but you shouldn't rule out other options based solely on the primary posters here pushing Toto. While the above-mentioned Kohler with AquaPiston and the Toto models with G-Max flush system are excellent in terms of waste removal capacity and not clogging, from my personal experience, both leave MUCH to be desired in the area of bowl rinse. Toto offers several models with their Double-Cyclone flush system that both effectively clear and rinse the bowl. American Standard models with the PowerWash rim are also excellent in both of these areas, as are Gerber's Viper and Avalanche. You'll see a lot of bashing of American Standard because of quality control issues, but don't think they're in a league of their own in this area. Like any other mass-produced product, there are going to be "lemons," regardless of the manufacturer. The best thing with a toilet (or anything else) is to do a thorough visual inspection before installation. Check for any obvious damage, lack of consistent glazing and/or other flaws in the glazing and, before installation, set the bowl on a surface that you know to be level to make sure it doesn't wobble. You can do this in the store or, if your toilet is delivered, take it out of the box and check it out before you sign for it, and refuse the delivery if it's not correct.

Good luck!!!

 

[WJcandee]

Well, I wouldn't say "push". I would say "educate". There are plenty of Aprons at the big boxes "pushing" garbage on people every day, some of which is from the non-Toto manufacturers mentioned. If other manufacturers are starting to catch up on trapway design and quality control, it's because competition is forcing them to, not because it's an actual company value like it is at Toto. In the case of AS, the fact that its quality control and design creativity is improving is likely due primarily to its purchase by the other big Japanese toilet manufacturer, the owners of INAX, which has similar corporate values.

And, yeah, given the choice, I would rather continue to dance with the one that brung me, after having been burned to the tune of probably a grand all-in to have installed that horrible Kohler Ingenium Flush low-flow years ago, which tortured our family and guests for years before I pulled it and installed a Drake myself, that we love, for -- what -- $250 all-in? Toto, the guys that did it right from the beginning and continue to do it right, deserve to have people consider them as an option when they are not as well-known a brand in the US and when they are competing with the Aprons at the big-boxes and plumbers who don't recommend Toto because they don't want to be seen as recommending a brand the customer hasn't heard of. What used to be called "IBM syndrome" in the tech business (i.e. nobody gets fired for recommending IBM). [HJ is probably the only one who will remember this phrase, given his tech experience, now that I say it...it dates me, I guess.]

And when you buy a Toto, if it matters, you also know that the company treats its employees well, has excellent, responsive telephone customer service based right here in the US, bends over backwards to keep customers happy by basically giving them anything reasonable that they ask customer service for, uses special, more-expensive clay for its porcelain which means that variation from unit to unit is minimized and so the dimensions on the spec sheets actually mean something, and is a leader in recycling and energy-conservation. They heat their Atlanta, Georgia-area offices with heat reclaimed from their manufacturing plant, they recycle everything that can even remotely be recycled, and they have a program where their employees can bring them absolutely-anything that they would like to recycle and the company takes care of it for them. They're a good company, they're good people, and they are a responsible corporate citizen, which makes their industry-leading products easy to recommend, as long as the products continue to perform exceptionally-well.

Toto is the first to make a 1.0gpf toilet that is reasonably-priced and actually works well and gets rave reviews (albeit from people who likely are willing to trade some performance for the knowledge that they are saving 20 percent off the water consumption of the 1.28gpf toilets).

But what makes it easiest to recommend the Totos, beyond my own excellent personal experience, is that I have never, ever had someone come back and say anything other than that they loved the toilet. The satisfaction of the people who take the time to talk to us here on the forum is what makes the recommendation worthwhile.

As to bowl wash, we have never had an issue at home, either with the Drakes or the Double-Cyclone. Indeed, the swimming-pool water spot of two of the replaced toilets didn't prevent skid marks any better than the Totos. Of course, YMMV, but that's our experience.

 

[Wallijonn]

Bob,

One of the first things you will want to do is to go with Scott Towel 1000 sheet single ply toilet paper. The Charmin Double Ply super soft tissues may clog the toilet just as the silky type paper has clogged so many toilets in NY that it is being outlawed.

As far as Kohler goes, besides design, is parts - as in not being able to figure out what part you need for 'that' toilet. Toto used to have just a few standard parts and then started going with parts that can be used on many different models, what some of us call "Universal". Ask and we'll tell you which is the best part to use in your application (like the 528MP fill valve versus some other Korky part.)

The "only" two weaknesses I know of with Toto is the flush lever tends to break (don't flush with your foot) and the tank sometimes leaks because of the spud washer. I'll take that any day of the week and twice on Sunday rather than have to shlep a toilet back to HD or Lowes or Costco two or three times to get one that is perfect. As far as streaking goes - all toilets can streak. On a Toto the streaks usually disappear on subsequent urine flushes. It's the debris above the water line that you have to worry about - you don't want them to harden. Which is why something like the Double Cyclone is probably the best bet. But even it may need an immediate wipe down with a toilet brush and dish washing detergent.

 

[Bob Gall]

Guys,
The thing that concerns me about TOTO Entrada is that it doesn't have the Double Cyclone technology. I need something low maintenance, an immediate wipe down after a #2 isn't necessarily possible given the family aspect.

I found this rebate too on the home depot website, can I use both: http://amwater.com/files/VN Rebate 042315.pdf

 

[WJcandee]

I have never had to do a wipe down after a #2. In our house, the regular ol' Drake with the EMax flush is the most-used toilet by far. And I have never heard a complaint about skid marks. We saved the schwanky Double-Cyclone for the master. I like it, but I can't say in all honesty that it makes some kind of truly enormous difference. Both are "low maintenance".

But you have to follow your gut. Because if you get the Entrada, the first time you see a skid mark you will blame yourself. So go ahead and get the Drake II (CST454CEFG), which is probably the best deal on a toilet with Double-Cyclone, and it comes with CEFIONTECT standard. The street price is only $100-ish more.

Given your concerns, if you go for the Drake II, I would be super-sure that I am getting the CST454cEfg, not he cUfg, because the latter is the 1.0gpf version. That works amazingly well, and the people who seek it out love it (because they want to save water). It uses 20 percent less water, but you lose some bowl water and likely a little bowl wash. I have seen where some stores get confused between the two. One is the "Drake II", while one is the "Drake II 1G". Easy to get mixed up by the model name, so just make sure you've got the right model suffix (cEfg).

 

[Plumbs Away]

When the government enforced 1.6 GPF in '94, no one was ready for it, with the most guilty parties being the major U.S. plumbing companies. American Standard's, Kohler's and Gerber's first generation 1.6 GPF toilets sucked, and not in the way intended. They have since stepped up their game by supposedly following Toto's lead. It goes without saying that American Standard's first shot at the Champion was a colossal failure. It is now vastly improved, though it's a little difficult for the amateur DIYer to change the flush valve seal (not to be confused with the fill valve seal). Their Vormax line offers top-notch performance, but its flush valve parts are proprietary and expensive. Their Cadet line is excellent across the board, especially on the models equipped with the PowerWash rim. Repair parts for the Cadet are readily available anywhere.

As I mentioned before, Gerber's Avalanche and Viper are great performers. They also take universal repair parts.

Kohler, these days, is more about looks and style than function. If you want a "pretty" toilet, there are endless Kohler options but they are expensive and, in my opinion, don't live up to the performance that is essential in their price range.

As usual, my remarks are not meant to slight Toto. I just think that it's more fair for people to be informed of viable options than be led to believe that the ONLY sensible thing to do is buy a Toto. My remarks are not based on what I read, but what I use in my home. I'm always looking for the best in affordable toilets, so I try out different brands and models and post my remarks based on my "real world" experiences. That's why I suggest to people on a tight budget to get the $99 (White) AquaSource at Lowe's. It's made by the same company that makes Gerber's Avalanche and Viper, and performs identically. I wasn't happy with the included fill valve and replaced it with a Fluidmaster. I could have used a Korky. Many people don't care for the quality of the included plastic seat, but that's not a deal-breaker for me. You can use any seat you like and still come out ahead in terms of savings. It is also available in Biscuit for $165.

My apologies to Wallijohn, but I have to strongly disagree about the Scott toilet paper. You might as well wipe your butt with wax paper. It doesn't save money because you have to use more. Although I use Charmin Basic, the problem with the Ultra Softs and Ultra Strongs is that people tend to use too much. It doesn't take nearly as much of the thicker stuff to get the job done. And certainly don't wrap your hand in it. That's why God invented antibacterial soap!!!

 

[Bob Gall]

I couldn't find a bad thing to be said about the Entrada so I went with two of those. I'll report back when I get installed.

 

[Bob Gall]

Hey so one of the entradas was cracked from online and they're sold out. Will the CST454CEFG fit in the 12.5" round in?

 

[Gary Swart]

Any 12" rough in toilet will fit. Now you know why we do not recommend ordering toilets online. A local shop would likely have met or beat the price.

 

[WJcandee]

Hey so one of the entradas was cracked from online and they're sold out. Will the CST454CEFG fit in the 12.5" round in?

If you have at least 12" from finished wall to the cente of the closet bolts, yes it will fit, and it's an excellent toilet. If they are offering it as a no-difference-in-price replacement, jump on it.

 

[Wallijonn]

That's why I suggest to people on a tight budget to get the $99 (White) AquaSource at Lowe's.

If it's one with a nice sweeping trapway. HD had a nice looking $88 toilet with a nice trapway but it was standard height 14.5"

Scott toilet paper... You might as well wipe your butt with wax paper. It doesn't save money because you have to use more. Although I use Charmin Basic, the problem with the Ultra Softs and Ultra Strongs is that people tend to use too much.

So in both cases people use too much? (I notice that Charmin Basic is a single ply, too... )

http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/search/toilet%20paper?
http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/hea...er-reviews/a26511/scott-1000-toilet-paper-30/
http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/hea...reviews/a26502/charmin-basic-toilet-paper-16/

Just to tick you off I did some calcs:

Charmin Basic (new version) is 3.92"x4" = 15.48" per sheet, times 264 sheets = 4139.52 square inches per roll. 344.92 square feet.

Scott 1000 is 4.1"x3.7" = 15.17" per sheet, times 1000 sheets = 15,170 square inches per roll. 1264.17 square feet.

Charmin Basic Double Roll, 48 count, $24.99 = $0.520625 per roll
Scott 1000, 27 count, $19.57, = $0.72481481481481481 per roll.


264:1000 = 3.787878787878788, meaning that it takes 3.78 Charmin rolls to equal one Scott roll. (3.78 rolls x 264 sheets per roll = 997.92 sheets, total). 3.78 x 0.52 = $1.97 per 1000 sheets of Charmin Basic. Basically it's costing you 2.7 times as much, $1.97, vs $0.73 for the same number of sheets of Scott. If you do the math according to the number of square feet, then you end up paying $1.90 per roll vs. one roll of Scott for $0.73. (I laugh when I read at the Supermarket that 6 rolls of "X" brand = 12 rolls of "the leading brand" 1-ply toilet paper. Don't fall for the false advertising. Do the math.)

Or, to put it another way, you'd have to spend $67.44 for what I pay $19.57.

Not that it really matters, if you like Charmin Basic more than Scott, more power to you.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Flushable-Wipes-Sewage-Clog-Pipes-Toilet-Paper-261714921.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...ms-sewer-clogging-wet-wipes-article-1.2112087