17" rough in with a space the size of Texas behind tank

Users who are viewing this thread

Ruby

New Member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Connecticut
Just purchased our 1940's home and discovered that our toilet has a 17" rough in, and the previous owners have a 12' rough in toilet on it. We are looking into the Toto-unifit set up. ..Or is there something else we should be looking at? (and no, adding a cabinet behind the toilet isn't really the solution I am looking for).
 

Terry

The Plumbing Wizard
Staff member
Messages
29,942
Reaction score
3,459
Points
113
Location
Bothell, Washington
Website
terrylove.com
Right now there are very few bowls that can be moved back even two inches.
The TOTO models with the Unifit, can be purchased with the optional 14" Unifit, which allows shifting the bowl 2"
That still puts you out there a ways, but does give a bit more leg room while sitting.

unifit_14_install.jpg


14" Unifit adapter
 
Last edited:

Reach4

Well-Known Member
Messages
38,798
Reaction score
4,413
Points
113
Location
IL
If the closet flange is readily available from your crawl space, you might be able to reasonably get your rough in changed to 12 inches. Consider posting an under-side photo (800 pixels max). Were you planning to re-do the bathroom floor? If so, think about moving the flange as part of that project.
 

R1ck

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Right now there are very few bowls that can be moved back even two inches.
The TOTO models with the Unifit, can be purchased with the optional 14" Unifit, which allows shifting the bowl 2"
That still puts you out there a ways, but does give a bit more leg room while sitting.


Is it possible to modify a Toto unifit out to 16"? from the photos I've seen, it looks like it's made from regular plumbing pipe...

Rick
 

Jadnashua

Retired Defense Industry Engineer xxx
Messages
32,770
Reaction score
1,190
Points
113
Location
New England
I think this would be risky. It might work, though. The siphon jet can only push stuff so far, and adding a couple more inches may be more than it can handle. The start of the flush has to get the entire length moving in order to create the siphon that then pulls the rest of the waste to follow it out and then down.
 

Gary Swart

In the Trades
Messages
8,101
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Location
Yakima, WA
While moving the flange would be the best option, there must have been a reason the original flange was roughed in at 17". In my opinion, altering the Unifit adapter would not be wise even if possible. The 14" adapter would be the best second option if the flange relocation proves to be unreasonably difficult. You'd be left with a 3" space behind the tank, but that isn't a great deal more than many toilets with standard flanges have. My Dartmouth sits on a 12" (exact) flange and has a 2-1/4" space between the tank and wall, so an additional 3" wouldn't be all that bad.
 

R1ck

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
While moving the flange would be the best option, there must have been a reason the original flange was roughed in at 17". In my opinion, altering the Unifit adapter would not be wise even if possible. The 14" adapter would be the best second option if the flange relocation proves to be unreasonably difficult. You'd be left with a 3" space behind the tank, but that isn't a great deal more than many toilets with standard flanges have. My Dartmouth sits on a 12" (exact) flange and has a 2-1/4" space between the tank and wall, so an additional 3" wouldn't be all that bad.


The toilet is in a daylight basement unit in a condo built in the 60's, with the flange cast into the concrete slab. Relocating the flange would probably involve a jackhammer, not to mention the approval of the condo board...not gonna happen. All the toilets in the building were replaced several years ago with basic/cheapo 12 rough low flow units on a city utility program to reduce water usage. I think that the building was done with 16 rough throughout, 'cause everybody complains about how far the 'new' 12" toilets are from the walls...my speculation is that the original plumbing was planned by an old-school plumbing guy, since I've heard that 16 was more common 20 years earlier...

I'll just get the Toto unifit 14. From what I've measured, the two inches going from 12 to 14, plus the dimensions of the Toto bowl front will give me close to 3" setback on the front of the toilet. Maybe I can finally re-hang the master bathroom door...

Thanks

Rick
 

Gary Swart

In the Trades
Messages
8,101
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Location
Yakima, WA
I'm sure not an old school plumber, but there are some on this forum that are and I don't recall any of them ever mentioning that 16" was a normal rough in the the days of yore. Maybe HJ or Terry might expand on this.
 

R1ck

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
While moving the flange would be the best option, there must have been a reason the original flange was roughed in at 17". In my opinion, altering the Unifit adapter would not be wise even if possible. The 14" adapter would be the best second option if the flange relocation proves to be unreasonably difficult. You'd be left with a 3" space behind the tank, but that isn't a great deal more than many toilets with standard flanges have. My Dartmouth sits on a 12" (exact) flange and has a 2-1/4" space between the tank and wall, so an additional 3" wouldn't be all that bad.


I saw something on another thread on this board about 16 rough being done in the 30's and 40's... I suppose that the other possibility is that after the rough was done, during the framing of the condo they moved the wall slightly for some reason... And it's not the space behind that's the issue - it's that the current 12 toilet on a 16 rough doesn't let the small bathroom door open fully.

Rick
 

Terry

The Plumbing Wizard
Staff member
Messages
29,942
Reaction score
3,459
Points
113
Location
Bothell, Washington
Website
terrylove.com
I saw something on another thread on this board about 16 rough being done in the 30's and 40's... I suppose that the other possibility is that after the rough was done, during the framing of the condo they moved the wall slightly for some reason... And it's not the space behind that's the issue - it's that the current 12 toilet on a 16 rough doesn't let the small bathroom door open fully.

Rick

In the 20's with tanks that mounted on walls, they used a 14" rough.
There never was a 16" unless the framing was missed.
As plumbers, we shoot for 12"
Sometimes because wood is in the way, we wind up at 10" or 14", or close.
On a concrete pour, things can get knocked around, or they might know exactly where walls will be framed.
Often, the lower floor was left unfinished, and it was years later before someone decided to layout a room.
 

Gary Swart

In the Trades
Messages
8,101
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Location
Yakima, WA
One more thing you might want to consider is changing the swinging door to a pocket door. This can greatly increase the usable floor space in a small room.
 
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

This is awkward, but...

It looks like you're using an ad blocker. We get it, but (1) terrylove.com can't live without ads, and (2) ad blockers can cause issues with videos and comments. If you'd like to support the site, please allow ads.

If any particular ad is your REASON for blocking ads, please let us know. We might be able to do something about it. Thanks.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks