Replacement toilet for older home with Cast Iron pipes

Users who are viewing this thread

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
I have a basement bathroom that has a 12 year old Kohler 1.6 that I would like to replace. It clogs every so often (once or twice a month on average) and is eventually going to need a rebuild. After reading up on the Toto toilets I think I am sold. I am near Seattle (in Tacoma) so might even be able to work out a deal with Terry? My interest is leaning toward something that would have the least problem coping with the older drain pipes (house is 50 years old and cast iron drains)
The Kohler 1.6 model has been able to keep up most of the time but wonder if going to a high efficiency toilet might be a poor idea? Stay with a 1.6 flush model and combine that with some of the important features - Sanigloss coating, elongated bowl, standard or the higher ADA model? Can any of these features be combined with a higher flush capacity reservoir to leave a margin of safety? I would prefer the dual cyclone flush and newer tech unit if it does a better job cleaning the bowl.
Thanks!
 

Gusherb94

Member
Messages
152
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
chicago/nw IN
Website
www.youtube.com
If you really want to stick with 1.6 but get something like a Drake II or Entrada which are 1.28 only, then you can swap the flapper for a 1.6 flapper. The flapper is what makes it 1.28.

Have you ever had any problems with mainline clogs? Are there other high water use fixtures upstream of the toilet? (Shower, old top load washer, etc). I've heard of 1.28 toilets being a problem on some cast iron drains but if you have other high water use fixtures upstream of it, there won't be any problem. Otherwise, I personally might be a little leery.
 

WJcandee

Wise One
Messages
3,181
Reaction score
170
Points
63
Location
New York, NY
I would definitely talk to Terry. I think the 1.28 Drake II would satisfy your needs very nicely. It's 1.28 gallons per flush, but it is going to perform very well, and has all the other features (Universal Height, CEFIONTECT, Double-Cyclone) that you are looking for. The 1.28 Totos basically flush as well as the 1.6s, and one incredibly-heck-of-a-lot better than your 12-year-old Kohler 1.6, which was made during the period when virtually all their low-flows sucked. I have talked often on here about what an absolute joy it was to hit my Clog-O-Matic Kohler 1.6 with a sledgehammer after replacing it with a Toto Drake.

But do give Terry a call. Even if he doesn't install in Tacoma, you can pick it up from him and get all his recommendations. In my view, he is America's Most Trusted (and Trustworthy) Plumber, so the fact that you live near him is a great thing.
 

Jadnashua

Retired Defense Industry Engineer xxx
Messages
32,770
Reaction score
1,190
Points
113
Location
New England
IF the pipes were installed properly with the right slope and are not clogged or collapsed, will have no problem with a good quality, well-designed toilet, regardless of how much water it uses to flush.

Two things happen with really low-flow toilets...typically, smaller water spot, and less bowl wash. Toto tries to keep a level playing field with engineering and materials science using the dual cyclone rim wash and a super smooth glaze.
 

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Thanks you all for the great feedback. I used to have occasional mainline clogs (about yearly) caused by some rhododendrons that had roots entering. I had to have the line cleared every year until about 5 years ago when I had the line hydrojetted. It has not clogged since (knock on wood!) Also, there is nothing immediately upstream from the toilet but there is a shower that is about 8 feet downstream. There are other drains that join but they are also downstream of the shower. I have never had a blockage in that toilet that could not be cleared with a plunger- have never had to auger it. The 1.6 clog-o-matic has been able to maintain the line even with a 2 inch flush valve and trap.
So the reservoir would not have to be changed to maintain 1.6 gpf? Is it just the flapper that has to be changed or the entire flush valve? The Drake II sounds like it would work for me. How easy is it to change any of the other models back to 1.6? Perhaps as some of you have said I should just not worry about it. If it clogs the mainline then I will know...
 

WJcandee

Wise One
Messages
3,181
Reaction score
170
Points
63
Location
New York, NY
So the reservoir would not have to be changed to maintain 1.6 gpf? Is it just the flapper that has to be changed or the entire flush valve?

Just the flapper. The toilet tank as designed only dispenses about half the tank on each flush, to use the weight of the extra water to create pressure at the valve. So, you can use a Korky adjustable 3" flapper and dial up the length of time that the flapper stays open, or you can pop in a Blue Korky "Fits Toto" flapper which was made for the older Power Gravity line and will basically drain the tank. Both are widely-available. I would try it at 1.28 and see how it goes. Most folks do more flushing than they think without introducing "solids", and those liquid flushes move the solid stuff down the line. After 8 feet, you will have some other water sources to help move it.

I had to have the line cleared every year until about 5 years ago when I had the line hydrojetted

Hydrojetting rocks! The only disadvantage is the price. However, one of our professional members recommended a drain guy on Long Island who tows his hydrojet equipment over and uses it for basically the same price that a good plumber would want to use a large snake. He opened a driveway drain for us that multiple others had said would need to be dug up and the entire line r.eplaced. Fifteen minutes of jetting filled the basin-shaped driveway ankle-deep with muddy water from the drain line, and then he broke through the clog (which was at the far end of the line from the drain). The whole driveway immediately drained like a tub, and the drain now runs like it was brand new. I am a believer.
 

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Thanks wjcandee, that's exactly what I was wondering. It sounds like the only thing that makes these toilets high efficiency low flow 1.28 gpf is the design of the flapper used? If so it sounds simple to adjust the flow rate. Obviously the flushing system will also vary in terms of design (Gmax vs dual cyclone bowl). I think the only thing left to decide is whether I need a standard or ADA height. My wife is only 5'2 and I am 5'11 so I would imagine one of us will have to compromise (me:() but the universal height of some of the Toto's is kind of in between which might work?
 

Terry

The Plumbing Wizard
Staff member
Messages
29,942
Reaction score
3,459
Points
113
Location
Bothell, Washington
Website
terrylove.com
Hi Rider,
A Drake CST744SG, standard height with CEFIONTECT would work fine too.
Bowl height is 14-5/8" before the seat is added.

This could be picked up in Puyallup.
http://terrylove.biz/toilets/101-toto-drake-toilet-elongated-CEFIONTECT.html
 

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Thanks Terry!
That sounds like a perfect solution. Would you recommend the 1.6 option or the 1.28? I am leaning toward the 1.6 as I would not be as concerned with my toilet not having enough oomph to make the main drain line (I have not had a problem with my current 1.6 toilet plugging the drain line). There is about a 10 foot lateral run on a very light slope and the toilet is the first in that line so it gets no assist. I guess I could also just change the flapper if the 1.28 has a better bowl action? Puyallup would work great for me. Is the CEFIONTECT worth the extra$$?
 

Terry

The Plumbing Wizard
Staff member
Messages
29,942
Reaction score
3,459
Points
113
Location
Bothell, Washington
Website
terrylove.com
It's the same bowl, different tank.
You could go with the 1.28 and hold the handle down a moment if you want more water. 1.6 would be fine too. It just depends on how much water you want to save. There is a pretty good push out of the gate with either.
 

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Terry, the tanks are different? Are the tanks actually different size or is the only difference the flapper or flush valve? I am not fully understanding the difference if they are both Gmax bowls. Are there any other differences in the fill valve or tank assembly? Thanks for helping me to learn.
 

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Do you think this toilet would perform better than my current 12 year old Wellworth in this application? CEFIONTECT sounds interesting. Either toilet could work for me. How soon could I pick one up from Puyallup?
 
Last edited:

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Point taken Reach, I just don't want to trade one set of problems (occasional clogging) for another (lateral drain blockage) by lowering the flow too much. I think I would be safest with what I know (1.6 gpf) and not push it too much. I don't even know if this current toilet and drain are appropriately sized. I understand that 3 in drain is the ideal standard for these low flow units and I may still have 4 in.
 

Jadnashua

Retired Defense Industry Engineer xxx
Messages
32,770
Reaction score
1,190
Points
113
Location
New England
Personally, I'd go with the 1.28g and if I found (unlikely) that I had problems, just swap the flapper and get more water. The majority of difference between the two is that they fine-tuned the bowl-tank fill so that they both filled at the same time. On the 1.6g, that extra water dribbles over the weir in the toilet slowly, but isn't going fast enough any more or enough of it to actually do much except waste water.
 

Rider56

New Member
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Tacoma, Washington
Thanks Jim, so with the old design it sounds like the full 1.6 is not immediately available for the flush and is partly used to slowly clean the bowl and as a result is not any more in total available flush volume than the new design. In that case, I can see that they are accomplishing the same thing with less water. I would think the newer design is improved and worth the small price increase. I will have to see if there is some way to confirm my wife can use the taller profile seat height. She is only 5'2.
 

WJcandee

Wise One
Messages
3,181
Reaction score
170
Points
63
Location
New York, NY
Terry, the tanks are different? Are the tanks actually different size or is the only difference the flapper or flush valve?

The tanks have absolutely 100-percent identical porcelain, only the guts inside and the model number stamped on it are different (ST743E for the 1.28gpf tank and ST743S for the 1.6gpf tank) (the same tank is used on the round CST743 toilet and the elongated CST744 toilet, so the tank bears the 743 rather than the 744 stamp inside). The flush valve is the same with a different flapper for the 1.28 and 1.6, and the fill valve is set to a slightly-different refill ratio (the percentage of the water coming into the tank that flows through the refill hose and down the overflow riser into the bowl to refill it while the tank is refilling). So by swapping the flapper or using an adjustable flapper, you can vary the amount of water that is used in the flush. (A little water will be wasted on the refill the more water you drain from the tank on each flush, because the refill will be longer but the percentage of water diverted to refill will be the same. If you are super-finicky, you can solve that problem by installing a $10 Korky 528MP fill valve which has an infinitely-adjustable refill ratio, and set it so the bowl fills to the optimal level right as the tank shuts off.) Any excess water that flows into the bowl on refill just flows over the weir and the bowl will always settle to that level after a minute or two.

toilet-cut-out-diagram.jpg


So it's all good. I would follow Jim's advice and go with the 1.28 initially, and just toy with the flapper if for some reason you find it isn't sufficient, which it more than likely is. I had a little bit of the same concern when I installed ours, but haven't had any problems and haven't looked back.
 

Wallijonn

Member
Messages
335
Reaction score
15
Points
18
Location
Arizona
I have a basement bathroom ... I would prefer the dual cyclone flush and newer tech unit if it does a better job cleaning the bowl.

The real problem will be that you won't want the best toilet in the house to be in the basement. ;) No, siree Bob, you will want that Drake II in the master bathroom and then move the toilet that is in the master bathroom down to the basement. ;) Unless the basement is your Man Cave. :D
 

hj

Master Plumber
Messages
33,602
Reaction score
1,041
Points
113
Location
Cave Creek, Arizona
Website
www.terrylove.com
MANY Kohler toilets have a clogging problem because of the way they are designed, NOT because of the types of pipes they are connected to. If it unplugs with a plunger or closet auger, you just need a better toilet, regardless of who makes it.
 
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