Re: Briggs 4200 Vacuity Vs. American Standard Cadet Vs. Toto
Posted by Mike Bosela on August 31, 1999 at 16:54:50:
In response to Re: Briggs 4200 Vacuity Vs. American Standard Cadet Vs. Toto
I've three new Briggs in a new home you can have. I'll even through in the threeplungers I had to have next to them to finish the flush by hand. They are quiet,I'll give you that. Of course they might be louder if they would empty. Herb

I think the test was based on the use of ping pong balls....lots of luck withyour selection. Terry has got the best information on performance of all themajor manufacturers from around the World....Bud.

Hi Michael,

Thanks for your input- I did contact Toto, and their nearest supplier is many, many, miles away from me. as far as the "finely balanced" thing; it appears to me that the vacuum assist doesn't actually involve the touching of water; therefore, mineral deposits in the "vacuum" end of things should not come into play. As well, (I'm defending my decision to purchase one of these), the design principal is analogous to the difference between a front-wheel vs. rear-wheel drive car. It's always better to "pull" than to "push"... Front-wheel drive always, in my opinion, becoming the winner. I've also seen a bit of controversy out there on the round Vs. Elongated bowl, the naysayers on the Elongated stating that they don't flush as well as the round, with the round having a better "Vortex" action. However, the promoters of the Elongated bowl, stating the comfort, and the design considerations of the Briggs Vacuity, as well as youur own personal experience, seem to concurr tht the elongated design has more "pros" than "cons".

Thanks Again,


P.S.- The "Quietness" of the Briggs has another thing going for it vs. the 'pressure flush' systems as well.


The Vacuity is not all that quiet.  Toto is quieter and clears the bowl better.  Liann

: : You can't know if there're no Toto suppliers in the RV capital of the country until you've asked Toto. So call them up. If you look at how the Briggs works, it would seem to be finely "balanced," such that the normal mineral accumulation could affect the vacuum system. I used a Briggs 1.6 gallon toilet at a hotel recently. It flushed okay, but it had a round bowl. Just awful. Always get an elongated bowl.

: : : Hi Terry,

: : : Thanks for all the help with your web-site. I'm searching for a replacement toilet, and of course am concerned over the 1.6gpf limitation. We just moved from a new home featuring the 1.6gpf toilets made by Church, and were extremely disappointed, of course. In replacing the existing toilet, which I believe was still a 3.0gpf unit, which required a plunger by it's side(I won't mention manufacturer- not fair to them- the previous owners purchased the cheapest toilet they could, thinking they were all the same), I've come across several that are getting my focus, due to availability- the american Standard Cadet, the Briggs 4200 Vacuity, and by reading your review, the Toto. Main drawback with the Toto is, I don't think anyone carries it in my area. (Elkhart, IN). So, I guess I'm really leaning towards the Briggs 4200 and AM Cadet. I've got an American Standard which has not plugged-up since we've lived here; it's a Siphon-Jet style, unfortunately I don't know the model #. It's relatively older, and I'm guessing it's at least a 3gpf model. Any further experience or thoughts with the Briggs Vacuity? I've been seeing some good responses over the net about it, as well, in Toto's favor, of it. The price of the Toto vs. Briggs might make Brigg's the winner, however. I also read a response about the Briggs Vacuity by someone stating that this appeared to be a "finely- balanced" system, referring to it as though it could "backfire", and not work well all of the time, depending on various conditions of use- any thoughts?

: : : Thank You kindly for you or any of your readers responses.

: : : Good Luck,

: : : Mike Bosela

Replies to this post
There are none.