Connelly vs Drake II

I've read plenty of reviews about the Drake II. I went to the Toto website ans poked around and of course was enthused about the various options. In a nut shell I thought the Tornado 3D would be better than the Tornado flush system.

So I ordered the Connelly from a local big-box. Then I looked at reviews for the Connelly and wasn't impressed. Seems like the super low water level is a problem. One report is that it is more of a aesthetic toilet than a functional toilet. Being that it uses the Tornado system (plus 3D) it seems like it would be better, but maybe not.

So I ordered the Drake II as a backup since I saw no real negative reviews of that.

So my burning question is - what is the consensus on the Connelly?

Follow up question is where I can find water area for each toilet as this seems to be a problem for the Connelly (maybe all low flow toilets?)?

 

Thanks Terry. Not looking to constantly clean a bowl. Is there a table for water spot dimensions?

Also, thoughts on the bidets that pre-mist? Seems like they would help with small surface areas.

 

Just as a follow-up... the "water spot" area can be found on the Toto spec sheets.

Connelly: 5-1/2" x 4-3/16"
Drake II: 7-1/8" x 9-1/8" ​

So the Connelly is ~20" of water surface area versus ~63". To me that is significant. Seems like the Connelly might be more suitable for some sort of entry-way/powder room toilet that is sparingly used than the main toilet. Or if you do get it, get it with the bidet that does pre-mist to help with the small water spot.

FYI: Ultramax II is also 7-1/8" x 9-1/8" which seems correct since I've seen Terry say the Drake II and UltraMax II are basically the same toilet.

Thanks Terry.