Toilet with more water in the bowl than Toto Ultramax II?

Users who are viewing this thread

kinoko

New Member
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Idaho
I have a MS604114CEFG Toto Ultramax II 1.28 gpf toilet (from 2015) and I always felt like the small amount of water in the bowl itself allowed more odor to escape during use, compared to less water-efficient toilets I had before. Not horrible, but kind of unpleasant.

Meanwhile I also have a cheap 1.28 Kohler (also 2015) that's a worse toilet in every other way, but it holds slightly more water in the bowl so it doesn't have this specific issue for me.

So, the question: for people who prefer to have more water in the bowl when using, is there a Toto toilet that just keeps more water in the bowl than the Ultramax II 1.28? Thanks!

ms604-terrylove-16.jpg


MS604114CEFG
MaP Score 800 grams
 
Last edited by a moderator:

breplum

Member
Messages
734
Reaction score
258
Points
63
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
I have been a plumbing contractor for 47 years so been around a lot of toilets. Had my share of Totos and still have one Drake.
I just replaced an old CST744E Drake (that had too much lime build up even after using muriatic acid every six months)

cst744-terrylove-02.jpg


CST744E
MaP Score, 1,000 grams

cadet-flowise-3378-128.jpg


Cadet Flowise 3378.128
MaP score, 1,000

with The Am. Std. Cadet 3 FloWise elongated 1.28 and want to recommend it. Has EverClean surface (we'll see if it amounts to anything), is chair height, flushes like a champ and decent water spot of about 9" x 7-3/4". Nice price under $200 and much nicer than Toto's CST244EF Entrada that is a good flushing WC without the special surface treatment.

cst244ef_zoom.jpg


CST244EF
MaP Score, 1,000 grams

The ballcock inside the Cadet is Fluidmaster decent, and most Toto's have either the worthless toy-like green junk or Hunter style that I could take or leave. Fluidmaster beats Hunter in my book.
I've literally never run into the complaint you speak of about odor escaping.
The FlowWise has a MaP performance score of 1,000. (grams). https://www.map-testing.com/map-search/

The MS854114E Eco Ultramax EL only showed a score of 500, how did you find the flush in real life conditions?

ms854_sg_wallpaper.jpg


MS854114E
Map Score 500 grams
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Terry

The Plumbing Wizard
Staff member
Messages
28,911
Reaction score
2,894
Points
113
Location
Bothell, Washington
Website
terrylove.com
In the TOTO line, the good bowl finish is:

G = CEFIONTECT™ Glaze, similar to the AS EverClean

The TOTO bowl that breplum had didn't have the better finish that is now standard on the new Drakes. CST776CEFG and CST775CEFG bowls.

The old MS854114E Ultramax that breplum mentioned was tested very early on using bean paste. For the more recent testing they decided to wrap the bean paste in plastic so that the media could be reused. When they changed the testing method, all of the toilets had remarkable higher MaP scores.

So comparing the MS854114E with the 500 gram score to a recently tested CST744E Drake that got 1.000 grams,
Same 3" flush valve, same trapway design, and same bowl dimensions.

Changing the tested method made a big difference in the numbers. I've been tracking this for customers and have sold and installed thousands of toilets, all brands, and all the time.

Which toilets have the deeper bowls? That's a tough one, as many states have gone to 1.28 gallons, so the bowls were modified to make that requirement. All of the brands did that.
 
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