I have searched through the threads here but after a while I feel like I am getting red marks on my butt from all the sitting and toilet reading! So thought I would ask a direct question....
I do understand MAP scores are a number and do not necessarily represent more than a single benchmark data point. Neither my wife or I make "medical issue logs".
Back in 2013 at our other house I wrenched my brain over toilets. At the time our remodel budget was blowing up and I decided to save approximately $500 by buying the Kohler Cimarron toilets (the newer version with the side bowl wash similar to Toto). The decision worked out.. 1 clog in 7 years for 3 toilets.
We just moved to a different house and it has the first generation Cimarron toilets without the bowl swirl jets. One of our dogs messed on the floor and it led to a big clog. At the time I semi blamed my wife with putting too much in. Few days later another dog mess (the dog messes are a weird thing but may be due to all the rain and 3 of them not liking to go out). I found the mess and only put two smaller pieces in the toilet. There is a slight chance I short flushed BUT I also got a clog. So much for blaming my spousal unit!
When looking at MAP scores the new Ultramax II has a lower number than many of the others in the Toto line even though the flushing system seems very similar. The promenade II for example has a larger MAP score. I could go that direction since they are priced similarly but the flush lever seems odd to me, especially for those of who stand to urinate.
Are the two flushing systems actually the same and the MAP scores just an aberration? Or does the Promenade actually do better? The Drake II also has higher values (MAP) and is a little less expensive than the UltraMax II.
Any perspectives are appreciated, especially regarding the vertical flush lever for the Promenade. My wife doesn't usually like change very well though sitting down I would think the vertical lever might actually be easier. Thx
I do understand MAP scores are a number and do not necessarily represent more than a single benchmark data point. Neither my wife or I make "medical issue logs".
Back in 2013 at our other house I wrenched my brain over toilets. At the time our remodel budget was blowing up and I decided to save approximately $500 by buying the Kohler Cimarron toilets (the newer version with the side bowl wash similar to Toto). The decision worked out.. 1 clog in 7 years for 3 toilets.
We just moved to a different house and it has the first generation Cimarron toilets without the bowl swirl jets. One of our dogs messed on the floor and it led to a big clog. At the time I semi blamed my wife with putting too much in. Few days later another dog mess (the dog messes are a weird thing but may be due to all the rain and 3 of them not liking to go out). I found the mess and only put two smaller pieces in the toilet. There is a slight chance I short flushed BUT I also got a clog. So much for blaming my spousal unit!
When looking at MAP scores the new Ultramax II has a lower number than many of the others in the Toto line even though the flushing system seems very similar. The promenade II for example has a larger MAP score. I could go that direction since they are priced similarly but the flush lever seems odd to me, especially for those of who stand to urinate.
Are the two flushing systems actually the same and the MAP scores just an aberration? Or does the Promenade actually do better? The Drake II also has higher values (MAP) and is a little less expensive than the UltraMax II.
Any perspectives are appreciated, especially regarding the vertical flush lever for the Promenade. My wife doesn't usually like change very well though sitting down I would think the vertical lever might actually be easier. Thx