Ultramax versus Drake

Users who are viewing this thread

Ottawan

New Member
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
Hi, Terry. Given that they both have the same G-Max flush mechanism, what accounts for difference in flushing capacity between the Toto Drake (900 gm) and the Toto Ultramax (700 gm)?
 

janet1

New Member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
eco-drake vs. drake?

Since the difference is in the gallons per flush for the Toto Eco-Drake vs. the Toto Drake, does that mean the Eco-Drake does not flush as well?

What dual flush toilet, if any, do you recommend?
 

Terry

The Plumbing Wizard
Staff member
Messages
29,942
Reaction score
3,458
Points
113
Location
Bothell, Washington
Website
terrylove.com
I have the Eco Gywenth in the main bath, and an Eco Drake in the Master.
I have a 1.6 SG Ultramax downstairs.
I used to have the Dual Flush Aquia in the Main.

They all work pretty good.
Anything over 500 grams is very good.
 
Last edited:

Peanut9199

Customer Service Manager Plumbing Wholesale
Messages
869
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
Ontario, Canada
G-Max Drake Elongated regular height has a Map test of 900.
The E-Max same size has a Map test of 600.
Anything over 250 is a good flush.

We have the Gyweth in our Ladies bathroom and the Aquia in our Men's bathroom and both work great, we have no problem with flush or staining and they are both used quite alot in the day.
 

Gary Swart

In the Trades
Messages
8,101
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Location
Yakima, WA
I think the problem many people have in understanding low flow toilets is that we all were brought up to believe you needed anywhere of 3 gallons to 7 gallons to properly flush. Common sense tells us that the more water used, the better the flush. It didn't help when the low flow mandate came out that many well known brand manufactures tried to use old designs with less water and of course that didn't work, but it gave most folks the idea that low flow toilets would require lots of plunging, lots of double flushes, and just poor performance in general. Since most people don't spend much time researching advances in toilet design, this opinion remains in the minds of many consumers. It is hard to accept the fact that a toilet using only 1.6 gallons per flush will perform as well as or even better than old 3 gallon toilets. Maybe even harder to accept is that a toilet using just 1.3 gallons will do as well as a 1.6 gallon toilet! To me, an interesting thing about this is that although the toilet is the most frequently used device in our homes, with the exception of the water heater, it is the least understood. Dishwashers and disposals are used maybe 1 or 2 times per day, and showers once a day per person, but the toilet is used 3-4 times per day per person everyday.
 

Neotonic

New Member
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Southern California or Russia
I think the problem many people have in understanding low flow toilets is that we all were brought up to believe you needed anywhere of 3 gallons to 7 gallons to properly flush. Common sense tells us that the more water used, the better the flush. It didn't help when the low flow mandate came out that many well known brand manufactures tried to use old designs with less water and of course that didn't work, but it gave most folks the idea that low flow toilets would require lots of plunging, lots of double flushes, and just poor performance in general. Since most people don't spend much time researching advances in toilet design, this opinion remains in the minds of many consumers. It is hard to accept the fact that a toilet using only 1.6 gallons per flush will perform as well as or even better than old 3 gallon toilets. Maybe even harder to accept is that a toilet using just 1.3 gallons will do as well as a 1.6 gallon toilet! To me, an interesting thing about this is that although the toilet is the most frequently used device in our homes, with the exception of the water heater, it is the least understood. Dishwashers and disposals are used maybe 1 or 2 times per day, and showers once a day per person, but the toilet is used 3-4 times per day per person everyday.

I agree. People think that we need tons of water to flush, but with advances in water conservation technology, we can do a clean flush with only 1.1gpf. I have modified my 1.6Gpf Cadet 2 to only flush with approx. 1.4 to 1.3gpf (I think..or I am totally wrong).

My Parents have a Toto Eco-Drake and they never complained about it. My Modified Cadet 2 from 1997 flushed better than out 1985 American Standard Cadet that uses 3.5Gpf.
I think what sparked peoples idea of low-flow toilets being a bad ideas was when the low-flow toilet first became popular. they were designed for 3.5GPF but they were using 1.6Gpf so there was an off-balance in performance thus causing problems with clogging and double flushing. Nowadays we design toilets that can actual handle as low and lower than 1.28gpf and do a complete flush with excellent performance. People are being reassured that new low flow toilets are better than the low flow toilets from the 1990's or earlier. (Refrencing 1989 1.5Gpf URC:confused:)
 
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