Just wish they’d standardize the seat shapes... some of them are downright bizarre.
Seriously, the seat thing drives me nuts. I had to return two before I found one that didn’t feel like sitting on a spaceship. As for flush power, I’ll admit the first ultra-low flow we tried was a disaster—constant double-flushing and yeah, the dreaded clogs. But after swapping to a better brand, it’s been smooth sailing. Water bill dropped noticeably, too. I guess it comes down to picking the right model, not just grabbing any “eco” label off the shelf.
I guess it comes down to picking the right model, not just grabbing any “eco” label off the shelf.
That’s fair, but honestly, I still think the whole “just pick a better brand” thing is a bit of a gamble. I’ve specified a bunch of these for projects and even with the so-called top brands, it’s hit or miss. Sometimes you get one that works great, other times it’s like you need an instruction manual just to get a decent flush. And don’t get me started on the seat shapes—some of them look like they were designed by someone who’s never actually used a toilet.
I get the water savings are real, but if you’re constantly dealing with clogs or weird ergonomics, is it really worth it? I’d rather have something reliable than shave a few bucks off my water bill and end up frustrated every day. Maybe I’m just old school, but I miss when toilets were simple and just worked.
I get the water savings are real, but if you’re constantly dealing with clogs or weird ergonomics, is it really worth it? I’d rather have something reliable than shave a few bucks off my water bill and end up frustrated every day.
Honestly, I’ve wondered the same thing. I swapped out an old toilet for a “high efficiency” one in my last build and yeah, it used less water, but I had to keep a plunger nearby way more often than before. The seat was also this odd oval that just felt...off.
Is there actually a model out there that nails both water savings and reliability, or is it always some kind of trade-off? I’m not sure if it’s just the brands I’ve tried or if that’s just how these new designs are. Has anyone found one that feels like the older style but still hits the low-flow targets? Or is it just wishful thinking to expect both?
MAKING THE SWITCH TO WATER-SAVING TOILETS: WORTH IT?
I totally get where you’re coming from. I’ve specified a few of these newer models for clients, and honestly, some are just awkward to use—either the flush isn’t strong enough or the seat shape feels weird. But there are a couple brands out there that seem to have figured it out. I’ve seen Toto and Kohler models that balance water savings with decent performance, though they’re not always perfect either. It’s definitely not wishful thinking to want both, but it does take a bit of trial and error...and maybe a little luck with the model you pick.
MAKING THE SWITCH TO WATER-SAVING TOILETS: WORTH IT?
I’ve overseen a few multi-unit projects where we had to make the call on water-saving toilets. Honestly, the first round was a headache—clogs, double flushes, complaints from tenants about the flush power. We ended up swapping out a batch that just didn’t cut it. But after some trial and error, we landed on a couple models (Toto was one, American Standard another) that actually worked well and didn’t generate maintenance calls every week.
From a cost perspective, the water savings do add up, especially at scale. But I wouldn’t say every model is created equal. Some are just not up to the task, especially in high-traffic buildings. It’s worth doing a bit of research and maybe even testing a few before committing to a bulk order. The right choice can save money and headaches, but the wrong one...well, you’ll hear about it fast.
