Chatbot Avatar

AI Chatbot

Ask me anything about our forum!

v1.0.0
Notifications
Clear all

Making the switch to water-saving toilets: Worth it?

709 Posts
661 Users
0 Reactions
10.3 K Views
Posts: 0
(@aviation_shadow)
New Member
Joined:

MAKING THE SWITCH TO WATER-SAVING TOILETS: WORTH IT?

- Ran into this exact issue on a mid-century duplex I was updating last year. Swapped in low-flow toilets thinking it’d be a quick win for water bills.
- Ended up with tenants complaining about clogs, especially on the longer runs with older cast iron pipes. Turns out, those pipes just weren’t designed for such low volumes.
- Had to go back and check the slope and venting—some of those lines just didn’t clear well unless you had the extra water from a full-flush model.
- Dual-flush is great in theory, but if the “light” flush doesn’t move waste all the way out, you’re right back to double-flushing or worse.
- In newer builds or after a full re-pipe, I’ve had no issues. But retrofitting old plumbing? Sometimes sticking with a 1.6 gpf (or even 3.5 in rare cases) is just less hassle and actually uses less water overall because you’re not flushing twice.

Honestly, it’s one of those “depends on your pipes” situations. If you’re not ready to redo the whole drain line, sometimes old-school is just more practical.


Reply
Posts: 0
(@jakej97)
New Member
Joined:

- Had the same debate when picking fixtures for my place.
- Ended up going with 1.28 gpf, but only after checking the drain runs and slope—new PVC, so no issues yet.
- I get the water savings, but honestly, if I had old cast iron lines, I'd be nervous about clogs too.
- Sometimes feels like you save water on paper but not in reality if you’re plunging all the time or double-flushing.
- If your plumbing’s newer or you know the slope is good, low-flow seems fine. Otherwise, might not be worth the headache.


Reply
Posts: 0
(@diver33)
New Member
Joined:

- Just went through this with our new build, and I totally get what you mean about the drain lines.
-

Sometimes feels like you save water on paper but not in reality if you’re plunging all the time or double-flushing.

- That was my biggest worry too. We have all new PVC, so I figured we’d be safe, but I still kept a plunger handy for the first couple months... just in case.
- Honestly, it’s been fine. No clogs, no double flushes, and our water bill dropped a bit.
- I do wonder if it’d be a different story with the old cast iron pipes at my parents’ place. Their low-flow toilet is a nightmare—always seems to need a second flush, and they’re constantly dealing with slow drains.
- If your plumbing’s up to date, I’d say go for it. But yeah, if you’ve got older lines, I’d probably stick with something a little higher flow just for peace of mind.
- It’s one of those things that sounds great in theory, but the details really matter.


Reply
Posts: 0
(@jackfurry124)
New Member
Joined:

Making The Switch To Water-Saving Toilets: Worth It?

I’ve run into this exact debate on a few of my projects, and honestly, I’m still not convinced the “one size fits all” approach works here. In newer builds, with modern PVC and proper slope, low-flow toilets seem to do their job just fine—no drama, no extra maintenance. But I’ve seen older homes where the switch just causes headaches. One place we renovated had those ancient cast iron lines, and after swapping in a water-saver, it was like a weekly ritual to snake the drains. The plumber said the lower volume just wasn’t pushing waste far enough, especially with those rough old pipes.

It’s tempting to chase the water bill savings, but if you’re constantly dealing with clogs or double-flushing, are you really saving anything? Sometimes I think the push for efficiency overlooks how much the existing infrastructure matters. If you’re working with old plumbing, I’d be wary of going too low-flow. Maybe there’s a middle ground—something efficient but not extreme. Otherwise, you might end up trading one problem for another...


Reply
Posts: 0
(@athlete55)
New Member
Joined:

I’ve wondered about this too, especially since I’m always looking for ways to cut costs at home. The water bill savings sound great, but if you’re dealing with constant clogs or having to call a plumber more often, that’s money out the window. My place is from the 70s, and I’ve heard mixed things about low-flow toilets with older pipes. Maybe dual-flush models are a safer bet? They seem to offer a bit more flexibility without going too extreme on the water-saving side. Still, I’d hate to swap out a working toilet just to end up with more headaches...


Reply
Page 76 / 142
Share:
Scroll to Top