What is the deal with the Low-Flow toilets?
I know that the idea is to use less water to flush the waste down, but almost every time I try to flush solid waste, it never flushes it completely the first time. I have to flush again to get it all down, thus using MORE water than a regular (non-low-flow) toilet that is flushed once. So why is it required that all new toilets installed have to be low-flow?
Because this is a “feel-good” rather than an effective law. The lawmakers get accolades for “finally doing something about this problem”. Never mind that it doesn’t do anything about this problem.
“The inability of science to grasp Quality, as an object of enquiry, makes it impossible for science to provide a scale of values.”
Robert Pirsig
Yes, but when you urinate (presumably more often), you save water. Also in a family with children, I imagine that in most cases one flush would suffice, so overall less water is used.
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.
Plus, most of the old style toilets flushed 3.5 gallons per flush, whereas the newer, low-flow style use 1.6 gpf. Even having a second go at it winds up using less water.
Although, I also prefer the old fashioned toilets.
Waste
Flick Lives!
For the complete text of Dave Barry’s article, visit http://www.herald.com/herald/archive/barry/ and select Head to Head!
The upshot, though, is that Dave had to eat his words from an earlier column. Actually, his new LoFlo works great.
Personally, we have a Kohler 1.6 gal. terlet (I can’t remember the exact model, Home Depot has 'em for about $100-$120 for the two pieces) and we have never had a blockage problem with it. Not once. We HAVE had a problem, though with the old 3.5 gal. toilet in the other bathroom - probably because of its older design (and smaller “neck,” or “throat,” or whatever).
So if you’re having trouble, change to the correct model - even if it costs an extra $20.
Low-flush.
Anyway, look at that hole in the bottom of it, see how small it is? Yes, big shit just can’t fit down that little thing. Next time you buy one, get one with a big hole. How big hole does that Kohler have?
Sounds like a democratic idea.Al Gore must have been involved, or Ted Kennedy.
Low-flo toilets are a fantastic idea…if you have perfect plumbing (sewer) lines, and they don’t move around. In south Texas, that’s a point of hysterical laughter, where we have clay soils that contract and expand with both excessive rains/droughts, as well as heat/cold. What this ends up doing is causing the sewer lines to settle, and create bellies (or low spots in the sewer lines). These bellies result in a total inability of a low-flow toilet to deal with waste (unless you do #1 and use 1-2 squares of toilet tissue).
The end result is that you end up flushing repeatedly, using more water than you would have with the old 3.5 toilets…that can deal with sewer line bellies through the force of water flushed. I hear the U.S. Gummint is admitting they may have made a mistake on low-flow toilets. (gasp…)
All I know is that for me to install low-flow toilets in my 15-year-old home, I would merely have to completely replace my sewer system (about $15,000) and then replace my bathroom floors (because the base for a low-flow toilet is smaller than a 3.5 base, which means the flooring around said toilet base would have to be replaced (about another $1,500).
Where do I sign up??? (ha)
“There will always be somebody who’s never read a book who’ll know twice what you know.” - D.Duchovny
Mazey, Keep your toilets just put a half gallon or a gallon milk container full of water in your tank, or change your float ball so that less water goes in & presto! a low flush toilet that flushes the big stuff.
during water rationing here i found a gizmo and its got two handles on it, one lets a little water flush for pee and then a big handle for the other stuff. Useful motto then was, if its pee let it be, if its brown, flush it down.
There are some types of toilets available that can flush with more force than a common gravity-powered low flow toilet. One type uses line pressure to help with the flush, somewhat like a commercial toilet, but your water pressure has to be at a certain level (25 psi, I think) for it to flush properly. Another type uses an electric pump, but if your power goes out, it won’t flush.
Well said. Some research I read recently (but not recently enough for me to be able to tell you when or where) claimed that over 80-88% of water usage is by businesses. Those businesses don’t have the same level of water restrictions that private citizens do, but it’s the private citizens who are expected to cut back when drought strikes. Money talks, it seems.
–Da Cap’n
Another interesting thing I’ve seen is a household mini-urinal that used only 10 ounces of water per flush. Great thing for men who want to save water (or avoid walking all the way to the bathroom).
RoboDude, if a guy pees in the bathtub or shower, uses no water at all…
Shower, sure…but in the bathtub? Or did you mean something other than ‘during a bath?’
(Whoo, that’s one powerful search engine…wonder why I never bothered with it for the first few months. :))
We got a couple of those low-flow toilets a few months back. They really are a lot like the ones in public restrooms, using line pressure to compensate for less water (every time I flushed while I was still stitting on it, I got squirted…couldn’t do that no more). Oftentimes it works. Sometimes it doesn’t. You can imagine my chagrin when I push the handle, and the water’s still cloudy afterward. (Did I mention that I sometimes get diarrhea?)
Overall, they’re perfectly adequate; the repeated flushes that I’ve heard so many complaints about happens rarely enough that we’re still saving quite a lot of water. I should mention, though, that the climate here is pretty stable, and we’ve never had any serious problems with our plumbing. Other places might not find them appropriate.
There’s a fellow in town here in Canada who collects old crappers and hauls them to the US (where they are in great demand due to low flows). I find it somehow patriotic. 
The standard (mandatory?) toilet installation these days is a dual flush model, where the cistern holds 6-8 litres when full. The half flush is, of course, about 3 litres.
Entirely sensible in the driest civilised continent on the planet.
Maybe I have misread the posts above, but don’t you people have dual flush toilets?
Cool, someone actually searched & brought an old topic back.
Say, our city is miffed right now cause they found that thse toilets don’t flush enough water to keep the sewer going in the pipes. Results? Gross sewage spills.
Have them? Most Americans have never even heard of dual-flush toilets, myself included. They sound like a good idea, though.
I’ve one of these about 4 months old. It went in with the remodeled bathroom, replacing an old 3? 6? gallon “conventional” toilet that was probably original to the house (1951).
It works PERFECTLY. The old toilet sometimes needed double-flushing, but this “pressure-assisted” toilet has never given me a problem. IF you’re willing to flush the second time, it’s relatively self-cleaning (the pressure takes the streaks). When I eat a lot of fiber, there’s no, uh, cause for self-cleaning 
This model cost about $450 with the extended bowl. Yeah, over-priced, but I was too lazy to go to Canadian Tire (or other Windsor store).