"desertsteph, it sounds you like you could definitely benefit from an ADA height due to your knees. "
yeah, who knew there'd be so much pain just trying to sit down and get up! if i ever go thru something like that again i'll get the walker I saw last wk on qvc - it'll fit back on the toilet so the sides of it can be used as levers to help get up and down. who knew that existed??? heck, there are times still where that knee is so painful if i put pressure on it!

i'll probably add something to the one i have to make it about an inch higher and see if my feet can still touch the floor - lol! if not, I won't worry about it (just get that walker).

eric - how about starting a thread with the 3 of those in the topic line? then those who have 1 of those 3 can post to you about them! they might not be opening this one anymore not knowing you have centered in on those 3.

We just installed a Toto Soiree (1.6gpf) and love it. Although the 1.6gpf is being replaced by the 1.28, the 1.6 is still widely available around our area. I am 5'4" have had 2 knee surgeries and the ADA height of the Soiree is definitely easier to use than the antiquated avocado green toilet it replaced.

The Soiree is Double Cyclone (water goes around instead of straight down), sanigloss, and it has a 3 inch flush valve. It is quiet, flushes fast, and refills fast. Definitely a great toilet!

We have a Toto Ultramax ADA, no Sanigloss. Quick fast flush, not noticeably noisy, tank refills quickly with about 4 second of drippy, hissy noises as it refills. It's the most heavily used toilet in the house and we've had no problems at all with it. When we redo our other bathroom, we'll replace the current toilet with an Ultramax.

Anemone, when I look on Toto's web site, the only Soiree they now show is the Eco Soiree with a 1.28 gallon flush. Maybe some distributors still have the 1.6 gallon version? I didn't even know there were Double Cyclone models with 1.6 gallons!

Side note: Toto's naming conventions drive me crazy! Almost every "Eco" toilet is a 1.28 gallon E-Max flush, and almost every "II" model is a Double Cyclone flush -- but then they reverse it for just a couple, like the Eco Soiree, which is a Double Cyclone rather than an E-Max. Who makes these naming decisions?! ;)

I definitely like the skirted look, but prefer the rounded, smooth look of the Carlyle II without the lines of the Soiree. I assume these toilets are otherwise pretty similar. I'd also be okay with one of the Ultramax models, but given the choice, I'd go for the similar but skirted look of the Carlyle II. (If I could have that look, ADA height and sanagloss with a 1.6 gallon flush instead of 1.28, I'd do it in a heartbeat!)

-- Eric

Eric, I did a search and there are still a lot of older Carlyle 1.6gpf available. The 1.6 are skirted and have sanigloss but they don't seem to come in ADA height. They aren't exactly short but technically not ADA height. The rim height (without the seat) is about 15 inches while my Soiree is 16 1/8 inches.

The new Carlyle II are skirted, sanigloss, and ADA height but only come in 1.28gpf. I have heard some say that the 1.28 flushes as well as the 1.6 but I don't know if that is true or not. Good luck!

Ah, right -- the older Carlyle (not the "II") wasn't the taller height, which we had decided we wanted, so that's why it wasn't on my radar initially. It seems many more of the newer "II" models are coming in the ADA height. So with the Carlyle, I could have the original with 1.6gpf that I'd prefer but no ADA height, or the newer II model, with the ADA height I'd prefer but the 1.28gpf. Toilets, it seems, like life, are all about tradeoffs and compromise! :)

-- Eric

jacobse-
It's time to sh-- or get off the pot! (Sorry, I couldn't help myself). Seriously, buy whatever Toto looks good to you and don't agonize so much. It's like choosing between a Mercedes or BMW, and worrying that one will be a terrible mistake. I don't think there is a bad decision here. Good luck.

kudzu9, thanks -- for the push and the laugh! Carlyle II remains our leader at the moment; we're going to order on Tuesday, and that will be that. (Well, for the *first* bathroom; then we'll have a chance to evaluate our choice up close for a week or two before it'll be time to order the next toilet for the next bathroom!)

-- Eric

jacobse - can I ask where you are ordering from? There is not a local Toto dealer where we live. The closest one is an hour away so it may be worth the drive depending on shipping costs. I think the Carlyle II is the winner in house so far too thanks to your input in another thread - especially now that I'm reading here that it isn't quite as tall as the full ADA height. I'm only 5'0" and the comfort height was a really for my 6'1" DH!

Chelsercat, I'm not sure what you mean about not being quite as tall as ADA height; the Carlyle II, like other Toto ADA toilets do meet the ADA requirements, which call for a hight of 17" to 19" to the top of the seat height. The Carlyle II is 17-3/8" tall at the top of the seat.

There are some dealers which ship nationwide, with no shipping fee or no fee if you hit a minimum cost. Without endorsing any particular company, I can share a few I've come across. NationalBuilderSupply.com ships toilets for free. Ira Woods is a well-regarded company I used for many of our kitchen products a few years ago; they offer free shipping if your total offer exceeds $750, so if you combine something else with your toilet order, you'll qualify. I got price quotes from both for the Carlyle II; I'll order locally if I can get a reasonably good price, otherwise I'll order from Ira Woods.

-- Eric

Chelsercat, it is the original 1.6gpf Carlyle that is not quite ADA height. The newer Carlyle II is ADA height. I don't think Toto is making the original Carlyle anymore but I know they are still available on the internet.

At 5'0", you may not want full ADA height. I am 5'4" and although my knees like it, my feet are just barely flat on the floor.

We have Totos and love them. Nexus and Aquia II comfort height. I did months of research on toilets and then bought the ones I thought were pretty....worked out well.

Jacobse...good information about purchasing online..thanks! I think Anemone2000 knew what I was referring to about "not quite" ADA height which was very helpful. I don't like the idea of my feet dangling so I need to watch the height carefully it sounds like!

Now that I finally have my Toto toilet installed, I'm updating this thread I started two months back, for the benefit of anyone who comes across the thread in the future.

I ended up purchasing the Toto Carlyle II, and it was finally installed two days ago. So with the caveat that we don't have a lot of use experience yet, my initial impressions are completely positive. This is by far the best flushing toilet I've ever had (or perhaps used!), even through it only uses 1.28 gallons per flush. We'll need a month or two of use under a variety of, um, "conditions" to see if that assessment holds up, but for the moment, I'm completely satisfied with our choice. Thanks to all who contributed to my Toto education!

I'll probably be ordering another one within a week as we complete work on the guest bathroom and start ordering materials for the master bathroom.

-- Eric

Eric,

I have been following your posts and am glad you now have your toilet installed.
Can't wait for photos of your bathroom when completed.
Are you finding any of the so called water drip noise that some peole have mentionbed with skirted toto's. If you look at my thread today tiltled "totos unifit 14 inch rough in" maybe you will understand what I mean.

Lyban, I thought I posted something in that thread too, but I may be confusing multiple threads. In any case, the answer is: no! I'm happy to say I don't hear any of the post-flush dripping noises some other Toto owners have described. I have no idea whether it's something they tweaked in the latest models (the Carlyle II I bought was just released in February), something that only turns up in specific toilets or manufacturing runs, or has anything to do with the installation/plumbing environment in some people's homes -- all I can say is that I'm happy not to be hearing "the noise"! :)

-- Eric

P.S. Pictures coming soon. I picked up the mirror from the glass cutter yesterday, so that should go in tomorrow and allow the tiles around the mirror to be grouted. If the electrician shows up (he was supposed to be here Friday), the fan and recessed lights will go in, and we'll be nearly done.

Jacobse, are you still happy with the Carlyle II? My 1.6gpf Soiree is defective (Toto is taking it back) and I am thinking about replacing it with the Carlyle II. Would you still recommend it? Any issues with it?
Thanks!

Just my thoughts our own recent Toto purchases:

I have both the Eco Ultramax and the Ultramax II. I went with the II because it was substantially less expensive for some unknown reason. The II also has the double cyclone flushing which I thought was the better flushing system. However, I don't necessarily agree. I think they both are equal in the flush and the cleansing the toilet. Both have Sanigloss. I wish the force of the double cyclone flush coming out of the side opening was much stronger and I think it would be a better flushing system.

That said, we all are very pleased with them. The last toilet we buy for our remodel will also be a Toto but I don't think the flushing system will be a huge factor in our decision. I wanted the best ADA height skirted design with Sanigloss they make. I think all their flushing systems are about equal because they wouldn't produce something "crappy."

Anemone, yes, I'm still happy -- delighted -- with our Carlyle II. I'd absolutely recommend it. Of course, we've only been using it for about two weeks, but so far, so good!

Susan, it's interesting that you say you wish the water flow in your Ultramax II was stronger; in our toilet, it seems incredibly forceful. If it was any stronger, I'd be afraid it would splash out of the bowl! Out of curiosity, does your Ultramax II flush as fast and strong as looks in the Toto video? If not, it's possible there's some issue with your installation.

-- Eric

jacobse, thanks for starting this great thread...I just finished reading through all of the posts and I'm relieved to hear of your happy ending!

I'm also glad you have a positive experience to report about the 1.28 gpf...that was the one thing I was most worried about since we're only in the planning stages of our new home. Just not sure if the 1.6 gpf toilets will still be available a year from now when we might be ordering them.

:)

Eric,

The Ultramax II is a standard install with existing piping so I don't think the install is the issue (although I'll make sure the valve is turned all the way on tonight). I see no difference between the video and our flush. I think the volume of water (1.28) is the issue and that mixed with my 20 year old son (sorry to be graphic but he has IBS). It didn't pass that test like I hoped. I'm sure my toilet would pass the toilet paper, grease pen test too. But I was hoping it would pass the "son test."

jacobse, many thanks for the update. I realize that it is still early days yet but glad to hear that you still like the Carlyle II. Unfortunately, they are currently on backorder. They are available on the internet but since our current Toto has a manufacturing defect, I would rather it be easy to return......if lightening does happen to strike twice.

Most of the time, when we have gone back for a flushing complaint, it's been wax covering the outlet of the bowl.
For some reason, people put wax on the bowl, and then walk the toilet over to the floor flange to set it.
A plumber would never do that. Wax can easily drop off the bowl and land in the wrong spot.
A plumber would set the wax ring, or two wax rings if the flange is lower then the finished floor, right on the closet flange on the floor, then he would carry the bowl over and set it onto the flange.
The wax can't go anywhere that way.

If there is anything blocking the exit, it will slow down the siphon.

Here is a link that might be useful: Double Cyclone Flush Video

Thanks, Terry. I watched the guy set the toilet and the wax rings (2) were definitely set on the floor and the toilet lifted and placed straight down on it.

Eric pointed me to the video before and my toilet flushes exactly like the video. Even tried the toilet paper test. I just think a bit more force would be helpful. I read an older post where the person felt exactly the same way I did about the force of the Double Cyclone flush and called Toto. She thought this description, "The dual-nozzle water propulsion system allows more water to be directed to the siphon for a more powerful flush" meant that there was a power boost but Toto said it was more how the water was directed not about any boost of power.

Coupled with Sanagloss I thought I was all set. Now dont get me wrong, I love Toto toilets, but the Double-cyclone was not as I expected and the flushing system will not dictate my next Toto purchase.

We just had our Carlyle installed today -the original Carlyle that is "not quite" ADA height and that is 1.6 gpf. Seems just perfect height-wise. Haven't actually used it yet, just flushed it a couple of times and it sounds pretty powerful. Thanks to this thread for helping us decide on this one. We love the skirted look!

I have the Toto Mercer which I confess I chose because it is the most beautiful (if one can say such a thing about such a device) toilet I've seen. Will fess up that it does have a bit of a water trickle noise from time to time -- nothing major or constant. It works well. I love the ADA height and it may be only an inch and a fraction higher, but when I use the Kohler toilet in the other bathroom, my knees can really feel the difference.

Was puzzled and annoyed that Toto has obfuscated the differences between the two flush systems.

We have the the Toto Promenade - 2 of them. One Round and one elongated. They are ADA height. Never an issue with either of them. Plunger has never had to be used. The are both 1.6 Gal with the G-Max system.

We had 2 40 year old toilets that flushed great, plumber says they were 3.5 or 5 gallon toilets. When we updated our bathrooms, we updated the toilet in one bath while demo was going on in the other bath. Liked the Promenade so much that we ordered the second one.

We had 2 Toto Drake's installed in our last house 6 or more years ago and they worked better than what I pulled out - but a plunger was still required once in a while. We have not had that experience yet with the Promenade.

I buy a lot of stuff online, but like to buy toilets local.

I�ve recently spoken with many people about Toto while trying to find the "best" toilet. I have no technical toilet expertise nor have I done scientific research but here is the picture that has emerged.

When the 1.6 Gallon per flush toilet became law, Toto was the only company to successfully solve the reduced flow flush problem. Their reputation soared. Eventually, most other companies solve the problem (e.g. Kohler with their Class 5 & 6 toilets).

Being first is a great advantage as Toto continued to benefit even though other companies now have good flush systems too.

Fast forward: Soon, the government will mandate a lowering of the maximum to 1.28 gpf. Perhaps in an attempt to scoop the field again, Toto switched their toilet line to the new standard of 1.28 in advance of the date required by the new law. This time they failed. Their new design does not work so well and their reputation is beginning to suffer. I don't know why they haven't switched back to their previous design. Perhaps they have already changed their production line and doing so would be too expensive.

In conclusion, it is important to take the age of posts into consideration, and the specific model being discussed, when evaluating reviews. Things do change.

Again, I don�t know any of the above to be fact, so any input of corroboration or refutation is welcome.

Bestiarius, your comments are poignant to all Japanese toilets. The Japanese got serious about toilets in the late 1970s and are now so far ahead of the rest of the world nobody else comes close.

Toto is the largest Japanese toilet maker, and now makes toilets for the North American market in Georgia. But the #2 Japanese toilet maker, Inax -- the Avis to Toto's Hertz -- is just now diving into the North American market, and historically Inax has been even more innovative than Toto. (Inax had a super bidet toilet seat on the market in Japan before Toto introduced the Washlet.)

Toto and Inax are both excellent; either one is fine; but for peace of mind, you should review both before settling on either.

Here is a link that might be useful: Low water consumption flushing system

Sorry I'm a few days late catching up with this thread, but I would respectfully disagree with Bestiarius. What leads you to conclude that Toto "failed" with their line of 1.28 gallon toilets?

Speaking first of my own experience with two Toto 1.28 gallon toilets purchased last year, I feel Toto hit a home run with their current toilet technology. They're excellent! These toilets flush far better and cleaner than our older Kohler toilets, including a 1.6 gallon model from four years ago and even our 2+ gallon models from 15 years ago. Flush better + use less water = success, not failure.

Reading comments on this and other online forums for much of last year, I found almost all positive comments about new Toto toilets. A few people had problems with what they felt was excessive noise, and few people didn't think the bowl was cleaned as well as they expected (mostly those who purchased dual-flush models, and a few who purchased E-Max models, but none that I found who purchased Dual Cyclone models). But the vast majority of people who purchased Toto toilets in the past year or so were very happy with their toilets.

Bestiarius, you say the "new design does not work so well", but I'm curious what information you are basing that on? I'd also note that Toto's current lines of low-flush toilets consists of three different designs: Dual Cyclone, E-Max and Dual-Flush. Which one do you believe doesn't work well? Or are you saying you believe none of them work well?

I don't mean to get into a war of words here, and everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But to anyone reading this thread, I'd simply encourage you to draw your own conclusions based on information from people who have actually bought and installed Toto toilets in the past year or so since the current models have been on the market. (I know, from doing this research last year, that one or two negative comments can completely spook you about any particular product!)

-- Eric

jaconse writes: "I would respectfully disagree with Bestiarius. What leads you to conclude that Toto 'failed' with their line of 1.28 gallon toilets?"

I had missed that line when I replied to Bestiarius's post a few days ao.

You are correct, jaconse, that Toto did not "fail" with its 1.28 gpf toilets. We had a Dual Cyclone Toto Vespin II (1.28 gpf) installed in our home one month ago today, and it flushes more efficiently and more reliably completely than the 1.6 gpf American Standard Hamilton in our other bathroom and as well as (though not as quietly as) the Eljer 3.5 gpf toilet that the Vespin II replaced.

We just purchased the Drake II 1.28 with sanigloss. No problems with flushing, however following a BM there is residue which sticks to the bottom. Everybody in the family has had this experience. Are we the only ones?

We've got a Drake, some Daltons and Carusos. Occasional sticky but mostly due to lack of dietary fiber.

Doug, sorry you're not having a great experience with the Drake II. I have two Carlyle II's, and we don't experience any residue. I know the Double Cyclone flushing system is specifically designed to wash the bowl better than other models, and you're the first person I've read to report residue with one of the Double Cyclone models. When you're saying you have residue at "the bottom", do you mean it's the bottom of the bowl which is beneath the water line? When you flush, does the bowl empty within about 2 seconds? I'm just wondering whether there could be any installation issue causing it not to flush as forcefully as it should. (I'm no expert, only a satisfied customer, so I'm just "thinking out loud".)

-- Eric

Thanks Eric, I'll check with our plumber.

HI Everyone, I see that this thread is almost 3 years old. I am just now trying to make a decision on a new toilet. Any updated experiences or info anyone would like to add? I am looking at the TOTO MS604114CEFG Ultramax II (1.28gpf, Double Cyclome)) or the TOTO CST744SG Drake (1.6gpf, G-Max) or the TOTO CST454CEFG Drake II (1.28gpf, Double Cyclone)

Any input is very much appreciated!

Jeckyl1: "I am just now trying to make a decision on a new toilet. Any updated experiences or info anyone would like to add? I am looking at the TOTO ... Ultramax II (1.28gpf, Double Cyclome)) or the TOTO ... Drake (1.6gpf, G-Max) or the TOTO ... Drake II (1.28gpf, Double Cyclone) "

You may wish to add the Vespin II to your list, It is identical to the Drake II except that the Vespin II is skirted, which makes it easier to clean, and many think improves the appearance.

Thanks for the tip, herring_maven. I'll check it out.

I just purchased the 1.6 gal toto nexus. (Not the Eco version) I was originally looking at the dual flush toto aquia II but got cold feet because I read that it gets dirty fast due to not a lot of water in the bowl. We are putting this in a frequently used powder room.

Jekyl1, the Carlyle II is the Ultramax with a skirt. We bought two but haven't installed yet. The Carlyle is double cyclone.

I have the Drake I believe - not sure the version; and I can't speak to specifics. I can only say that for reasons I completely do not understand, this is a miracle-toilet. Almost no water, never icky-dirty. Easy to clean and it stays clean. I can't imagine what they do and why others can't seem to, but it is one of life's little miracles.

Just to update:
We went with the Toto Drake II.
So far so good! It seems very clean, looks beautiful, and has a quick flush. The only thing is there is a "gurgle" when it flushes that is louder than I had hoped. But other than that, I am super happy with it. And the soft close seat is great, too.

I just ordered the Vespin II for our reno. DH thinks I'm off my rocker because I'm soooooo excited to use it. It will be a while, as I still haven't decided on the washlet and haven't even started on the reno.

I chose it because of the smaller width, comfort height, decent water spot, and positive reviews.

alex9179: I just ordered the Vespin II for our reno. DH thinks I'm off my rocker because I'm soooooo excited to use it. It will be a while, as I still haven't decided on the washlet ..."

Let me make your decision easier:

The spectrum from primitive to 21st century is:

outdoor ground --> pit privy --> 20th c. toilet --> advanced

The 20th century toilet is closer to the pit privy than it is to a 21st century advanced toilet system.

Washlet is a registered trademark of Toto. There is a better advanced toilet seat system: Inax, which invented the category, and has remained one step ahead of Toto for three decades. (Inax and Toto are rivals in Japan, in the same way as General Motors and Ford are rivals in the United States.) We are VERY familiar with Washlets, and we chose to match our Toto Vespin II toilet with an Inax Clessence advanced toilet seat. They are perfectly compatible, and the Clessence is the better seat at that price point.

I am so disappointed. My bathroom remodel is on hold. I have been waiting patiently for the Aquia with the 10-inch rough in and apparently there aren't any in the whole USA. I know there's a Unifit but I like the design of the Aquia so much that I think I will wait. It has been over four months now.

We're absolutely getting an advanced seat (used washlet term like Kleenex). I haven't decided which brand.

I really like the idea of stainless wands and the silver oxide sanitizing feature of the Coway and Brondell, as well as their lower profile. I live in the very humid south, so any extra anti-germ feature for a toilet is great.
A lid you can sit on is important, too. I KNOW someone will do that eventually.

Inax is known for longevity but is more expensive, without the SS and sanitizing.

I'm waffling between them.

This site has both helped and hindered my decision making! No affiliation. It has a helpful chart and write-ups on a bunch of seats.

Here is a link that might be useful: Comps and features

Now have the two Carlyle IIs installed with washlets. Using them about a month now. I don't find the smaller water spot from the original Kohler to be a problem, and they have been staying clean. (went with sanigloss) I have used a few drops of liquid dish soap and a soft brush to freshen them up weekly. Good flushing action, nothing left behind so far (at least for me, can't speak for DH). The 350e washlet (Toto) sprays what they call e+ water before use to sanitize and reduce material from sticking to the porcelain, and it auto-runs a spray of this water every 24 hours if no one uses the toilet.

alex9179: "We're absolutely getting an advanced seat (used washlet term like Kleenex). I haven't decided which brand.
"I really like the idea of stainless wands and the silver oxide sanitizing feature of the Coway and Brondell, as well as their lower profile. I live in the very humid south, so any extra anti-germ feature for a toilet is great."

You may be over-thinking. We spend a lot of time in Japan (relatives), where we have used Washlets and Inax advanced toilet seats many, many times; and the humidity (and summer heat) in much of Japan is at least as great as it is in the American South. Toto and Inax have been selling advanced toilet seats there for more than three decades, and I have never seen or heard of any problem that stainless steel wands or sanitized wands could solve.

In modern models of advanced toilet seats, each wand is automatically flushed with water before and after each and every use . . . and the amount of splash-back during use is minuscule: the wands are located several inches below and away from the surface toward which the spray is directed.

Two more important features than the ones that you mention are:

(1) one-wand vs. two-wand designs; the two-wand (separate wands for posterior and feminine) is more efficient at cleaning (because of optimized angle of spray for each function); and -- relating to your earlier concern -- the posterior wand is not exposed to any splash-back when the feminine function is activated, and vice versa.

(2) Possible maintenance. Toto and Lixil (parent of Inax) are GIANT international corporations, with major commitments to the American market (Lixil bought American Standard last year); and each subcontracts with American suppliers for subcomponents. With large warehouses and American suppliers, you are not likely to have parts unavailability problems with either Toto or Inax. Moreover, I suspect that a sanitizing mechanism will require a reservoir of a sanitizing fluid, and where do you go to purchase a refill?

"Inax is known for longevity but is more expensive..."

The site you are using for comparisons lists only the luxury L series (Luscence) model Inax toilet seats; the Inax C series (Clessence) seats (which have an integrated "armrest" control rather thn a "remote" control) are several hundred dollars less expensive, and (other than the "remote" control) are functionally the same as the L series. And -- honestly now -- how far are you planning to stray from the toilet seat: do you really need a remote control that allows you to operate a toilet seat in the bathroom from the comfort of your living room?

This post was edited by herring_maven on Sat, Apr 19, 14 at 0:15

Herring_maven, I've been looking at all kinds of models for about a year, so I'm not limiting myself to the ones on that page. I just thought it was helpful in giving an overview of some of the features available. The models I'm thinking about have two nozzles, an option that I wasn't going to compromise on from the beginning. The must-haves were set, and now it's coming down to those other details.

We have a Luxe-bidet in our bathroom right now. Very basic to try to convince DH that a seat was the way to go :) but it DOES have two wands (plastic).
Anyway, the wands need hand-cleaning every other day or two, even with the water cleansing feature. I have to clean the faucet aerators frequently, as well. That's why something a little more aggressive is appealing, to help combat the inherent ick we deal with in our area.

I've read your advice since becoming aware of this seat option, and I appreciate your knowledge and experience. Inax has been at the top of the list because of your recommendations.

I've seen some of the armrest-type controls in a local golf course deteriorate due to high use. So while the remote may seem silly, there is not an extra area to clean (the arm) although one should still wipe down the remote during regular bathroom cleaning. The remote buttons may or may not last any longer than the arm. .