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

what about the cadet 3's quality was questionable? from everything i've read here on the forums it seems to be a highly rated, reasonable priced product. run a search. there have been many discussions related to this particular unit.

I believe any of the Toto skirted models will adapt for your 10" rough-in. They'll come with a 12" fitting, you will have to purchase the 10" separately. I would recommend a model having a 3" trap. If you have space for elongated, they flush a bit better because the trap-bend is not as severe. Check the specs for your water supply location as it may need to be moved.

I've had the Toto Vespin 11 installed for a few weeks now. It is bascially a skirted version of the Drake 11. Love the Sanigloss, and compared to my two other dual flush toilets seems to flush better and no streaking. Have to admit have also not cleaned it...appears sparkling clean! Though I wonder if using a bidet seat and the additional water that produces has any bearing on that? I guess it's the water in the tank, not the water in the bowl that has any bearing? I just notice, that there appears to be more water sitting in bowl than in my other two. So does that water get calculated into the 1.28 or the 1.6 number, or does that number reflect just the volume of water in the tank? If there are two volumes flushed together, I would assume the Vespin/Drake has a larger total volume...