No satisfaction from American Standard
sherwindu
flushing toilets they started making when the 1.3 gal rule kicked in. I made
the mistake of buying one of those in a non-standard color, Rhapsody Blue. I
did my whole bathroom in that color. However, I later discovered that the damm
toilet did
not do the job, and the plunger became a necessity. I am almost positive the
toilet is
installed properly and the line is clear because of another nearby toilet
working fine on the same line. Then I heard American Standard was coming out
with a new line
of toilets to work around the earlier poor design. This model was called the
'Champion' and came out in only two colors. I thought it was only a matter of
time before they would come out with my color. Guess again. They have
increased their
color line to what is probably the maximum, and Rhapsody Blue is not there.
There is currently only one toilet they make in my color, and it's the old style
version that doesn't cut it. So I'm left holding the plunger because I bought a
defective toilet from
a company that doesn't back up their products.
Sherwin D.
buffalobill
sewers. maybe you've got the newer pvc sewer at your place.
on the possiblity of an invisible obstruction:
drain all the water out and shopvac out the leftover water, remove
toilet from the floor, run a closet auger snake all the way thru, tie
an old towel to the end, pull it back up to the user side of the toilet
and see if you win a free toothbrush or plastic picnic spoon or
whatever may be stuck there.
this presumes your previous bathroom was existing. see also:
http://www.fluidmaster.com/
that new toilet may flush just fine when sitting outdoors and filled by
your garden hose.or in the tub on a towel covered pair of concrete
blocks. play with it with a helper or two and see.
if the bathroom is brand new and this is its first toilet there may be
a VENT problem. see also:
http://www.free-ed.net/sweethaven/BldgConst/Plumbing01/lessonmain.asp?iNum=fra0309
Joseph Meehan
Many people feel that if they spend a lot of money on a product it will
function better or at least properly. This is not so and in toilets it is
more of a problem than most. Most toilets sold are bought by contractors,
who only buy based on price, after all who makes the decision to buy a new
home based on a test of how well the toilet works? Most people buying a
replacement or remolding, look at how pretty it is is (non-standard color)
and don't do their homework on what works well. The manufacturers sell what
people buy.
Information is available on what works well is available. Try Consumer
Reports for one source. You can also generally expect a that if it has a
FULLY GLAZED trap of 2" or larger (larger is better) it will function
properly. Neither of those two features cost much, but I doubt if more than
1% of the people who make the decision about what to buy even know what
those things mean, let alone bother to check the specifics of what they buy.
They look at the outside and make sure it is the right color.
--
Joseph Meehan
Dia duit
JoeSpareBedroom
news:44769460...@comcast.net...
Consumer Reports actually tested toilets using pseudo-turds. You can read
how they did it when you go to the library, which you WILL before buying
your next toilet. Right? I understand that it's stylish to doubt CR, but in
fact, some of their work is done very well.
hal...@aol.com
They still sell the old good flushers there:)
You can check e bay too, a little pricey but cheaper than gutting your
bathroom! canadians sell new toilets shipping them into the us
who knows american standard might still sell that color as a old style
into canada?
hil...@fashionsintime.com
the poor design and not enough water, we had your same problem with
constant plunging.
My husband spent about 20 minutes upside underneath the tank, drilling
out the plastic thing (water inlet valve I guess). He then replaced
the "guts" of the toilet with standard packaged stuff from Home Depot.
The entire project cost about $20 and took about an hour. Now we have
"old style" flushing and the toilet hasn't blocked up in 4 years.
sherwindu
Noozer wrote:
> "sherwindu" <sher...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:44769460...@comcast.net...
> > You would think that American Standard would do something about the poor
> > flushing toilets they started making when the 1.3 gal rule kicked in. I
> > made
> <snip>
> There is currently only one toilet they make in my color, and it's the old
> style
> > version that doesn't cut it. So I'm left holding the plunger because I
> > bought a
> > defective toilet from
> > a company that doesn't back up their products.
>
> Or a consumer doesn't do their homework.
sherwindu
these problems, plus there is a larger capacity toilet on a short extension line which
is
working fine.
Sherwin D.
sherwindu
Not sure exactly how you worked around your problem. The limitation as I see
it,
is the capacity of the tank (1.3 gal) plus the diameter of the outflow tubes in
the toilet
itself. I have my tank set to the maximum height of water, to no avail. I'm
not sure
what 'guts' your husband was able to replace, short of a whole new toilet?
Sherwin D.
JoeSpareBedroom
products, like stereo speakers, their opinions are nothing but that -
opinions. But sometimes, you read one of their articles and see that they've
tested something in a unique way which has nothing to do with opinion.
Toilets were a good example. You probably would've bought something
different if you'd done your homework.
"sherwindu" <sher...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4477F10E...@comcast.net...
Edwin Pawlowski
"sherwindu" <sher...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> I'm
> not sure
> what 'guts' your husband was able to replace, short of a whole new toilet?
The guts is the mechanism inside the tank. Most use 1.3 gallons, but have a
resevoir of considerably more. Watch a flush and see how much water is
left.
hil...@fashionsintime.com
sherwindu wrote:
> Hi Hilary,
> Not sure exactly how you worked around your problem. The limitation as I see
> it,
> is the capacity of the tank (1.3 gal) plus the diameter of the outflow tubes in
> the toilet
> itself. I have my tank set to the maximum height of water, to no avail. I'm
> not sure
> what 'guts' your husband was able to replace, short of a whole new toilet?
>
> Sherwin D.
>
> hil...@fashionsintime.com wrote:
>
gallons fit in the tub. There was no water in the rest of the tank. He
drilled out/removed the tub, so that the entire tank would fill with
water. The removal of the tub required some repairs (new float, etc.)
because some things were attached to the plastic tub. Again, once this
was completed, we had a "regular" high water use toilet, and we now
only have to flush once, instead of 5-6 times. The brand is Eljer, so I
don't know if American Standard toilets can be fixed this easily. Good
luck!
EXT
tubs in the tanks. Nothing was attached to the tub, the flapper valve was
inside the tub. The tub kept a lot of water in the tank after flushing --
basically it was an high flow toilet with a restrictor in the tank to
convert it to a low flow -- which seriously impacted its performance. We
simply took a pair of heavy scissors to the tub and hacked a large chunk out
of an accessible side of the thin plastic tub so that the trapped water
could escape down to flush the toilet. All three toilets worked fine
afterwards.
<hil...@fashionsintime.com> wrote in message
news:1148739354.8...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
hil...@fashionsintime.com
all that would fill with water. Once the tub was removed and a new
float installed (original was in the tub), the whole tank was able to
fill up with water. Do you really have only a 1.3 gallon tank?
sherwindu
about 1.3 gallon
toilets, you couldn't buy much else. There was not a lot of testing going on,
so many people bought
these things thinking of saving the water and our dependencies on it. By the
time I realized what the
problems were with the 1.3's, I had already committed to 'Rhapsody Blue' for my
tub, sink,and
toilet. American Standard still makes that color in their Cadet series of old
fashioned designs. I
was hoping to see it in their more modern designs, but no luck.
I consider myself a very careful shopper, and I scan the web and literature
before I buy, especially
on high priced items. I do not put too much faith in Consumer Reports, who go
off on tangents like
downrating cars because there are not enough drink holders. Their reviews are
spotty, at best, and I
even find inaccuracies in their reports.
It's real easy to look back in hindsight and say we should have known better.
We obviously cannot
depend on either the government or our industries to do the right thing. I
waste more water with multiple
flushes than I ever did with the old style toilets. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> He probably means that it's often worth checking Consumer Reports. For some
> products, like stereo speakers, their opinions are nothing but that -
> opinions. But sometimes, you read one of their articles and see that they've
> tested something in a unique way which has nothing to do with opinion.
> Toilets were a good example. You probably would've bought something
> different if you'd done your homework.
Probably not. Their wasn't any information out at the time, and the older
style toilets were
very hard to find. Lets call it for what it is, the government and these
companies screwed us.
Sherwin D.
sherwindu
the
toilet. The newer design toilets push through the same amount of water, but
they use
a better geometry to allow the passageways to be enlarged.
Sherwin D.
sherwindu
toilet just
after the government forced us into 1.3 gallon tanks. As I said earlier, I have
adjusted my tank float to allow water to fill up to the maximum, before it
starts spilling out a relief tube. As I stated earlier, the problem is in the
passageway size,
not the water volume.
Sherwin D.
JoeSpareBedroom
> You folks have short memories. When the government came out with their
> edict
> about 1.3 gallon
> toilets, you couldn't buy much else.
CR began testing toilets about a month after the government issued its
edict. They tested them using fake turds made out of oatmeal & peanut
butter, or some such thing (described in the articles). I understand that
it's considered hip to dislike the organization because they've been
(correctly) slamming American cars since the late 1970s, but you only hurt
yourself by having this ignorant attitude. You're claiming that because you
don't like the way they review one product category, all their other tests
are invalid.
> There was not a lot of testing going on,
> so many people bought
> these things thinking of saving the water and our dependencies on it.
What if there was "a lot of testing"? Who else would be doing it, except
for Consumer Reports? Do you think Popular Mechanics would invest money in
50 different toilets, just to test them?
> I consider myself a very careful shopper, and I scan the web and
> literature
> before I buy, especially
> on high priced items. I do not put too much faith in Consumer Reports....
For toilets, who *do* you put faith in? You "scan the web". Whose sites do
you "scan"?
> Their reviews are
> spotty, at best, and I
> even find inaccuracies in their reports.
Please describe one or two such inaccuracies.
hil...@fashionsintime.com
style". The toilet tank of our 20 year old "normal" toilet is EXACTLY
the same size as the tank on our 1.3 gallon toilet. The only difference
was that the new toilet had a 1.3 gallon plastic tub inside the tank
which was all that would fill with water. We removed the tub, got a new
float, and no more problems. Sorry yours isn't like that. Perhaps
because the manufacturer decided it was easier/cheaper to add the tub
than to re-tool the factory. Who knows?
Rudy
> a resevoir of considerably more. Watch a flush and see how much water is
> left.
The saying Goes.."if its brown, hold it down". Use the whole tank of water
rather than the usual half a tank, to get the job done.