Re: For those who don't like oxygenated gas:

[Kneale Brownson <knotnook@traverse.com>]

Actually, as a rentals property and former motel owner, my concerns were
with the build-up within the plumbing downstream of the bowl, as well as
the complaints of renters regarding the steady stream of usually cool water
hitting their toes while showering.  Apropos of Audi thoughts:  The newer
bowl-siphon designs are similarly effective,  and just as weak/lame as the
Type 44 doorhandle improvements.

Kneale Brownson


At 04:22 PM 7/27/99 -0700, Michael Williams wrote:
>Kneale Brownson decided to speak these words:
>
>>This is sort of like the federal regulations that all new toilets have the
>>minimal-water flush capacity (so you have to flush three times to remove
>>any solids) 
>
>
>Actually, you probably have an older design of the toilet.  They have 
>remedied this problem by redesigning the shape of the bowl to work better 
>with the low flush toilets.  the original design was such that they had 
>the old style bowls with a smaller tank, necessitating multiple flushes 
>to remove waste.  Now, they have created a bowl which creates a type of 
>siphoning effect on the contents of the bowl to evacuate it more 
>effectively.....There is also the pressure assisted variety which most 
>definitely works well, if a bit loud and expensive...
>
>Plus, the manufacturer of the toilet is a HUGE factor in the 
>effectiveness of this too.  Kohler and American Standard make good 
>ones...anything else, well, use it at your own risk....
>
>No affiliation, just experienced in the plumbing industry...hehe