I've installed and serviced plenty of dual-flush and low-flow toilets over the years, and honestly, it really does come down to the brand and build quality. A few quick points from experience:
- Higher-end dual-flush models usually hold up pretty well. I've seen some going strong 8-10 years without any major issues.
- Cheaper models, though...yeah, buttons can get sticky, valves leak, and replacement parts can sometimes be tricky to find.
- Single-flush low-flow toilets are simpler, fewer moving parts means fewer things to break. Usually less hassle long-term.
- If you're leaning toward dual-flush, just make sure replacement parts are easy to source locally. Saves a lot of headaches down the road.
Bottom line, don't let one bad experience put you off completely. Good water-saving toilets can definitely be worth it, just gotta pick wisely and maybe spend a bit more upfront to avoid frustration later.
"Single-flush low-flow toilets are simpler, fewer moving parts means fewer things to break. Usually less hassle long-term."
This is exactly what I've found too. When we remodeled our bathroom a few years back, I debated forever between dual-flush and single-flush low-flow. Ended up going with a decent-quality single-flush model, and honestly, it's been trouble-free since day one. I was worried about clogs or needing multiple flushes, but nope—works just fine.
I do have a friend who got a cheaper dual-flush toilet, and he's always complaining about the buttons sticking or the valve leaking. Seems like your experience matches his pretty closely. Makes me wonder if dual-flush is really worth the extra complexity unless you're willing to spend more upfront.
Have you noticed any significant difference in water savings between dual-flush and single-flush low-flow models? Curious if the savings justify dealing with the extra maintenance issues...
We put in a single-flush low-flow when we moved into our first house last year, and it's been pretty solid overall. Haven't had any real issues, and maintenance has been minimal. Honestly, I doubt the water savings from dual-flush would be noticeable enough to justify the extra hassle. Seems like simplicity usually wins out in the long run...
"Honestly, I doubt the water savings from dual-flush would be noticeable enough to justify the extra hassle."
Yeah, I'd generally agree with this. I've installed both single-flush low-flows and dual-flush models in several properties over the years. Dual-flush sounds great on paper, but tenants often misuse or ignore the two-button system, reducing actual savings. Plus, maintenance can be trickier—more moving parts means more potential leaks or issues down the road. In my experience, simplicity and reliability usually save you more money (and headaches) in the long run.
I've gotta disagree a bit here. Sure, dual-flush can be finicky sometimes, but once you get used to it, the water savings do add up—especially if you've got kids who flush like it's their job. Mine took some getting used to, but now it's second nature.
