I've swapped out toilets in a bunch of my rental units over the years, and honestly, the savings are usually pretty modest. Like you said, if you're replacing something ancient that guzzles water like crazy, you'll notice a difference. But if you're already using something relatively modern, the savings aren't exactly gonna blow your mind.
Totally agree on Fluidmaster kits though—those metal-reinforced ones are solid. I've had way fewer callbacks from tenants since switching to those. The cheap plastic stuff always seems to break at the worst possible time (like midnight on a Saturday... ask me how I know).
One thing I've noticed is that tenants sometimes complain about needing multiple flushes with the ultra-low-flow models. Even when water pressure checks out fine, some of these toilets just don't seem to clear everything in one go. I've had better luck with mid-range models that balance water savings with decent flushing power.
Curious though—has anyone tried dual-flush toilets in their properties? I've been tempted to give them a shot, but I'm not sure if tenants actually use them correctly or if they just end up hitting the full flush every time anyway...
I've installed dual-flush toilets in a few units, and honestly, they're kind of hit or miss. Some tenants get it right away and actually use the half-flush option, but others just mash the bigger button every single time. Can't really blame them—it's not always obvious which button does what, especially if they're not labeled clearly.
Also, I've noticed the internal mechanisms on dual-flush models can be a bit fussier. Had a couple callbacks for buttons sticking or valves not sealing properly. Nothing major, but still annoying enough to make me question if they're worth the hassle.
Personally, I've had better luck just sticking with decent mid-range single-flush toilets. Reliable flush, fewer callbacks, and tenants don't have to think about it. Sometimes simpler is just better...
I've run into similar issues with dual-flush setups. A few things I've learned along the way that might help:
- If tenants are consistently confused about which button does what, you can get aftermarket labels or stickers. Seems silly, but clearly marking "half" and "full" flush actually makes a difference.
- Some dual-flush models are definitely fussier than others. Cheaper ones especially have given me headaches with sticking buttons or valves not sealing properly. I've found that spending just a bit more upfront on a better-known brand usually cuts down callbacks significantly.
- Single-flush toilets with a lower gallon-per-flush rating (like around 1.28 gpf) can be a solid compromise if you're looking to save water without the hassle of dual buttons. They're simpler internally and tenants don't have to think twice about it.
- Also, check if your city offers rebates or incentives for installing water-efficient fixtures. Sometimes that can offset the cost difference and make the occasional callback easier to swallow.
In my experience, simpler is often better in rental units—less maintenance, fewer headaches—but there are ways to make dual-flush setups workable if you're committed to them.
Totally agree with your point about simpler being better, especially in rentals. I've been called out to fix more dual-flush issues than I care to count. You nailed it when you said:
"Cheaper ones especially have given me headaches with sticking buttons or valves not sealing properly."
I've seen some real messes from those sticky valves—water waste, leaks, even minor flooding if tenants don't notice right away. Not fun.
I usually steer customers towards a reliable single-flush model around 1.28 gpf too. Less moving parts means fewer things to break, and honestly, tenants appreciate the straightforwardness. That said, if you're set on dual-flush, labels definitely help reduce confusion—sounds minor but it really does make a difference.
Another small tip: keep an eye on local plumbing codes. Some areas are starting to require water-efficient fixtures anyway, so even though they're sometimes a hassle initially, it's better to get ahead of the curve and avoid compliance headaches later on...
I'm with you on the single-flush toilets being less of a headache overall. I've lost count of how many times I've had to deal with those dual-flush buttons getting stuck or tenants accidentally breaking them because they pressed too hard. And you're right about labels—seems trivial, but it really does help tenants figure out the system and avoid unnecessary wear and tear.
"keep an eye on local plumbing codes. Some areas are starting to require water-efficient fixtures anyway..."
Good point here, too. Codes are definitely tightening up in my area, and I've had to swap out fixtures sooner than expected just to stay compliant. But honestly, even with the occasional hassle, I still think water-saving fixtures are worth it in the long run. Lower water bills and less strain on local resources add up over time.
One thing I wonder about though—has anyone had experience with pressure-assisted toilets? They're pricier upfront, but I've heard they can be super reliable and still save water. Curious if they're worth the extra investment or just another maintenance headache waiting to happen...
