Maybe some of the rim jets are blocked, for that reason, didn't do well on the bowl rinse. But overall it did better than expected. With that urinal trapway, i thought it'd clog with air...
"Cyclops" siphon jet for this trapway matters a great deal. The trap mouth to cyclops distance seams rather small. The standard diameter back then was 1 7/8". IMO, for your plastic bag tests, feed the seam side first as this prevents air bubble from hanging the bag up on the trapway mouth that is so common I see in terlit tests you guys do. I have seen this terlit on a flushometer and boy howdy, what a big difference !
A little sad for a vintage toilet - an early unbadged 'Budget' version of another similar toilet (possibly a VHP from the 1960's) but overall it did okay (once the scrubbing pad was removed from the trapway). I agree with your rant about manufacturers skimping on quality when making toilets (especially for those who cannot afford higher end toilets and have to go with the budget range toilets).
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations I had it on a homemade tank, so it may have been weakened due to how much the tank leaked whenever I flushed it. But I do have a Briggs tank, so I can try it again with that.
This toilet is Above Average imho and also this is my rant to the toilet companies just because a toilet is dirt cheap don't make it horrible that's not fair to the people who can't afford bougie toilets
Well, quite honestly; I actually WOULD NOT actually be at all surprised😮😯😲… (like, at all👍); if it (that toilet🚽) HAD struggled on that washcloth or even if it (that toilet🚽) HAD Downright FAILED 😞😣😨 on that washcloth; because that toilet🚽’s trapway opening has got to be one 1️⃣☝️ of the smallest one1️⃣☝️s (one 1️⃣☝️ of the smallest trapway openings) that I HAVE ever seen, or that toilet🚽’s trapway opening has got to be THE SMALLEST one 1️⃣☝️ (one 1️⃣☝️ of the smallest trapway opening) that I HAVE ever seen!😞😣😨 😮😯😲
Maybe some of the rim jets are blocked, for that reason, didn't do well on the bowl rinse. But overall it did better than expected. With that urinal trapway, i thought it'd clog with air...
A lot of these cheap toilets just have bad bowl rinse by design
Still waiting on the tests for your 2012 Penguin toilet.
BTR will have to do them, I didn't keep it long enough to do tests.
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations Aww... Darn
"Cyclops" siphon jet for this trapway matters a great deal. The trap mouth to cyclops distance seams rather small. The standard diameter back then was 1 7/8". IMO, for your plastic bag tests, feed the seam side first as this prevents air bubble from hanging the bag up on the trapway mouth that is so common I see in terlit tests you guys do. I have seen this terlit on a flushometer and boy howdy, what a big difference !
I always cut little holes in my bags so the air comes out.
It Kind of looks like a URC Castle but with a forward trap and siphon jet. overall great toilet, though!
It looks like a lot of different things
A little sad for a vintage toilet - an early unbadged 'Budget' version of another similar toilet (possibly a VHP from the 1960's) but overall it did okay (once the scrubbing pad was removed from the trapway). I agree with your rant about manufacturers skimping on quality when making toilets (especially for those who cannot afford higher end toilets and have to go with the budget range toilets).
I feel like these could have been good if they stepped up the quality a little bit.
So far, it still did better than my 1965 Neuday with the grocery bag. However, my Neuday obviously has better bowl rinse though.
Sucks that your Neuday didn't perform so well
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations I had it on a homemade tank, so it may have been weakened due to how much the tank leaked whenever I flushed it. But I do have a Briggs tank, so I can try it again with that.
@@christopherpotomski8463 I would guess that was why
I've never seen a toilet like this one. Although I wouldn't want one of these, it did do better than I expected it would.
Yeah, this was a very interesting find.
Did better than I thought, but I was expecting better on the bowl rinse.
Bad bowl rinse is typical with cheap toilets
This toilet is Above Average imho and also this is my rant to the toilet companies just because a toilet is dirt cheap don't make it horrible that's not fair to the people who can't afford bougie toilets
I guess they have better technology now because the cheap stuff isn't so bad anymore.
HERE WE GO
YES
It was interesting to test this one
I bet that's why it was struggling in the past because of that scrub pad
It was my scrub pad from when I cleaned it
you should put this next on your bucket to see how it flushes for how this toilet wasn't disappointed
I will!
I had a pink version of this toilet. It's surprisingly good.
Oh cool! Did you film it?
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations nah, cell phones weren't big in those days, I was about to finish high school. I was 16 at the time and was poor.
@@SuperShadowMarioFan When I was a kid, I had a camera that I carried absolutely everywhere.
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations not me unfortunately. I'm 39 now. Was in the country too so didn't have much of technology.
@@SuperShadowMarioFan Oh
I think my best guess will be a vhp forward trap.
VHP had their distinct designed too
It could be from a brand that none of us have ever even heard of.
It's possible
Well what a weird toilet this came 8n 100 ssome years
It definitely is weird
Gostei
Thanks!
Maybe a Case?
Highly doubtful
I have a 1962 just like it! Video is pending
Awesome
It seems like a crane neuclo. The bowl does
It doesn't share the characteristics of a Crane but it might be similar
seems to have a pretty weak flush
Yeah, I'm not fond of it.
The trap way is to small to be able to flush
Somehow it worked but I don't know if it worked well.
que vaso bonito
It does look cool!
1966 Case Foward-Trap
Case was different at that time.
Case was different at that time.
Well, quite honestly; I actually WOULD NOT actually be at all surprised😮😯😲… (like, at all👍); if it (that toilet🚽) HAD struggled on that washcloth or even if it (that toilet🚽) HAD Downright FAILED 😞😣😨 on that washcloth; because that toilet🚽’s trapway opening has got to be one 1️⃣☝️ of the smallest one1️⃣☝️s (one 1️⃣☝️ of the smallest trapway openings) that I HAVE ever seen, or that toilet🚽’s trapway opening has got to be THE SMALLEST one 1️⃣☝️ (one 1️⃣☝️ of the smallest trapway opening) that I HAVE ever seen!😞😣😨 😮😯😲
The Open is very narrow
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations, Yeah, it really DOES look 👀 like 👍 that it IS really “Narrow!”👍
This is a Crane Neuday
It's not Crane, they look too different.
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations Oh you're right👍🏻
I think it’s a case toilet
It's a Nationaline
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations oh that so rare
The trapway design makes no sense
It's very narrow
Idk
Muito antigo
Yeah, it's 57 years old.
HOW IS IT!!😮
It's probably fine
I think 8ts a crane neuday😊
It is too different from other Crane models.
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations yeah that's a dumb answer idk why
What a strange toilet. Definitely looks like a cheapo budget option from back in the day. The quality control is disappointing.
Yeah, these were like Glacier Bay of the 1960s.
You edited to Nationaline
Yep
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorationshow did you find out it’s nationaline and this toilet is a great preformer
Do a bemis toilet
Bemis is the seat, the toilet is something different.
Nice but I mean a toilet from bemis
its decent enough but it is a VERY cheap toilet
Yeah, too cheap for my liking.
Pretty bad cheap toilet
Yeah
I don’t like it
what dont u like
Same
The toilet
That is your cleaning supplie.
I use other stuff to clean my toilets. These cloths are specifically selected for these tests.
@@OCC_Plumbing_and_Restorations yep.