Anyone using a cassette toilet in their B?

[Trekkar]

I'm weighing the pros and cons on changing over to a cassette toilet.
Anyone out there with recent experience?

[Trekkar]

Again, thanks for all of the suggestions. I replaced the standard toilet with a cassette-style porta-potty.

[CSG]

I prefer the idea of a Porta-Potti and finally got to try one because the PW Traverse came equipped with the little ones. Having dealt with black tanks on three previous RV, the PP was easier. Still don't like dumping but it is less of an issue. My dream RV would have onboard water, primarily for a shower, not kitchen or toilet use. In my Traverse, I can't remember when I used the onboard 12 g water tank. I carry a 4 gallon Reliance blue cube in the sink and set it on the counter to use for teeth brushing, handwashing, etc. I don't wash dishes (use paper and plastic cups and utensils). My trips are rarely longer than 3-4 nights. Simple and easy is what I want. The Porta-Potti is there for emergencies but I think I've used it less than a half dozen times in the almost 11 years I've owned the rig. It's a shower I miss.

[JimBollman]

steveh27 wrote:

JimBollman wrote:
We have used porta potys for over 40 years of camping and always thought a cassette toilet would be a nice upgrade. But on our used B it had a recirculating toilet which kind is the worst of all worlds and I ripped it out. Though briefly about a cassette but decided on a high end porta potty mostly for the freedom to change my mind on where we install it as we make mods and it can be used in the house if it became necessary. Never wanted to mess with stinky slinks and finding a dump station.

Jim,

My 1997 Xplorer 230XL has Thetford's recirculating toilet. Is that what you had? I have never found it bad, but with it's small volume, will take about 3 gallons, it needs dumped frequently. It's a pain to find & use a dump site. I've been thinking about replacing it with a cassette type. I know it would probably have less capacity, but be a heck of a lot easier to empty.

Yea, I think that was the brand. Besides sounding like a bad idea it was located in a spot that if you were over 5'4" and 120lbs you would have to work real hard to use which might be hard to do if you had to go bad.

I definitely didn't want to carry a dump tube and find a spot to dump with such a small capacity. The porta-potty we put in has a 5.3gal holding tank and 3.2 gal of fresh water for flushing.

[steveh27]

JimBollman wrote:
We have used porta potys for over 40 years of camping and always thought a cassette toilet would be a nice upgrade. But on our used B it had a recirculating toilet which kind is the worst of all worlds and I ripped it out. Though briefly about a cassette but decided on a high end porta potty mostly for the freedom to change my mind on where we install it as we make mods and it can be used in the house if it became necessary. Never wanted to mess with stinky slinks and finding a dump station.

Jim,

My 1997 Xplorer 230XL has Thetford's recirculating toilet. Is that what you had? I have never found it bad, but with it's small volume, will take about 3 gallons, it needs dumped frequently. It's a pain to find & use a dump site. I've been thinking about replacing it with a cassette type. I know it would probably have less capacity, but be a heck of a lot easier to empty.

[Trekkar]

Thank you all for the great input!

[JimBollman]

We have used porta potys for over 40 years of camping and always thought a cassette toilet would be a nice upgrade. But on our used B it had a recirculating toilet which kind is the worst of all worlds and I ripped it out. Though briefly about a cassette but decided on a high end porta potty mostly for the freedom to change my mind on where we install it as we make mods and it can be used in the house if it became necessary. Never wanted to mess with stinky slinks and finding a dump station.

[SidecarFlip]

gbopp wrote:

SidecarFlip wrote:
No need for a dump station, any tirlet will do or even a pit tirlet or a dug hole in the ground and, you can use the grey water to recharge the holding tank.

I just open my dump valve while rolling down the Interstate, no dump station needed. You can't easily do that with a cassette tirlet. :B

Lets hope you are jesting. If I was behind you and you did that, you and I would have an issue.

[toedtoes]

I have a cassette toilet in my FnR. Having gotten used to having a toilet with black tank in the clipper, I can see the difference.

The cassette toilet doesn't hold as much - so you need to dump it more often. But, you just dump it in a campground toilet. The FnR cassette toilet can also be dumped using a stinky slinky and a dump station, but you can do whichever way is more convenient - remembering that the grey tank does not use the same piping as the toilet so you have to move the stinky slinky to dump both in that manner. It is easy to carry the cassette to a toilet - no need to use a rolling tote, etc.

The clipper toilet must be emptied using a dump station, etc. The grey and black tanks use the same drain pipe, so no moving the stinky slinky around - just open and close the gates.

Once you are comfortable with how often you need to dump, there really is no operational difference between the two.

I would not hesitate to get another cassette toilet RV if the rest of the RV was what I want.

[gbopp]

SidecarFlip wrote:
No need for a dump station, any tirlet will do or even a pit tirlet or a dug hole in the ground and, you can use the grey water to recharge the holding tank.

I just open my dump valve while rolling down the Interstate, no dump station needed. You can't easily do that with a cassette tirlet. :B

[SidecarFlip]

gbopp wrote:
My dad had a home built camper that we borrowed. It had a cassette toilet. It worked but, we used it very little.
Our 96 Southwind has a toilet and holding tank. Personally, I would not want a RV, of any size, with a cassette. The holding tank is much more convenient.

If you're going to be staying mostly at campgrounds and use their toilets it may be okay.
For everyday use, I wouldn't want one.

I disagree. A cassette toilet is Much more user friendly versus a black tank. Capacity is less, but emptying the poo is a whole lot easier. No need for a dump station, any tirlet will do or even a pit tirlet or a dug hole in the ground and, you can use the grey water to recharge the holding tank. Less mess, no stinky slinky and way more convenient. Plus they are totally self contained.. No plumbing, no knife valves, nothing but a slide out tank.

Might not work in all applications but are good for probably 95% of all RV apps.

[Deb_and_Ed_M]

(No experience with a cassette toilet) I think in an RV with a "full" water system sinks/shower/toilet - using the system as designed is the easiest. That being said, as a fellow Michigander, I know winterizing can be a pain - many of us do that multiple times per year, depending on whether we head south for a winter vacation (and just how far south you go). It's why I opted for a self-contained freshwater system for the kitchen sink; and a "Luggable Loo" with kitty litter as our middle-of-the-night potty. No more worrying about how cold it will get at night.

[gbopp]

My dad had a home built camper that we borrowed. It had a cassette toilet. It worked but, we used it very little.
Our 96 Southwind has a toilet and holding tank. Personally, I would not want a RV, of any size, with a cassette. The holding tank is much more convenient.

If you're going to be staying mostly at campgrounds and use their toilets it may be okay.
For everyday use, I wouldn't want one.