Upgrade from DC 250 - Advice needed

[markbird]

Hi, this is my first post so apologies if this subject has already been covered.

I run a design and print company and we currently have 2 litho presses and a Xerox DC 250 (high cap feeder and advanced finisher for stacking) for our digital work. As our digital requirements increase (currently 30-40'000 a month) we are finding that the 250 isn't up to it. Specifically we find that colour matching historic jobs is very difficult and registration on duplexed jobs has too much variation. Spot colour matching also seems very hit and miss and the bundled Fiery rip doesn't offer enough control.

My own initial research points to the machines listed below but this is where I need your help. We're not looking for a massive step up in expenditure from our current lease deal but I'm just not sure what we should be looking at. Which of the following or other model would you guys recommend:

Xerox DC 700/7000
Konica Minolta 6501
Oce S665 Pro
Ricoh Pro C900
Canon imagePRESS C7000
HP Indigo
Other?

I'm pretty sure the DC 7000, C7000 and HP Indigo are too expensive/advanced for us but hoping to get some guidance.

We have in-house finishing facilities so don't require booklet makers etc. but we do produce a wide range of items from large brochures and manuals to small flyers and business cards. I expect our usage to increase steadily but don't expect that it will more than double in the next couple of years so upto 100'000 a month should be adequate.

I hope this is enough to go on and I look forward to hearing from you all!

 

[lfelton]

my 2c worth: we run multiple 6501 at relatively high volumes (about your highest end) and they're fine. Colour matching / consistency is going to be a challenge on any of these machines, but all should be significantly better than your 250. The Oce is a 6501 with a different badge and as Canon just bought 71% of Oce, I'd question Oce's long term committment to the product. Indigos are in a completely different league in terms of price.

 

[jotterpinky]

We were in in a similar situation several months ago and ended up trying three different machines: Xerox 700, KM6501, and Canon 9065. We decided upon the Xerox 700, it seemed to us the registration was very good...better than it's 1mm front to back rating and the color looked great. The color on the KM with our same files and same RIP (Fiery) did not seem as vivid and saturated. The KM is probably more accurate of what the color in photos actually was when the picture was taken but everyone seemed to like the extra saturation on the Xerox. As for the Canon 9075 it seems too new to give any real credence to it's claims. Registration on the machine we tried was horrible...sometimes up to 1/8" from sheet to sheet. I think part of this is how the Hi-Cap trays load the sheet. The KM and Canon load the sheet so it's centered in the tray leaving some play between the guides. The Xerox loads so one edge is always constant. Just butt your paper up against that edge flush and adjust the guides up against the open edge...we found there to be much less play. Along the same lines the hi-cap trays on the KM and Xerox seem much more "heavy-duty" while the Canon trays are a bit on the cheesy side.

The Canon also will not print good looking prints unless the sheet has a very smooth or coated finish. Almost all uncoated sheets are mottled and speckled which our tech kept telling us was paper dust...might have been but we did not see this problem at all on either the KM or the Xerox using similar papers. (keep in mind we had all three at different times for a month each)

I don't think any of the three are great at matching spot colors and despite calibrating at least once, sometimes multiple times, per day we could not hit the exact same color a week later using spot colors. What we have been doing is having to tweak the curves on the RIP to get the color reasonably accurate and for spot colors we change the definition slightly. We ended up purchasing a Xerox 700 with a Creo RIP. I've found that the color control on the Creo is much better than the Fiery...you can tweak curves on each individual job to get the color right where you need it (I belive the Xerox branded RIP also has similar functionality). The only problem we've run into is the lack of Windows 7 support from Creo in terms of drivers and software...which has been difficult as we recently updated our entire lineup of computer systems to 64bit Windows 7 to take advantage of the extra RAM...only to have to pull out the old computers to print to the Creo front end and use their "VDP Merge" software. I should probably also mention that I like the spot color functionality on the Fiery better since you can print out a chart of the color on a "color wheel"-like chart that allows you to pick similar colors with slightly different shades to get the closest match possible.

If you go with the Xerox 700 I would recommend the Light Production C finisher so you can get the interface module with decurler. The KM and Canon have relatively good decurling systems but the "basic" decurler on the Xerox 700 should not be referred to as a decurler...it does nothing from my tests and we've had the machine for 3 months. The interface module includes another decurler that gives you "on the fly" adjustment and works great.

I should probably also mention that the Canon is extremely slow...we haven't timed it yet but on an 80# gloss cover job it's probably only outputting about 9 sheets of 12x18 per minute...we can get probably 12-15 on the Xerox.

If you can spare the extra money I would recommend the Xerox...it was about 2x the price of the Canon 9065 but for the money it's worth it.

 

[LodAssoc]

You defenitly DO NOT want the DC7000. It's going to be very expensive compared to what you have. Furthermore, they probably won't want to sell you a 7000, they will probably try to get you into a 7002. DO NOT take this machine. It is junk. They will make it sound very good, but it isn't.

If you are wanting to stay in the Xerox family, the 700 or the DC5000 are both logical steps up from what you have. I ran a 5000 for 2 years, and it was great. They don't sell the 5000 new anymore, it is now a 5000AP (basically the same, will some tweaks). You will have a little glossier finish, but better productivity. The 5000 we had lasted to about 2mm click and it started to go downhill. I haven't ran a 700, however I hear good things about it.

I can't speak for many other machines. I do know however that Oce, KM, and Canon do not have as good quality or color consistency than either the 5000, or 700. HP Indigo it about 3x as expensive (if not more) than what you are currently running.

Also, regardless of what box you go with make sure there is a strong service team in your area with a good track record. You can get all this information if you call the company's service relations department, or, of course, speak to others in your general area that have dealt with the company.

Good luck to you. Just remember...say NO to the 7002/8002.

 

[markbird]

We were in in a similar situation several months ago and ended up trying three different machines: Xerox 700, KM6501, and Canon 9065. We decided upon the Xerox 700, it seemed to us the registration was very good...better than it's 1mm front to back rating and the color looked great. The color on the KM with our same files and same RIP (Fiery) did not seem as vivid and saturated. The KM is probably more accurate of what the color in photos actually was when the picture was taken but everyone seemed to like the extra saturation on the Xerox. As for the Canon 9075 it seems too new to give any real credence to it's claims. Registration on the machine we tried was horrible...sometimes up to 1/8" from sheet to sheet. I think part of this is how the Hi-Cap trays load the sheet. The KM and Canon load the sheet so it's centered in the tray leaving some play between the guides. The Xerox loads so one edge is always constant. Just butt your paper up against that edge flush and adjust the guides up against the open edge...we found there to be much less play. Along the same lines the hi-cap trays on the KM and Xerox seem much more "heavy-duty" while the Canon trays are a bit on the cheesy side.

The Canon also will not print good looking prints unless the sheet has a very smooth or coated finish. Almost all uncoated sheets are mottled and speckled which our tech kept telling us was paper dust...might have been but we did not see this problem at all on either the KM or the Xerox using similar papers. (keep in mind we had all three at different times for a month each)

I don't think any of the three are great at matching spot colors and despite calibrating at least once, sometimes multiple times, per day we could not hit the exact same color a week later using spot colors. What we have been doing is having to tweak the curves on the RIP to get the color reasonably accurate and for spot colors we change the definition slightly. We ended up purchasing a Xerox 700 with a Creo RIP. I've found that the color control on the Creo is much better than the Fiery...you can tweak curves on each individual job to get the color right where you need it (I belive the Xerox branded RIP also has similar functionality). The only problem we've run into is the lack of Windows 7 support from Creo in terms of drivers and software...which has been difficult as we recently updated our entire lineup of computer systems to 64bit Windows 7 to take advantage of the extra RAM...only to have to pull out the old computers to print to the Creo front end and use their "VDP Merge" software. I should probably also mention that I like the spot color functionality on the Fiery better since you can print out a chart of the color on a "color wheel"-like chart that allows you to pick similar colors with slightly different shades to get the closest match possible.

If you go with the Xerox 700 I would recommend the Light Production C finisher so you can get the interface module with decurler. The KM and Canon have relatively good decurling systems but the "basic" decurler on the Xerox 700 should not be referred to as a decurler...it does nothing from my tests and we've had the machine for 3 months. The interface module includes another decurler that gives you "on the fly" adjustment and works great.

I should probably also mention that the Canon is extremely slow...we haven't timed it yet but on an 80# gloss cover job it's probably only outputting about 9 sheets of 12x18 per minute...we can get probably 12-15 on the Xerox.

If you can spare the extra money I would recommend the Xerox...it was about 2x the price of the Canon 9065 but for the money it's worth it.

Thanks Jotter, you say you had problems with Windows 7 support. We use macs, do you know what the support is like for them?

 

[markbird]

Thanks for your replies so far. It looks like it's between the KM6501 & the DC700 then unless anyone has anything more to add? If these 2 appear to be the best for our usage I would be interested to hear from more people who have used both machines.

 

[che.c]

 

[LodAssoc]

I love it. I think I'll get t-shirts made and wear and pass them out at On Demand in Philly. Ha!

Thanks for the laugh!

 

[lkl7255]

Hi Markbird,

I agree with the others that the Xerox700 and 5000 would be the logical next step. The Canon 7000, Indigo, and DocuColor 7002 I think are in a higher production range than what you currently need right now.

If you like the look of the DocuColor 250, the Xerox 700 will have that same matte look with the EA toner (the 5000 has a glossier look to it). It has the same customer replaceable units as well.
For your comments about duplexing and registration, you'll be able to move into a large volume band, and can duplex coated stocks and a heavier weight (220gsm instead of 176 gsm). Lastly, you have more control over registration with alignment profiles, which is nice. You can adjust both side 1 and side 2 up to 4 mm for registration, skew, etc.

I haven't done any spot color matching with the 700, so I really can't offer any insight into that. Xerox does offer a variety of RIPs, and it may be worth getting some of your files tested on each of them to see what you like most.

Lastly, from my experience at shows, I felt the color remained consistent throughout the day. We did calibrate daily and used a FreeFlow Print Server (Xerox's RIP). That has more color strips to scan (9 isntead of 4) so it tends to have better accuracy with grays and neutrals.

I'll try to think of customers who have both a Xerox and Konica and ask them to post their comments here.

 

[pedwards]

Upgrade from Xerox 250

Upgrade from Xerox 250

You certainly have reached a high volume level with your 250.. For the money, have you considered just adding a new Xerox DC 260? Same basic machine, only faster, You might want to configure it with a different rip.

If you are going to make a move to another or different machine, I would also encourage you to look at additional substrates that you may want to run to widen your digital print product offering. Your Xerox Supplies Account Manager can show you a wide range of possible substrates like DocuCard, ValuPeelCard, ValuPerfCard, DocuMagnet, synthetics, low tack labels for signage plus a wide range of specialized Xerox papers. The addition of these new throughput media may generate enough new revenues for you to cover the cost of a more robust machine.

Good Luck!
Paul Edwards
CEO
FormStore
Membership cards and magnet designed to be preprinted and then personalized on Xerox black & white and color digital printers and presses
Follow me on Twitter @predwards

 

[Printeratic]

If you run Heavy weight paper and / or coated stock. Then I can advice you to take a close look at the specs of both machines.
Although the X700 will decrease in speed, the Konica will decrease significantly in speed either on heavy weight as coated, not to mention when is is heavy weight coated stock.

Besides that, you are used now to work with the separate drums and fuser unit. All those things should be replaced by an Konica engineer, so you have to wait for them! The X700 is alike the DC260 you own right now, with the separate drums and fuser...!!

Good luck on your decision!

 

[Jackie/]

Xerox 700 Fiery Rip

Xerox 700 Fiery Rip

We have a 700 with a Fiery Rip and are very happy with print quality and speed. The decurler works well for us. We have good field support and if any issues come up our Xerox manager is always making sure problems are resolved.

 

[UberTech]

If you run Heavy weight paper and / or coated stock. Then I can advice you to take a close look at the specs of both machines.
Although the X700 will decrease in speed, the Konica will decrease significantly in speed either on heavy weight as coated, not to mention when is is heavy weight coated stock.

Besides that, you are used now to work with the separate drums and fuser unit. All those things should be replaced by an Konica engineer, so you have to wait for them! The X700 is alike the DC260 you own right now, with the separate drums and fuser...!!

Good luck on your decision!

Really? I think you will find the speed difference between the two is marginal so you should stop making wild assumptions now. Also, and I think this is the vox populi on removeable fusers - they belong in office machines.

 

[GusG]

Also, and I think this is the vox populi on removeable fusers - they belong in office machines.

That sound illogical to me, surely it's in a production environment that it's truly valuable to be able to do as much as possible yourself rather than having to wait hours for a technician to turn up.

 

[UberTech]

We are dealing with card hear not 100gsm paper. The fuser is a critical component to the whole operation, not just something that just sticks the toner to the paper. I'm pretty sure most x700 owners on here that aren't sales people masquerading as owners (generally they have less than a dozen posts) would agree the fuser on the X700 has been an achilles heel.

 

[X33]

would agree the fuser on the X700 has been an achilles heel.

can you elaborate more on this?

Hundreds of customers I have seen love the fact that they can replace the fuser in 2 minutes.

 

[markbird]

Update

Update

Thanks for all your comments, it seems fairly clear that so far the KM6501 and the X700 are looking like our best options. Having spoken to reps from both companies I have to say there are some points that lead me to favour the Konica at this point although I am yet to see either of them working up close to test them with our own files and stocks.

It maybe that our local KM rep is better than the Xerox one but the following features caught my attention. What does everyone think?

The points I liked about the KM6501 are:

• Our rep is throwing in Creo Darwin VDP software
• KM will train our sales staff to sell VDP
• A Spectrometer is included for colour profiling (including training)
• 1/2mm tolerance on registration (compared to 1mm with Xerox)
• Metal body for better accuracy and durability
• Cost savings (cheaper unit cost and click charge)

Any thoughts?

 

[Scott Johnson]

Canon 7000VP.
Also you need to take into consideration the companies ability to keep it running at your expectation level.
what market are you in?

 

[markbird]

Canon 7000VP.
Also you need to take into consideration the companies ability to keep it running at your expectation level.
what market are you in?

Thanks Scott, we are design and print company with a current digital print volume of around 30-50'000 a month. We've mainly had good experiences with the Xerox engineers in our area but I like the fact the KM will give me the mobile numbers of their engineers and will also send them in to provide regular preventative maintenance. We don't get this from Xerox.

Seems to me that KM have really considered the practical needs of companies such as ours. However, I need to speak to people who have used them in our area as I'm only basing this on what the sales guys are telling me. Anyone got any experience of Konica Minolta engineers in the Cardiff (UK) area?