Battle of the 400

[Shredder]

I have been trying to read reviews of the various machines capable of 400+ gsm. Can anyone give any anecdotal experience with their machines when running 350+ gsm stock consistently? I have spent years shoving heavy stocks that were beyond capacity of my machines to the point I bought an Oki C911 just for heavy stock (the only machine I knew about 5 years ago that was capable of 360 gsm stock).

It seems like a dream to be able to run 400 gsm stock day in and day out esp through a vacuum paper feed. The stock we use is close to cardboard in terms of stiffness. When I would run it through the Oki it almost felt like we were damaging the unit even though it was rated for it.

I already bought a Konica Minolta C6100 but haven't set it up yet. I didn't spend time comparing it to other machines and couldn't find much info online. Our company has been a KM user for 25+ years. I do like how KM doesn't require minimums and is much easier to work with. I just wish their service contracts were cheaper so I don't run thousands of dollars per month in fees. I can't imagine toner costs being over $200/month for 100k sheets.

 

[Puch]

We had a KM C1085 for five years (sold it 3 months ago), which printed onto 350gsm without any problems. I remember long print runs taking 3-4 hours, where the only stop were paper feeding and automatic calibration. No jams, no misfeeds (using a high capacity vacuum feeder).

 

[pacart]

We have put millions of impressions onto our KM C1100 and have run 16pt in it, about 350gsm give or take. I runs great 1 sided, sometimes we have trouble duplexing, just depends on the coverage. We are awaiting our new 6100 and will be putting the 400gsm in it, so we'll see. The best thing about the 1100 was that it wasn't supposed to slow down with the higher weight paper, so I hope the 6100 is the same.

 

[Shredder]

Yeah im trying to run 18 point (356 gsm) and may do 22pt (400 gsm) soon.

 

[Shredder]

I came across this article:
Konica vs Ricoh: A Drastic Difference Between Costs

It's got me thinking. Not sure if this is sales man doubts trying to sell their equipment or if this is something true. I do know that ultimately I would love a machine that was self serviceable. Not requiring serviceman or service contracts.

 

[Puch]

I came across this article:
Konica vs Ricoh: A Drastic Difference Between Costs

It's a shame that such biased "article" can be published. After bashing Konica because of its use of 'proprietary' imager in its machines, I'm really missing the info about Ricoh's imager. Is that available in the grocery shop at the corner, for pennies?

 

[Mr Production Print]

I've just read that article. My company sells both KM and Ricoh and it's complete nonsense. In fact, we find KM parts are a little cheaper but conversely those said parts don't last quite as long. It evens out.

 

[jdodoubleg]

Well now you can get the Ricoh 9210 that will do 450gsm, so there is that.