Best digital printer for cardstock

Abie

Member
Hi,

Our printshop is new to digital printing and I was hoping maybe someone could indicate what might be a good choice for large run b/w printing of white cardstock from a weight of 12pt up to 16 pt, c1s and c2s, both in simplex and duplex printing, using 13x19 sheets, at a reasonable click cost using a reliable printer or press?

Thank you in advance, Abie
 

gregbatch

Well-known member
Absolutely, though all major brands have good color offerings for the stocks you mention. We are extremely happy with Ricoh color because of the wide variety of stocks it can handle, especially heavy textures. The 8210/8220 is the only B/W I've seen that gives a high quality image on glossy stock that you would expect only from a color machine. That with the ability to handle 13x19 is the reason for my recommendation. KM doesn't do 13x19. Xerox doesn't do as nice of an image on glossy stock. I have no recent experience with Canon/Oce.
 

Abie

Member
Thank you for your input. You have encouraged me to visit my local Ricoh dealer for a demo. At the same time though I noticed that KM has the updated and highly rated AccurioPress C6100 which also allows for 13x19 sheets and comes with their "IQ-501 Intelligent Quality Optimizer" which they claim maintains accurate registration. As such, between the two choices, which do you believe might perform better in the long run with fewer issues to deal with over the many years of expected use (i.e. jams, general breakdowns, lack of tech support, etc)?
 

gregbatch

Well-known member
Both the C6100 and Ricoh 7200 are good machines. The KM edges out the Ricoh by 5 on speed. I don't know the price of the C6100. It may be closer to the Ricoh 9100 which would be faster at 115. Look at both and consider the service teams for each. That is just as important as the machine. I can say that user replaceable units on the Ricoh have greatly reduced downtime.
 

ksherrod

Well-known member
Thank you for your input. You have encouraged me to visit my local Ricoh dealer for a demo. At the same time though I noticed that KM has the updated and highly rated AccurioPress C6100 which also allows for 13x19 sheets and comes with their "IQ-501 Intelligent Quality Optimizer" which they claim maintains accurate registration. As such, between the two choices, which do you believe might perform better in the long run with fewer issues to deal with over the many years of expected use (i.e. jams, general breakdowns, lack of tech support, etc)?
I've recently demoed the C6100 and 7210x. Quality-wise, they are both in the same ballpark. KM has more of an "enamel-like" quality to their toner...very shiny. Reminds me of how digital prints used to look before they quit using fuser oil, but without the streaks obviously. It looks "good" on its own, but if you don't like shiny, or are trying to match offset, it may not be your thing. In my testing, I give a very slight edge to 7210x registration, I thought this was as near perfect as I'd ever seen. C6100 was fine and certainly acceptable, but the Ricoh was better. The Ricoh certainly feels more operator friendly as well, in terms of user serviceability.

Cost wise, the C6100 is more like a 9200 in terms of price, somewhere around 10-15% higher than the 7210x. However, in my proposals, the click charge is more attractive on the C6100 and the 9200 than the 7210x. If you run a lot of volume and could use more speed, don't care about fifth color, then the 9200 might make more sense.
 

wonderings

Well-known member
The Versant series from Xerox is solid and you get some perks being able to print envelopes on top of normal printing on card stocks and text weight stocks.

We have a Versant 2100 that has been fantastic. It is a full width array which allows for internal colour calibration as well as alignment calibration which has made this all so simple and easy when it needs to be adjusted.

I would say whatever you do go right to the manufacturers and talk to a salesmen for your area, cuts out the middle man of a reseller. We ran full jobs digitally on demo machines from both Canon and Xerox when looking in the past and is the best way to go really. You see how a real job will perform and get an idea of what you will be getting into with digital.

Click price is something negotiable to a certain degree. You will want a machine with a service plan, no matter what machine you have there will be hiccups and weird things that need work. We generally have service in every 2 to 3 months.

The big thing for us with our digital was consistent colour and alignment, probably the big things for just about everyone. Alignment used to be an issue and was a pain in the butt to make adjustments to line things for front to back. I only know how simple it is now on our Versant, I am sure Ricoh, Canon and the rest of great tools as well, just cannot speak to them about it.

Or colour has been very consistent, have had jobs I do a reprint on 6 months later and colours are almost bang on. That was a dream on previous machines, I dreaded re prints where colour consistency matter.
 

Abie

Member
Thank you. I called the Big Four (KM, Xerox, Ricoh, Canon) for demos and aside from KM I have yet to hear back from the rest. I liked a lot the KM Accurio C6100 and the few tests we ran came out beautifully even when printing in duplex on 20pt stock. The click charge was interesting at $04.4 for color and $0.02 for black, with parts and labor included for seven years. Although it seems like a photocopier on steroids, I believe it can hold up over time and the KM service support would be there to see it through.

I should add that in December we purchased a four year old refurbished MGI Meteor DP8700XL with just under four million clicks which was installed end of January, and unfortunately it has been a dissapointment unitl now due to non stop error codes and constant jams, which is why we are in the market for a better option. The dealer we bought it from hasn't been able to get it to work properly up to now (although I give them an A for effort), and today we gave them one last chance to get it up to factory specs by weeks end, failing which we will have no choice but to swap it for one of the suggestions above.

One of the main advantages we found with the MGI is that it's more of an industrial type machine, as well as the "pay as you go" system regarding toner, which for mostly black printing which is what we do would put us ahead of the game, or so we believe. Thinking out loud, even if the MGI starts to work properly, it might still be wise to have another press such as the suggested Ricoh 8220 so that we would always be in production, especially given that 90% of what we print is Next Day Service.

I appreciate all the great advise offered here. Thank you
 

AP90

Well-known member
Thank you. I called the Big Four (KM, Xerox, Ricoh, Canon) for demos and aside from KM I have yet to hear back from the rest. I liked a lot the KM Accurio C6100 and the few tests we ran came out beautifully even when printing in duplex on 20pt stock. The click charge was interesting at $04.4 for color and $0.02 for black, with parts and labor included for seven years. Although it seems like a photocopier on steroids, I believe it can hold up over time and the KM service support would be there to see it through.

I should add that in December we purchased a four year old refurbished MGI Meteor DP8700XL with just under four million clicks which was installed end of January, and unfortunately it has been a dissapointment unitl now due to non stop error codes and constant jams, which is why we are in the market for a better option. The dealer we bought it from hasn't been able to get it to work properly up to now (although I give them an A for effort), and today we gave them one last chance to get it up to factory specs by weeks end, failing which we will have no choice but to swap it for one of the suggestions above.

One of the main advantages we found with the MGI is that it's more of an industrial type machine, as well as the "pay as you go" system regarding toner, which for mostly black printing which is what we do would put us ahead of the game, or so we believe. Thinking out loud, even if the MGI starts to work properly, it might still be wise to have another press such as the suggested Ricoh 8220 so that we would always be in production, especially given that 90% of what we print is Next Day Service.

I appreciate all the great advise offered here. Thank you
I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure a MGI Metor is just a KM box repackaged and a few bells and whistles added to make it do thicker stocks. Honestly, haven't ever really heard of a positive experience with MGI Metor's on here. Don't think many people have them.
 

gregbatch

Well-known member
Our Ricoh 9100 was .036 and .0078. US. You can always get a service contract without toner included. In our case we average .4% coverage on our B/W, so we come out way ahead by buying the toner outright.
 

Abie

Member
I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure a MGI Metor is just a KM box repackaged and a few bells and whistles added to make it do thicker stocks. Honestly, haven't ever really heard of a positive experience with MGI Metor's on here. Don't think many people have them.
I wish I knew this before. We thought we were getting a good deal on an industrial press ($95K CAN). Even when I called MGI USA for advise on getting the machine to work, they were aggressive, rude and refused to answer any questions defering instead to the dealer. Quite an eye opener indeed.
 

Abie

Member
Our Ricoh 9100 was .036 and .0078. US. You can always get a service contract without toner included. In our case we average .4% coverage on our B/W, so we come out way ahead by buying the toner outright.
Where might be a good place to purchase toner from?
 

Abie

Member
So, further to my search for the right printer for our 13x19 350 gsm cardstock (10,000 sheets per month, approximately 80% in black), I have set up demos this Thursday with both Canon and Konica Minolta to view their printers. Each of course is praising their machines, the Canon C650 and the KM C3080, and each promises that their printer will perform flawlessly.

What I asked is that they demonstrate the ability fpr their printer to handle as thick a cardboard stock as possible without getting into trouble (i.e. jams, error codes, etc.), in both simplex and duplex mode. The printing on both are probably good and so I'm not very concerned about that.

I further indicated to both that not only do I not have a need for finishing units such as staplers, folders, scanners, etc., I would prefer they weren't even installed.

As such, I was wondering if anyone had an opinon on either the printers, the companies and also what would constitute a fair and comprehensive demonstration that would leave me convinced which is the better printer for our needs?

I should also add that the reps from both companies were really involved and responsive to any and all queries.
 

gregbatch

Well-known member
A fair and comprehensive demonstration would be to bring a couple of cartons of your own paper and your files to each demo and give each a good run. Check each for image quality (first to last sheet), registration (on sheet, sheet-to-sheet, and front to back), and see how long they can run without a jam. If they do jam, which machine is easier to clear and get back up and running? If each proves worthy, in the end it is your personal preference on which delivers the image you are most happy with and which one you feel most comfortable operating. Which is easier to correct when things are NOT right?
 

pippip

Well-known member
Also, ignore the first sheet off the machines each time or any single sheets they show you.
Look at the subsequent sheets as with heavier stock it will show up any banding lines or imperfections that will appear in an actual print run.
 

So You Want to Invest In Inkjet

I Want to Invest in Inkjet, But…
Over the past few years I’ve watched a group of transactional and direct mail printers strategically shift from monochrome toner machines to full-color toner and inkjet presses. Most banished old black-only toner boxes but kept their color toner devices around because they anticipated needing both color inkjet and toner presses to meet customer needs. They were right then and continue to be right today. Because toner and inkjet can be better together. Read the Post

   
Top