Copier purchase

[superhawkman]

We are looking at a replacment for our Canon IR 7086 copier. The finalists are the Sharp MX1100 and the Oce' 4110/4120. We complete 400,000 copies per month 8.5x11 8.5x14 usually duplex. The Oce' seems like a much better machine from a user standpoint as well it seems better built. Any feedback would be helpful!

Thanks in advance !

 

[Craig]

Check into the Konica Minolta 1200. We just replaced a Ricoh MP9000 which is similar to the Sharp MX1100 with a 1200. The two machines are night and day. We had 15MM in that Ricoh and it was totally SHOT!

 

[Gconley]

Disclaimer: I work as a sales rep for Oce.

With respect to buying a production b/w unit, it often surprises me that more users don't ask about the engine's life expectancy, and get that in writing. There are a lot of great units out there that can't hold up long term to the consistent needs. As an example, the a popular 105ppm light production unit was a great engine that was marketed with a recommended duty cycle of 500,000 to 1,000,000 per month; yet the service recommendation on this system was that it was expected to last to 15 million impressions total. If you do the math, these numbers don't all work together.

Figure out what life expectancy you need from the engine, and get that in writing from the service department. That way, you won't just have two or three years of happy usage, you'll meet your expectations.

good luck! and yes, the Oce engine is outstanding... but do your homework, don't take my word for it.

 

[OkiTech]

Hi. As previously mentioned Sharp 1100 is a Ricoh built, if you decide to go for it, might as well get it from ricoh for a simple reason that it's service codes are still ricoh and sharp would have to send you a specially trained tech as regular guys would not be comfortable around different service mode structure. Some Oce machines are capable of imaging both sides of paper in one pass which is a great advantage - less heat stress on paper and it will not slow down in duplex so it might be a better choice. Keep in mind- normally machines slow-down more than twice while duplexing so OCE may be a better fit if you print a lot of 2 sided documents.

 

[TOprint]

Just for clarity, to the best of my knowledge, the Toshiba high volume BW machines are re-badged Ricoh's. Sharp manufacturer's their own units. Have a look at the units, the Toshiba and Ricoh look identical and the Sharp is completely different.

 

[msaeger]

Toshiba is a rebadged Ricoh the Sharp is something else.

 

[[email protected]]

Just curious what you went with.

A lot of the recommended monthly volumes and other related numbers are wishy washy hogwash and bullsh*t. And yes they never really seem to add up!

I've seen many 120ppm+ machines that should have had an engine life as stated in the 30million+ range but for some odd reason no one would ever hang on to them after about 5-10 million pages if that.

Then there's the sales crap. For some reason the manufacturers would rate a machine for a million a month but tell their sales rep to sell that machine to the people doing half a million or so a month. The general sales rule was take the monthly recommended volume and cut it in half. Sure, that's viable to account for growth but as soon as the customer pushes the recommended monthly volume as stated by the manufacturer the techs, sales, and manufacturer reps state oh you should only do that volume one or two months out of the year. Rrrrrrriiiiiight.

Then again, take one of my all time favorite mid volume machines. The Canon IR550/600 machines. They're a bit dated now but there's still a lot of them out there. The engine life on those little beauty beasts was 20million+. Every one I ever came across was under 3 million on the meter. Why? Because the manufacturers and sales reps oversell and want you to buy a new box. There's little money in rebuilding and reusing. The truth is on the IR600 for instance about every 2-3 million pages you figured you'd need to put about $1,000 in rollers, pm kits, a $1000 developer unit, and every other time a $1200 drum. Which if you add it up is pretty f*ckin outstanding for a 60ppm office grade machine.

But nobody ever wants to fully use a machine for what it's really capable of. Sad thing is 99% of people end up getting rid of a "best machine ever" and replace it with something cheaper without even knowing it.

The technicians are the best source for realistic information on the machines expected performance!

 

[OkiTech]

Yeah IR550-600 was not a bad machine, but I found 6020 to be an improvement especially if you print to it and file processing time is important. Also while looked bulky and strong a Document feeder had strange issues way too often and feed rollers where irreplaceable - buried under pretty much everything, plus new technology where paper moves trough ADF and scanner standing still has proven to put less wear on the machine. Biggest problem with IR550-600 would be no Drivers for anything past Windows XP and as far as service life expectations, you're right - IR105 seems to be built on the same platform so it must be strong.

 

[OkiTech]

But on other hand - we bought Ricoh MP9000 with 800,000 clicks, added another 2 mil in less than a year and spent less than 1000 on parts. It has it's moments and flaws I have found that putting a new fresh drum every 400,000 clicks that cost $200 better than one $1200 every million clicks or so, also Ricoh is Developer Carrier based - means I have to change developer while in Canon there is no Carrier, I found dense solids printed juicier than out of canons... User interface, Ricoh MP9000driver beats Canon IR550/600 even 6020 hand down. Don't get me wrong - I am not a Ricoh dealer nor seller, nor lover - we haven't sold a single ricoh in 10 yeas in service business - mostly HP and canon. Canon is great for office use, in graphic arts Developer/carrier machines, in my opinion, give better results.

 

[[email protected]]

Most people would probably say that the IR5000/5020/6000/6020 was the best machine Canon ever made. I still look for them to refurb and put in offices but it's so hard to find any let alone in any volume.

Now I know compared to true production machines the IR550/600 is not in the same league but I tell ya I have had them run for a solid 8 hour shift before with only a few jams. Tax office that did their own local paper marketing inserts wanted 60,000 done in a few days. So I said fire it up, roll it in front of the air conditioner and rubber rejuvenate the rollers and bam, off she went. True that graphics wasn't as great because of the machine resolution. The finisher wasn't made for thousands and thousands so you'd have to empty it frequently. It was one of the last before Canon went cheaper plastic on us.

The IR105 is practically identical but did have issues because of it's speed. The 7105 fixed some things but had a laser unit defect so those had to be field updated. The IR105 does still hold its price on second hand markets.

Yeah IR550-600 was not a bad machine, but I found 6020 to be an improvement especially if you print to it and file processing time is important. Also while looked bulky and strong a Document feeder had strange issues way too often and feed rollers where irreplaceable - buried under pretty much everything, plus new technology where paper moves trough ADF and scanner standing still has proven to put less wear on the machine. Biggest problem with IR550-600 would be no Drivers for anything past Windows XP and as far as service life expectations, you're right - IR105 seems to be built on the same platform so it must be strong.

 

[[email protected]]

I do like the real high end Ricohs. They can run and run. I think some people get bad ones or bad service techs...makes a big difference.

At a minimum though I always clean my equipment once a week and on machines for sale I turn them on and run them once a week to prevent flatspots on rollers and keep them moving and gears lubed, etc. I found that out the hard way. Maybe that's why I've had good luck with most of my machines.

But on other hand - we bought Ricoh MP9000 with 800,000 clicks, added another 2 mil in less than a year and spent less than 1000 on parts. It has it's moments and flaws I have found that putting a new fresh drum every 400,000 clicks that cost $200 better than one $1200 every million clicks or so, also Ricoh is Developer Carrier based - means I have to change developer while in Canon there is no Carrier, I found dense solids printed juicier than out of canons... User interface, Ricoh MP9000driver beats Canon IR550/600 even 6020 hand down. Don't get me wrong - I am not a Ricoh dealer nor seller, nor lover - we haven't sold a single ricoh in 10 yeas in service business - mostly HP and canon. Canon is great for office use, in graphic arts Developer/carrier machines, in my opinion, give better results.