Decent IGEN replacement

R

raminmd

Well-known member
Hi all,

This is a question that I have been grappling with for sometime now. I have spent a lot of time going through the forums but am not any closer. I am hoping you guys can help me. I recently bought the book of business from an existing business.

The business does anywhere between 60,000 to 100,000 color clicks (oversized) per month. Most of them are on 11 x 17 or 12 x 18 sheets. About 99% of everything printed is oversized. For 2008, they probably averaged around 80,000 color oversize clicks per month. Everything was printed on the IGEN. However, they had major difficulties keeping the IGEN busy. It was costing them way too much in lease, electricity etc. and their volumes were too low for the IGEN.

I need to get a replacement for the IGEN to run all the prints on. Almost all of it is flyers (8.5 x 11) or postcards (5.5 x 8.5, 4.25 x 5.5 etc.). Most of it is printed on 12 point oversized stock duplex and then cut down into the desired sizes. Quality is definitely important.

For my volumes, stocks and use which press is the better option - Imagepress or the KM 6500. From what I read, the quality for both the Canon and KM is extremely good. I ran some samples on the Canon and really liked the quality. I have not looked at depth at a KM yet. I heard that KM is not very good at front to back registration and cannot duplex 12 pt. stock. Is my understanding right? Is Canon my best bet between the two? Are there other presses in the same price range as the Canon or the KM that I can consider?

Thanks for any help.
 
Take 1 step backward with Xerox and get an DC8000AP, almost as productive as an iGen (1200/hour duplexed 12x18 300gsm) at 1/2 the cost.
 
Leaning towards the Canon 7000VP here based on your description. When we did our "Known" File benchmark test for quality the results were as follows. We asked over 200 Color Specialists in a blind comparison.

Indigo
Canon 7000VP
Xerox 8000 - (Note 8000AP was not out yet)
Kodak NextPress
Xerox iGen
Xerox 5000

The K-M unit was NOT considered due to its relative newness.

In fairness to the above machines the quality difference was not all that wide. IMO all are money makers placed in the correct environment.

ALL of the equipment has their share of internet horror stories so the internet negativity isn't all that helpful.

Also we did not have the ability in a class environment to see the quality throughout the run.

I would rule the Indigo out based on the amount of operator intervention and maintenance required.

For me the NextPress is out due to the fact I didn't like the quality, same for the Xerox 5000. NextPress seemed grainy and the 5000 had a lot of excess gloss. Highly subjective I know.

I say test the ever loving crap out of the 7000VP and 8000AP and if there isn't a clear winner pit the two vendors against each other and get the best deal you can. Make sure it's an apples to apples price war.
 
Last edited:
UberTech said:
Strange? It came out atleast 6 months before the 7000, yet that makes the list?

Check this post and ask the user as they have a IGEN and a c6500.

http://printplanet.com/forums/digit...et-web-prepress-digital-printing/5#post102694
Click to expand...

I get that they are trying to replace the iGen.

You'd have to ask Canon's Marketing Department why the K-M was not considered competition at the time as I've no idea. I'm telling you what i was told by them when I did the launch training.

For this application I don't like the K-M 6501 and that's merely an opinion. Now if you want to talk about TWO K-M 6501's and a MicroPress to drive them and you can balance color between platforms to a tolerance acceptable to the customer base then I think it's a different story.
 
I wouldn't recommend a micropress on a c6500 unless the 64-bit release is signifcantly better than the version they have now. Micropress is fantastic on B&W but when it comes to colour it struggles. Well thats what I have found on our Micropress/c6500 sites.
 
PineyBob said:
Leaning towards the Canon 7000VP here based on your description. When we did our "Known" File benchmark test for quality the results were as follows. We asked over 200 Color Specialists in a blind comparison.

-----------

Also we did not have the ability in a class environment to see the quality throuFor me the NextPress is out due to the fact I didn't like the quality, same for the Xerox 5000. NextPress seemed grainy and the 5000 had a lot of excess gloss. Highly subjective I know.

I say test the ever loving crap out of the 7000VP and 8000AP and if there isn't a clear winner pit the two vendors against each other and get the best deal you can. Make sure it's an apples to apples price war.
Click to expand...

Okay, I have to make a comment!

I'm not sure but is there something that I don't understand. There is two machines that are exactly the same, NexPress M700 and Canon Imagepress 7000VP, so how can you say that M700 quality is not equal to 7000VP?

There is two things that separates this two presses:
1. Kodak provides ORC -model (Operator Rechangeable Components) and Canon is charcing clicks.
2. Kodak is using their own RIP NexPress V Front End (the same front end is also in the digital production presses 2100S, 2500S and 3000S) and Canon is using Fiery or Creo, they don't have their own RIP (as far as i know).

NexPress V Front End has a Adobe Print Engine 1.1 and I haven't heard that there is any other RIP in digital area that has one init.

I haven't seeing much of discussion about M700 in this forum but in Finland, where I'm from, the M700 and IGEN are counted competitors mainly because of ORC model.

:cool:
 
raminmd said:
Hi all,

This is a question that I have been grappling with for sometime now. I have spent a lot of time going through the forums but am not any closer. I am hoping you guys can help me. I recently bought the book of business from an existing business.

The business does anywhere between 60,000 to 100,000 color clicks (oversized) per month. Most of them are on 11 x 17 or 12 x 18 sheets. About 99% of everything printed is oversized. For 2008, they probably averaged around 80,000 color oversize clicks per month. Everything was printed on the IGEN. However, they had major difficulties keeping the IGEN busy. It was costing them way too much in lease, electricity etc. and their volumes were too low for the IGEN.

I need to get a replacement for the IGEN to run all the prints on. Almost all of it is flyers (8.5 x 11) or postcards (5.5 x 8.5, 4.25 x 5.5 etc.). Most of it is printed on 12 point oversized stock duplex and then cut down into the desired sizes. Quality is definitely important.

For my volumes, stocks and use which press is the better option - Imagepress or the KM 6500. From what I read, the quality for both the Canon and KM is extremely good. I ran some samples on the Canon and really liked the quality. I have not looked at depth at a KM yet. I heard that KM is not very good at front to back registration and cannot duplex 12 pt. stock. Is my understanding right? Is Canon my best bet between the two? Are there other presses in the same price range as the Canon or the KM that I can consider?

Thanks for any help.
Click to expand...

Take a look to the new Xerox 700 Digital Press... I believe can be a good fit for your needs.
 
Raminmd needs a replacement to an iGen, he clearly stated his volumes are 80 to 100K/month of over sized sheets. Plus he is running 12pt cover DUPLEXED. No way will a Xerox 700, Konica Minolta 6501 or any other entry level production unit fill his needs! That would be like going from a Hummer H1 to a Toyota Rav4.

Your options are limited and unfortunately they will be expensive.
Xerox 8000AP
Canon 7000VP
Nexpress M700
Nexpress 2500 (cost as much as a iGen)
Indigo 3500 (requires more maintenance)

My opinion would be lean towards the 7000VP/M700 or the 8000AP. Your volumes/stocks are what I am averaging on my 8000AP, and I am having no problems making money with it!
 
raminmd said:
However, they had major difficulties keeping the IGEN busy. It was costing them way too much in lease, electricity etc. and their volumes were too low for the IGEN.
Click to expand...

I don't know how far down the road you are, but just thinking outside the box here.

If they knew what the costs would be going in, isn't the real problem that their volumes are lower than they expected/wanted? What if they could achieve volumes that would justify the iGen? What percent increase would make it worthwhile? It would certainly be more seamless than swapping equipment.
 
Todd Bernhard said:
I don't know how far down the road you are, but just thinking outside the box here.

If they knew what the costs would be going in, isn't the real problem that their volumes are lower than they expected/wanted? What if they could achieve volumes that would justify the iGen? What percent increase would make it worthwhile? It would certainly be more seamless than swapping equipment.
Click to expand...

Good point Todd! Leave it to a software guy to point out the obvious to all us "Iron Heads"
 
PineyBob said:
Good point Todd! Leave it to a software guy to point out the obvious to all us "Iron Heads"
Click to expand...


:)

well, it just set off an alert to me, as we have (forgive the crass commercial message) lots of customers who HAVE ADDED iGens BECAUSE of the increase in volume. WebCRD customers typically increase volume 30% to as much as 400%, for a very quick ROI. Now back to your commercial-free messages!
 
Craig said:
Raminmd needs a replacement to an iGen, he clearly stated his volumes are 80 to 100K/month of over sized sheets. Plus he is running 12pt cover DUPLEXED. No way will a Xerox 700, Konica Minolta 6501 or any other entry level production unit fill his needs! That would be like going from a Hummer H1 to a Toyota Rav4.

Your options are limited and unfortunately they will be expensive.
Xerox 8000AP
Canon 7000VP
Nexpress M700
Nexpress 2500 (cost as much as a iGen)
Indigo 3500 (requires more maintenance)

My opinion would be lean towards the 7000VP/M700 or the 8000AP. Your volumes/stocks are what I am averaging on my 8000AP, and I am having no problems making money with it!
Click to expand...

atleast he took the 5000 out. The choice is obviouse between these machines 2 x 6501 :)
 
Todd Bernhard said:
If they knew what the costs would be going in, isn't the real problem that their volumes are lower than they expected/wanted? What if they could achieve volumes that would justify the iGen? What percent increase would make it worthwhile? It would certainly be more seamless than swapping equipment.
Click to expand...

750,000-2,000,000 A4 is a good target range for the i-Gen, they like to run if they get less they have problems.They can do less but then you also have a underutilized machine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Marks Lead Edge to Trail Edge
2
Replies
28
Views
701
REHSR
R
E
Announcement cards - which printer and cutter/trimmer?
Replies
13
Views
1253
Craig
Craig
R
Nexfinity vs Iridesse Vs Igen
2 3
Replies
40
Views
6110
raminmd
R
jpfulton248
Xerox D125 Alignment
Replies
13
Views
1511
jpfulton248
jpfulton248
S
buying new digital production machine KMC7090/KMC12000/Canon V1000/RicohC9200
Replies
12
Views
1869
sweedanartpress
S

PressWise

A 30-day Fix for Managed Chaos

As any print professional knows, printing can be managed chaos. Software that solves multiple problems and provides measurable and monetizable value has a direct impact on the bottom-line.

“We reduced order entry costs by about 40%.” Significant savings in a shop that turns about 500 jobs a month.

Learn how…….

   
Back
Top