KM 6501 duty cycle - FYI

[lfelton]

Just a warning, as this is one thing we missed when purchasing a 6501 system 7:- the total "supported" life of a 6501 is 3.5 million impressions (A3/SRA3, or 7 million A4). After this point KM will not guarantee that your machine will work at all and consider that the machine has reached the end of its useful life. I have this information from a senior level within KM and I am waiting to get it in writing, but it appears that you may not be able to get service at all beyond 3.5 million clicks.

If run at the rated duty cycle, the machine will therefore last for just under 2 years.

I certainly feel that this should have been made clear earlier and we've cancelled our plans to purchase a second machine.

 

[St.Nicholas Press]

KM officials at DRUPA2008 said it`s about 5 million clicks.

 

[Craig]

Just a warning, as this is one thing we missed when purchasing a 6501 system 7:- the total "supported" life of a 6501 is 3.5 million impressions (A3/SRA3, or 7 million A4). After this point KM will not guarantee that your machine will work at all and consider that the machine has reached the end of its useful life. I have this information from a senior level within KM and I am waiting to get it in writing, but it appears that you may not be able to get service at all beyond 3.5 million clicks.

If run at the rated duty cycle, the machine will therefore last for just under 2 years.

I certainly feel that this should have been made clear earlier and we've cancelled our plans to purchase a second machine.

Ooops, that's not production level performance. Even if it was 5 million that's not a lot better if you have a 5 year lease. I wonder if Random could clarify what the actual number is?

 

[random]

News to me - you call I fix.

Hang on sec - you run 150k a month? This has now put you off buying another one because why? You intend on doing 300k per month? You probably need to find a different product altogether if you are running 300k per month as those sort of volumes (unless variable) would not be profitable on a c6500.

My highest volume machine runs about 1.6m per year and I fully expect them to land at 6million buy the end of the contract at which stage we will have the 80 pager. Anyways we will guarantee your machine for as long as you pay the bill!!!

I can't say I have heard of a contact that goes by volume (except maybe a car) rather than time.

 

[lfelton]

@Random

Maybe my original post did not make this clear enough?

If you run 150K SRA3 impressions per month you will reach 3.5M impressions in just over 23 months. At this point your machine has reached the end of it's KM designated life span. If you didn't know this, then that does not surprise me as it was news to me post-sale as well.

I don't understand your point regarding higher volumes not being profitable. We now do about 100,000 SRA3 impressions a month digitally and certainly plan on growth. I'd provisionally planned on another 6501 system 7 in Jan/Feb, i.e. keeping well within it's duty cycle. I think you are missing the issue here - which is that the total life span is low and this is not made clear to customers.

For people who pay the bills; we have to be able to plan on, and have a level of trust in, the numbers given to us by a supplier. We need to know that within a given time frame a machine will print to a certain standard and that the supplier will come and fix it if it breaks.

To be blunt; it does not matter what you personally post. What matters is what the printer has in their contract with K-M.



@St.Nicholas

5 million must have been for the 6500. The newer 6501 is definately 7 million (i.e. I have that in writing). Bear in mind that this is A4 clicks, so an A3 or SRA3 will halve this number. So, the correct figure is 3.5 million SRA3 for the 6501.

 

[St.Nicholas Press]

@Random

Maybe my original post did not make this clear enough?

If you run 150K SRA3 impressions per month you will reach 3.5M impressions in just over 23 months. At this point your machine has reached the end of it's KM designated life span. If you didn't know this, then that does not surprise me as it was news to me post-sale as well.

I don't understand your point regarding higher volumes not being profitable. We now do about 100,000 SRA3 impressions a month digitally and certainly plan on growth. I'd provisionally planned on another 6501 system 7 in Jan/Feb, i.e. keeping well within it's duty cycle. I think you are missing the issue here - which is that the total life span is low and this is not made clear to customers.

For people who pay the bills; we have to be able to plan on, and have a level of trust in, the numbers given to us by a supplier. We need to know that within a given time frame a machine will print to a certain standard and that the supplier will come and fix it if it breaks.

To be blunt; it does not matter what you personally post. What matters is what the printer has in their contract with K-M.



@St.Nicholas

5 million must have been for the 6500. The newer 6501 is definately 7 million (i.e. I have that in writing). Bear in mind that this is A4 clicks, so an A3 or SRA3 will halve this number. So, the correct figure is 3.5 million SRA3 for the 6501.

RIGHT, it said for 6500

MAX. MONTHLY COPY VOLUME 300.000 copies/prints
AVERAGE MONTHLY COPY VOLUME 35.000 – 75.000
MACHINE LIFE 5 Million images or 5 years (whichever comes first)

 

[Craig]

I would expect that KM would keep servicing your machine if and when it runs over the 3.5m mark, but at a much higher click charge. It wouldn't make sence for them to call you up one day and say that even though you still have 2 years of lease payments, we will no longer service your box. I think that may be what Random was referring to by saying high volumes would not be profitable, the click charges would be too high for maintenance.

On the other hand I fully understand and agree with your post. If they are selling a production box they should be up front with the numbers! This just reinforces my opinion regarding the KM 6500's, they are an office copier that will do VERY LIGHT production. In the end you get what you pay for, there is a reason why these (not just KM, but Xerox, Ricoh, Canon, Sharp...) "entry level production" color devices are so affordable, they are not built to last in the production world.

Manufactures are shooting themselves in the foot buy marketing these boxes as something they aren't. All they are going to do is turn off customers who may buy a larger box in the future. Why get burned twice? Ifelton and myself are perfect examples. That's why I have VERY LITTLE RESPECT for copier salesmen, they don't give a crap about what happens after you sign on the bottom line! Sure a Xerox 242 or a KM 6500 or a Canon CLC will print 100,000 a month, but will it do it month in and month out..... NO! At least without folks like Random invading your shop to keep them together on a regular basis. (Not a slam on Random, more like a pat on the back for all service people who have to pick up after sales).

 

[MrTonka]

Duty Cycle

Duty Cycle

Anyone know what the monthly duty cycle is on the Canon C6000VP & C7000VP??

 

[random]

Can't beleave someone posted this on a website but for those who want to know the differences between a c6500 and a c6501 from a marketing perspective here it is Copytechnet.com. I think slide 6 is quite interesting and shows konica don't have a real grasp on xerox, or they take the spin as fact.

For example DC12 prints as good as a 8000? I know a DC12 is good, but that good? Also the IGEN prints better than a 8000. I have heard the IGEN isn't that great someone must have compared prints off each?

 

[Craig]

The iGen does in fact print better than the 8000 depending on the substrate. I have seen prints from a DC12 and I will say that the KM6500 and 8000AP definitely look better. Random I will bow down and say on uncoated paper the 6500 does have a nice print, I personally nor do my customers like the extra matte look on coated sheets. (I have samples from a 6500)

 

[random]

ummmm, ahhhhhhh, duhhhhhh, ahhhhhh, ummmmmm really? Were the prints calibrated to the coated stock or do you think regardless of calibration it will always look too matte?

 

[Craig]

ummmm, ahhhhhhh, duhhhhhh, ahhhhhh, ummmmmm you'll have to asked the KM folks at GraphExpo. If they didn't then they had no business with samples on coated. Shame on them! Also when compared to the QP magazine they were very much alike.

This is not a slam on the 6500, just an observation of the prints on coated paper, especially with large solids. Again on uncoated it looks fine.

 

[Island]

I just had sample prints run on a xerox 242 and a 5501 (lower end machines, but the same toner and fusers as their bigger brothers respectively).

The KM looked more natural to me on uncoated 24# bond with a more satin image and gloss differential didn't appear until looking at the prints from a much lower abnormal angle.

The xerox had more gloss differential where the toner shined too much in black or dark areas on the uncoated stock and made the xerox prints on uncoated look "cheaper" and more "copier like".

However the samples I had run on gloss were the reverse -- the KM toner stayed too flat and gave it a very digital look on gloss stock with the black and very dark areas standing out as much too flat.

The xerox toner on kromekote looked great - not imagepress quality gloss and not nearly offset qualty gloss evenness, but very very very good to my eye for this $ printer and 100% better than the KM on gloss stock to my eye.

 

[Craig]

Solution, a KM6500 for uncoated and a Xerox 700 for coated!

 

[Whygen]

The KM 6501e with the latest Creo IC304+ RIP has a superior output to the 6500 ...please do the tests...

BUT i have also found out about the life time duty cycle of the KM and am worried that we may too exceed the life expectancy of the press but I was also told that if the machine became useless due to us taking it beyond its life expectancy we would have it replaced at no charge.....
Also aware that the KM 80ppm machine is due to launch summer 2010 so plan to replace then anyway. Done the figures and think its better to run 2 x KM's for the next couple of years than spend A LOT more cash on the opposition which will also probably be out of date in a couple of years....

 

[Craig]

BUT i have also found out about the life time duty cycle of the KM and am worried that we may too exceed the life expectancy of the press but I was also told that if the machine became useless due to us taking it beyond its life expectancy we would have it replaced at no charge.....

Again, get it writing, signed by as many KM folks as you can. Just sounds too good to be true.

 

[geoman]

Hi everyone, do any of you have the Custoimer Expectation Document for the 6501? (I have the CED for the 6500 but not for the 01(

Any help you be appreciated.

 

[random]

Can you post the one for the c6500?

 

[Zubaz]

Two 6501's is better than one of the big boys in my biased opinion, because while completing a PM on one device (usually 2.5 hours for every 200K) the other device can be running full throttle. Not a bad deal at all when compared to the $100,000 + you may spend for one device from other manufacturers and the 4-6 hours I've heard it takes to complete a PM.

The one thing I tell my partners, and it seems like people on here have the same understanding, is that the device (whether Xerox, Canon or KM) is only as good as the people and service organization supporting it. It really grinds my gears when I hear about issues people are having on their devices because I know in most instances it's due to poorly trained service techs or lack of training for end users. Every manufacturer has issues but printers are looking for the best value, especially in this economy when more and more companies are printing in-house, marketing/advertising via the net or not at all.

From my experience, printers are looking for products that allow their organizations to increase their offerings, maintain high quality output and increase their margins thus providing a better value to their customers.

For any future acquisitions, no matter who the manufacturer, if you can find a service organization who has private label financing with a performance guarantee in the lease agreement, who is knowledgeable about the product and software that goes along with it and who is proactive in staying on the bleeding edge of emerging trends in the industry then you will have a partnership that will allow you to grow and competitively compete with any of the big boys.

It also creates a win-win situation where you aren't tied to a third party leasing agent, where your vendors hands are tied, and your locally owned KM vendor will likely upgrade you to the 80 ppm and do a complete reman on the 65 and sell it to a smaller print for pay with volumes more appropriate for the device.

Any smart buyer should know that all manufactures blow up their duty cycles to absorbent amounts and that the sweet spot for most devices is roughly around 1/3 of the rated duty cycle. Which brings me back to 2-3 6501's as opposed to one of the big boys. Whygen knows what up!! Are you working with a locally owned vendor Whygen?

In reference to Ikon, Xerox or any national dealer for that matter, they're job is to move boxes and increase market share and typically when the clock strikes 5 they're heading home. Not to mention the amount of turnover. Local vendors go to sleep with the same worries you do because your business is their livelihood and their ability to service and support your device will have a large effect on your success.

 

[Rooster]

Pro C900

Pro C900

If you are worried by duty cycles and PM times and have the volume why not look at the Ricoh pro C900?

Duty cycle : Average 240k pe rmonth
Max duty: 400k per month

You can also do some of the PM work your self to save on downtime.

The investment is certainly less than 2 x KM6501 light production devices.....it is a production press!