KM C4065 & C3080 lots s/s paper banner prints

[billp]

In March the service agreement on our old but trusty C1060 concludes, (I believe they can't wait).

Looking to purchase a C3080 or C4065, or if affordable C4070... even a C6085. (Ricoh 7200 dark horse). Refurb preferred.

We predominantly print 80gsm banners; 900x320mm s/s cmyk, 15-20k pm. Plus about 5k SRA3 on 128 or 300gsm coated.

We've rigged up a very simple jig to hold up to x200 of the 900x320mm sheets, it lines the paper up and into the bypass feeder tray, as if had a long extension arm. The jig sits on top of the LU202.

Likewise we rigged up a very simple catch tray extension from corflute with supporting legs, & can usually print 100 sheets before needing to remove them. It's a hands on affair to but I dont believe the PF-812 (900mm) paper deck is available with any of our (budget) contenders.

For us this process works adequately, the prints sometimes skew a 1 or 2mm but thats ok. We can generally manage 750/hour.

A C14000/12000/C7090 with PF-812 deck would be nice but idk if their economics match our budget.

I would greatly appreciate any feedback regarding similar 'hands on' banner printing you may have done or seen on one of the machines we're considering. Perhaps you've tried unsuccessfully, or knowing these machines much better than I do could hunch a guess that it may, or may not work on them also. I'm not sure senior KM staff would give us the nod to demo our garage workaround in their showroom.

Some other very helpful advice would be any pointers on if I should expect our click charge to increase dramatically, at least for banners? During the Y toner shortage I used KM's C14000 & was advised "each of these are normally x3 clicks", I came to believe we have a pretty sweet deal, a single rate for b/w (1c) & a single rate for col. (Rhymes with Rick's). fwiw we're sorta near Auckland.


Appreciate any helpful ideas, thanks Bill

and based on kslights advice I think that means we should ensure the machine is rated for an average >50k prints per month ie not C4065 (& read the contract & CED closely!)

 

[Ynot_UK]

In March the service agreement on our fairly trusty C1060 concludes, (I believe they can't wait).

Looking to purchase (bank loan) a C3080 or C4065, or if affordable C4080 even a C1085. (c7200 dark horse) Refurb preferred if specs suits.

I doubt you'll get a refurbished C1085 on a click contract nowadays - that machine is about 10 years old and was replaced by the C6085 in 2018, which in turn was discontinued last year and replaced with the C7090

You do know C7200 is a Ricoh, whereas all the other machines you mention are KM?

For all the reasons discussed extensively on this forum in the past, let your chosen dealer who will be providing the click contract be the one to source whatever machine you go with. I really cannot stress this enough.

This process works adequately, sure I'd love a 14000 with massive banner feed paper drawers. But having used one several times when there was a toner shortage cant justify on our qtys. We can generally manage 750/hour, but wouldn't really want anything slower.

You don't need to stretch to the C14000 to get the PF-812 (900mm paper deck) The C7090 engine supports this option too.

 

[kslight]

I would definitely expect your click charge to be expensive on an old machine, that’s generally how it works. Often I see banner charge as an extra click per 8.5” above 19”.

I have the banner drawer and output tray extension on our Ricoh 7210. It’s pretty cool and more productive than other banner solutions I’ve used, but we don’t have a ton of customers using this yet so it’s kind of a novelty.

 

[billp]

I doubt you'll get a refurbished C1085 on a click contract nowadays - that machine is about 10 years old and was replaced by the C6085 in 2018, which in turn was discontinued last year and replaced with the C7090

You do know C7200 is a Ricoh, whereas all the other machines you mention are KM?

For all the reasons discussed extensively on this forum in the past, let your chosen dealer who will be providing the click contract be the one to source whatever machine you go with. I really cannot stress this enough.

You don't need to stretch to the C14000 to get the PF-812 (900mm paper deck) The C7090 engine supports this option too.

Thankyou Ynot, yes I will be. Will suss C7090 but I'm pretty sure it's out of the ballpark.

 

[billp]

I would definitely expect your click charge to be expensive on an old machine, that’s generally how it works. Often I see banner charge as an extra click per 8.5” above 19”.

I have the banner drawer and output tray extension on our Ricoh 7210. It’s pretty cool and more productive than other banner solutions I’ve used, but we don’t have a ton of customers using this yet so it’s kind of a novelty.

thanks kslight I will look deeper into the Ricoh option. Ouch, on that basis we'd have provide our clients 1.5" shorter banners or be hit x4 clicks!

 

[kslight]

thanks kslight I will look deeper into the Ricoh option. Ouch, on that basis we'd have provide our clients 1.5" shorter banners or be hit x4 clicks!

I think 900mm single sided would be 3 clicks total, but the banner tray we have only goes to 27” (they also have a different tray option that allows 49”, but has a different paper weight range…for us I didn’t think 49” would be as useful).

Since you go into things knowing you will run a lot of banner sheets, perhaps the thing to do would be to try to negotiate a favorable banner click charge on your contract.

 

[Ynot_UK]

The equivalent number of clicks is set within the Engineer's access screen and is essentially dependent on what you agree with your click provider.

For example, when we added an LU-202-XLM to our C4080, since up to SRA3 counts as one click, the rationale we agreed with our provider was that up to 660mm length would count as 1.5 clicks, which is the value the engineer set in the machine.
Not relevant to us as we don't have the bypass tray so can't do 900mm banners, however if we did I'm pretty certain our provider would treat 900mm as 2 clicks, as it is twice SRA3 in length.

 

[billp]

The equivalent number of clicks is set within the Engineer's access screen and is essentially dependent on what you agree with your click provider.

For example, when we added an LU-202-XLM to our C4080, since up to SRA3 counts as one click, the rationale we agreed with our provider was that up to 660mm length would count as 1.5 clicks, which is the value the engineer set in the machine.
Not relevant to us as we don't have the bypass tray so can't do 900mm banners, however if we did I'm pretty certain our provider would treat 900mm as 2 clicks, as it is twice SRA3 in length.

Thankyou Ynot, that logic I can definitely work with.

 

[jwheeler]

I made an initial post, but removed it because I thought about it a bit more and wanted to revise...(keep in mind that I used to sell production gear for KM, and now I run a county in-plant with all KM gear).

You seem to be really budget focused, but also have a unique need of a decent volume of 900mm prints. The C7090 or C7100 with the PF-812 paper deck would be the best fit because it's a high capacity, vacuum feed drawer that supports up to 900mm sheets. However, I didn't initially suggest that simply because we have the C7090 in our shop and have been very unhappy with it. I was just speaking with our tech yesterday, and he said nearly everyone in the area is having the same issues of the colors not holding consistently throughout the run. Others have commented about that as well here on Print Planet. KM just came out with a firmware update that is supposed to address that. The user @criccidisk and I both just got that updated on our machines so we'll see how it goes after we run some volume through them. We've also both had issues with the color registration, especially with smaller text. If you look at the engine and components of the C7090/C7100, it's really just a C4070 that has been sped up (even the drums, fuser, and toners are identical), and it seems the internal components can't keep up with the higher speeds. Therefore, we also seem to go through components much quicker than we do on our C6085, which clearly has a larger build.

Therefore, my recommendation for your budget would be the C4070. It's a proven engine, you're already happy with the performance of the C1060 (the C4070 has been significantly improved over the years), and now the C4070 offers the MB-508 with the MK-760 extension arm that is specifically designed to handle the longer sheets. You can add the MK-761 extension tray to the FS-532m or OT-512 to catch the long sheets. Optionally, you can add the IQ-501 for automatic skew and alignment adjustments, and that will require the relay unit which will help with decurling. If you don't have the IQ, you can still do semi-automatic skew and alignment adjustments using the document scanner on the engine. The system prints out a 2-sided chart and you scan two corners of each side. It measures and automatically fixes the alignment/skew for you.

Regarding the clicks for larger sheets, we have 3 rates as others have mentioned above. I don't remember the exact size breaks, but it's something like up to 19" is 1x, 19" to 36" is 2x, and over 36" is 3x the click rate.

 

[Ynot_UK]

@jwheeler interesting what you point out above regarding the physical similarities between the C7090 and the C4080.
I guess KM could quite easily let the C4080 support the PF-812 if the desire was there? Although this is unlikely to happen, since doing so would limit the points of difference in opting for the C7090.

That latest firmware upgrade you mentioned… is that only for C7090/C7100?

 

[criccidisk]

Of important note to @jwheeler 's post: We have a c7100 in our shop that was exhibiting the color shifting issues he described. While there is a firmware update that's supposed to address this color shift, our technicians unfortunately had to roll it back shortly after installing it. Turns out the latest firmware faults the machine when you use its document scanner to perform a Both Sides Adjustment.

The c7090/c7100 series also has a known problem with random color misregistration on parts of the press sheet. It's especially noticeable with white text on solid backgrounds and CMY builds of text. A KM rep told me yesterday that they're planning on having a hardware kit available in the semi-near future to hopefully remedy that, but there wasn't an exact ETA. Not sure if that will be more pronounced on a banner-length sheet, but it might be worth demoing.

Of important note as well, since they'll try to sell you on it: the IQ-501 really isn't all it's cracked up to be. I was very impressed with it for the first year or so of our KM journey, but over time I've found it to be more finicky than it's worth for both color measurement and front-to-back alignment.

 

[jwheeler]

our technicians unfortunately had to roll it back shortly after installing it. Turns out the latest firmware faults the machine when you use its document scanner to perform a Both Sides Adjustment.

It's interesting that you note this @criccidisk ...since they installed the firmware update on ours, we can no longer access the controller from the machine touch panel. We have the KM controller. They are waiting for a specialist to become available to come and see what's wrong.

since they'll try to sell you on it: the IQ-501 really isn't all it's cracked up to be. I was very impressed with it for the first year or so of our KM journey, but over time I've found it to be more finicky than it's worth for both color measurement and front-to-back alignment.

We have mixed feelings about the IQ-501 as well. When I worked at KM selling it, they made it seem like it was the best thing since sliced bread. Now that I'm on the user side, it's another story. The one thing it does really well is correct the front/back registration and skew with one measurement. We are always impressed when we cut down full bleed jobs how you can practically slice the crop mark in half all the way through. However, the long warm up time that the IQ takes in addition to the machine adjustments is quite a time waster. We do use it for color calibration now instead of a hand-held spectro, so that has been nice. However, it doesn't seem to catch the color shifts throughout a run on our C7090. Another problem we've had with it is when some dust gets on a sensor, it becomes inoperable. They provide a cleaning wand for it, but that doesn't always work and we have to wait for a tech.

 

[jwheeler]

That latest firmware upgrade you mentioned… is that only for C7090/C7100?

I don't know...we only have a C7090 and C6085, so I'm not sure what they have for other models.

 

[kslight]

It's interesting that you note this @criccidisk ...since they installed the firmware update on ours, we can no longer access the controller from the machine touch panel. We have the KM controller. They are waiting for a specialist to become available to come and see what's wrong.


We have mixed feelings about the IQ-501 as well. When I worked at KM selling it, they made it seem like it was the best thing since sliced bread. Now that I'm on the user side, it's another story. The one thing it does really well is correct the front/back registration and skew with one measurement. We are always impressed when we cut down full bleed jobs how you can practically slice the crop mark in half all the way through. However, the long warm up time that the IQ takes in addition to the machine adjustments is quite a time waster. We do use it for color calibration now instead of a hand-held spectro, so that has been nice. However, it doesn't seem to catch the color shifts throughout a run on our C7090. Another problem we've had with it is when some dust gets on a sensor, it becomes inoperable. They provide a cleaning wand for it, but that doesn't always work and we have to wait for a tech.

This was my experience with the Iq501 attached to our former 6085. I don’t think it’s great design from an engineering perspective. Our Ricoh achieves measurably better registration without the problems and without whatever fairy dust KM sells. YMMV

 

[billp]

Thankyou all for your helpful advice. I will see what km & dealers suggest/can offer.

Probably the vital issue for me is keeping to <2clicks on 900mm (35.5"), and containing any potential increase. Or 1.5 clicks for everything colour.

I think a PF812 is financially unrealistic unless there's been alot if 7000 series returned .

I have difficulty justifying anything bnib, and as the 4000 series has only been on the market see for 24months, I think a 3080 is most likely. Not a great improvement on our 1060 but adequate & affordable (& I can probably reuse fs612).

Though I will also check if the the mk760/1 will enhance our productivity, along with the other improvements, enough to warrant 4065/4070

Once I ve drilled down a bit I will post again, cheers

I'll give Ricoh a nudge too.