Realistic Volume Expectations - v900

[tngcas]

I'm getting told by our Canon Sales Representative that the v900s are rated for 250k impressions per month BUT only for 8.5x11 plain letter paper.

My Math is this:

• That would be 125k Impressions on full sheets (at most)
• Salesperson says running 12x18 - 110lb or 130lb Coated media that lowers the threshold even lower.
• They recommend only 100k impressions per month per machine.
• By my math that's roughly roughly 4000 clicks per day per machine or 2000 sheets of double-sided prints on cardstock.

Does that sound about right to everyone? I'm just trying to gauge whether or not the salesperson (who is pushing for us to upgrade our printers to higher volume) is being reasonable or if I'm being unreasonable in expecting more.

 

[EdwardB]

there is a reason they call them "Light Production"

 

[bill kahny]

Your attachment shows 500,000 max pages that's 250,000 2 up (full size) and cut again for cover it's still double your math. But yes that kind of volume go bigger and faster you will probably get a better click rate too.

 

[pippip]

I would have said that's about right for that production level machine.
What did they suggest? Were they trying to push you to a higher model or mulitple v900s?
How far off is 4k a day from what you currently do?

 

[tngcas]

We asked them about a third machine because we are starting to get a lot of downtime on service calls but they want to up the click charges if we get the third machine.
We already have two v900s - the sales rep is suggesting a v1350. The v900s were installed in January after we had a very bad experience with the v1000. This was before they came out with the v1350 which is supposed to be the new golden goose.
We went from averaging 125k clicks/month per machine to over 300k/month per machine over last two months.
We plan to see if that volume change is sustained over the next few months or if it's just a short term volume change (based on a handful of unusually high volume jobs).
Just laying out the groundwork but was surprised to hear that the machines were only rated for 100k when we were already over that when we got the v900s

 

[jwheeler]

I agree with the sales rep. I used to sell production equipment (for KM, not Canon)...and if an account told me the volumes you are doing (600k/month), I'd have recommended 3 of the v1350's from the start instead of the 2 v900's. Even at your lower volume of 250k/mo, I'd have recommended 2 of the v1350's over the v900's. As others have suggested, the v900's are light production, and you're doing heavy production.

 

[tngcas]

That's useful to know

I agree with the sales rep. I used to sell production equipment (for KM, not Canon)...and if an account told me the volumes you are doing (600k/month), I'd have recommended 3 of the v1350's from the start instead of the 2 v900's. Even at your lower volume of 250k/mo, I'd have recommended 2 of the v1350's over the v900's. As others have suggested, the v900's are light production, and you're doing heavy production.

That's useful to know. Thank you!

 

[kslight]

Yeah this is why I always ask for the customer expectations document when looking at a machine. What they are saying, is that if you’re outside the optimum range it can do it, but it will be down a lot if you consistently do that. If you have the volume you would be overall better served by heavier duty equipment…speed, quality, cost per copy, registration, paper specs, downtime, etc… it’s not always as simple as multiple lower end machines > one high end machine. I’ve been places that had this method and what happens is nobody is ever happy, customer because the machines are always down / quality isn’t that good, cost is higher and the service team because they’re always trying to fight to make the machine do something it isn’t designed for.