Ricoh Pro C900

[adamfilip]

We recently installed a Ricoh Pro C900
the thing sure is quick compared to my Xerox 700 and Xerox 4112

Been running alot of 300gsm 4 up postcards.
toner has been sticking great., nice colour, great registration

So far so good.

 

[Keness]

We recently installed a Ricoh Pro C900
the thing sure is quick compared to my Xerox 700 and Xerox 4112

How can it be "quick" compared to a 4112, which is 20ppm faster? Of course, it is also a B&W machine which makes the comparison kind of... odd.

 

[adamfilip]

I was surprised aswell. the 4112 is rated at 110 and the ricoh at 90
the 4112 slows down when feeding from the Oversized High Cap Tray and when outputting to the stacker. and ofcourse the 4112 slows down for thicker stock
The Ricoh does not slow down. for any of these options. so it is running quicker.
I run some BW on the Ricoh as my 4112 jams like crazy

 

[Keness]

Just a minor correction, the 4112 is 110ppm.

I've always found the 4110 and 4112 to be amazingly bulletproof and efficient... If you're having problems to the degree you're suggesting, I'd be inclined to think your maintenance peeps are doing you a disservice. You shouldn't be having hardly any jams at all, provided your paper isn't unusual.

As for slowing down, I've not experienced it, but I don't have the OHCF. I know a couple people who do, and they love it and never mentioned anything about it being slow, but that isn't first-hand experience for me. The 4000-sheet HCF doesn't slow down at all.

Fair point on the heavy paper, though. The 411x are not AP (all speed) machines. But again, it is an odd, unfair comparison since the C900 is a completely different class of machine, not to mention color vs. B&W.

The 700 isn't in the same class as the C900 either. It's a robust-ified office machine. Considering the price-point difference, I would be exceptionally disappointed if the C900 wasn't more impressive than the 700.

 

[adamfilip]

My 4112 was perfect for the first 8 months but since then has become a lemon IMO xerox is working to replace the unit. The 700 has been more reliable lately. I agree that the Ricoh should performe better given it's specs and class. I hope xerox ups there game or we might just become a 100% Ricoh shop

 

[msaeger]

What paper are you running the post cards on ?

 

[adamfilip]

Xerox Digital Color Elite Silk 110 lb. Cover (300 gm2), 17 x 11

 

[NLprintguy]

Ricoh c900

Ricoh c900

I get about 1200-1400 sheets per hour running duplexed on 100 lb cover(12x18) on the c900. One side is about 80-90% ink coverage. It does pretty good.

 

[msaeger]

I get about 1200-1400 sheets per hour running duplexed on 100 lb cover(12x18) on the c900. One side is about 80-90% ink coverage. It does pretty good.

What paper are you running ?

 

[NLprintguy]

Paper

Paper

We've been running this paper for about 8 months - Mohawk 50/10 Blue White Matte, 100 lb cover, 12x18 (270 gsm). It's pretty much all I run through this machine.

 

[adamfilip]

It may not be impressive to some.

but I just ran 10,000 sheets of 12x18 Duplex on my C900
without a single jam or hickup..

cant say that has ever happened on my 700 or 4112

Adam

 

[NLprintguy]

Nice. Is that on Xerox silk also?

 

[msaeger]

It may not be impressive to some.

but I just ran 10,000 sheets of 12x18 Duplex on my C900
without a single jam or hickup..

cant say that has ever happened on my 700 or 4112

Adam

Congrats

Was it 10K of a single sheet ? What kind of coverage was it ?

I just got done helping a customer run 800 saddle stitched books on our demo c900 with a Plockmatic booklet maker. They were 11x17 100 lb cover 28 lb body. Both were Mohawk didn't make note of the exact type. Had two hiccups in the Plockmatic no jams in the printer though.

 

[adamfilip]

it was a Xerox 32lb Silk stock
Heavy coverage both sides. (dark blue)