xerox 800/1000 - reliable work horse or stay away?

[onlinestar]

Hi guys,

i'm considering new Xerox 800/1000 printer.

agenda - print high quality, short run, business cards, postcards, greeting cards. Paper - 13x19 350gsm 16pt cover stock (coated and not). Cycle - just under 300-350k sheets / year.

What I'm basically asking is the quality of the machine and if it is an appropriate choice for my project. I'm hoping for a printer that could be a work horse and be quality built, with no technology issues, constant break down that is printer related and has little to do with how well it's been run or taken care of. So basically how much is it a lemon. And would it handle the 16pt 350gsm coated cover stock well enough for trouble free day's long printing?


Thanks all!

 

[vaugh6288]

As an operator of a Xerox 800/1000 I would like to say the we experience some pretty bad jamming problems with anything higher than 14pt...Really 12pt works the best. I would be cautious of how they sell the whole running 130# DTC on here. We've yet to be able to run 130# cover which is close to 17pt

It's a great press ofr short run high quality work but those extra thick covers just don't work on our 800. Coated or uncoated. Hope this helps

 

[onlinestar]

that sucks! I had a meeting with high shot Xerox guy and he said yup 16pt no problem for sure.... why can't these guys just be straight with us...

anyone else had same or different experience with it?

 

[vaugh6288]

I would have them run several samples on the actual paper you run -- same size, weight, thickness etc. Maybe even see if they'll let you watch at the demo room in Chicago or at another site

 

[Josh]

I'd say you haven't got anywhere near the volume to justify an 800/1000.

The volume would be more suited to a J75 or 550 machine.

Any reason you wanted to look at an iGen and then a Colorpress rather than the other machines?

 

[onlinestar]

Josh, the reason is that I don't have much experience and hence I think smaller machines can't handle same quality output, reliability and print on 16pt stock.

I would want top quality print (without getting into $500k machines) and ability to reliably print day to day on 16pt stock. I just don't think smaller machines can handle it. Am I much wrong?

 

[Josh]

There's obviously a balance to be had. I'd say the main reason for the "larger" machines is due to volume... a colorpress is suited to 100000-250000 impressions per month and this will be reflected in the costs.

In terms of output quality a lot of the smaller machines are very good. In fact the actual "imaging" part of the machines can actually be the same... Xerox will change other parts for example paper feed, fusing etc in order to allow for a higher duty cycle (more printin')

The only thing which makes your situation slightly more complicated is due to the 16pt stock.


Here is a really rough idea of the costing comparison:

Colorpress $4000 per month + 5c per click, 25000 clicks per month = $5250

J75, $800 per month + 6c per click = $2300


This is only a rough idea but should give you an idea of how the cost differences will add up... it's worth picking the right machine!

If you've told your Xerox rep you're looking to do 25000 per month and they recommended a Colorpress then ask for a different rep. They're taking the p*ss.

 

[arossetti]

Here is a really rough idea of the costing comparison:

Colorpress $4000 per month + 5c per click, 25000 clicks per month = $5250

J75, $800 per month + 6c per click = $2300

I wish we payed $4k a month for our x800

 

[onlinestar]

Josh Im so sorry I miss typed. That was 300k per month, not year. So since fhe duty is right the big question is 16pt cover stock

 

[onlinestar]

I wish we payed $4k a month for our x800

I would really appreciate if you shared your thoughts on 16pt 350 gsm cover paper from your experience

 

[Josh]

I wish we payed $4k a month for our x800

I think my GBP:USD calculation may have been slightly off I know X aren't too keen on public pricing so won't go any further.



...Anyway...

300k per month makes more sense.

16pt (350gsm) is in spec for the colorpress so at the end of the day if it wasn't running it properly you can make them take it back.

Arossetti should be able to give you some better info on it but it seems to get quite mixed reviews.

I'm interested to know how you seem to be going from 0-300k pm straight away? That's quite a jump!#

EDIT:
Just to add... just because one machine wasn't running 16pt reliably it doesn't mean none of them will. Firstly different papers although rated as 16pt can perform quite differently, there's also a big difference between running short grain or long grain. Second the environment can play a big part on this. The paper feed path is made up of quite small rollers with ball bearings in, if the environment (your shop) is too cold/hot the oil in the bearings can seize causing feed/jam problems.

 

[arossetti]

We have 130# Pro Digital Silk and 130# Cougar Cover which will barely run through, lots of jams on the vtra's usually I get a 077-116 (sensor on the fuser assembly before the fuser. Also we get jams in the registration area, I forget that code.)

Runs better simplex. Seems like this is a new development though because I remember having better success a year or two ago. I don't know if the vtra is losing suction or stalling a little. I have watched the machine run with the doors open and it looks like on a duplex print after it runs side 1 and comes back around to print side 2 the sheet isn't pulled all the way down to the vtra belts. My guess is the curl caused from the fuser during side 1 and the rigidness of the sheet is making it curl up too much for the vtra to hold it down. Since the first 1" of the sheet is lifted off the belt the sensor doesn't see the paper till it is already an 1" over the sensor. The printer then thinks that the paper was late to the sensor since it should have hit the sensor an 1" sooner.

Does any of this make sense?

Beyond trying to run 350gsm stock consistently we have had a lot of success with our x800. A lot of the complaining on this forum from me and others about the x800 has been worked out. I think the machine was announced in Q2 of 2011 and we bought it Q3, engineering has made changes to some of the parts that were causing issues.

 

[Josh]

We have 130# Pro Digital Silk and 130# Cougar Cover which will barely run through, lots of jams on the vtra's usually I get a 077-116 (sensor on the fuser assembly before the fuser. Also we get jams in the registration area, I forget that code.)

Runs better simplex. Seems like this is a new development though because I remember having better success a year or two ago. I don't know if the vtra is losing suction or stalling a little. I have watched the machine run with the doors open and it looks like on a duplex print after it runs side 1 and comes back around to print side 2 the sheet isn't pulled all the way down to the vtra belts. My guess is the curl caused from the fuser during side 1 and the rigidness of the sheet is making it curl up too much for the vtra to hold it down. Since the first 1" of the sheet is lifted off the belt the sensor doesn't see the paper till it is already an 1" over the sensor. The printer then thinks that the paper was late to the sensor since it should have hit the sensor an 1" sooner.

Does any of this make sense?

Beyond trying to run 350gsm stock consistently we have had a lot of success with our x800. A lot of the complaining on this forum from me and others about the x800 has been worked out. I think the machine was announced in Q2 of 2011 and we bought it Q3, engineering has made changes to some of the parts that were causing issues.

Makes sense The upwards curl on the lead edge means it isn't contacting the sensor properly?

You'll know way more about this machine than me but thought I'd throw these out there anyway...

Do you get the same results with long grain / short grain?

Have they changed the vacuum transport belts?

Have they changed the rubber wheels which drive the paper... on the second side the bottom wheels will be driving the first side which has been printed on and there can be less friction... if the wheels are a bit worn they may drive the first side ok but have trouble with the 2nd side because they're driving on a printed sheet.

I'm guessing this is the same as on other machines... but on the paper path tray (which pulls out) there's a foam "lip/join" which joins the vac trans to the back of the machine which creates the "vacuum"... as the tray goes in and out (clearing jams etc) the foam join gets bashed up meaning you don't get a clean join with no gaps and a loss of suction.

I had this exact problem on another X machine and I'd guess the 800 uses classic X product development of recycling as many parts from other machines as possible so it's likely to be the same.

 

[arossetti]

Makes sense The upwards curl on the lead edge means it isn't contacting the sensor properly?

You'll know way more about this machine than me but thought I'd throw these out there anyway...

Do you get the same results with long grain / short grain?
I am seeing this only on cardstock and all of our heavyweight is short grain

Have they changed the vacuum transport belts?
There are 3 vacuum transports, we replaced 1 recently. We are going to replace the belts on all 3 now

Have they changed the rubber wheels which drive the paper... on the second side the bottom wheels will be driving the first side which has been printed on and there can be less friction... if the wheels are a bit worn they may drive the first side ok but have trouble with the 2nd side because they're driving on a printed sheet.
The jams are happening on the transports, and I haven't had any codes showing it is in the areas that use the wheels. We have cleaned them recently however.

I'm guessing this is the same as on other machines... but on the paper path tray (which pulls out) there's a foam "lip/join" which joins the vac trans to the back of the machine which creates the "vacuum"... as the tray goes in and out (clearing jams etc) the foam join gets bashed up meaning you don't get a clean join with no gaps and a loss of suction.
Good call, I told my tech about my suction theory and asked him if those foam connection could be part of it. He didn't think that the suction would be playing that big of a roll in what is happening. He is going to change the belts and see what happens.

I had this exact problem on another X machine and I'd guess the 800 uses classic X product development of recycling as many parts from other machines as possible so it's likely to be the same.
The imaging and registration area is very similar to the 8080 series or whatever it is at now. The paper path is a little different since it is so elongated which is where all these vtra's come into play. The distance from the 2nd btb to the fuser is probably about 3-4'

It is making me write something out side of the quote, so....something.

 

[C8000]

Disclosure...I work with KM in the Michigan Market.
Have you looked at the KM C8000? We have had great success with a 16pt Carolina that come in at 330gsm and is within 350gsm spec. The C8000 will simplex up to 350gsm and duplex up to 300gsm.

Let me know your thoughts.
Thanks.

 

[onlinestar]

Yes I did, thank you. I'm in contact with KM dealer in my area. Xerox machine looked a little more promising and they are working on competitive price quote for me. I will have to see their price before reconsidering C8000. Thanks.

 

[C8000]

what area of Michigan are you in...If I may ask?

 

[onlinestar]

Metro detroit. Been to dealer in Troy

 

[arossetti]

We think our issue with the 130# cover is with the paper stock setup now, I'll circle back when I know more.

 

[lfelton]

Disclosure...I work with KM in the Michigan Market.
Have you looked at the KM C8000? We have had great success with a 16pt Carolina that come in at 330gsm and is within 350gsm spec. The C8000 will simplex up to 350gsm and duplex up to 300gsm.

Let me know your thoughts.
Thanks.

I have to warn you that the c8000 is nowhere near capable of running 350K a month, absolutely nowhere near. Three c8000s are maybe capable of that, probably more like 5 to be sure. We run more than that, but spread over several machines. The c8000 is significantly less reliable than the older c6501 and we struggle to get more than around 120K a month through a c8000 (on a single shift). As it is, we lose approximately 1 shift per week in down time. I don't remember a single day this year when we didn't have a Konica or Xerox engineer (or both) in our factory. The good news with a c8000 is that when they are actually running, they produce beautiful work. That brings it's own challenges as we now have people like photographers running single proof copies (2-300 page books) of large photo sessions and that absolutely kills our production schedule as the Konica RIPs are just not fast enough to keep up (by a long, long, way).

I don't mean to be negative, as a single iGen4 would do our volume, BUT when it's down everything stops. So you need 2 and then you really need a million clicks a month to make that pay. At least now, we can count on 50-80% of production capacity being available every day, but you really do have to nurse the things. Having said that, we had a day earlier this week where we had 4 digital presses down at the same time waiting for engineers, which is a low point record for us.