Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

R800 Clogged up!

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
Anonymous
December 21, 2004 3:07:15 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hi,

Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
helpful company to deal with so far then.

Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
point?

When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.

Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
how I get on with Jettec.

Cheers,

René

More about : r800 clogged

Anonymous
December 22, 2004 1:14:23 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 21 Dec 2004 00:07:15 -0800, spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
>truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
>change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
>the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
>Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
>inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
>helpful company to deal with so far then.
>
>Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
>inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
>replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
>point?
>
>When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
>seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
>yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.
>
>Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
>the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
>how I get on with Jettec.
>
>Cheers,
>
>René



You do need a Driver License to run a Epson, I am on my third one printer.

Please read the advice given by me and others on how not to get clogged heads.
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 7:16:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I find this posting suspect.

You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
changed the ink. Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
admit there have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet). It
is a very new printer, but I know of several cases of people who have
gone through over 4 sets of ink with no problem.

You are suspect of the Epson because your Epson 875DC clogged. You
don't say how long you had it and under what conditions you it clogged.

You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
replacement by Epson or what. I can state that there is a 98% chance
that the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of
that clog and been made into a printer almost as new with a little home
maintenance.

I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
responsibility for the clog, but you still blame Epson.

While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at
fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad
batch, maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do know
is "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is appropriate.

I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to
determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that doesn't
imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.

I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer
and may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased,
especially considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180
degrees to your own conclusions. I think you should have waited for
much more knowledge before making a public pronouncement, don't you think?

Art


spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
> truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
> change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
> the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
> Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
> inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
> helpful company to deal with so far then.
>
> Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
> inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
> replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
> point?
>
> When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
> seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
> yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.
>
> Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
> the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
> how I get on with Jettec.
>
> Cheers,
>
> René
>
Related resources
Anonymous
December 22, 2004 8:52:46 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Funny that. I have a 950 which always gave the appearance of being blocked
when using Jettec cartridges. What was actually happening was the cartridges
were draining so there was no ink in the cartridge even if they showed 70%
full.
This appears to be a fault caused by pulling the pin out of the cartridge
when removing the tab. The cartridges in which the tab snapped and left the
hole blocked by the pin gave me no trouble at all, other than needing the
occasional clean.
I did receive an email from Jettec stating that the hole should remain
blocked to stop the cartridge leaking and, that should a pin pull out when
removing the tab, the hole should be blocked with tape.

I have returned to using Genuine Epson cartridges and since then I have had
no trouble at all, perfect prints first time every time, without the need
for the occasional clean.

Costs more for Ink, but money saved on reprints of misprinted media.

--
Mick Doherty
http://dotnetrix.co.uk/nothing.html


"Arthur Entlich" <artistic@telus.net> wrote in message
news:o 5hyd.14229$KO5.9463@clgrps13...
>I find this posting suspect.
>
> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you changed
> the ink. Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you admit there
> have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet). It is a very new
> printer, but I know of several cases of people who have gone through over
> 4 sets of ink with no problem.
>
> You are suspect of the Epson because your Epson 875DC clogged. You don't
> say how long you had it and under what conditions you it clogged.
>
> You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
> replacement by Epson or what. I can state that there is a 98% chance that
> the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of that clog
> and been made into a printer almost as new with a little home maintenance.
>
> I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
> quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
> responsibility for the clog, but you still blame Epson.
>
> While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at
> fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad batch,
> maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do know is
> "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is appropriate.
>
> I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to
> determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that doesn't
> imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
> doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.
>
> I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer and
> may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased, especially
> considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180 degrees to your
> own conclusions. I think you should have waited for much more knowledge
> before making a public pronouncement, don't you think?
>
> Art
>
>
> spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
>> truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
>> change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
>> the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
>> Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
>> inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
>> helpful company to deal with so far then.
>>
>> Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
>> inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
>> replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
>> point?
>>
>> When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
>> seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
>> yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.
>>
>> Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
>> the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
>> how I get on with Jettec.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> René
>>
>
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 10:16:43 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Have had a R800 for four months

Never had a clog

Only used Epson ink

keith
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 1:30:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

We run a computer shop and Epson Express centre up North and have had major
problems
with JetTec ink accross the WHOLE Epson range not just the R800.

It is in our opinion that the JetTec range cause blocking problems with
Epson products.

Arron.
www.peterlee.info


"William Bell" <wbell@tinkle.com> wrote in message
news:96qfs05h3nfc1eng7tbaghgfng3k8rrdm3@4ax.com...
> On 21 Dec 2004 00:07:15 -0800, spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
>>truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
>>change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
>>the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
>>Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
>>inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
>>helpful company to deal with so far then.
>>
>>Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
>>inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
>>replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
>>point?
>>
>>When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
>>seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
>>yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.
>>
>>Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
>>the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
>>how I get on with Jettec.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>René
>
>
>
> You do need a Driver License to run a Epson, I am on my third one printer.
>
> Please read the advice given by me and others on how not to get clogged
> heads.
>
>
December 23, 2004 1:41:02 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

> "William Bell" <wbell@tinkle.com> wrote in message
> news:96qfs05h3nfc1eng7tbaghgfng3k8rrdm3@4ax.com...
>> On 21 Dec 2004 00:07:15 -0800, spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
>>>truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
>>>change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
>>>the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
>>>Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
>>>inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
>>>helpful company to deal with so far then.
>>>
>>>Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
>>>inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
>>>replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
>>>point?
>>>
>>>When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
>>>seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
>>>yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.
>>>
>>>Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
>>>the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
>>>how I get on with Jettec.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>René
>>

As a pro photographer I wouldn't use any third party ink products....selling
my prints on Epson paper with Epson ink is the only way for me (and yes,
I've tried HP and Canon)...

However, back in the day I used to use a Stylus Photo 915 - very bad cloggs.
But since switching to an R200 (and perhaps soon an R800) I've had very few
problems.

Si.
December 23, 2004 3:50:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:16:43 GMT, kstewart@actrix.gen.nz wrote:

>Have had a R800 for four months
>
>Never had a clog
>
>Only used Epson ink
>

Carry on, we need people like yourself to subsidise the cost of printers!
December 23, 2004 5:38:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"pete" <pete@maildox.com> wrote in message
news:bmfls01c5b0mtht2649afhfmvl0b552vqg@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:16:43 GMT, kstewart@actrix.gen.nz wrote:
>
>>Have had a R800 for four months
>>
>>Never had a clog
>>
>>Only used Epson ink
>>
>
> Carry on, we need people like yourself to subsidise the cost of printers!

If you are happy with sub-standard then keep buying your third party inks.

As a pro, I sell reprints with Epson ink on Epson media to the general
public. I make a scandalous profit. Therefore, I buy the genuine inks and
paper.

Si.
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 9:09:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

For a service facility to make a statement like this, give some pause
about the product line.

Now, it is possible this place sells a lot of Epson ink cartridges, but
more likely they make money on repairs, and if that is the case,
promoting inks that clog would be to their advantage... it seems like
there may be some validity to this report (unless it is a competitor
selling their own inks ;-))

Are most Jettec clients satisfied with the ink, or not?

Art



The Computer Shop wrote:

> We run a computer shop and Epson Express centre up North and have had major
> problems
> with JetTec ink accross the WHOLE Epson range not just the R800.
>
> It is in our opinion that the JetTec range cause blocking problems with
> Epson products.
>
> Arron.
> www.peterlee.info
>
>
> "William Bell" <wbell@tinkle.com> wrote in message
> news:96qfs05h3nfc1eng7tbaghgfng3k8rrdm3@4ax.com...
>
>>On 21 Dec 2004 00:07:15 -0800, spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Just thought you'd like to know that my Epson R800 became well and
>>>truly clogged after only 30 days use. The problems coincided with a
>>>change to Jettec inks though of course these inks may not have caused
>>>the problems as Jettec guard their reputation for high quality.
>>>Talking of which, Jettec have agreed to take the R800 back in for
>>>inspection and if they can't fix it they'll send me a new one - very
>>>helpful company to deal with so far then.
>>>
>>>Epson on the other hand did the old 'have you been using third party
>>>inks' routine when I phoned them - of course I could have wasted £90
>>>replacing the carts with Epson ones just to send it back but what's the
>>>point?
>>>
>>>When it's working properly the R800 is a mighty fine photo printer but
>>>seeing as this one replaced an Epson 875DC (with permanently clogged
>>>yellow) I'm suspicious of all Epson kit now.
>>>
>>>Thought I'd make this post because I seem to be the only R800 owner in
>>>the world that has experienced clogging problems. Will let you know
>>>how I get on with Jettec.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>René
>>
>>
>>
>>You do need a Driver License to run a Epson, I am on my third one printer.
>>
>>Please read the advice given by me and others on how not to get clogged
>>heads.
>>
>>
>
>
>
Anonymous
December 23, 2004 10:23:30 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Glad to help :-)


keith
February 10, 2005 11:18:08 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> I find this posting suspect.
>
> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
> changed the ink.

Hi Art,

Well, the failure didn't happen straight away - for a while the printer
ran perfectly with combined Epson and Jettec inks on board. As the
original Epson ones ran out so they were replaced by Jettec items. In
fact I changed the cyan and yellow twice with Jettec before needing a
magenta. It was when I replaced this cart for the first time that it
all started going wrong. To me it seemed to be a mechanical failure
with the printer - I even ditched the offending magenta cart for
another (Jettec) one but to no avail. Why should a printer that was
working fine with a third party product all of a sudden NOT work?

I have some evidence that early R800s had problems with cracked intake
ports (where the cart's ink outlet meets the printer). Bought last
July, I'd say my R800 was one of the first...

Or, maybe it is as you suggest; some sort of chemical reaction, in this
case with the magenta.

As for blaming Epson for not taking responsibility - at the end of the
day, I bought an expensive printer to print photos. The printer
printed the most beautiful images I've ever seen, until it broke down -
therefore it is a warranty claim against Epson. Whether or not I chose
to use third party consumables in it makes no difference; despite
Epson's FUD in this respect they cannot force customers to buy their
(overpriced) inks by threatening not to honour the warranty, because
this is against the law. You have to bear in mind where the profit is
- you guessed it; in the inks and papers, not the printer itself.
Incidentally, I only use Epson's very best photo paper.

> Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
> admit there have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet).
It
> is a very new printer, but I know of several cases of people who have

> gone through over 4 sets of ink with no problem.

They are on Epson ink? OK, I have to admit, if faced with a free
choice of Epson or Jettec ink for my printer, I'd choose Epson. Faced
with the bill, I'd choose Jettec.

What I'd like to know is; who is using third party ink to print lots of
photos, trouble free, on an R800?


> You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
> replacement by Epson or what.

I still have the 875DC - now used for printing invoices.

> I can state that there is a 98% chance
> that the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of

> that clog and been made into a printer almost as new with a little
home
> maintenance.

Hmm - I've tried ALL this 'maintenance'on the 875DC; Windowlene, paper
towels, running cleaning cycles and leaving the thing overnight etc.
None of it worked. Then again, why should I have to mess about with my
printer like this? If I look at Canon for instance, I see non-chipped
cartridges and removable print heads. To top this the cost of the
proper Canon carts isn't extortionate, unlike Epson's prices.

So, why did I choose the R800? On the basis that it was the best photo
printer available that took my favourite paper and could also use a
ready supply of high quality, reasonably priced third party inks.

>
> I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
> quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
> responsibility for the clog,

Because they state this in their guarantee - if their product causes a
problem, they'll take the printer in and sort it out.

>
> While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at

> fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad
> batch, maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do
know
> is "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is
appropriate.

Quite true, but I am assured that there are many satisfied Jettec users
out there. Maybe they're not all as fussy as me when it comes to photo
quality output. For me, an inkjet photo has to be indistinguishable
from a RA45 print. This *was* achieved to begin with using part
Jettec, part Epson ink.

>
> I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to

> determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that
doesn't
> imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
> doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.

Quite honestly, I don't know which is to blame. However, Epson have
now replaced the printer and Jettec are sending me a complimentary set
of cartridges for my trouble.

Both companies are therefore rather brill. But, I haven't plucked up
the courage to even unpack the printer yet.

>
> I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer

> and may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased,
> especially considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180
> degrees to your own conclusions. I think you should have waited for
> much more knowledge before making a public pronouncement, don't you
think?
>

Nooo - that's what Usenet is for! Put it this way, there are other
Jettec / R800 users out there and they will find this thread most
helpful. I'm hoping that one or two will pipe up and declare the
Jettec cart to be absolutely fine for photo work, then again maybe the
opposite will happen. Then we'll all know for sure.

What I'm trying to achieve is a characterisation of the problem - from
there a solution will emerge.

R.
February 10, 2005 11:30:09 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

> The Computer Shop wrote:
>
> > We run a computer shop and Epson Express centre up North and have
had major
> > problems
> > with JetTec ink accross the WHOLE Epson range not just the R800.
> >
> > It is in our opinion that the JetTec range cause blocking problems
with
> > Epson products.

Arthur Entlich wrote:
> For a service facility to make a statement like this, give some pause

> about the product line.
>
> Now, it is possible this place sells a lot of Epson ink cartridges,
but
> more likely they make money on repairs, and if that is the case,
> promoting inks that clog would be to their advantage... it seems like

> there may be some validity to this report (unless it is a competitor
> selling their own inks ;-))

Quite right - vested interests galore.

However, they may well be right!

>
> Are most Jettec clients satisfied with the ink, or not?

We need to know!!!
Anonymous
February 10, 2005 2:39:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <1108052288.896570.243860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Zero <spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk> wrote:
>Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>> I find this posting suspect.
>>
>> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
>> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
>> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
>> changed the ink.
>
>Hi Art,
>
>Well, the failure didn't happen straight away - for a while the printer
>ran perfectly with combined Epson and Jettec inks on board. As the
>original Epson ones ran out so they were replaced by Jettec items. In
>fact I changed the cyan and yellow twice with Jettec before needing a
>magenta. It was when I replaced this cart for the first time that it
>all started going wrong. To me it seemed to be a mechanical failure
>with the printer - I even ditched the offending magenta cart for
>another (Jettec) one but to no avail. Why should a printer that was
>working fine with a third party product all of a sudden NOT work?
>
>I have some evidence that early R800s had problems with cracked intake
>ports (where the cart's ink outlet meets the printer). Bought last
>July, I'd say my R800 was one of the first...
>
>Or, maybe it is as you suggest; some sort of chemical reaction, in this
>case with the magenta.
>
>As for blaming Epson for not taking responsibility - at the end of the
>day, I bought an expensive printer to print photos. The printer
>printed the most beautiful images I've ever seen, until it broke down -
>therefore it is a warranty claim against Epson. Whether or not I chose
>to use third party consumables in it makes no difference; despite
>Epson's FUD in this respect they cannot force customers to buy their
>(overpriced) inks by threatening not to honour the warranty, because
>this is against the law. You have to bear in mind where the profit is
>- you guessed it; in the inks and papers, not the printer itself.
>Incidentally, I only use Epson's very best photo paper.
>
>> Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
>> admit there have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet).
>It
>> is a very new printer, but I know of several cases of people who have
>
>> gone through over 4 sets of ink with no problem.
>
>They are on Epson ink? OK, I have to admit, if faced with a free
>choice of Epson or Jettec ink for my printer, I'd choose Epson. Faced
>with the bill, I'd choose Jettec.
>
>What I'd like to know is; who is using third party ink to print lots of
>photos, trouble free, on an R800?
>
>
>> You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
>> replacement by Epson or what.
>
>I still have the 875DC - now used for printing invoices.
>
>> I can state that there is a 98% chance
>> that the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of
>
>> that clog and been made into a printer almost as new with a little
>home
>> maintenance.
>
>Hmm - I've tried ALL this 'maintenance'on the 875DC; Windowlene, paper
>towels, running cleaning cycles and leaving the thing overnight etc.
>None of it worked. Then again, why should I have to mess about with my
>printer like this? If I look at Canon for instance, I see non-chipped
>cartridges and removable print heads. To top this the cost of the
>proper Canon carts isn't extortionate, unlike Epson's prices.
>
>So, why did I choose the R800? On the basis that it was the best photo
>printer available that took my favourite paper and could also use a
>ready supply of high quality, reasonably priced third party inks.
>
>>
>> I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
>> quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
>> responsibility for the clog,
>
>Because they state this in their guarantee - if their product causes a
>problem, they'll take the printer in and sort it out.
>
>>
>> While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at
>
>> fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad
>> batch, maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do
>know
>> is "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is
>appropriate.
>
>Quite true, but I am assured that there are many satisfied Jettec users
>out there. Maybe they're not all as fussy as me when it comes to photo
>quality output. For me, an inkjet photo has to be indistinguishable
>from a RA45 print. This *was* achieved to begin with using part
>Jettec, part Epson ink.
>
>>
>> I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to
>
>> determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that
>doesn't
>> imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
>> doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.
>
>Quite honestly, I don't know which is to blame. However, Epson have
>now replaced the printer and Jettec are sending me a complimentary set
>of cartridges for my trouble.
>
>Both companies are therefore rather brill. But, I haven't plucked up
>the courage to even unpack the printer yet.
>
>>
>> I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer
>
>> and may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased,
>> especially considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180
>> degrees to your own conclusions. I think you should have waited for
>> much more knowledge before making a public pronouncement, don't you
>think?
>>
>
>Nooo - that's what Usenet is for! Put it this way, there are other
>Jettec / R800 users out there and they will find this thread most
>helpful. I'm hoping that one or two will pipe up and declare the
>Jettec cart to be absolutely fine for photo work, then again maybe the
>opposite will happen. Then we'll all know for sure.
>
>What I'm trying to achieve is a characterisation of the problem - from
>there a solution will emerge.
>
>R.
>


A search of google groups for "jettec ink" gets about 2400 hits. A
click scan shown that some of them are not very happy.

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.
Anonymous
February 10, 2005 8:23:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Al Dykes" <adykes@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cug2n4$ppk$1@panix5.panix.com...
[...]
> A search of google groups for "jettec ink" gets about 2400 hits. A
> click scan shown that some of them are not very happy.
>
> --

Doing a search for "Epson Ink Clog" returns just about as many hits of
people who have used JUST Epson inks and still have head clog problems.
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 5:53:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I find myself in an odd situation here. I certainly have a number of
issues with how Epson approaches their ink sales, and cartridge design,
and I am not pleased with their business model, or the waste they create
in the cartridges being non-reusable.

However, although I'm happy on your account that Epson chose to replace
your printer, I am less happy on my account, (because there is a good
likelihood they should not have) and because you are not correct about
where the laws stand on their warranty.

Although there are differences between the law used in different
countries, they are all pretty much based upon the concept of what is
referred to as Tie-In sales. The basis in law is that a company should
not be able to require a purchaser to have to buy certain goods to get
other goods, and that creating a warranty that forces a present to use
certain specific parts or consumables in order to maintain a warranty is
another way to coerce a purchaser into having to buy a tied-in product.

However, the law goes further in its interpretation, and I feel that
this is only fair. The warranty cannot be refused on account of use of
of a different brand of consumable IF:

1) The consumable was not in any way related to the nature of the
failure (as an example a company would have a hard time proving a power
supply failure was related to the brand of paper you used)

2) The consumable product was a reasonable equivalent and met the
manufacturer's or an independent bodies standards.

For instance, you use a standard brand of gasoline or oil in your car
that is equivalent or exceeds the manufacturer's stated standards to
protect the car, the manufacturer cannot deny the warranty claiming that
the engine failure was caused by the oil or gas not being their brand.

However, let's say the gasoline was too low an octane, causing pinking
or it contained dirt and water in it, or the oil did not have proper
anti-oxidation additives and became sludgy and clogged the oil ports, so
the engine died from friction. That would be a legitimate right for the
manufacture to bill for the engine failure.

Epson recently paid for an "independent" test on their inks compared to
several un-named brands. However, these unnamed inks were described by
origin. Several were made in the UK and sold in the UK and the US.
Some were made in China, one or two were US.

All were found to be inferior, either leading to lower yield per
cartridge, or more often leading to rather severe clogging. The tests
were done both with refill inks, and with "compatible" cartridges.

Now I know that Epson makes their profits on the ink, but then again, so
do the 3rd party vendors, and they don't have the cost of making the
printers which are often sold near cost.

In many cases, especially with Durabrite and Ultrachrome substitute inks
there are some major clogs that can occur. The people I know that are
using the R800 have used exclusively Eposninks, andEpson inks still
printing without difficulties.

So, yes, you got a new or refurb printer from Epson, and that's "nice"
but it is also what raises costs for everyone. Head clogs are always
the result of the ink, on some level. The risk of problems with newer
ink formulations made by 3rd party is yet a higher risk. Yes, it saves
money, but how can you expect Epson to be responsible? People could
feed anything into their printers.

Epson has taken a policy of not arguing too often about this issue,
because of the misperception about the law, and because it would become
a he said/she said situation. But there may come a time, especially as
OEM ink products lose market share to compatibles, that Epson may well
dig in their heels and say, we will test each printer for inks
installed, and if it's a head clog and a 3rd party ink, we will only
repair or replace by charging the customer. They would be in their
rights to do so, and it would lower costs for others. Warranty repair
and replacement is one of the most expensive cost in servicing a client.

I'm guessing, as profit margins shrink some companies may indeed begin
to get hard-nosed. Especially in the low end printers, where they give
you the printer for the "cost" of the ink, and then people use
non-branded ink, to save money, but expect the printer manufacturer to
pay cost to repair or replace when bad ink is used.


As far as usenet, I think perhaps couching the terms a bit more fairly
without jumping to conclusions as to cause, may have been more fair,
especially consdiering the company got you a new printer.

Art





Zero wrote:

> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>
>>I find this posting suspect.
>>
>>You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
>>cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
>>taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
>>changed the ink.
>
>
> Hi Art,
>
> Well, the failure didn't happen straight away - for a while the printer
> ran perfectly with combined Epson and Jettec inks on board. As the
> original Epson ones ran out so they were replaced by Jettec items. In
> fact I changed the cyan and yellow twice with Jettec before needing a
> magenta. It was when I replaced this cart for the first time that it
> all started going wrong. To me it seemed to be a mechanical failure
> with the printer - I even ditched the offending magenta cart for
> another (Jettec) one but to no avail. Why should a printer that was
> working fine with a third party product all of a sudden NOT work?
>
> I have some evidence that early R800s had problems with cracked intake
> ports (where the cart's ink outlet meets the printer). Bought last
> July, I'd say my R800 was one of the first...
>
> Or, maybe it is as you suggest; some sort of chemical reaction, in this
> case with the magenta.
>
> As for blaming Epson for not taking responsibility - at the end of the
> day, I bought an expensive printer to print photos. The printer
> printed the most beautiful images I've ever seen, until it broke down -
> therefore it is a warranty claim against Epson. Whether or not I chose
> to use third party consumables in it makes no difference; despite
> Epson's FUD in this respect they cannot force customers to buy their
> (overpriced) inks by threatening not to honour the warranty, because
> this is against the law. You have to bear in mind where the profit is
> - you guessed it; in the inks and papers, not the printer itself.
> Incidentally, I only use Epson's very best photo paper.
>
>
>>Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
>>admit there have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet).
>
> It
>
>>is a very new printer, but I know of several cases of people who have
>
>
>>gone through over 4 sets of ink with no problem.
>
>
> They are on Epson ink? OK, I have to admit, if faced with a free
> choice of Epson or Jettec ink for my printer, I'd choose Epson. Faced
> with the bill, I'd choose Jettec.
>
> What I'd like to know is; who is using third party ink to print lots of
> photos, trouble free, on an R800?
>
>
>
>>You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
>>replacement by Epson or what.
>
>
> I still have the 875DC - now used for printing invoices.
>
>
>>I can state that there is a 98% chance
>>that the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of
>
>
>>that clog and been made into a printer almost as new with a little
>
> home
>
>>maintenance.
>
>
> Hmm - I've tried ALL this 'maintenance'on the 875DC; Windowlene, paper
> towels, running cleaning cycles and leaving the thing overnight etc.
> None of it worked. Then again, why should I have to mess about with my
> printer like this? If I look at Canon for instance, I see non-chipped
> cartridges and removable print heads. To top this the cost of the
> proper Canon carts isn't extortionate, unlike Epson's prices.
>
> So, why did I choose the R800? On the basis that it was the best photo
> printer available that took my favourite paper and could also use a
> ready supply of high quality, reasonably priced third party inks.
>
>
>>I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
>>quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
>>responsibility for the clog,
>
>
> Because they state this in their guarantee - if their product causes a
> problem, they'll take the printer in and sort it out.
>
>
>>While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at
>
>
>>fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad
>>batch, maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do
>
> know
>
>>is "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is
>
> appropriate.
>
> Quite true, but I am assured that there are many satisfied Jettec users
> out there. Maybe they're not all as fussy as me when it comes to photo
> quality output. For me, an inkjet photo has to be indistinguishable
> from a RA45 print. This *was* achieved to begin with using part
> Jettec, part Epson ink.
>
>
>>I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to
>
>
>>determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that
>
> doesn't
>
>>imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
>>doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.
>
>
> Quite honestly, I don't know which is to blame. However, Epson have
> now replaced the printer and Jettec are sending me a complimentary set
> of cartridges for my trouble.
>
> Both companies are therefore rather brill. But, I haven't plucked up
> the courage to even unpack the printer yet.
>
>
>>I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer
>
>
>>and may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased,
>>especially considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180
>>degrees to your own conclusions. I think you should have waited for
>>much more knowledge before making a public pronouncement, don't you
>
> think?
>
>
> Nooo - that's what Usenet is for! Put it this way, there are other
> Jettec / R800 users out there and they will find this thread most
> helpful. I'm hoping that one or two will pipe up and declare the
> Jettec cart to be absolutely fine for photo work, then again maybe the
> opposite will happen. Then we'll all know for sure.
>
> What I'm trying to achieve is a characterisation of the problem - from
> there a solution will emerge.
>
> R.
>
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 6:00:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Then again, if you do a Google search on just about anything or any
product you will find some unhappy campers. It might be an indication,
however if the numbers start looking convincing.

Art



Al Dykes wrote:


>
> A search of google groups for "jettec ink" gets about 2400 hits. A
> click scan shown that some of them are not very happy.
>
Anonymous
February 11, 2005 10:23:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Do you know if Canon has the same head clogging issue when using the
higher quality 3rd party inks?

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> I find myself in an odd situation here. I certainly have a number of
> issues with how Epson approaches their ink sales, and cartridge
> design, and I am not pleased with their business model, or the waste
> they create in the cartridges being non-reusable.
>
> However, although I'm happy on your account that Epson chose to
> replace your printer, I am less happy on my account, (because there is
> a good likelihood they should not have) and because you are not
> correct about where the laws stand on their warranty.
>
> Although there are differences between the law used in different
> countries, they are all pretty much based upon the concept of what is
> referred to as Tie-In sales. The basis in law is that a company
> should not be able to require a purchaser to have to buy certain goods
> to get other goods, and that creating a warranty that forces a present
> to use certain specific parts or consumables in order to maintain a
> warranty is another way to coerce a purchaser into having to buy a
> tied-in product.
>
> However, the law goes further in its interpretation, and I feel that
> this is only fair. The warranty cannot be refused on account of use
> of of a different brand of consumable IF:
>
> 1) The consumable was not in any way related to the nature of the
> failure (as an example a company would have a hard time proving a
> power supply failure was related to the brand of paper you used)
>
> 2) The consumable product was a reasonable equivalent and met the
> manufacturer's or an independent bodies standards.
>
> For instance, you use a standard brand of gasoline or oil in your car
> that is equivalent or exceeds the manufacturer's stated standards to
> protect the car, the manufacturer cannot deny the warranty claiming
> that the engine failure was caused by the oil or gas not being their
> brand.
>
> However, let's say the gasoline was too low an octane, causing pinking
> or it contained dirt and water in it, or the oil did not have proper
> anti-oxidation additives and became sludgy and clogged the oil ports,
> so the engine died from friction. That would be a legitimate right
> for the manufacture to bill for the engine failure.
>
> Epson recently paid for an "independent" test on their inks compared
> to several un-named brands. However, these unnamed inks were
> described by origin. Several were made in the UK and sold in the UK
> and the US. Some were made in China, one or two were US.
>
> All were found to be inferior, either leading to lower yield per
> cartridge, or more often leading to rather severe clogging. The tests
> were done both with refill inks, and with "compatible" cartridges.
>
> Now I know that Epson makes their profits on the ink, but then again,
> so do the 3rd party vendors, and they don't have the cost of making
> the printers which are often sold near cost.
>
> In many cases, especially with Durabrite and Ultrachrome substitute
> inks there are some major clogs that can occur. The people I know
> that are using the R800 have used exclusively Eposninks, andEpson inks
> still printing without difficulties.
>
> So, yes, you got a new or refurb printer from Epson, and that's "nice"
> but it is also what raises costs for everyone. Head clogs are always
> the result of the ink, on some level. The risk of problems with newer
> ink formulations made by 3rd party is yet a higher risk. Yes, it
> saves money, but how can you expect Epson to be responsible? People
> could feed anything into their printers.
>
> Epson has taken a policy of not arguing too often about this issue,
> because of the misperception about the law, and because it would
> become a he said/she said situation. But there may come a time,
> especially as OEM ink products lose market share to compatibles, that
> Epson may well dig in their heels and say, we will test each printer
> for inks installed, and if it's a head clog and a 3rd party ink, we
> will only repair or replace by charging the customer. They would be
> in their rights to do so, and it would lower costs for others.
> Warranty repair and replacement is one of the most expensive cost in
> servicing a client.
>
> I'm guessing, as profit margins shrink some companies may indeed begin
> to get hard-nosed. Especially in the low end printers, where they
> give you the printer for the "cost" of the ink, and then people use
> non-branded ink, to save money, but expect the printer manufacturer to
> pay cost to repair or replace when bad ink is used.
>
>
> As far as usenet, I think perhaps couching the terms a bit more fairly
> without jumping to conclusions as to cause, may have been more fair,
> especially consdiering the company got you a new printer.
>
> Art
>
>
>
>
>
> Zero wrote:
>
>> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I find this posting suspect.
>>>
>>> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
>>> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
>>> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
>>> changed the ink.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Art,
>>
>> Well, the failure didn't happen straight away - for a while the printer
>> ran perfectly with combined Epson and Jettec inks on board. As the
>> original Epson ones ran out so they were replaced by Jettec items. In
>> fact I changed the cyan and yellow twice with Jettec before needing a
>> magenta. It was when I replaced this cart for the first time that it
>> all started going wrong. To me it seemed to be a mechanical failure
>> with the printer - I even ditched the offending magenta cart for
>> another (Jettec) one but to no avail. Why should a printer that was
>> working fine with a third party product all of a sudden NOT work?
>>
>> I have some evidence that early R800s had problems with cracked intake
>> ports (where the cart's ink outlet meets the printer). Bought last
>> July, I'd say my R800 was one of the first...
>>
>> Or, maybe it is as you suggest; some sort of chemical reaction, in this
>> case with the magenta.
>>
>> As for blaming Epson for not taking responsibility - at the end of the
>> day, I bought an expensive printer to print photos. The printer
>> printed the most beautiful images I've ever seen, until it broke down -
>> therefore it is a warranty claim against Epson. Whether or not I chose
>> to use third party consumables in it makes no difference; despite
>> Epson's FUD in this respect they cannot force customers to buy their
>> (overpriced) inks by threatening not to honour the warranty, because
>> this is against the law. You have to bear in mind where the profit is
>> - you guessed it; in the inks and papers, not the printer itself.
>> Incidentally, I only use Epson's very best photo paper.
>>
>>
>>> Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
>>> admit there have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet).
>>
>>
>> It
>>
>>> is a very new printer, but I know of several cases of people who have
>>
>>
>>
>>> gone through over 4 sets of ink with no problem.
>>
>>
>>
>> They are on Epson ink? OK, I have to admit, if faced with a free
>> choice of Epson or Jettec ink for my printer, I'd choose Epson. Faced
>> with the bill, I'd choose Jettec.
>>
>> What I'd like to know is; who is using third party ink to print lots of
>> photos, trouble free, on an R800?
>>
>>
>>
>>> You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
>>> replacement by Epson or what.
>>
>>
>>
>> I still have the 875DC - now used for printing invoices.
>>
>>
>>> I can state that there is a 98% chance
>>> that the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of
>>
>>
>>
>>> that clog and been made into a printer almost as new with a little
>>
>>
>> home
>>
>>> maintenance.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmm - I've tried ALL this 'maintenance'on the 875DC; Windowlene, paper
>> towels, running cleaning cycles and leaving the thing overnight etc.
>> None of it worked. Then again, why should I have to mess about with my
>> printer like this? If I look at Canon for instance, I see non-chipped
>> cartridges and removable print heads. To top this the cost of the
>> proper Canon carts isn't extortionate, unlike Epson's prices.
>>
>> So, why did I choose the R800? On the basis that it was the best photo
>> printer available that took my favourite paper and could also use a
>> ready supply of high quality, reasonably priced third party inks.
>>
>>
>>> I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
>>> quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
>>> responsibility for the clog,
>>
>>
>>
>> Because they state this in their guarantee - if their product causes a
>> problem, they'll take the printer in and sort it out.
>>
>>
>>> While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at
>>
>>
>>
>>> fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad
>>> batch, maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do
>>
>>
>> know
>>
>>> is "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is
>>
>>
>> appropriate.
>>
>> Quite true, but I am assured that there are many satisfied Jettec users
>> out there. Maybe they're not all as fussy as me when it comes to photo
>> quality output. For me, an inkjet photo has to be indistinguishable
>> from a RA45 print. This *was* achieved to begin with using part
>> Jettec, part Epson ink.
>>
>>
>>> I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to
>>
>>
>>
>>> determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that
>>
>>
>> doesn't
>>
>>> imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
>>> doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.
>>
>>
>>
>> Quite honestly, I don't know which is to blame. However, Epson have
>> now replaced the printer and Jettec are sending me a complimentary set
>> of cartridges for my trouble.
>>
>> Both companies are therefore rather brill. But, I haven't plucked up
>> the courage to even unpack the printer yet.
>>
>>
>>> I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer
>>
>>
>>
>>> and may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased,
>>> especially considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180
>>> degrees to your own conclusions. I think you should have waited for
>>> much more knowledge before making a public pronouncement, don't you
>>
>>
>> think?
>>
>>
>> Nooo - that's what Usenet is for! Put it this way, there are other
>> Jettec / R800 users out there and they will find this thread most
>> helpful. I'm hoping that one or two will pipe up and declare the
>> Jettec cart to be absolutely fine for photo work, then again maybe the
>> opposite will happen. Then we'll all know for sure.
>>
>> What I'm trying to achieve is a characterisation of the problem - from
>> there a solution will emerge.
>>
>> R.
>>
>
Anonymous
February 12, 2005 4:25:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:23:49 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Do you know if Canon has the same head clogging issue when using the
>higher quality 3rd party inks?
>
Canon's problem is usually head burn out.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
February 12, 2005 6:56:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Well, first of all, one never quite knows how "higher quality" the inks
are that you used, or how compatible they were. The R800 uses a
uniquely designed ink that Epson owns the rights to. Canon printers do
not currently come with pigment colorant inks, only dye, and as a
result, they fade rather badly. And yes, Canon 3rd party inks can
causes clogging, but dye inks are less clog prone than pigment colorant
types.

Most people buy the R800 because it uses these specialized pigment
colorant inks which have very good light resistance. Are the 3rd party
inks you put in pigment types? Do they use Epson's patented pigments or
equivalent, which are every finely ground? Do they use polymer
encapsulation? I am not just tossing these terms around because Epson
uses them in their advertising. The Durabrite and Ultrachrome inks were
designed by/for Epson and are a patented formulations. Getting pigment
colorant inks through an inkjet is no simple matter. The formulations
need to be designed very carefully, their solvents and carriers are
critical, as are the sizes of the ground pigments. Their drying time
and ionic charges are important also.

It's a bit like the difference between diesel and jet fuel. You can run
a diesel engine of oil furnace fuel without a problem, but I wouldn't
try mixing up jet fuel in my backyard.

If you want a Canon printer, and be saddled with fading inks, go ahead
and buy one, and use 3rd party inks with it, and chances are it won't
clog too badly. Buying a C , CX or the R800 or 2200 printers and then
running them of 3rd party inks is perhaps pushing the current limit of
the 3rd party ink distributors. Tests have show even some of the 3rd
party dye inks have problems in the Epson dye ink printers.

Art

measekite wrote:

> Do you know if Canon has the same head clogging issue when using the
> higher quality 3rd party inks?
>
> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>> I find myself in an odd situation here. I certainly have a number of
>> issues with how Epson approaches their ink sales, and cartridge
>> design, and I am not pleased with their business model, or the waste
>> they create in the cartridges being non-reusable.
>>
>> However, although I'm happy on your account that Epson chose to
>> replace your printer, I am less happy on my account, (because there is
>> a good likelihood they should not have) and because you are not
>> correct about where the laws stand on their warranty.
>>
>> Although there are differences between the law used in different
>> countries, they are all pretty much based upon the concept of what is
>> referred to as Tie-In sales. The basis in law is that a company
>> should not be able to require a purchaser to have to buy certain goods
>> to get other goods, and that creating a warranty that forces a present
>> to use certain specific parts or consumables in order to maintain a
>> warranty is another way to coerce a purchaser into having to buy a
>> tied-in product.
>>
>> However, the law goes further in its interpretation, and I feel that
>> this is only fair. The warranty cannot be refused on account of use
>> of of a different brand of consumable IF:
>>
>> 1) The consumable was not in any way related to the nature of the
>> failure (as an example a company would have a hard time proving a
>> power supply failure was related to the brand of paper you used)
>>
>> 2) The consumable product was a reasonable equivalent and met the
>> manufacturer's or an independent bodies standards.
>>
>> For instance, you use a standard brand of gasoline or oil in your car
>> that is equivalent or exceeds the manufacturer's stated standards to
>> protect the car, the manufacturer cannot deny the warranty claiming
>> that the engine failure was caused by the oil or gas not being their
>> brand.
>>
>> However, let's say the gasoline was too low an octane, causing pinking
>> or it contained dirt and water in it, or the oil did not have proper
>> anti-oxidation additives and became sludgy and clogged the oil ports,
>> so the engine died from friction. That would be a legitimate right
>> for the manufacture to bill for the engine failure.
>>
>> Epson recently paid for an "independent" test on their inks compared
>> to several un-named brands. However, these unnamed inks were
>> described by origin. Several were made in the UK and sold in the UK
>> and the US. Some were made in China, one or two were US.
>>
>> All were found to be inferior, either leading to lower yield per
>> cartridge, or more often leading to rather severe clogging. The tests
>> were done both with refill inks, and with "compatible" cartridges.
>>
>> Now I know that Epson makes their profits on the ink, but then again,
>> so do the 3rd party vendors, and they don't have the cost of making
>> the printers which are often sold near cost.
>>
>> In many cases, especially with Durabrite and Ultrachrome substitute
>> inks there are some major clogs that can occur. The people I know
>> that are using the R800 have used exclusively Eposninks, andEpson inks
>> still printing without difficulties.
>>
>> So, yes, you got a new or refurb printer from Epson, and that's "nice"
>> but it is also what raises costs for everyone. Head clogs are always
>> the result of the ink, on some level. The risk of problems with newer
>> ink formulations made by 3rd party is yet a higher risk. Yes, it
>> saves money, but how can you expect Epson to be responsible? People
>> could feed anything into their printers.
>>
>> Epson has taken a policy of not arguing too often about this issue,
>> because of the misperception about the law, and because it would
>> become a he said/she said situation. But there may come a time,
>> especially as OEM ink products lose market share to compatibles, that
>> Epson may well dig in their heels and say, we will test each printer
>> for inks installed, and if it's a head clog and a 3rd party ink, we
>> will only repair or replace by charging the customer. They would be
>> in their rights to do so, and it would lower costs for others.
>> Warranty repair and replacement is one of the most expensive cost in
>> servicing a client.
>>
>> I'm guessing, as profit margins shrink some companies may indeed begin
>> to get hard-nosed. Especially in the low end printers, where they
>> give you the printer for the "cost" of the ink, and then people use
>> non-branded ink, to save money, but expect the printer manufacturer to
>> pay cost to repair or replace when bad ink is used.
>>
>>
>> As far as usenet, I think perhaps couching the terms a bit more fairly
>> without jumping to conclusions as to cause, may have been more fair,
>> especially consdiering the company got you a new printer.
>>
>> Art
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Zero wrote:
>>
>>> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I find this posting suspect.
>>>>
>>>> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
>>>> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
>>>> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
>>>> changed the ink.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Art,
>>>
>>> Well, the failure didn't happen straight away - for a while the printer
>>> ran perfectly with combined Epson and Jettec inks on board. As the
>>> original Epson ones ran out so they were replaced by Jettec items. In
>>> fact I changed the cyan and yellow twice with Jettec before needing a
>>> magenta. It was when I replaced this cart for the first time that it
>>> all started going wrong. To me it seemed to be a mechanical failure
>>> with the printer - I even ditched the offending magenta cart for
>>> another (Jettec) one but to no avail. Why should a printer that was
>>> working fine with a third party product all of a sudden NOT work?
>>>
>>> I have some evidence that early R800s had problems with cracked intake
>>> ports (where the cart's ink outlet meets the printer). Bought last
>>> July, I'd say my R800 was one of the first...
>>>
>>> Or, maybe it is as you suggest; some sort of chemical reaction, in this
>>> case with the magenta.
>>>
>>> As for blaming Epson for not taking responsibility - at the end of the
>>> day, I bought an expensive printer to print photos. The printer
>>> printed the most beautiful images I've ever seen, until it broke down -
>>> therefore it is a warranty claim against Epson. Whether or not I chose
>>> to use third party consumables in it makes no difference; despite
>>> Epson's FUD in this respect they cannot force customers to buy their
>>> (overpriced) inks by threatening not to honour the warranty, because
>>> this is against the law. You have to bear in mind where the profit is
>>> - you guessed it; in the inks and papers, not the printer itself.
>>> Incidentally, I only use Epson's very best photo paper.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
>>>> admit there have been no reports of clogged heads in the R800 (yet).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It
>>>
>>>> is a very new printer, but I know of several cases of people who have
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> gone through over 4 sets of ink with no problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They are on Epson ink? OK, I have to admit, if faced with a free
>>> choice of Epson or Jettec ink for my printer, I'd choose Epson. Faced
>>> with the bill, I'd choose Jettec.
>>>
>>> What I'd like to know is; who is using third party ink to print lots of
>>> photos, trouble free, on an R800?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> You state the R800 replaced the 875DC. I can't tell if that was a
>>>> replacement by Epson or what.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I still have the 875DC - now used for printing invoices.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I can state that there is a 98% chance
>>>> that the "permanently clogged yellow head" could have been cleared of
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> that clog and been made into a printer almost as new with a little
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> home
>>>
>>>> maintenance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm - I've tried ALL this 'maintenance'on the 875DC; Windowlene, paper
>>> towels, running cleaning cycles and leaving the thing overnight etc.
>>> None of it worked. Then again, why should I have to mess about with my
>>> printer like this? If I look at Canon for instance, I see non-chipped
>>> cartridges and removable print heads. To top this the cost of the
>>> proper Canon carts isn't extortionate, unlike Epson's prices.
>>>
>>> So, why did I choose the R800? On the basis that it was the best photo
>>> printer available that took my favourite paper and could also use a
>>> ready supply of high quality, reasonably priced third party inks.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I also wonder how you know "Jettec guard their reputation for high
>>>> quality". It seems to me they are, at least for now, accepting some
>>>> responsibility for the clog,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Because they state this in their guarantee - if their product causes a
>>> problem, they'll take the printer in and sort it out.
>>>
>>>
>>>> While Jettec may indeed "guard their reputation" they may still be at
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> fault. Maybe the inks react with each other, maybe they made a bad
>>>> batch, maybe its all a coincidences, but we don't know. What I do
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> know
>>>
>>>> is "guarding one's reputation" doesn't prove the product is
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> appropriate.
>>>
>>> Quite true, but I am assured that there are many satisfied Jettec users
>>> out there. Maybe they're not all as fussy as me when it comes to photo
>>> quality output. For me, an inkjet photo has to be indistinguishable
>>> from a RA45 print. This *was* achieved to begin with using part
>>> Jettec, part Epson ink.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think that Jettec is being responsible in evaluating the printer to
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> determine if their inks were involved in the failure, but that
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> doesn't
>>>
>>>> imply the problem wasn't of their product's doing, and it certainly
>>>> doesn't point the finger at Epson, at least not yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Quite honestly, I don't know which is to blame. However, Epson have
>>> now replaced the printer and Jettec are sending me a complimentary set
>>> of cartridges for my trouble.
>>>
>>> Both companies are therefore rather brill. But, I haven't plucked up
>>> the courage to even unpack the printer yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I know you don't want to irritate Jettec while they have your printer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> and may replace it for you, but your posting is pretty biased,
>>>> especially considering the circumstantial evidence turns exactly 180
>>>> degrees to your own conclusions. I think you should have waited for
>>>> much more knowledge before making a public pronouncement, don't you
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> think?
>>>
>>>
>>> Nooo - that's what Usenet is for! Put it this way, there are other
>>> Jettec / R800 users out there and they will find this thread most
>>> helpful. I'm hoping that one or two will pipe up and declare the
>>> Jettec cart to be absolutely fine for photo work, then again maybe the
>>> opposite will happen. Then we'll all know for sure.
>>>
>>> What I'm trying to achieve is a characterisation of the problem - from
>>> there a solution will emerge.
>>>
>>> R.
>>>
>>
Anonymous
February 12, 2005 9:07:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:53:40 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net> wrote:

>I find myself in an odd situation here. I certainly have a number of
>issues with how Epson approaches their ink sales, and cartridge design,
>and I am not pleased with their business model, or the waste they create
>in the cartridges being non-reusable.



The EU has or is bringing out a law that will ban chipped Ink Tanks, and they
must be refillable..

Its to do with EU Pollution laws..
Anonymous
February 12, 2005 9:07:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Yes, I am are of that, and I comment them for doing so. I think it goes
into effect next year. It will be very interesting to see how the
inkjet companies decide to meet the legislation.

Art

puss@purrpurr.com wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:53:40 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I find myself in an odd situation here. I certainly have a number of
>>issues with how Epson approaches their ink sales, and cartridge design,
>>and I am not pleased with their business model, or the waste they create
>>in the cartridges being non-reusable.
>
>
>
>
> The EU has or is bringing out a law that will ban chipped Ink Tanks, and they
> must be refillable..
>
> Its to do with EU Pollution laws..
>
>
Anonymous
February 12, 2005 10:48:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich


I don't know if you have this web site so here it is

http://www.alotofthings.com/supportforrefillers/beyondt...



Very similar Tanks to my R210..

Epson NZ told me by E-mail, the reason for the different Tanks and Model
number (R200/210) was that the Ink & Tanks were made for NZ/OZZ Climatic
conditions..


What a Big load of Bull.

Its to shop people importing Epson tanks from the US etc..

As most stuff here is way dearer..

Funny though that my R210 Tanks are made in Mexico..
February 13, 2005 2:52:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

puss@purrpurr.com wrote:
>
>
> Arthur Entlich
>
>
> I don't know if you have this web site so here it is
>
> http://www.alotofthings.com/supportforrefillers/beyondt...
>
>
>
> Very similar Tanks to my R210..
>
> Epson NZ told me by E-mail, the reason for the different Tanks and Model
> number (R200/210) was that the Ink & Tanks were made for NZ/OZZ Climatic
> conditions..
>
>
> What a Big load of Bull.
>
> Its to shop people importing Epson tanks from the US etc..
>
> As most stuff here is way dearer..
>
> Funny though that my R210 Tanks are made in Mexico..
>
>

I have had 3 different packaging for the ink cartridges of my R210 all
work the same - the current ones are "for the asia pacific" and are made
in mexico.

have one left from an old set "for use in Taiwan" - this box has
different markings and not specified where its made.

Inspecting the actual cartridge, the internal sealed package, they are
both identical. Both have the Japanese address. But the Taiwan use has
Made in China on the cartridge. And the Asia/Pacific has Mexico on it.

Go figure?
Anonymous
February 13, 2005 4:17:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich


I don't know if you have this web site so here it is

http://www.alotofthings.com/supportforrefillers/beyondt...



Very similar Tanks to my R210..

Epson NZ told me by E-mail, the reason for the different Tanks and Model
number (R200/210) was that the Ink & Tanks were made for NZ/OZZ Climatic
conditions..


What a Big load of Bull.

Its to shop people importing Epson tanks from the US etc..

As most stuff here is way dearer..

Funny though that my R210 Tanks are made in Mexico..
Anonymous
February 14, 2005 12:56:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
> I find this posting suspect.
>
> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
> changed the ink. Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you

I agree, I have seen so many of such postings in correlation
with use of 3rd party inks. Of course the genuine inks are
expensive, but until a specific 3rd party ink will be tested
by one of the known labs and maybe even endorsed by the
manufacturer (...keep dreaming...), I would rather stay with the
genuine article, *especially while printer warranty is valid*!!!

This is my recommendation to everyone. Stay away from 3rd
party inks as long the printer has a valid warranty!

We all know that this policy of not endorsing any 3rd
party ink by printer manufacturers does not base on merits
of these products. They want to sell you their overpriced
ink. Consider it what it is: A rest payment for the printer
in small rates. Investigate the market and *maybe* go for a
3rd party ink after your printer warranty becomes void.

Thomas
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 4:53:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:56:28 -0800, ThomasH <henrymot@coco.net> wrote:

>Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>
>> I find this posting suspect.
>>
>> You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
>> cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
>> taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
>> changed the ink. Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
>
>I agree, I have seen so many of such postings in correlation
>with use of 3rd party inks. Of course the genuine inks are
>expensive, but until a specific 3rd party ink will be tested
>by one of the known labs and maybe even endorsed by the
>manufacturer (...keep dreaming...), I would rather stay with the
>genuine article, *especially while printer warranty is valid*!!!
>
> This is my recommendation to everyone. Stay away from 3rd
> party inks as long the printer has a valid warranty!
>
>We all know that this policy of not endorsing any 3rd
>party ink by printer manufacturers does not base on merits
>of these products. They want to sell you their overpriced
>ink. Consider it what it is: A rest payment for the printer
>in small rates. Investigate the market and *maybe* go for a
>3rd party ink after your printer warranty becomes void.
>
It really does depend on the ink. The inks that cause problems are
the ones which people buy as a cost saving. Inks such as Permajet and
Lyson (And their CIS systems) are not at all cheap and work well.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 2:12:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I don't know New Zealand enough in terms of how much variation in
climate there is there within the country, although as I recall Northern
and Southern N.Z. differ markedly in terms of heat and humidity.

If the whole country was truly similar, an ink formulation could be
varied for things like drying time.

What I found very interesting was while dissecting the R800 cartridges
just recently. As far as I was able to determine, much of the complexity
is designed around making the cartridge difficult to refill. It is a
bit of injection plastic marvel and innovation. I particularly like the
fact that one wall of the cartridge can be removed without the fear of
leaking ink (the wall opposite the labeled wall). Once open, there is a
black opaque plastic covering on the cartridge, which makes it
impossible to see where the ink would be going in trying to refill it.
I was able to peel back this black plastic, leaving behind a coating of
clear plastic, so I could see the interior of the cartridge. I wouldn't
suggest removing that black plastic, because the clear plastic left is
thin and probably doesn't protect the cartridge against desiccation, but
I do suspect that black layer is black to keep people from seeing into
the maze of chambers the cartridge has.

Anyway, all a sad state of affairs, as I see it.

Art



BILL wrote:

>
>
> Arthur Entlich
>
>
> I don't know if you have this web site so here it is
>
> http://www.alotofthings.com/supportforrefillers/beyondt...
>
>
>
> Very similar Tanks to my R210..
>
> Epson NZ told me by E-mail, the reason for the different Tanks and Model
> number (R200/210) was that the Ink & Tanks were made for NZ/OZZ Climatic
> conditions..
>
>
> What a Big load of Bull.
>
> Its to shop people importing Epson tanks from the US etc..
>
> As most stuff here is way dearer..
>
> Funny though that my R210 Tanks are made in Mexico..
>
>
Anonymous
February 15, 2005 3:46:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I suggest people buy inks from reputable and well documented ink
sources, who have long solid reputations, and obviously wish to have
long repeated client orders, if they want to buy 3rd party inks. These
inks will tend to be more expensive than other, less known inks, in fact
some specialty inks may cost more than Epson's (hard to believe!) ;-)

Art




Hecate wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:56:28 -0800, ThomasH <henrymot@coco.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>
>>>I find this posting suspect.
>>>
>>>You admit the R800 clogged right after you replaced the Epson ink
>>>cartridges with a third party product. You then blame Epson for not
>>>taking responsibility for this clog which occurred right after you
>>>changed the ink. Somehow your case is coincidental, in spite that you
>>
>>I agree, I have seen so many of such postings in correlation
>>with use of 3rd party inks. Of course the genuine inks are
>>expensive, but until a specific 3rd party ink will be tested
>>by one of the known labs and maybe even endorsed by the
>>manufacturer (...keep dreaming...), I would rather stay with the
>>genuine article, *especially while printer warranty is valid*!!!
>>
>> This is my recommendation to everyone. Stay away from 3rd
>> party inks as long the printer has a valid warranty!
>>
>>We all know that this policy of not endorsing any 3rd
>>party ink by printer manufacturers does not base on merits
>>of these products. They want to sell you their overpriced
>>ink. Consider it what it is: A rest payment for the printer
>>in small rates. Investigate the market and *maybe* go for a
>>3rd party ink after your printer warranty becomes void.
>>
>
> It really does depend on the ink. The inks that cause problems are
> the ones which people buy as a cost saving. Inks such as Permajet and
> Lyson (And their CIS systems) are not at all cheap and work well.
>
> --
>
> Hecate - The Real One
> Hecate@newsguy.com
> veni, vidi, reliqui
>
Anonymous
February 16, 2005 5:15:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:46:10 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
wrote:

>I suggest people buy inks from reputable and well documented ink
>sources, who have long solid reputations, and obviously wish to have
>long repeated client orders, if they want to buy 3rd party inks. These
>inks will tend to be more expensive than other, less known inks, in fact
>some specialty inks may cost more than Epson's (hard to believe!) ;-)
>
Absolutely Art. In particular, the B&W inks from the companies I
mentioned are great,. but expensive :) 

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 12:51:11 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:12:32 GMT, Arthur Entlich <artistic@telus.net>
wrote:

>...
>What I found very interesting was while dissecting the R800 cartridges
>just recently. As far as I was able to determine, much of the complexity
>is designed around making the cartridge difficult to refill. It is a
>bit of injection plastic marvel and innovation.
>...

Hello,

I can't speak about the R800 cartridges, I own an Epson Stylus 2100
which has cartridges of similar complexity (yes, pretty amasing,
indeed), but I disagree that much of the complexity is to make refill
more difficult. (Actually refill of the 2100/2200-cartridges is quite
easy if you know how to do it. I expect the same for the R800, but where
can one get the bulk R800-ink? For the "normal" Ultrachrome ink there
are those big catridges for the Epson Pro 4000/7600/... quite cheaper
per ml than the small cartridges!)

Some of the complicated multi-chamber "injection plastic marvel" is
designed to maintain a constant (optimal) liquid pressure to the print
head over most of the cartridges ink capacity. Air breathing must be
designed in a way to minimize foaming up the ink. You can't use a sponge
with those pigment inks.

But some features are clearly against easy refill: one or two one-way
valves, double wall design, overall complexity ...

You can't just drill a hole and fill in the juice (use negative pressure
refill techniques instead and a little easy modification of the
cartridge, that's it!).


\relax\bye % Viktor 8-)
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 5:42:14 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I agree some of the design is to protect the ink flow and from oxidation
and drying, and somewhat to maintain even flow and pressure, but much of
the complexity is there to compound and confound.

Negative pressure filling probably works (it looks as though that's how
they fill them the first time) but for most people, it is just too involved.

Art

Viktor Darnedde wrote:


>
> But some features are clearly against easy refill: one or two one-way
> valves, double wall design, overall complexity ...
>
> You can't just drill a hole and fill in the juice (use negative pressure
> refill techniques instead and a little easy modification of the
> cartridge, that's it!).
>
>
> \relax\bye % Viktor 8-)
>
February 28, 2005 4:13:06 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Well everyone, thanks for a very interesting read so far. The next
part of the tale follows; you'll like this.

There was I, with the factory refurbished (as far as I could see it was
brand new) R800, but no Epson inks had come with it. In the meantime,
Jettec had kindly sent me a complimentary set of inks for all my
trouble, so a scientific test was on: new printer with 3rd party inks.


I decided to document my findings in minute detail (which I will
summarise here) for Jettec's benefit; after all here was a brand
spanking new printer and if their product didn't work properly in it
then there would be absolute proof that any problem caused was at least
not from a chemical reaction between Epson and Jettec ink. It would
also hint very strongly that a printer malfunction was not the cause.
Ultimately, if the combination didn't work then the problem would point
at the inks, not the printer.

A revealing result was obtained.

The new printer and new Jettec ink were introduced. Everything went
smoothly whilst the printer primed itself. Then began the nozzle
checks - o-ho, what do we have here; no magenta or red ink flowing but
all other inks absolutely fine! No matter what I tried, be it standard
cleaning program, an auto-nozzle-check / cleaning program, leaving it
overnight and trying to print out large blocks of magenta and red,
hardly any of either colour came through.

If you remember, my initial problem began when replacing an Epson
magenta cartridge for a Jettec one, despite previously having used
Jettec cyan and yellow. This therefore pointed at a design flaw with
the Jettec magenta and red R800 inks.

I revealed my findings immediately to Jettec, who were magnanimous;
another brand new R800 (*with* Epson inks) would be dispatched to me
the same day and the suspect unit returned to them by the same courier.


That was a couple of weeks ago but I've not had the courage to even
open the new R800 box!

I will try and find out what happened with the faulty printer/ink combo
from my contact at the factory and post back on this thread.

Cheers all

Zero.
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 12:30:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 28-Feb-2005, "Zero" <spamtest@linuxpeople.co.uk> wrote:

> A revealing result was obtained.
>
> The new printer and new Jettec ink were introduced. Everything went
> smoothly whilst the printer primed itself. Then began the nozzle
> checks - o-ho, what do we have here; no magenta or red ink flowing but
> all other inks absolutely fine!

This explains a lot, my printer died the day I refilled with Jettec. Will
never touch Jettec again. Their inks aren't compatible. I've got
hold of some of the old cycle valve rubber tubing, if it fits the spike
I'll try to see if the Jettec syringe will flush cleaner through the jets,
I've nothing to lose since Jettec b*****red up the printer.
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 3:23:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

While some have had reasonable luck with 3rd party inks (others have had
trouble) whether it be Canon or Epson, it appears that when using a 3rd
party pigmented ink like what the R800 uses, there may be a tendency for
more problems. I guess that expensive factory ink is best for this
expensive printer.

Zero wrote:

>Well everyone, thanks for a very interesting read so far. The next
>part of the tale follows; you'll like this.
>
>There was I, with the factory refurbished (as far as I could see it was
>brand new) R800, but no Epson inks had come with it. In the meantime,
>Jettec had kindly sent me a complimentary set of inks for all my
>trouble, so a scientific test was on: new printer with 3rd party inks.
>
>
>I decided to document my findings in minute detail (which I will
>summarise here) for Jettec's benefit; after all here was a brand
>spanking new printer and if their product didn't work properly in it
>then there would be absolute proof that any problem caused was at least
>not from a chemical reaction between Epson and Jettec ink. It would
>also hint very strongly that a printer malfunction was not the cause.
>Ultimately, if the combination didn't work then the problem would point
>at the inks, not the printer.
>
>A revealing result was obtained.
>
>The new printer and new Jettec ink were introduced. Everything went
>smoothly whilst the printer primed itself. Then began the nozzle
>checks - o-ho, what do we have here; no magenta or red ink flowing but
>all other inks absolutely fine! No matter what I tried, be it standard
>cleaning program, an auto-nozzle-check / cleaning program, leaving it
>overnight and trying to print out large blocks of magenta and red,
>hardly any of either colour came through.
>
>If you remember, my initial problem began when replacing an Epson
>magenta cartridge for a Jettec one, despite previously having used
>Jettec cyan and yellow. This therefore pointed at a design flaw with
>the Jettec magenta and red R800 inks.
>
>I revealed my findings immediately to Jettec, who were magnanimous;
>another brand new R800 (*with* Epson inks) would be dispatched to me
>the same day and the suspect unit returned to them by the same courier.
>
>
>That was a couple of weeks ago but I've not had the courage to even
>open the new R800 box!
>
>I will try and find out what happened with the faulty printer/ink combo
>from my contact at the factory and post back on this thread.
>
>Cheers all
>
>Zero.
>
>
>
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:52:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hi Zero

Suggestion: stick to Epson inks.

The great advantage of the r800 is that,
besides printing lovely images, the prints
will last a very long time.

Forgetting clogged nozzles for the moment:
By using 3rd party inks, the odds are high
that your prints won't last as long.

In an r800, 3rd-party inks are a false economy.

-- stan
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 11:10:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

So if you do not use the Epson Brand of pigmented inks then you are
tabling the longevity issue so you might as well have all of the
advantages of a Canon Pixma Printer.

Stanley Krute wrote:

>Hi Zero
>
>Suggestion: stick to Epson inks.
>
>The great advantage of the r800 is that,
>besides printing lovely images, the prints
>will last a very long time.
>
>Forgetting clogged nozzles for the moment:
>By using 3rd party inks, the odds are high
>that your prints won't last as long.
>
>In an r800, 3rd-party inks are a false economy.
>
>-- stan
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 7:55:07 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I do wonder why someone would spend the money that an R800 costs, at
about double to triple that of similar printers using dye inks, and then
not use the specialty inks that Epson produces for it. I suppose there
could be reasonable clone ink out there, but the characteristics of the
R800 inks are somewhat unique. They are special colors (CMYRBKK +GLOSS,
have special characteristics (very fade resistant colorants) and the
gloss feature for high gloss result) all making 3rd party inks probably
harder to accomplish well.

I think, at least for now, anyone buying an R800 or R1800 printer should
calculate the cost of the OEM inks in their usage plans, or buy a
different printer.


Art

measekite wrote:

> So if you do not use the Epson Brand of pigmented inks then you are
> tabling the longevity issue so you might as well have all of the
> advantages of a Canon Pixma Printer.
>
> Stanley Krute wrote:
>
>> Hi Zero
>>
>> Suggestion: stick to Epson inks.
>>
>> The great advantage of the r800 is that,
>> besides printing lovely images, the prints
>> will last a very long time.
>>
>> Forgetting clogged nozzles for the moment:
>> By using 3rd party inks, the odds are high
>> that your prints won't last as long.
>>
>> In an r800, 3rd-party inks are a false economy.
>>
>> -- stan
>>
>>
>>
>>
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 9:59:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Arthur Entlich wrote:

> I do wonder why someone would spend the money that an R800 costs, at
> about double to triple that of similar printers using dye inks, and
> then not use the specialty inks that Epson produces for it. I suppose
> there could be reasonable clone ink out there, but the characteristics
> of the R800 inks are somewhat unique. They are special colors
> (CMYRBKK +GLOSS, have special characteristics (very fade resistant
> colorants) and the gloss feature for high gloss result) all making 3rd
> party inks probably harder to accomplish well.
>
> I think, at least for now, anyone buying an R800 or R1800 printer
> should calculate the cost of the OEM inks in their usage plans, or buy
> a different printer.

:-) Halleula :-)

But the ink is very expensive and Epsons are designed in such a way to
use as much of it as possible. If your not a print reseller then I
would say the Canon i9900 would provide better results.

>
>
> Art
>
> measekite wrote:
>
>> So if you do not use the Epson Brand of pigmented inks then you are
>> tabling the longevity issue so you might as well have all of the
>> advantages of a Canon Pixma Printer.
>>
>> Stanley Krute wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Zero
>>>
>>> Suggestion: stick to Epson inks.
>>>
>>> The great advantage of the r800 is that,
>>> besides printing lovely images, the prints
>>> will last a very long time.
>>>
>>> Forgetting clogged nozzles for the moment:
>>> By using 3rd party inks, the odds are high
>>> that your prints won't last as long.
>>>
>>> In an r800, 3rd-party inks are a false economy.
>>>
>>> -- stan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 12:08:42 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Prof. Dr. Yr. Honor Measekite:

> If your not a print reseller then I would say the Canon i9900 would
> provide better results.

Is it possible for you to envision a universe
in which printers other than Canons meet
a variety of users' needs ?

-- stan
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 6:38:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Stanley Krute wrote:

>Prof. Dr. Yr. Honor Measekite:
>
>
>
>>If your not a print reseller then I would say the Canon i9900 would
>>provide better results.
>>
>>
>
>Is it possible for you to envision a universe
>in which printers other than Canons meet
>a variety of users' needs ?
>
>

If you have followed many of my posts you will find that my primary
business printer is an HP990CSE. It does produce better quality
business documents and a super high quality draft (rivals the Canon
Standard Quality) although not quite as fast. The printer also has a
duplex printing mode. While it does product photos the Canon does much
better and has twin paper feeds. While it is still possible to get a
HP990 today, I would probably get an HP1200. This printer is faster and
has all of the features. It uses individual ink tanks and has 4 very
expensive user changeable print heads independent of the cartridge. I
have not tested the difference in quality nor read any test reports.

That said, for those who want to have just one printer to do everything;
the best compromise is the IP4000. It is even better than the IP8500 if
you are heavy on business documents; however the photos are better and
rival the i9900.

So you see, Canon is not my vision but your interpretation of my vision.

>-- stan
>
>
>
>
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 12:26:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

P.D.Y.H. Measkite

> So you see, Canon is not my vision but your interpretation of my vision.

Thanks for the qualifier Re: your choices being your vision.

Agreement Re: goodness of HP 890's.

-- stan
!