Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

HP laser toner refill question

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
March 21, 2005 3:19:26 AM

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

Hi

Does anyone have a link to a site they could share that shows where on
different HP laser carts you punch the whole to refill with toner?

thanks

dan
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 1, 2005 1:07:27 AM

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

If your lucky may get through the first refill without damaging your
fuser. These cartridges need to be dissasembled to empty the waste
toner and inspect the internal parts for cleaning and damage. But if
your absolutely determined to destroy the cartridge try here:

http://www.refilltoner.com/
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 1, 2005 3:17:04 AM

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

Drill and fill method, if your lucky can be used for one refill safely.
After that you are taking chances as you are bypassing waste removal
(almost all cartridges still produce waste toner, only a very few are
considered waste free, but even they have a drum cleaning roller which
must be removed and cleaned). There are also PCR's , drums and other
components which must be replaced at some point for optimum quality.
For the cartridges with waste bins the waste toner can overflow
spilling toner on the paper which not only causes bad prints, but also
adds excessive wear to all the rollers (including the fusers) in the
paper pathway. It dirties up tranfer coronas and PCR's.

refilltoner.com is using a method which is best kept to fill once then
throw away, basically very low volume users who replace a cartridge
once, maybe twice, a year. How much do they want for the melting
device? You could probably use the cost of the device towards
additional toner or keep it in your pocket if you simply disaasemble
the cartridge (most of which take about 5 minutes to do).
Related resources
April 1, 2005 8:36:03 AM

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

Same here and also for HP color laser. Also what are the issues with the
cartridge chip if one does a refill. I use a 3500.

TIA

"dan" <test@test.com> wrote in message
news:iqo%d.742572$Xk.599002@pd7tw3no...
> Hi
>
> Does anyone have a link to a site they could share that shows where on
> different HP laser carts you punch the whole to refill with toner?
>
> thanks
>
> dan
>
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 1, 2005 11:28:04 AM

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

In message <1112332047.906196.322790@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
WeInk_TechSupport <inksupport@weink.com> writes

>If your lucky may get through the first refill without damaging your
>fuser.

Then I must be very lucky !

But as I'm usually not lucky, I must ask why you think fuser damage is
likely ?


> These cartridges need to be dissasembled to empty the waste
>toner and inspect the internal parts for cleaning and damage.

Which ones do ?

The OP asks

"Does anyone have a link to a site they could share that
shows where on different HP laser carts you punch the
whole to refill with toner?"

and quite a few carts don't even store waste toner do they ?

Indeed, do all printers e.g. LJ4M+ produce toner waste ?


> But if
>your absolutely determined to destroy the cartridge try here:
>
>http://www.refilltoner.com/

Yes - used them a fair bit. Very good !


Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 2, 2005 12:19:03 AM

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

In message <1112339824.109664.253080@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
WeInk_TechSupport <inksupport@weink.com> writes

>Drill and fill method, if your lucky can be used for one refill safely.

Depends what you mean by 'safely' I guess. With LJ4M+ carts I get about
5 refills before quality starts to fail, then I move on to another one.


>After that you are taking chances as you are bypassing waste removal
>(almost all cartridges still produce waste toner, only a very few are
>considered waste free, but even they have a drum cleaning roller which
>must be removed and cleaned). There are also PCR's , drums and other
>components which must be replaced at some point for optimum quality.

Well - I guess it depends what you call optimum.

When an old cart is starting to fail I use the next one for best quality
print, and 'finish off' the old one on draft documents etc. Not rocket
science.


>For the cartridges with waste bins the waste toner can overflow
>spilling toner on the paper which not only causes bad prints, but also
>adds excessive wear to all the rollers (including the fusers) in the
>paper pathway. It dirties up tranfer coronas and PCR's.

Well, maybe, but how much is ware actually increased ?

I've no doubt that there will be some increase if the point where the
cart is leaking is reached, but in percentage terms, how much does this
actually reduce the life of the machine ?

Does anybody have experimental data as opposed to manufacturers
fud ?


>refilltoner.com is using a method which is best kept to fill once then
>throw away, basically very low volume users who replace a cartridge
>once, maybe twice, a year.

Seems to me that the number of carts per year is neither here or there.

As I see it, the more you use, the more you save.


> How much do they want for the melting
>device?

Mine is an apple corer which you heat in a gas flame then cut the hole
with. They bundled it with my first order of toner.


> You could probably use the cost of the device towards
>additional toner or keep it in your pocket if you simply disaasemble
>the cartridge (most of which take about 5 minutes to do).

Possibly, though some people are better with screwdrivers than others.


J/.
--
John Beardmore
April 2, 2005 12:19:04 AM

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

So if I refill my cartridges on my HP 3500 then I will ruin my printer? And
if I refill will it even work if the chip is not replaced or reset?


"John Beardmore" <wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4an3nH8n6ZTCFw9y@wookie.demon.co.uk...
> In message <1112339824.109664.253080@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> WeInk_TechSupport <inksupport@weink.com> writes
>
>>Drill and fill method, if your lucky can be used for one refill safely.
>
> Depends what you mean by 'safely' I guess. With LJ4M+ carts I get about 5
> refills before quality starts to fail, then I move on to another one.
>
>
>>After that you are taking chances as you are bypassing waste removal
>>(almost all cartridges still produce waste toner, only a very few are
>>considered waste free, but even they have a drum cleaning roller which
>>must be removed and cleaned). There are also PCR's , drums and other
>>components which must be replaced at some point for optimum quality.
>
> Well - I guess it depends what you call optimum.
>
> When an old cart is starting to fail I use the next one for best quality
> print, and 'finish off' the old one on draft documents etc. Not rocket
> science.
>
>
>>For the cartridges with waste bins the waste toner can overflow
>>spilling toner on the paper which not only causes bad prints, but also
>>adds excessive wear to all the rollers (including the fusers) in the
>>paper pathway. It dirties up tranfer coronas and PCR's.
>
> Well, maybe, but how much is ware actually increased ?
>
> I've no doubt that there will be some increase if the point where the cart
> is leaking is reached, but in percentage terms, how much does this
> actually reduce the life of the machine ?
>
> Does anybody have experimental data as opposed to manufacturers
> fud ?
>
>
>>refilltoner.com is using a method which is best kept to fill once then
>>throw away, basically very low volume users who replace a cartridge
>>once, maybe twice, a year.
>
> Seems to me that the number of carts per year is neither here or there.
>
> As I see it, the more you use, the more you save.
>
>
>> How much do they want for the melting
>>device?
>
> Mine is an apple corer which you heat in a gas flame then cut the hole
> with. They bundled it with my first order of toner.
>
>
>> You could probably use the cost of the device towards
>>additional toner or keep it in your pocket if you simply disaasemble
>>the cartridge (most of which take about 5 minutes to do).
>
> Possibly, though some people are better with screwdrivers than others.
>
>
> J/.
> --
> John Beardmore
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 2, 2005 1:16:59 PM

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

Some toner cartridges recycle the unused toner, so there is no waste
toner (I don't know what HP is up to these days), and the process of
emptying the waste toner isn't all that difficult to do (although it can
be messy), but I do agree on such cartridges, it should be done to avoid
the waste toner chamber from becoming overfilled and spilling toner out.

Art


WeInk_TechSupport wrote:

> If your lucky may get through the first refill without damaging your
> fuser. These cartridges need to be dissasembled to empty the waste
> toner and inspect the internal parts for cleaning and damage. But if
> your absolutely determined to destroy the cartridge try here:
>
> http://www.refilltoner.com/
>
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 2, 2005 4:49:04 PM

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

In message <RNh3e.867855$Xk.192539@pd7tw3no>, gary
<satmaverick@hotmail.com> writes

>So if I refill my cartridges on my HP 3500 then I will ruin my printer?

I've no idea. All I'm getting at is that the generalisations from WeInk
don't seem very applicable to my HPLJ4M+ or the other mono lasers I've
used.


> And
>if I refill will it even work if the chip is not replaced or reset?

No idea, but it seems to be possible to buy new chips for a lot of
machines.


J/.
--
John Beardmore
April 3, 2005 3:37:09 AM

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

Does that mean a new chip each time you buy a cart or are the aftermarket
chips resettable? I saw a site that had them for $20US for each toner cart.
That is $80 in addition to the toner. The cost savings really narrows.


"John Beardmore" <wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:sbii3W$waoTCFwvL@wookie.demon.co.uk...
> In message <RNh3e.867855$Xk.192539@pd7tw3no>, gary
> <satmaverick@hotmail.com> writes
>
>>So if I refill my cartridges on my HP 3500 then I will ruin my printer?
>
> I've no idea. All I'm getting at is that the generalisations from WeInk
> don't seem very applicable to my HPLJ4M+ or the other mono lasers I've
> used.
>
>
>> And
>>if I refill will it even work if the chip is not replaced or reset?
>
> No idea, but it seems to be possible to buy new chips for a lot of
> machines.
>
>
> J/.
> --
> John Beardmore
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 3, 2005 12:03:28 PM

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

In message <p8F3e.884086$6l.632994@pd7tw2no>, gary
<satmaverick@hotmail.com> writes

>Does that mean a new chip each time you buy a cart or are the aftermarket
>chips resettable?

Resettable generally, but of course you have to buy the resetter !


Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 12, 2005 10:50:13 PM

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

Most HP toner cartridges that are chipped will permit you to refill the
cartridge up to 10 times with a used chip or no chip installed. Once 10
cartridges worth have been used that way the printer must have a
cartridge installed with new HP chip or new compatible chip. Unlike
Lexmark, HP does not lock the cartridge from use every time it empties.
The chips can be re-set professionally, but no consumer level
re-setters are available.

For Art:
None of the HP printers recycle waste toner. Brother and Okidata
printers do this and experience a great deal of maintenance related
problems because of this design, mostly drum unit failure from blocked
toner build-up in the recycling augers.

For Mr. Beardmore:
The type of prints you make have a lot to do with waste build-up in the
LaserJet 4/5 model cartridges. There is no spreader auger in the waste
to distribute waste evenly so if waste is formed unevenly by the
prints, build up can occur towards one end or the other of the waste
bin and eventually cause failure, Additionally the toner is being
constatly heated by the fuser assembly (next which it is located when
the cartridge is installed) and the heat will cause blocking of the
toner (formation of large chunks) molding it into position in the waste
bin.

Your model has a larger waste bin than most cartridges, and of all the
HP models could probably survive the longest in a drill and fill
situation. The 4L, 4P, and 5L on the other hand will fail almost
immediately on the second refill as the first two uses (the original
and first refills) will literally pack the waste hoppers with toner.

Models like the 3si, 4si, 5si, II, IID, IIID have spreader augers which
were powered by the OPC drum rotation so re-using the cartridge without
cleaning the waste bin was known to cause the cartridge to lock-up,
stripping gears in the cartridge and the printer, This was why drill
and fill was frowned upon early on, design changes in newer cartridges
(removing the auger from the waste bin reduced manufacturing costs)
make "drill and fill" less damaging, but does not eliminate all the
draw backs to "drill & fill".

Frankly the 4/5 cartridge is easy to separate into two halves (two
screws removed releases the holding pins) and the bin is easy to open
and clean, I can however understand why you would want to melt a hole
in the toner hopper, since the original fill hole is not accessible
without splitting the toner hopper and the only other way to fill it is
by removing the developer roller and pouring the toner into that
opening.

However, another advantage to disassembling the LaserJet 4/5 cartridge
is that you can clean the doctor blade, removing small paper particles
that collect on the surface (picked up from paper dust in the printer)
and create fine lines where toner is missing on the developer roller.
This is not a large issue with text only printing, but cleaning the
blade prevents early degradation of line art, large fonts, and graphics
which require a higher density of toner for optimum fill, detail and/or
contrast.

"Drill & Fill" is not a good method for all cartridges, and in my
opinion should not be used at all, and any company that encourages such
for everything is doing a disservice.
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 12, 2005 11:09:01 PM

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

Most HP toner cartridges that are chipped will permit you to refill the
cartridge up to 10 times with a used chip or no chip installed. Once 10
cartridges worth have been used that way the printer must have a
cartridge installed with new HP chip or new compatible chip. Unlike
Lexmark, HP does not lock the cartridge from use every time it empties.

For Art:
None of the HP printers recycle waste toner. Brother and Okidata
printers do this and experience a great deal of maintenance related
problems because of this design, mostly drum unit failure from blocked
toner build-up in the recycling augers.

For Mr. Beardmore:
The type of prints you make have a lot to do with waste build-up in the
LaserJet 4/5 model cartridges. There is no spreader auger in the waste
to distribute waste evenly so if waste is formed unevenly by the
prints, build up can occur towards one end or the other of the waste
bin and eventually cause failure, Additionally the toner is being
constatly heated by the fuser assembly (next which it is located when
the cartridge is installed) and the heat will cause blocking of the
toner (formation of large chunks) molding it into position in the waste
bin.

Your model has a larger waste bin than most cartridges, and of all the
HP models could probably survive the longest in a drill and fill
situation. The 4L, 4P, and 5L on the other hand will fail almost
immediately on the second refill as the first two uses (the original
and first refills) will literally pack the waste hoppers with toner.

Models like the 3si, 4si, 5si, II, IID, IIID have spreader augers which
were powered by the OPC drum rotation so re-using the cartridge without
cleaning the waste bin was known to cause the cartridge to lock-up,
stripping gears in the cartridge and the printer, This was why drill
and fill was frowned upon early on, design changes in newer cartridges
(removing the auger from the waste bin reduced manufacturing costs)
make "drill and fill" less damaging, but does not eliminate all the
draw backs to "drill & fill".

Frankly the 4/5 cartridge is easy to separate into two halves (two
screws removed releases the holding pins) and the bin is easy to open
and clean, I can however understand why you would want to melt a hole
in the toner hopper, since the original fill hole is not accessible
without splitting the toner hopper and the only other way to fill it is
by removing the developer roller and pouring the toner into that
opening.

However, another advantage to disassembling the LaserJet 4/5 cartridge
is that you can clean the doctor blade, removing small paper particles
that collect on the surface (picked up from paper dust in the printer)
and create fine lines where toner is missing on the developer roller.
This is not a large issue with text only printing, but cleaning the
blade prevents early degradation of line art, large fonts, and graphics
which require a higher density of toner for optimum fill, detail and/or
contrast.

"Drill & Fill" is not a good method for all cartridges, and in my
opinion should not be used at all, and any company that encourages such
for everything is doing a disservice.
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 14, 2005 3:51:42 AM

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

In message <1113356937.436548.293170@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
WeInk_TechSupport <inksupport@weink.com> writes

>For Mr. Beardmore:
>The type of prints you make have a lot to do with waste build-up in the
>LaserJet 4/5 model cartridges. There is no spreader auger in the waste
>to distribute waste evenly so if waste is formed unevenly by the
>prints, build up can occur towards one end or the other of the waste
>bin and eventually cause failure, Additionally the toner is being
>constatly heated by the fuser assembly (next which it is located when
>the cartridge is installed) and the heat will cause blocking of the
>toner (formation of large chunks) molding it into position in the waste
>bin.
>
>Your model has a larger waste bin than most cartridges, and of all the
>HP models could probably survive the longest in a drill and fill
>situation. The 4L, 4P, and 5L on the other hand will fail almost
>immediately on the second refill as the first two uses (the original
>and first refills) will literally pack the waste hoppers with toner.
>
>Models like the 3si, 4si, 5si, II, IID, IIID have spreader augers which
>were powered by the OPC drum rotation so re-using the cartridge without
>cleaning the waste bin was known to cause the cartridge to lock-up,
>stripping gears in the cartridge and the printer, This was why drill
>and fill was frowned upon early on, design changes in newer cartridges
>(removing the auger from the waste bin reduced manufacturing costs)
>make "drill and fill" less damaging, but does not eliminate all the
>draw backs to "drill & fill".
>
>Frankly the 4/5 cartridge is easy to separate into two halves (two
>screws removed releases the holding pins) and the bin is easy to open
>and clean, I can however understand why you would want to melt a hole
>in the toner hopper, since the original fill hole is not accessible
>without splitting the toner hopper and the only other way to fill it is
>by removing the developer roller and pouring the toner into that
>opening.
>
>However, another advantage to disassembling the LaserJet 4/5 cartridge
>is that you can clean the doctor blade, removing small paper particles
>that collect on the surface (picked up from paper dust in the printer)
>and create fine lines where toner is missing on the developer roller.
>This is not a large issue with text only printing, but cleaning the
>blade prevents early degradation of line art, large fonts, and graphics
>which require a higher density of toner for optimum fill, detail and/or
>contrast.

OK, thanks. I'll try splitting one.


>"Drill & Fill" is not a good method for all cartridges, and in my
>opinion should not be used at all, and any company that encourages such
>for everything is doing a disservice.

Hmmm... Any company that reduces my printing costs by a factor of three
isn't doing so badly.

D&F may not be ideal, but nothing short of design to optimise running
cost ever will be.

Granted the situation we have now is technical nonsense, but it largely
seems to stem from commercial objectives to make excessive profits from
consumables.


Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
Anonymous
a b α HP
April 14, 2005 1:05:02 PM

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

In message <7rmr515ebann49g33gb6quamfahr6l6gdt@4ax.com>, budgie
<me@privacy.net> writes

>>Granted the situation we have now is technical nonsense, but it largely
>>seems to stem from commercial objectives to make excessive profits from
>>consumables.
>
>That certainly is my view of inkjets ("give them the rajor\\\\\printer, cell
>them the blades\\\\\cartridges") but IMHO refillinmg lasers can get rather
>variable results, and with that will invariably follow reputation.

In my experience refilling my HPLJ4M+ has been far more successful than
any ink jet I've ever tried, and with less compromise of quality.


>If I were a laser printer manufacturer I wouldn't make carts which facilitated
>user refilling, but I suspect I'd also not be aiming quite as high with the
>profit factor either. There is a significant - and growing - sector of the
>market that looks at total cost of owning/operating a piece of equipment, and
>over a say five year SOHO life the cart cost starts to dominate even at modest
>usage.

Yes. 'Real cost of ownership' is the issue for sure, but for me,
refilling has had a massive impact on that and I'm very pleased with the
results !


Cheers, J/.
--
John Beardmore
April 14, 2005 2:59:31 PM

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

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 23:51:42 +0100, John Beardmore <wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <1113356937.436548.293170@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
>WeInk_TechSupport <inksupport@weink.com> writes
>
>>For Mr. Beardmore:
>>The type of prints you make have a lot to do with waste build-up in the
>>LaserJet 4/5 model cartridges. There is no spreader auger in the waste
>>to distribute waste evenly so if waste is formed unevenly by the
>>prints, build up can occur towards one end or the other of the waste
>>bin and eventually cause failure, Additionally the toner is being
>>constatly heated by the fuser assembly (next which it is located when
>>the cartridge is installed) and the heat will cause blocking of the
>>toner (formation of large chunks) molding it into position in the waste
>>bin.
>>
>>Your model has a larger waste bin than most cartridges, and of all the
>>HP models could probably survive the longest in a drill and fill
>>situation. The 4L, 4P, and 5L on the other hand will fail almost
>>immediately on the second refill as the first two uses (the original
>>and first refills) will literally pack the waste hoppers with toner.
>>
>>Models like the 3si, 4si, 5si, II, IID, IIID have spreader augers which
>>were powered by the OPC drum rotation so re-using the cartridge without
>>cleaning the waste bin was known to cause the cartridge to lock-up,
>>stripping gears in the cartridge and the printer, This was why drill
>>and fill was frowned upon early on, design changes in newer cartridges
>>(removing the auger from the waste bin reduced manufacturing costs)
>>make "drill and fill" less damaging, but does not eliminate all the
>>draw backs to "drill & fill".
>>
>>Frankly the 4/5 cartridge is easy to separate into two halves (two
>>screws removed releases the holding pins) and the bin is easy to open
>>and clean, I can however understand why you would want to melt a hole
>>in the toner hopper, since the original fill hole is not accessible
>>without splitting the toner hopper and the only other way to fill it is
>>by removing the developer roller and pouring the toner into that
>>opening.
>>
>>However, another advantage to disassembling the LaserJet 4/5 cartridge
>>is that you can clean the doctor blade, removing small paper particles
>>that collect on the surface (picked up from paper dust in the printer)
>>and create fine lines where toner is missing on the developer roller.
>>This is not a large issue with text only printing, but cleaning the
>>blade prevents early degradation of line art, large fonts, and graphics
>>which require a higher density of toner for optimum fill, detail and/or
>>contrast.
>
>OK, thanks. I'll try splitting one.
>
>
>>"Drill & Fill" is not a good method for all cartridges, and in my
>>opinion should not be used at all, and any company that encourages such
>>for everything is doing a disservice.
>
>Hmmm... Any company that reduces my printing costs by a factor of three
>isn't doing so badly.
>
>D&F may not be ideal, but nothing short of design to optimise running
>cost ever will be.
>
>Granted the situation we have now is technical nonsense, but it largely
>seems to stem from commercial objectives to make excessive profits from
>consumables.

That certainly is my view of inkjets ("give them the rajor\\\\\printer, cell
them the blades\\\\\cartridges") but IMHO refillinmg lasers can get rather
variable results, and with that will invariably follow reputation.

If I were a laser printer manufacturer I wouldn't make carts which facilitated
user refilling, but I suspect I'd also not be aiming quite as high with the
profit factor either. There is a significant - and growing - sector of the
market that looks at total cost of owning/operating a piece of equipment, and
over a say five year SOHO life the cart cost starts to dominate even at modest
usage.
!