Inkjet refill kits

M

Mike Hall

When the Canon BubbleJets first appeared, I was tempted to get one.. the guy
in the store had a page printed that looked really good.. I asked for a demo
and the paper went through :) nearly all of it.. :))).. he assured me that
it was the kind of paper that had been placed in the machine.. I could see
that for myself.. the problem was that paper had been placed in it at all..
:))))))))

That experience ensured that I never again considered Canon Printers.. my
last encounter with a Canon printer was a BJC 4400 that belonged to a
friend.. the cartridge carrier was a constant source of amusement (NOT) and
constantly tried to print more than one page at a time, so no change there..
maybe they have improved since then, but I will not take a chance.. this
friend then bought an Epson.. some people just can't be helped..

(F)Lexmark printers, in my opinion (and as the cat in the movie 'Babe'
would say) have no purpose.. they take up another printers space..

HP rocks.. HP for president (my 5150 is undoubtedly more intelligent than
the incumbent).. :)


Mike


Ron Cohen said:
Mike H.
I have multiple Canon printers, s820's, i950 and iP4000. These are
outstanding printers and I've never had any problems with multiple feeds
on any of them. I couldn't say that about my HP 720 that is now collecting
dust in the corner. The worst machine I've ever used (for misfeeding) is
my Lexmark E312 laser. Nice little printer, but the multiple feeds are
horrible. My old HP IIIP was also pretty bad about multiple feeds. As to
ink mileage, I print a lot of photos. With my Canon printers I will
usually get between 45-50 full sheets (8.5 x 11) before the first low ink
warning appears. The other tanks will usually be partially to nearly full.
That's a lot of ink mileage for very, very little money considering I
refill. Based on what I paid for the bulk ink, my per page ink cost is
1.2¢. Barely more than a penny. I think you may be confusing the very low
end Canons which use an integrated printhead similar to HP or Lexmark.
Canon printers which use individual ink tanks are great printers.

--
Ron Cohen

Mike Hall said:
JoAnn

Don't you just love Canon printers that feed multiple sheets through at
one time.. the cute little cartridges that don't last for the time it
takes to pee.. messages that inform you that due to the lack of magenta,
you're not going to print in black either..

Mike (avid member of the HP Appreciation Society }


JoAnn Paules said:
Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first printer
we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits or (2) buy a
Canon. HPs do rock!

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]



I have a Canon i860 that seems to drink ink. I like the job it does, but
the ink costs are digging into my wallet. I've read posts about
refilling the containers, some good and some bad. Does anyone have any
long-term experiences to relate? Does using a refill system cause
problems with the print head down the road? Do you have a system you
recommend? Are they messy?

Merry Christmas
Mike
 
B

Brian Kvalheim [MSFT MVP]

Hi Mike Koewler ([email protected]),
in the newsgroups
you posted:

|| I have a Canon i860 that seems to drink ink. I like the job it does,
|| but the ink costs are digging into my wallet. I've read posts about
|| refilling the containers, some good and some bad. Does anyone have
|| any long-term experiences to relate? Does using a refill system cause
|| problems with the print head down the road? Do you have a system you
|| recommend? Are they messy?

FWIW, I am anti-refill.
--
Brian Kvalheim
Microsoft Publisher MVP
http://www.publishermvps.com
~pay it forward~

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
 
L

Lee Rich

Mike,

Thanks for your comments and insight.

You read my message well. In March of 2001 I bought a Lexmark Z52 Color
Inkjet. I use it for black and white documents and black and white documents
with color graphics (charts and graphs) and clip art. The printer has done a
very nice job for those tasks. However, it does use a lot of ink. For the
last three and a half years I have had trouble free printing. The November
2000 issue of PC World gave the Lexmark Z52 a decent review.

A few months ago my wife and I bought a HP psc 2175 which we like very well.

Thanks again,

Lee
 
E

Ed Bennett

While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from Lee Rich said:
I am curious and would like to know what are the objections to the
Lexmark line of printers. What are the negatives that would prevent
you from buying a Lexmark?

- Print speed
- Print quality
- Build quality
- Driver quality

I have had parts of Lexmark inkjets break off when I was pulling gently to
clear a paper jam.
Cheap plastic interiors that don't stand up to any wear at all.
And the interface on the outside is clunky. You never know when it's on or
off.
And I most certainly do not want the default setting to have a disembodied
(American) voice shouting "PRINTING STARTED" and "PRINTING COMPLETE".
 
E

Ed Bennett

While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from JoAnn Paules said:
Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first
printer we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits
or (2) buy a Canon. HPs do rock!

I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap - but
either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning on
buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely hypothetical)
 
J

JoAnn Paules

Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but we
decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you the
price of another printer.
 
M

Mike Hall

One of the prime reasons for buying an HP is that one gets a new printhead
at each cartridge, thereby retaining print quality.. it also has to be said
that HP technology has ensured that their printers are economical in use..
if a printer is so heavy on ink that refills are considered, I would trash
the printer and buy an HP..

The refill people maintain that their ink is exactly the same, but
experience has shown me that the depth of color is lacking, and it dries way
too slow when used at any speed and especially fast draft on an HP.. that
and the fact that printing ink is next to impossible to remove from clothes,
hands etc..

JoAnn, they will all learn in time.. :)


JoAnn Paules said:
Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but we
decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you the
price of another printer.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]



Ed Bennett said:
While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a


I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap -
but either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning
on buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely
hypothetical)

--
Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
http://www.mvps.org/the_nerd/
Before reading this message, view the disclaimer:
http://mvps.org/the_nerd/disclaim.htm
 
J

JoAnn Paules

We can only hope............ ;-)

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]



Mike Hall said:
One of the prime reasons for buying an HP is that one gets a new printhead
at each cartridge, thereby retaining print quality.. it also has to be
said that HP technology has ensured that their printers are economical in
use.. if a printer is so heavy on ink that refills are considered, I would
trash the printer and buy an HP..

The refill people maintain that their ink is exactly the same, but
experience has shown me that the depth of color is lacking, and it dries
way too slow when used at any speed and especially fast draft on an HP..
that and the fact that printing ink is next to impossible to remove from
clothes, hands etc..

JoAnn, they will all learn in time.. :)


JoAnn Paules said:
Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but
we decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you
the price of another printer.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]



Ed Bennett said:
While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from JoAnn Paules <[email protected]>. On it is written:
Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first
printer we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits
or (2) buy a Canon. HPs do rock!

I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap -
but either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning
on buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely
hypothetical)

--
Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
http://www.mvps.org/the_nerd/
Before reading this message, view the disclaimer:
http://mvps.org/the_nerd/disclaim.htm
 
M

Mike Koewler

For the record:

I don't care about color fidelity. If I was using the printer to create
color proofs, I wouldn't be using this printer! This is an el-cheapo
printer used to print el-cheapo outputs.

If refilling the tanks isn't any messier than coloring Easter eggs, I
can live with the mess. :)

Mike

Mike said:
One of the prime reasons for buying an HP is that one gets a new printhead
at each cartridge, thereby retaining print quality.. it also has to be said
that HP technology has ensured that their printers are economical in use..
if a printer is so heavy on ink that refills are considered, I would trash
the printer and buy an HP..

The refill people maintain that their ink is exactly the same, but
experience has shown me that the depth of color is lacking, and it dries way
too slow when used at any speed and especially fast draft on an HP.. that
and the fact that printing ink is next to impossible to remove from clothes,
hands etc..

JoAnn, they will all learn in time.. :)


Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but we
decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you the
price of another printer.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]



While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from JoAnn Paules <[email protected]>. On it is written:

Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first
printer we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits
or (2) buy a Canon. HPs do rock!

I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap -
but either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning
on buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely
hypothetical)

--
Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
http://www.mvps.org/the_nerd/
Before reading this message, view the disclaimer:
http://mvps.org/the_nerd/disclaim.htm
 
R

Ron Cohen

I know this thread should really be on comp.periphs.printers but who said we
have to always follow the rules. When it comes to refilling it seems there
are about as many arguments on that subject as on politics or religion. For
a low usage application, refilling may not be the best choice and with some
printers, i.e. Lexmark or HP it may not be successful due to the design of
the printhead. However for me and other Canon (and Epson) users, who do a
lot of photo printing the cost of ink would be astronomical if we didn't
refill. There are several points to keep in mind about refilling and the
most important is to use a quality ink from a reliable source. There is no
evidence that refilling Canon printers with quality ink contributes to print
head failure. If you read the printers newsgroup, there are as many
complaints about printhead failures with OEM inks as with third party inks.
Most of the failures are with circuitry and not as a result of clogs from
the inks. In the case of my Canon s820 and i950 printers, they use six
individual tanks and my iP4000 uses five. These cartridges cost about $12
each or $72 per set for a six tank setup or $60 for the five tank models. An
8oz bottle of ink will refill over 40 Canon BCI-6 cartridges. The cost of an
entire set of inks - all six colors, CMYK, photo cyan and photo magenta - is
about $60 including s&h. That's less than the cost of a single set of OEM
tanks. I've been refilling for several years on multiple printers and so far
none of the printers has failed or had any problems as a result of
refilling. But lets assume that refilling did kill the printer. If I only
got two successful refills before a printhead failure occurs, I'm still
dollars ahead for two reasons. First a replacement printhead costs about
$80. Second a brand new printer i.e. iP4000 only costs around $125 depending
on the source. I paid less than that. The new printer would also come with a
new set of ink tanks and that alone is worth at least $60. If I refill three
or more times then the savings really begin to add up. How many refills have
I done? Too many to even count. Ink consumption on Canons is on the low side
compared to other inkjets, but using OEM tanks there is no way I'd ever have
been able to print the amounts of photos that I do. Let's go back to that
set of 8oz bulk inks. Each bottle will refill over 40 cartridges or 240
tanks if the entire set of all colors are considered at a total cost of
$60.00. 240 Canon BCI-6 cartridges would cost $2880.00. For the record, I've
refilled way more than that. Done properly, refilling is easy and is not
messy. At a leisurely pace, I can refill an entire set of BCI-6 tanks in
less than ten minutes.

When it comes to inkjets, ink is only one part of the equation. Paper is the
other critical element. There are two types of photo papers commonly used.
Microporous, also known as instant dry, is highly resistant to any kind of
water damage. The sheets can immediately be handled and are resistant to
fingerprints and moisture damage, but are reported to be more prone to
fading although I've not experienced any fading on the prints I've made. The
other paper type is Swellable Polymer which has a different coating than
microporous. These papers are not resistant to moisture, take time to dry
and are susceptible to damage from handling. However, they are reported to
be more fade resistant. I use both types but prefer microporous because of
its durability. For plain paper printing most any paper will work, but
papers specified for inkjet usage do give better results than multi-purpose
or copy paper.

I have a short pdf file (created from Publisher 2002) that shows how easy it
is to refill a Canon BCI-6 or BCI-3 cartridge. The file is 125k. If anyone
wants a copy, please send me a private email
--
Ron Cohen


Mike Hall said:
One of the prime reasons for buying an HP is that one gets a new printhead
at each cartridge, thereby retaining print quality.. it also has to be
said that HP technology has ensured that their printers are economical in
use.. if a printer is so heavy on ink that refills are considered, I would
trash the printer and buy an HP..

The refill people maintain that their ink is exactly the same, but
experience has shown me that the depth of color is lacking, and it dries
way too slow when used at any speed and especially fast draft on an HP..
that and the fact that printing ink is next to impossible to remove from
clothes, hands etc..

JoAnn, they will all learn in time.. :)


JoAnn Paules said:
Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but
we decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you
the price of another printer.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]



Ed Bennett said:
While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from JoAnn Paules <[email protected]>. On it is written:
Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first
printer we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits
or (2) buy a Canon. HPs do rock!

I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap -
but either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning
on buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely
hypothetical)

--
Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
http://www.mvps.org/the_nerd/
Before reading this message, view the disclaimer:
http://mvps.org/the_nerd/disclaim.htm
 
M

Mike Hall

The paint used for decorating eggs washes off.. the same can't be said of
printer refill ink.. :)


Mike Koewler said:
For the record:

I don't care about color fidelity. If I was using the printer to create
color proofs, I wouldn't be using this printer! This is an el-cheapo
printer used to print el-cheapo outputs.

If refilling the tanks isn't any messier than coloring Easter eggs, I can
live with the mess. :)

Mike

Mike said:
One of the prime reasons for buying an HP is that one gets a new
printhead at each cartridge, thereby retaining print quality.. it also
has to be said that HP technology has ensured that their printers are
economical in use.. if a printer is so heavy on ink that refills are
considered, I would trash the printer and buy an HP..

The refill people maintain that their ink is exactly the same, but
experience has shown me that the depth of color is lacking, and it dries
way too slow when used at any speed and especially fast draft on an HP..
that and the fact that printing ink is next to impossible to remove from
clothes, hands etc..

JoAnn, they will all learn in time.. :)


Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but
we decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you
the price of another printer.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]




While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from JoAnn Paules <[email protected]>. On it is written:

Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first
printer we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits
or (2) buy a Canon. HPs do rock!

I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap -
but either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning
on buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely
hypothetical)

--
Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
http://www.mvps.org/the_nerd/
Before reading this message, view the disclaimer:
http://mvps.org/the_nerd/disclaim.htm
 
R

Ron Cohen

Don't sell that i860 short. Using a decent photo paper, you can create lab
quality photos.
--
Ron Cohen

Mike Koewler said:
For the record:

I don't care about color fidelity. If I was using the printer to create
color proofs, I wouldn't be using this printer! This is an el-cheapo
printer used to print el-cheapo outputs.

If refilling the tanks isn't any messier than coloring Easter eggs, I can
live with the mess. :)

Mike

Mike said:
One of the prime reasons for buying an HP is that one gets a new
printhead at each cartridge, thereby retaining print quality.. it also
has to be said that HP technology has ensured that their printers are
economical in use.. if a printer is so heavy on ink that refills are
considered, I would trash the printer and buy an HP..

The refill people maintain that their ink is exactly the same, but
experience has shown me that the depth of color is lacking, and it dries
way too slow when used at any speed and especially fast draft on an HP..
that and the fact that printing ink is next to impossible to remove from
clothes, hands etc..

JoAnn, they will all learn in time.. :)


Exactly! I know the printer wasn't top of the line but that refill kit
coincided with the death of the printer. Not sure if it *caused* it but
we decided it just isn't worth saving pennies if it's going to cost you
the price of another printer.

--
JoAnn Paules
MVP Microsoft [Publisher]




While waiting for decisions from his 6 university choices, Ed sees a
message from JoAnn Paules <[email protected]>. On it is written:

Been there- tried that. YUCK!! Messy and the quality really sucked.
Everything turned to shades of grey. And that was in the first
printer we owned - a Canon. Never again will we (1) buy refill kits
or (2) buy a Canon. HPs do rock!

I'll reiterate that - it's exactly the experience I had with mine.

Either refills killed the printer or the printer died from being crap -
but either way I'm not doing Canons or refills for a while (not planning
on buying a new printer for a while anyway, so it's entirely
hypothetical)

--
Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
http://www.mvps.org/the_nerd/
Before reading this message, view the disclaimer:
http://mvps.org/the_nerd/disclaim.htm
 
S

Sam

I have been trying out the continuous ink system from
http://www.InkRepublic.com iINK system for more than 7
months for my R200 and C86. It works really cool, much "more" than what
I expected. I bought a system - it can
works for both of my printers. I did not even know that until they told
me.

Well, they are very honest to customers, and they dont even want to
make money from me "again".
Not like other continuous ink system supplies, their system can only
last 3-6 months, and you have
get back to them and buy the whole system again.


Many of the continuous ink systems are based upon a similar system to
the way the original
cartridges function. That is, they have the ink sitting in a sponge or
batting material in the base of the modified-cartridge, and it slowly
drains to
the ink outlet and drains by demand of the head.

The reasons for this design in the original cartridges are to control
the ink flow, so it doesn't just drip out once the ink outlet of the
cartridge is punctured and to keep the ink from sloshing around as the
head goes back and forth, which could cause vibration in the head
carriage movement.

In the continuous ink system system, there are similar concerns if the
system uses
standard cartridges which have a hole drilled into each color
compartment, into which is a tube that carried new ink.

The main problem with this modified-cartridge system is that the
surface of this sponge or
batting can slowly either dry, or it can become an "early filter" in
the
system, and the material can get filled with residue, particularly if
you are using pigmented inks, which can impede ink flow. Secondary
problem can be air bubbles can be temporarily trapped in the sponge or
batting, which might end up in the head and could a gap in the ink
flow.

Even Epson recognized there was a problem with this cartridge design.
The intellege cartridges were, of course, mainly designed to make them
difficult to refill, but Epson also made several other changes. They
got rid of the batting/sponge material other than a small filter. They
added a bunch of baffling to keep the ink from getting too much air
surface, which can cause drying and oxidation, and it also slows the
flow so they don't leak, and they added a spring loaded valve at the
ink
outlet, and the air vent, again to remove air flow, and leakage.
Basically, the new cartridges seal when they are removed.

Now, there are problems with just using a pure ink cartridge, as
mentioned above, and Epson's more complex design has potential problems

for a continuous ink system as well. That's where InkRepublic.com's ink
dampers come in.
They are designed to allow for ink feed fairly evenly, but without a
problem with
siphoning ink or leakage. I believe it is a revolution of continuous
ink system.

The continuous ink system systems that have been out there were
jury-rigged, and although
they were better than buying individual cartridges each time, they were

not designed from the top down. As a result, I hear about many of these

installation users, either when they first get installed (and the
difficulties in getting them to work) or more often, about a year after

they have been installed, when all the problems with the cartridge
system comes out of the closet.

With dye inks, they work fairly well for most people. With inks that
tend to be either corrosive or have a lot of residue, those systems
often become subject to intermittent clogs, etc.

One of the reasons some 3rd party inks have a short installed life is
because continuous ink systems tend to
use a air replacement systems for the ink to move. A much better design

would be ink dampers on the head end, and these collapsible ink sacks
on the other.

But for my own experience toward using http://www.InkRepublic.com iINK,
their
system is pretty well done besides, it is pretty flexible. Which means:


1. I can always apply the same system to most of my Epson printers
without purchasing another "whole" unit. I can just buy the new
chipsets, that's it. This is big saving.

2. I can always use pigment and dye ink based on the printout.

3. No clogging, no leaking.

4. The best thing is, I dont have to "stick" with their ink, I can
always use the ink from any other 3rd parties along with their system.
InkRepublic.com does not enforce their customers using their ink. At
least they are more customized and customers oriented.

Regarding the price and the function and environmental consideratioins,
I would suggest you guys use a really good continuous ink system that
can last longer and can be more flexible, just like the one from
http://www.InkRepublic.com


Here are more reference for you:
http://www.inkrepublic.com/VideoClips.asp
http://www.inkrepublic.com/Comparison.asp
http://www.inkrepublic.com/testimonials.asp
http://www.digitalanime.com.br/epson
 
M

Mike Koewler

Sam,

I wanted advice, not a marketing spiel. Ron and Sarah have done a great
job of giving useful information, without trying to "sell" anything,
which is what usenet is supposed to be about.

Sarah, since I'm thinking about it, my address is:

Valley Courier
218 W. Benson St.
Reading, OH 45215
USA

Yeah, I know - posting an address in a public forum, but at least it's a
business address!

Mike
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top