FREE HP Design Jet 6100 Large Format 62" Printer (Nutley, New Jersey)

[Thenasty]

Saw this in CL. It might be good to print your own Sideart with it.

Not Mine, good luck whoever picks it up FREE.


https://newjersey.craigslist.org/zip/d/nutley-hp-design-jet-6100-large-format/7612904780.html

[pbj]

Probably needs $2-3k in parts.  I used to mess around with one of these.   

[nitrogen_widget]

Probably needs $2-3k in parts.  I used to mess around with one of these.   

we had one of the HP large format printers at work.
3k sounds about right just for ink and printheads.

[lilshawn]

yeah, our boss looked into getting an old government surplus HP 42" wide printer... we could have got it for 300 bucks... but by the time you service it and replace the heads, ink tubes and buy a set of inks for it, we were looking at about 3k in parts plus rolls of paper. not that we wouldn't have made that back in prints, but it's a pretty hearty chunk to bite off to get an old used machine going again, especially when you can get a NEW 36 wide (which is about as wide as we would ever need anyway) for about the same price as the parts to fix an OLD one.

i mean if that freebie has a few more prints left in it, it would be worth it to get, even if only to get a control panel or 2 out of it.

[pbj]

On ours, the belt got jammed and then the printer proceeded to shred it and explode it everywhere on the inside.  That was $800.  Print heads on another service call were about $1,200.  The guy that repaired it wondered what in the hell we were doing with it as it was really intended for professional print shops.  He claimed HP sold very few printers like that.  I guess they had to blow some department funds at the end of a fiscal year or something.  I accidentally printed an invoice on it once.  And TMNT control panel art.  Accidentally.  But man we got some beautiful work related posters on the thickest, glossiest roll of paper I've ever seen.  The end of an era - now the scientists are printing them on some kind of fold up cloth vinyl stuff that you can put in a backpack and unfold relatively unscathed.  Runs about $75 a print.  Means fewer scientists arguing in the airport over which poster tube is theirs, too!

 

[RandyT]

No such thing as a "free" wide-format inkjet. 

I've had quite a bit of experience with these beasts over the years, and for all of the combined experience and intelligence of mankind, they have seemingly been unable to make one which doesn't have high maintenance and costs associated with them.

But if anyone is crazy enough to get one (or just can't get by without one) the main thing to understand is that they are designed with the expectation that they will be used many times a day, every day.  Some even have a timed cycle to push ink through the heads (and usually a fair amount) when left unused, which means that the often costly ink is basically flushed down the drain if you aren't printing something.  While this isn't ideal, the alternative is costly on-site maintenance calls, and replacement of expensive print heads, sometimes on the order of $1200 each or more.  And in the case of the ones which produce really nice prints, there can be up to 8 of them.  "Free" or cheap printers are usually those which have had the heads dry up and the cost to fix the issue outweighs their value.

They also have long timing belts with small rubber teeth.  As the belts age, or in the case of solvent printers, are exposed to vapors from the inks, they tend to harden and become brittle.  It's not uncommon to fire up an older printer and suddenly find pieces of these teeth being deposited onto your print.  The belts aren't too costly compared to the heads, but it's usually a 2 hour job to replace one and recalibrate.

That doesn't even begin to address the cost of the consumables.  While 3rd party inks have become a lot more available, few possess the temerity to risk the heads to such unknowns.  But some do, and with constant and proper use, can make them work.  Then there's the special papers and such, which can really only be considered economical when purchased in bulk quantities.  Nothing stings worse than being 85% into a large print on fancy material and running into a print issue, which causes it to end up in the trash can.

In short, if you don't want to spend a bunch of money and begin a new occupation as a printer technician, farm out your large format printing to someone who does it for a living. 

You're welcome. 

[lilshawn]

they have seemingly been unable to make one which doesn't have high maintenance and costs associated with them.

this is absolutely intentional. people who buy these, do it to make money with them...and they manufacturers know this... and bake extra costs into it because of it.

its like arcade... sure the video games themselves are 60 bucks for a nearly identical console version but with "insert coin" instead of "press start" at the title screen...and with 1500 worth of hardware...somehow costs 10k.

it's the "be able to make money with it tax"

[RandyT]

this is absolutely intentional. people who buy these, do it to make money with them...and they manufacturers know this... and bake extra costs into it because of it.

its like arcade... sure the video games themselves are 60 bucks for a nearly identical console version but with "insert coin" instead of "press start" at the title screen...and with 1500 worth of hardware...somehow costs 10k.

it's the "be able to make money with it tax"

I don't fully buy into this idea.  Where OEM ink and print head costs are concerned, sure.  These are usually $20k+ machines which have to run reliably for days on end, which means pretty high quality and durable parts, so some of it is understandable.  But really, the technology is the limiting factor.  Even commercial shops deal with clogging, belt wear, fouled encoder strips, head wear/misfires, and the need for constant cleaning/maintenance. And unlike a typical home inkjet, you can't just chuck a machine of that size and cost into the bin and get another when it starts giving you fits.

I suppose it's a technological miracle that these machines work as well as they do, but just like 3D printers, the foundational method of operation has significant limitations.

In other words, a different technology, like that of laser printers, can be considerably more reliable and simple to maintain.  Unfortunately, the size of the output to cost ratio doesn't scale nearly as economically, the color quality isn't as good and they aren't nearly as versatile.

A new technology is needed, but right now, inkjet is the best solution we have.  When something better comes along, it will be relegated to the past as something we had to deal with, not something which we necessarily wanted to use.  Fortunately, the industry is always looking for better solutions.  Whether or not they will be able to come up with one, is anyone's guess.

[SNAAKE]

^ Do you know anything about eco-solvent printers? Are they really...."eco"?

ive seen one at a local printshop here they were loading it up with like a gallon of ink or something lol

[RandyT]

^ Do you know anything about eco-solvent printers? Are they really...."eco"?

ive seen one at a local printshop here they were loading it up with like a gallon of ink or something lol

They are only "eco" in a relative sense.  Regular solvent printers are very nasty and absolutely require good ventilation and or fume extraction.  The "Eco" variety are a bit less toxic, but can still give you a nasty headache if you try using them in a closed room.  The prints are also a bit less durable and the inks may be somewhat less environmentally destructive.  But proper disposal of the waste ink is still important.

*Edit* 
But maybe to better answer your question, the "eco" is from "ecological", not "economy", unless you count the expense of needing a very good ventilation system for the alternative.

[SNAAKE]

cool thx

anything on the new epson latex printers? I need pure black prints, these random injet printers dont do black it always comes out slightly dark blueish or something lol

[lilshawn]

a dye based ink (opposed to a pigment based ink) really helps with the color saturations. still hard because you are trying to cover WHITE to make it black.

if you want REAL black blacks you are looking at toner, which is going to be a physical layer of black material deposited on the surface to get that black black.

"latex" is a new marketing buzzword just meaning it uses water based ink opposed to solvent based inks.

xante uv printers if you are serious about printing since uv cured inks print on... well, quite literally anything.

[SNAAKE]

this here?
https://www.xante.com/x16/

[RandyT]

a dye based ink (opposed to a pigment based ink) really helps with the color saturations. still hard because you are trying to cover WHITE to make it black.

if you want REAL black blacks you are looking at toner, which is going to be a physical layer of black material deposited on the surface to get that black black.

"latex" is a new marketing buzzword just meaning it uses water based ink opposed to solvent based inks.

xante uv printers if you are serious about printing since uv cured inks print on... well, quite literally anything.

Actually, pigment-based inks are far superior to dye-based inks if you are after solid, opaque colors, such as black.  But you are correct that dye-based inks offer better color reproduction, as the inks will blend more nicely to provide a larger color gamut.  Toner is probably the most durable, but the least color-capable.

I also wouldn't sell the latex technology short.  Being water-based is quite an advantage, especially where maintenance is concerned, where the solvents for the other types can cost nearly as much as the inks.  But the latex stuff is pretty costly and not the most common.  I've only had a single test case when I did a sign job for a local grocery store with it, printed through a commercial vendor.  The colors were vibrant and durable, and were fade resistant with direct sun for ~5 years, which better than a lot of solvent printers.

But as you stated, UV printers seem to be the king of the game.  As they basically deposit a UV-curable polymer and fuse it to the substrate with a high-intensity UV light source, it's probably as close as one is going to get to laser printing with an inkjet, with the benefit of much better color reproduction and the ability to print on anything that doesn't cause the inks to bead.  The caveats being the usually considerably higher costs for the machine, due to the need for the curing light source, and sometimes the inks as well.  But technically, maintenance should be reduced considerably because the inks don't harden on and in the heads nearly as quickly as those which need only air to make them cure.

[SNAAKE]

only xante make those printers or other known brands like epson and cannon gonna release their versions? epson in general has been realible for me things actually...work.

[RandyT]

only xante make those printers or other known brands like epson and cannon gonna release their versions? epson in general has been realible for me things actually...work.

UV printing is available from a number of the big names.  I know Roland has a model or two, and I'm sure there are others.  The UV inks are usually compatible with the Epson mild solvent print heads, which is the technology used by a lot of the sign printers.  The only real difference in the machines is the extra hardware and firmware to support the high-intensity UV curing aspects.  They will have a UV light source which travels with the head for the first stage of curing, and optimally will have a larger UV light unit the width of the material for final curing.  The second UV unit isn't really necessary though for printers with slower print speeds.

Someday, I hope to become bored enough to do the conversion on one of my older VersaCamm machines which needs repair anyway.