Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: NeilPrintArt on August 03, 2016, 08:20:36 am
-
Help!! Seems like the head on my 9890 is gone. I am attaching nozzle checks - was wondering if anyone had any advice or cleaver tips?
Couple days ago did my usual morning nozzle check on coming in the studio to find the MK pattern with 2 large bands of missing nozzles. I have tried all the normal cleaning routines (cleaning, service mode cleaning, wiper blade, capping station, soaked tissue under print head etc) but nothing has help. Have switched between MK and PK and back again - no change. I have now flushed that line out with Jon Cone PiezoFlush, have let it sit overnight, still no change.
My printer technician guy is saying 'looks like electrical or mechanical internal head fault'. Was wondering if anyone could confirm or deny?
I bought the machine new 3 years ago. I have used it regularly since then at a moderate to low volume. Have always run it using OEM inks. In the same room is my 6 or 7 year old 9800 running third-party inks which has been heavily abused and still happily cranking out prints. They don't make 'em like that any more!
So if I do need to buy a new head - does anyone have advice as to where to look? I'm outside the US (in Cape Town, South Africa) and the local Epson agents are quoting me about half the price of a new machine to just supply the head!
Any help would be grateful received thanks in advance.
Neil
-
*was wondering if anyone had any advice or cleaver tips?* - should read *clever* of course but cleaver or sledgehammer is actually feeling right just about now
-
I don't have a solution from this distance of course, but a few suggestions. Firstly, I've seen stubborn nozzle checks looking pretty much like that which were NOT caused by any electro-mechanical problem in the print head. I'm not saying the technician is wrong, just that he may not be necessarily correct. If, however, the following cleaning routine doesn't work, I would begin to believe that: do a series of power-cleans, but between each one print a letter-size sheet filled with only that ink. Do a nozzle check between each cycle of powerclean-print, powerclean-print. If after three or four of these the same pattern persists, it probably is the head. And yes, a replacement head does cost a high percentage of the value of a new printer, even here in North America. So before doing that you may want to think about moving up to a newer generation of printer.
-
From looking at those nozzle checks, my opinion is the head is gone. If you look at the vertical lines bordering both sides of the missing lines, you'll see the ink has a small rightward curve that shouldn't be there. Plus parts of the lines that are printing are not printing on the angle they should be.
I've seen these kinds of deflections before, and unsuccessfully fought them in every way I could think of. I now believe this pattern is simply characteristic of physical head failure. Parts of the printing surface have failed, and the areas adjoining those failed parts are still functioning but out of alignment. I'd hazard a prediction that if you keep trying to work with the head in various ways, you may see the blank area of the nozzle check expand, with the same visible flaws moving to the expanded boundary of missing ink.
If I was in your situation I would not waste any more time, ink or other material trying to clean the head. Based on my experience, I would either get a new head installed or scrap the printer.
-
From looking at those nozzle checks, my opinion is the head is gone. If you look at the vertical lines bordering both sides of the missing lines, you'll see the ink has a small rightward curve that shouldn't be there. Plus parts of the lines that are printing are not printing on the angle they should be.
I've seen these kinds of deflections before, and unsuccessfully fought them in every way I could think of. I now believe this pattern is simply characteristic of physical head failure. Parts of the printing surface have failed, and the areas adjoining those failed parts are still functioning but out of alignment. I'd hazard a prediction that if you keep trying to work with the head in various ways, you may see the blank area of the nozzle check expand, with the same visible flaws moving to the expanded boundary of missing ink.
If I was in your situation I would not waste any more time, ink or other material trying to clean the head. Based on my experience, I would either get a new head installed or scrap the printer.
You may well be right, but what I recommended would take half an hour and consume a very small value of ink and paper compared with the cost of replacing hardware. Worth a shot just in case.
-
Thanks for the replies,
Mark - I have tried the powerclean-print-nozzlecheck x3 cycle you recommended, but unfortunately to no avail. Does seem like a good idea though thank you.
My next step is to start looking for a new head (I am not in a position to invest in a new machine), looking at eBay and similar there are Chinese based adverts for "100% original made in japan" epson replacement heads. Does anyone have any experience (or recommendations) buying print heads online?
-
Thanks for the replies,
............. looking at eBay and similar there are Chinese based adverts for "100% original made in japan" epson replacement heads. Does anyone have any experience (or recommendations) buying print heads online?
Not me, but EXTREME caution recommended. If they are selling them at a throwaway price, it may well be throw-away equipment. I believe Epson keeps pretty tight control over the legitimate distribution channels for printheads in particular. This is not something that can be cloned in your typical basement workshop. !! :-)
-
Not me, but EXTREME caution recommended. If they are selling them at a throwaway price, it may well be throw-away equipment.
Yes the thought of buying something like a printhead from an online distributor on mainland china is pretty scary - but certainly not throwaway prices - around US$1500 - and just maybe legit?
-
Yes the thought of buying something like a printhead from an online distributor on mainland china is pretty scary - but certainly not throwaway prices - around US$1500 - and just maybe legit?
Warranty? Enforceability of a warranty claim? How much cheaper than buying it directly from Epson or their authorized service rep?
-
As I mentioned in the parallel x890 thread, I do a lot of self-support of our print shop's large format Epsons. So far the only task I have chosen not to tackle myself is a head replacement. :) There are online sources for Epson heads, but Epson tries to restrict the supply of heads strictly to authorized Epson service centres. So by definition these online heads, even if they are legitimate OEM parts, are coming from some sort of grey market supply pipeline.
The second issue with replacing a head yourself is that it's not designed to be a self-service option. You can physically pull the old head and put in the new one, following the guidance of the Epson service manual which is available from various sources. But activating the new head in the printer requires running an Epson maintenance software program (Windows-only I believe) on a laptop that's plugged into the printer in service mode. A code from the new head must be entered into the service app, supposedly to calibrate voltages used to drive the head or something like that.
Of course the Epson service program is also not legitimately available to anyone outside of authorized service centres. Again, you can probably obtain the software somewhere online through crack sites or whatever, but that's not something I am personally willing to do. So now you've got two pieces of essential equipment you need to perform this maintenance, that aren't legitimately available. Needless to say there would be no warranty on any of this, and you're dealing with the heart of the printer.
That's why head replacement is the one Epson service task I for sure still call Epson to do, rather than attempting it myself. I'm confident of my own technical competence to do the task, but I don't want that much grey market risk...
-
If after repeated cleanings there are no changes at all in the missing nozzles (which it appears from your attachments that is the case) the most likely cause is a head fault.
As far as replacing the head, Royce explained it very well. It requires Epson service software running on a windows machine. It’s not a plug and play type of thing. We replace quite a few heads for customers at my store, and we’ve even had cases where the codes didn’t match up correctly and required Epson service support to remedy. this isn’t the same support as end user support, and is difficult to get access to.
Additionally while it might cost more if Epson does it, I’ve seen cases where the new head has been defective or damaged during installation and had one tech who fried the main board when replacing the head in my original 7900 in the process of replacing the head. If Epson does it, they’ve got to fix it. If you do it, you’re out the new head and still do not have a working machine.
-
I recently paid to have the head replaced on my 9800. I had similar symptoms to the OP.
The head alone was about $700, if I recall correctly. It was sourced from Epson. Chinese suppliers wanted $1400. I had all the dampers replaced at the same time and the total bill including labour came to nearly $2K.
I watched the entire process and I don't think the mechanical part of the install is beyond the abilities of the average technically competent person equipped with a long-handled magnetic Phillips screwdriver. The "Adjustment Program" process was also trivial. Accessing the software might be another story.
-
Replace the damper unit first.
First of all it is only the Black channel that is clogged right? I would take the head cover off and try to pull ink through that ink line. The black ink channels, both of them are carbon and if the printer is left unused for awhile or the carts not shaken for awhile particles can lodge in the line. Also replace the damper unit, the filters that clean sediment from the ink cart to the head. You can order those from Compas Micro. Do that first before even thinking about a new head. That is often the problem with Epson printers. That would be my guess, ink starvation. You did put cones flush fluid in the cart which is good but maybe it didn't break through the blocked line. I have had this happen in years past. Decision One working for Epson wouldn't even try the easy things 90% of the time they would slap in a new head and charge you more than the printer is worth, and that's a damn shame for something as big and robust as the 9890, that in all other respects should last you many many years of moderate use.
I have this printer and it is a pretty solid machine if you keep the ink flowing and keep the pads from ever drying out at the cap station.
What I would do before thinking about replacing the head if the damper assembly doesn't do the job, is buy a set of the third part ink carts for all the channels, you only need the small ones, put the pink flush fluid in all the channels and do an initial fill, maybe twice, maybe more over a couple of days, clean the whole thing out and let it sit in there for a couple of days. Don't waste any more expensive pigment doing this. You can easily see the nozzle check pattern with the flush fluid, so don't put inks in the channel until it is clean, or you replace the head entirely if you know someone who is mechanical enough to install it. I don't trust myself doing stuff like this but many people can follow the manual. The Cone fluid actually dissolves the crud like a solvent but without damaging the print head. But sometimes it just takes time. I've been there with older Epsons.
If you do want a print head that I would try AliBaba in China through their website. There are several up there and these people get things from Japan that we can't get. https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/original-printer-head-for-Epson-stylus_759845965.html?spm=a2700.7724838.0.0.07fuY4 Like everything make sure the seller has a decent rating. Like Ebay if they scam people they get kicked off the site. Make sure they have a transaction history there.
I recently ordered the internal Eye One spectro for my Hp Z printer and it came in perfect condition, looks like it was never used, It was $100.00 and I got it in 5 days. People were selling them for 7x that on Ebay. You can bargain with these people on the site. Just make an offer. I wouldn't pay over $500.00-$700.00. Look on Ebay, what you see on Ebay is people ordering these printheads from China and selling them for $1,400.00, now that's a scam.
john
-
While your cleaning suggestions can be very useful, take a careful look in this particular case at the pattern of the blockage: it is virtually identical for both MK and PK. These share a line beyond the MK/PK switch in the damper assembly. So whatever the problem is, it would seem to be lodged between the damper and the printhead. If the additional clean/print cycles I recommended as a first step don't work, changing the pump/cap and damper assemblies may be the next step before contemplating a print head. I would recommend engaging a qualified technician to do this work. The parts themselves aren't difficult to manage, but it's all the disassembly and reassembly - you really need to know what you're doing.
-
While replacing the dampers is relatively inexpensive (compared to the head, and when you replace a head it's a good idea to replace the damper unit as well, and probably the pump/cap assembly if the printer is several years old), the typical symptom of damper failure is entire missing channels. I'm not aware of a filtering element to remove particles in the dampers (I have seen them disassembled), they are designed to filter out small air bubbles that can get in the lines. thus when they fail they allow air to get into the line so the ink doesn't get through. The scans in the original post are classic symptoms of a head failure ... missing nozzles that do not change regardless of any efforts to clear them (other than perhaps getting worse).
The value of repairing the machine vs a new machine depends on a few things, to me the first thing to consider does the new machine represent a technological step forward. So replacing a 9890 or 9900 with a p8000 or p9000 might make some sense.
But given that once the new head and dampers are in you have a machine which should offer the same quality as when it was new, and certainly several years of life expectancy (depending on all of the other factors). We are on our 3rd head with our 11880 and both heads lasted about 3 years, the printer is working 6 days a week and while not as heavily used as many epson, does crank out a decent amount of work.
As far as DIY head swap ... if you can get a copy of the service tech manual which walks through the process, and can get a copy of the Epson service software which is required to register the head to the printer, and are pretty handy with stuff like this, I guess it might be worth the chance. As mentioned, replace the damper assembly as well.
-
Wayne, while in the final analysis you may well be right that the problem is the print head, and as you correctly recommend to change the pump/cap/damper assemblies as well, don't you think it may be worthwhile trying the latter first just in case it solves the problem. If it doesn't, then the print-head change becomes inevitable. In so doing it will of course also be necessary to ensure that the lines are clean and there is no air in the works.
-
I guess it depends on the OP's appetite for DIY, and potentially taking side trips that cost time, some $ and materials but don't resolve the issue. The point of doing diagnostics is to try to learn what the real problem is, therefore suggesting one or more targeted solutions. In my experience, that nozzle check pattern is pretty well a definitive diagnostic for head failure. If it is a dead head, then none of the other actions will bring the printer back into service. If it was my printer, based on what I know I would consider it not open to question right now.
These other tasks may be useful to do in their own right, and I'm all in favour of LFP owners getting their hands dirty with their printers and learning to do good maintenance. It can add years of productive life span to a printer. I've done it myself, and it's rewarding to reassert a measure of control over the health and productivity of the printers I work with.
I've also taken the opportunity (as recently as this past weekend) to experiment with various things on a printer that I knew had a dead head, on the logic that I was "in for a penny, in for a pound". Since I'd be calling Decision One in anyway for a big ticket replacement of the known failed head, I could afford to experiment and not cost myself that much more if I pooched something else and had the tech fix it too. ;)
So really in this case it's the OP's call whether to experiment with other stuff like dampers, the capping unit, and so on, just in case. But having seen this situation several times, unsuccessfully tried all kinds of other remedies, and if the objective is more like "get the printer working again as quickly and low risk/cost as possible", then I'm pretty confident the head will have to be replaced anyway.
I have an 11880 with a dead head right now, and it has had a new cleaning unit and new dampers installed within the past few months. I will be calling in Decision One to replace the head, after which I'm going to keep the old one and do some closeup photos of the failed section. I want to see if there's any visible signs that could further help definitively ID this kind of failure...
-
What is really frustrating about these Epson heads, and I've been dealing with them for 15 years, is that when one nozzle goes down the whole freaking unit is worthless and has to be replaced for near the value of the printer. Maybe it is just me but having this giant, well made,robust machine that could easily last a decade and produce great work in the process, have to be trashed because of one nozzle is just about the craziest thing I can imagine. But we accept it.
The HP heads only have two channels each and cost $70.00 each. That is the smartest method anyone has come up with and why my Z3100 is still going strong after 9 years of use. I"m still buying the Hp inks every month and their heads when necessary. The Canons, at least the 8300-8400s have two heads so you spend $450.00 for one bad nozzle, and even that is crazy but a lot more reasonable than with my Epson.
I've heard all this Epson and Canon talk from sales people for So long that, oh you should just move on to the new "improved" model anyway. It's just like most things in the high tech industry - planned obsolescence. Now that is one thing when you talking about an iPhone or even a laptop, but something this big, that takes 4 people to move, it just goes against common sense. Their money is not being made from selling printers it is being made from selling consumables. So, even from their point of view it doesn't seem logical to me. It just makes the customer mad and less likely to buy another Epson in the future.
john
-
I have tried all the normal cleaning routines (cleaning, service mode cleaning, wiper blade, capping station, soaked tissue under print head etc) but nothing has help. Have switched between MK and PK and back again - no change. I have now flushed that line out with Jon Cone PiezoFlush, have let it sit overnight, still no change.
Wayne, while in the final analysis you may well be right that the problem is the print head, and as you correctly recommend to change the pump/cap/damper assemblies as well, don't you think it may be worthwhile trying the latter first just in case it solves the problem. If it doesn't, then the print-head change becomes inevitable. In so doing it will of course also be necessary to ensure that the lines are clean and there is no air in the works.
Seems from the original post he has already done enough to cause some changes in the missing nozzle pattern which is the classic symptom of internal head issues. Certainly changing out the dampers first if doing it anyway may be worthwhile, but from the symptoms described and the nozzle check patterns it just doesn’t look like a damper problem to me. I guess it’s a matter of time as well, to get the damper assembly to his location, change it out and then have to wait to get a head, and sort of go through all the same steps again. Guess depends on his budget and time.
-
What is really frustrating about these Epson heads, and I've been dealing with them for 15 years, is that when one nozzle goes down the whole freaking unit is worthless and has to be replaced for near the value of the printer. ............ it doesn't seem logical to me.
john
This takes us off topic, but now that you raised it, yes, it doesn't "seem" logical, but then perhaps one needs to know a lot more about the underlying technology to understand why it is the way it is. Perhaps there's something about the piezo-electric technology they developed that makes it much more expensive to provide these heads in modular formats. Then one also needs to look at the overall picture, for which we consumers have only anecdotal information. For example, one highly respected tech in my area who services about every make on the market tells me that for these Epson professional printers, the print head is usually the last place to go when service is required, and on the whole the heads last a very long time, unlike others that are consumables and behave as such - they get consumed - much faster. So yes, if MY head goes on MY printer and it's going to cost me 1500 bucks on account of a nozzle I have a right to be at least asking questions about the merits of this technology, but seen from a broader perspective I'm prepared to countenance the idea that there is a logic..........
-
I think the piezo heads are much more difficult to build. I do believe they offer a slight advantage in dot placement and size consistency, but I'm not sure that advantage offers any visible difference. After having used Canon printers for a year or so and then going back to Epson, I personally feel the epson printers are sharper and offer a slightly better quality ... but then I admit it's probably like the CD vs vinyl debate where some claim they can hear the difference, but I know I can't and I don't think many can. Both brands print very high quality work, and even the HP which I feel has some challenges in some colors still produces stellar output.
One challenge to epson heads is the density of the nozzles ... 360 nozzles in a linear inch which is double the density of a couple generations ago. I would assume this makes the heads even more delicate and sensitive. the only reason I mention this is the newest Epson printers (p10000 and p20000) they have moved from a 360dpi based design to a 300 dpi based design. Guessing it was more about speed since the channels are 800 nozzles wide so about 2.66 inches ... so laying down a lot of ink on each pass. It will be interesting to see if allowing that slight amount of extra space offers any advantage in head wear and tear as well as missing nozzles, and if they might eventually migrate that down into the other printers. This would be similar to what they did with the 11880 ... introduced new head technology that migrated down to the 24 and 44" machines.
-
Wayne, when you mention your use of Canon printers I assume you are talking about the models prior to the new Pro-1000 and Pro-2000/4000 (the latter just being marketed very recently with the same head and inkset as the Pro-1000). Even under a 7X loupe I and several savvy colleagues failed to see any difference of sharpness/definition between an Epson 4900, Epson SCP-800 and Canon Pro-1000, when all three are printed at highest quality, unidirectional, native resolution of the printheads.
-
I pretty much experienced the same problem with a 7890. I read all I could find on the issue, watched videos and so on, spoke with Epson, got a quote for repairing and probable head replacement which added up to close to the price of a P6000. Spoke with a very helpful Epson maintenance person at the Profusion show in Toronto. Ended up buying a P6000. I am seriously considering buying the extended warranty before the end of the first year of ownership.
Jean-Michel
-
Thanks to everyone who has replied and offered support. Unfortunately I can report that after trying everything and after having the BK channel filled with Cone PiezoFlush for 3 days there is no improvement. In fact it is worse, as predicated by some, the missing nozzle patten has expanded into adjacent rows. I have resigned myself to the idea that the head is gone. I could try cleaning the dampers as has been suggested but I have a queue of client work backing up and time is a big issue,
My options are therefore...
1. Buy a new machine - the P9000 is quoted by local Epson supplier at approx $8000 - before a full set of carts
2. Get a head replacement from the local authorized technician - about $3000. With a very limited warranty
3. Replace the head myself. I found a supplier in Germany who will ship to South Africa. A new head and a new damper unit plus shipping cost about $1115 plus whatever customs are going to hit me with. Then I have a technician - not 'authorised' but who works on epsons - who is going to charge me $100 to come in and help me do the fitting and who has the service program to sync new head.
Doing it myself is a gamble of course. There is no warranty and I have seen horror stories about people who have done it themselves and ended up with blown motherboards or heads that have been 'rejected' by the machine. So holding thumbs.
The 9890 looks to me like a solidly built machine. My thinking is that with a new head and new dampers I should hopefully get another 3 years out the machine. I did already have the 'cleaning unit' (pump cap assembly) replaced by authorised tech about 18 months ago.
Thanks again
-
I know it is a hard decision and one I will face myself eventually. A great printer working perfectly except for one nozzle going bad. That is our eventual fate.
If you are not going to try a head replacement, I would try one thing before you have it hauled away. You have nothing to loose. If you are not going to try replacing the damper unit yourself, try taking off the head cover and finding a way to remove the black ink line and try to force the flush fluid into the lines with a syringe that you can buy at a drug store, hopefully on both sides of the damper unit. If there is something blocking that line you might get lucky.
I hope that the new series Epsons will have improved head durability but it will probably be a couple of years before we know that.
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Pro/SeriesSureColorP20000/Overview.do?UseCookie=yes
Good luck man,
I feel for you.
John
-
Yeah, a lot of us feel for you Neil. Epson heads took a nose dive in longevity with the introduction of whatever is particular to the design of the core tech shared by the 11880, x900's and x890's. It might even have happened sometime into the run of those models. Our 11880's used to be rock solid in every way but are now going through heads like they're the consumable Canon variety -- new heads fail much faster than old ones. Perhaps something in the manufacturing slipped, and the highest levels of tolerance and quality required by the design are no longer being met by production. Who knows.
We have ordered our first SureColor. We're skipping the 4-digit series, and starting with a P10000, to get our feet wet with what promises to be the first radical move in head design for Epson in a long time. Fingers crossed that it's a significant improvement.
Good luck whichever route you go...
-
Royce, would you please keep me updated on your results with the new P 10K ? Like you I am really hoping this new series will be back to the future for the Epson heads.
I'm super interested in the grayscale rendition with QTR or other rips as well.
If it is anything like the original 10K with their big super durable heads (that lasted me over 10 years with 0 clogs ever and no changing of the waste tank in that whole period of time,) then I'm in. Looks like maybe Canon has screwed up their print permanence at just the time Epson caught up. If Epson has done it than I'll never have to bring up the old CF10K again :-).
For those people who have only been printing with Epson printers for 8-10 years, it is NOT an unfortunate characteristic of Piezo heads that they 1. have to die in 3 years, Or that they can't easily be replaced. The Roland Hi Fi large format printers used Epson piezo heads and not only were those printers super clean running but the end user could easily pop out the heads and replace them himself, in less than 15 minutes with no rank settings and all that BS. That is all totally unnecessary and designed to keep US out.
John
Yeah, a lot of us feel for you Neil. Epson heads took a nose dive in longevity with the introduction of whatever is particular to the design of the core tech shared by the 11880, x900's and x890's. It might even have happened sometime into the run of those models. Our 11880's used to be rock solid in every way but are now going through heads like they're the consumable Canon variety -- new heads fail much faster than old ones. Perhaps something in the manufacturing slipped, and the highest levels of tolerance and quality required by the design are no longer being met by production. Who knows.
We have ordered our first SureColor. We're skipping the 4-digit series, and starting with a P10000, to get our feet wet with what promises to be the first radical move in head design for Epson in a long time. Fingers crossed that it's a significant improvement.
Good luck whichever route you go...
-
Looks like maybe Canon has screwed up their print permanence at just the time Epson caught up.
John
What makes you think this?
-
Canon had published "preliminary" tests of the Lucia Pro inks on their website, but have since taken them off. Mark at Aardenburg had referred to the results published as perplexing, and noticeably worse than the original Lucia Ex set. Wilhelm has no info posted on these inks yet, and Aardenburg is just beginning to test them.
All I know is what he posted on his site. We are going to have to wait and see, but it doesn't seem encouraging.
From Aardenburg Imaging:
"Epson has claimed 2x improvement in light fade resistance for its newly reformulated Ultrachrome ink sets on select Epson media. “Years on display” life expectancy scores greater than 200 years are also being claimed for select Epson media when used in combination with the new inks. "
"Canon is making far more modest claims for print longevity, citing only internal studies using Canon Platinum Pro paper (PT-201) and Canon Photo Paper Pro luster paper (LU-101) with the new Pro-1000 printer and the new LUCIA PRO-11 ink set. The Platinum pro is rated at 60 years light fastness while the Luster is rated at 45 years light fade resistance. Canon has not disclosed it’s test methodology or failure criteria, but Canon’s claim is surprisingly more conservative than Epson’s 200 year figures, so we are keen here at Aardenburg Imaging to run some tightly controlled light fade testing of our own with with the new generation of Canon and Epson Inks on various media."
end of Aardenburg quote
It is possible that these Canon internal tests were not done behind glass which wouldn't be a very flattering thing to publish, and which could account for these low figures. They didn't say. You would think they would release complete tests on the Lucia Pro inks when the printers were released, as Epson and Hp have done. There is no reference to anything regarding longevity of these inks now.
john
What makes you think this?
-
Puzzling. I agree we need some respectable third-party testing using consistent methodology with published criteria.
-
If you want to watch the process of a head replacement take a look at Eric G's video. Goes through the entire process. Eric's original post on his 7900 which I think still holds the record on this site for both views and posts also holds a ton of info.
https://vimeo.com/59559486
It's more than I would want to tackle myself.
Paul C
-
Yea, definitely not a good idea for most of us, as you can easily do more harm than good. But a lot of people with electronics experience could do it.
Thanks for posting that video. I've replaced them in the past but I wouldn't do it with the new ones. It's a shame it is so complicated and tedious.
If you want to watch the process of a head replacement take a look at Eric G's video. Goes through the entire process. Eric's original post on his 7900 which I think still holds the record on this site for both views and posts also holds a ton of info.
https://vimeo.com/59559486
It's more than I would want to tackle myself.
Paul C
-
Wayne, when you mention your use of Canon printers I assume you are talking about the models prior to the new Pro-1000 and Pro-2000/4000 (the latter just being marketed very recently with the same head and inkset as the Pro-1000). Even under a 7X loupe I and several savvy colleagues failed to see any difference of sharpness/definition between an Epson 4900, Epson SCP-800 and Canon Pro-1000, when all three are printed at highest quality, unidirectional, native resolution of the printheads.
It's all about being old and stuck in a rut :)
I believe Epson's technology originally was more suited to finely controlled dot placement and thus the early leader in high quality printing. While canon printers did OK, it took canon until the ipfx300 series to eliminate the tail and control the dot placement, size and shape accurately enough to be competitive with Epson. but even the pifx100 series produced good work, although I had enough issues with the blacks I went back to Epson.
On paper I also get suckered in to the specifications, Canon printers are 300 dpi with a max resolution of 2400x1200, and a single dot size of 4 picoliter. That's 2.88 million possible locations to place a dot when the image. The epson is 360 dpi with max resolution of 2880x1440, and has variable dot technology with the smallest being 3.5 picoliters. that's 4.14 million possible locations. And I can print at 720 dpi max, instead of 600 dpi max taking advantage of some of that.
Sounds impressive, right? well, no. I freely admit that if you have to get a loop out to look for the difference there isn't any point of looking any further. And Epson themselves just shot that all down with their p10000 and p20000 printers which are 300dpi based devices (and probably the precursor for the next generation of 24 and 44" printers in a few years).
Canon is making great printers , but I doubt I'll try them again for a variety of reasons, first being completely satisfied with the Epsons, having very little issues with clogging or extra ink usage (my 5 year old 9900 has only had 1 maintenance tank replaced since I installed it, so very little ink to keep the nozzles clear).
And I did compare myself to those trying to defend vinyl over digital music even though I know that most (including myself) could never tell the difference in a test, (it all sounds pretty good to me.)
-
Many thanks to everyone who has offered advice and commiserations following my original post.
I thought I would report back on the current situation. The head on my 9890 failed after 3 years. Replacing the machine is not currently an option and to get the authorised techs to supply and fit was almost half of a new machine. So I decided to replace the head myself. My thinking being that if I can get another 3 years out of the new head I might then be in a position to look at the P10000 or even the P20000. As has been opined many times on this forum and elsewhere, my belief is that the heads on the x890 and x900 are prone to failure. I am hoping that the new design of the P10000 is a step ‘back to the future’ as someone else posted. Exhibit A would be my much abused 7 year old 9800 which just won’t quit. Still giving me a perfect nozzle check with the original head after thousands of prints and 3 location moves and several different inks.
The decision to do the job myself is not entirely without regret and if there was any way I could have afforded the authorised techs in hindsight I might well have got them to do it.
Ordered a new head (and figured to do the damper unit at the same time) which arrived no problem. Spoke to a freelance technician who assured me he had done the procedure many times. Got hold of the serviceprog.exe and field repair guide and service manual and watched Eric Gulbransen’s amazing video couple of times. On the day of course the tech guy sent one of his minnows who swore to me that me had done this ‘many times’. It quickly became apparent that in fact was not true. Turns out he had only worked on 9700’s before “but the 9890 is basically the same”. :( . Not a good moment. Long story short – after forcing the ‘technician’ to follow the steps in Eric’s video we got the job done. Not a thrilling experience and not a particularly recommended way to spend the day!
But I did learn a lot about The Machine. The only structural difference I could see between my 9890 and Eric’s 9900 is that in Eric’s video there are 2 ground wires that run from the board to the side of the carriage. In my 9890 one of those wires runs instead to a plate in the assembly that hold the ink lines. We also had a situation when we disconnected the ink lines from the damper, yellow ink start leaking out where the cartridges plug into the lines at the back of the ink bay. Am guessing that the valve which seals the ink lines at that point didn’t close properly?
Another note is it has taken me several days and apparently endless cleaning and printing to get a good nozzle check with the new head. My heart was in my stomach when after all that I wasn’t able to get a good check. Generally the gaps have been moving around (which I usually take as a good sign) and today is almost perfect with only one missing nozzle so hopefully it’s just been the new head settling in and air in the lines etc. But the whole episode has consumed a huge amount of pigment ($$$).
To anyone thinking of attempting the head change yourself I would say proceed with caution, the potential for disaster is fairly high, but most people with some electrical or mechanical skill should be able to do it. Watch Eric’s video right through a couple times before, have a friend with a steady hand to help, don’t drink lots of coffee beforehand and make sure to make a note of the head rank id BEFORE you install it :) .
-
Perfect nozzle check this morning!! It's taken four days since the new head was installed and buckets of ink but I finally have my printer back. Now the question is if I need to write all new media profiles? I use an i1 and iProfiler. In theory a new head and new damper unit should be identical in spec and therefore new profiles not needed? Will do some tests see if I can see a difference. But am thrilled to report that it appears I was successful in replacing the head and damper unit in my 9890.
-
Your head should be fine tuned with a head rank ID. Even when one is supplied, an Epson tech would linearise the printer at the firmware level. Since you won't have done that, I would certainly linearise your own profiles.
-
Congrats Neil, that's great!
I agree with Phil, but would also suggest as you have the profiling kit, why not make some new custom profiles. Not that much work and one more variable at hand to optimize your output - after all that effort.
-
I pretty much experienced the same problem with a 7890. I read all I could find on the issue, watched videos and so on, spoke with Epson, got a quote for repairing and probable head replacement which added up to close to the price of a P6000. Spoke with a very helpful Epson maintenance person at the Profusion show in Toronto. Ended up buying a P6000. I am seriously considering buying the extended warranty before the end of the first year of ownership.
Jean-Michel
Hi Jean,
I had the same issues as the OP back at the start of the year with the 9900. In my case it was the green nozzle and it simply would not respond to any of the recommended procedures for dealing with the situation. In February I found an excellent technician who has taught many of the Epson techs when he worked for Epson. An excellent example of serendipity, since he lives about a 20 minute drive from my business in the GTA. He replaced the print head and showed me a couple of little tricks that I hadn't come across on this site, even in Eric's thread. Total cost $2,250.00 CDN. Unfortunately, since this building has recently been sold and my business has been slowly dwindling I am now looking at moving the business to my home. Since I have no room for the 9900 and would also dread the idea of moving it, I will be selling that printer and likely downsizing to a P6000, as I believe it will fill my needs as well as whatever amount of business I continue to do. Now to your situation Jean. Before I took possession of the 9900 six years ago I had already set up a log to record any possible 9900 issues, since I had read every post I could find on this forum concerning the "new" printers at that time. At the end of the first year I extended the warranty and the same at the end of the second year, so in all a 3 year warranty. Not an inexpensive investment at $1,050 CDN per year, but worth every penny, as it helped me sleep at night, knowing that any issues with the 9900 were the responsibility someone else. There were several issues during the first year, including new print head and cleaning station, as well as other problems. Some of these issues were repeated in the second year, none of which were due to negligence on my part, since the printer was and has always been very well taken care of. During the third warranty year and since, the printer has performed very well until the green nozzle decided to crap out early this year. So in my opinion the extended warranty is a must, and if I do take possession of a P6000 I shall be extending the warranty on it as well, regardless of its first warranty year performance. In my business I always considered the expensive of the extended warranty an insurance policy, and a necessary part of doing business. I believe one can extend the warranty on the newer printers for a maximum of one year only, but I would most definitely suggest you take advantage of it.
Sorry to be so wordy, but I thought perhaps a bit of background info might be useful in this case.
Gary