Considering replacing a clogging Epson 4900 with a new one

[ericbowles]

I've had an Epson 4900 from about three years.  When it works, it's been a great printer, but clogs have been a problem.  It's partially clogged in three colors right now and is not acceptable for color prints.  Still, I'm considering replacing the clogged printer with another Epson 4900.

I'm looking for input on whether this path makes sense.  Here's my thought process.

I don't print on a daily basis.  Once or twice a week is typical.  Overall volume is in the hundreds of prints per year. 

I use 80-90% roll paper and have an ample stock.  I want to use the paper I have.  I use the paper cassette for proof prints.

I have 50% or more in a full set of inks.  There is value in the inks (probably $500-600) and I would use the existing inks with a new printer rather than opening the starter inks. 

My printer is in a basement area.  I'm in a relatively humid climate.  The basement area has high humidity so I have to run a dehumidifier to prevent mold.  It's set at 50% and automatically cuts off if the humidity drops lower.  I could probably raise the humidity level to 55%.

I don't have room for an Epson 7900 or 9900.  Those printers are a little bigger than I need.  I do have a custom table that can easily support the 4900 or larger printers up to 250 pounds or more.

I did not have clogging at all for the first year with my 4900.  Even after that, clogs were easily cleared.  Problem clogs first appeared after the printer went unused for several weeks due to travel.  It's not typical, but I do have periods of 2-3 weeks that I travel and can't produce a print.  To reduce the impact, I would put a tray of water in the printer to increase humidity. 

So I am thinking about replacing my current 4900 with another of the same model.  I would probably get an extended warranty since service is cost prohibitive.  I would be able to use my inks, table, and paper.  Maintenance and regular use would be a higher priority - hopefully reducing issues.  I would hope to get 3-4 years of use out of the printer - and anything beyond that is gravy.

Is there another printer I should consider?

Is there anything I may have missed?

Is there anything I should add to my maintenance routine?

[Mark D Segal]

It probably remains the highest quality, widest gamut printer in its size range, and I have heard quite unofficially that small improvements were made to the pump/capping station assembly since it first came out which may improve the clogging/cleaning business; that said, using it regularly, adequate humidity (which you have) and running papers that don't shed particulates are the most important measures for assuring relatively trouble free operation. The extended warranty is like an insurance policy and therefore a game of risk, not knowing the odds of it being called. I don't know how much they charge for it these days but if it's not too unreasonable the peace of mind may be worth the price.

[ericbowles]

Thanks, Mark.  The extended warranty for two additional years is $539.  That's not cheap, but failures seem to come late in year 2 or in year 3. 

I hope they have made some adjustments to prevent clogging.  For the first two years it was a terrific printer.

I just have not seen anything on the market in this segment that matches the 4900 it in terms of quality.  Even the 7900 has its share of issues.

[Mark D Segal]

Eric, ALL printers (perhaps except the 3800/3880) have their share of issues. Read the forums and you will see. If I were buying a new 4900 I would buy the warranty. My own experience is that over the 40 months I've owned this printer, I've spent about $200 on technician service, so in my case I would have lost this bet, but the peace of mind has value. IF something really bad were to happen the repair cost could well exceed the cost of the warranty. That said, you must assume that Epson has this policy priced to at least break-even across the board. However, what matters is what happens to you and how you feel about it.

[John Caldwell]

4900 and 9900 owner here: Would not buy a 4900 without the maximum extended warranty. With the warranty, you can certainly do a lot of printing, as I have.

A local and reliable source tells me that the 4900 is up for replacement with Epson's "new inks and technology". If you can postpone the upgrade, consider that for what it's worth.

John-

[ericbowles]

Thanks, John

The 4900 fits in a nice place in the product lineup and would be a logical replacement.  Features that address clogging and make service cost effective would be a big help.  I can probably wait a little while by contracting out my printing needs.

[bobjoek]

Eric,

I currently am running two Epson Pro 4000 printers, which are probably more prone to clogs than your 4900.  I also print on an inconsistent basis, sometimes going a week or two between printing sessions.  You are on the right track by controlling the humidity in the printer, but as you are aware, Epson pro printers must be used frequently to prevent clogs.  My solution is using "Harvey Head Cleaner", a little $40 utility that prints a nozzle check on a scheduled basis.  You have to leave the printer and a computer powered on 24/7 for this to work.  I just load the printers with cheap copy paper and set Harvey Head Cleaner to print the nozzle checks each morning.  The small amount of ink pushed through the printer heads is enough to prevent the ink from drying out.  Now I only experience a nozzle clog on a very infrequent basis and the clog is usually cleared with only one head clean cycle.

Another option is the latest version of Qimage Ultimate, which has a similar function to print on a scheduled basis.  A minor downside to Qimage Ultimate is that it must be open 24/7 and uses a bit more of your computer memory than Harvey Head Cleaner.

BTW, it was great seeing you at ANPAT this spring.

Bob

[BobShaw]

I was looking to replace my ageing 3880 with either the P800 or the 4900.
The advise I got that made the most sense was that the 4900 is designed to be used a lot, daily if not continually. If you aren't doing that you will probably have problems.
The road I am currently taking is to continue to use my 3880 and only buy one ink at a time. That way I will get the most value out of my inks what ever happens, as any new printer won't take the old ink.
I suggest if you can clear the clogs you keep using inks and see what announcements occur.

[ericbowles]

I'm going to try service first at a local Epson Service Center. 

It's a nuisance, but I can save a lot of money by taking the printer to them for repair.  They have a cheaper hourly rate, no travel charges, and the opportunity to use some alternatives that save money which will save at least $200.  A friend recently had his clogging 4900 repaired for under $200 and it has worked perfectly ever since.  On site service looks like it will start at around $500.

After doing more research, it looks like the only repair that is not cost effective is a head replacement.  Chemical solutions, pump replacement, and other repairs are much more practical and cost effective.

[Mike Guilbault]

I'm in the same situation with a clogged PK/LK channel - no ink at all moving through.  This happened quite suddenly and nothing has helped. I used the 4900 mostly with PK ink for lustre/glossy prints and the 9900 for MK on canvas and fine art papers.  I have the 9900 running double duty right now, but it's frustrating to have to switch inks for a few 8x10 glossy! I've got a job coming up with over 600 8x10s and it was always nice running both printers to get the job done.
So I'm following this thread since I have to decide whether to service, replace or forego the 4900 (and just print everything on the 9900). If there's a replacement coming soon, then I can wait, but if it's only $500 or so for the service then it'll be worth repairing (I too have a full set of 1/2 - 3/4 full cartridges). I may have to resort to a house-call though. Might be tricky getting the 4900 into my Jetta!

[Mark D Segal]

Look out for PM coming to you.

[Pete Berry]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the only direct competitor to the 4900 - the Canon iPF5100 - which has all the Epson features and more: 12 inks with auto, lossless black switch, and most importantly, thermally activated head nozzles with a huge auto-remapping redundancy for burned-out nozzles. Heads fail eventually when spare nozzles are exhausted, but heads are user-replacable at about $400 each (2), generally lasting several years.

What this means is total freedom from nozzle check prints and no forced cleaning cycles. Yes, TOTAL, until a head error message comes up and time for head change (takes about 15 minutes). In my iPF5000 the original heads were replaced under warranty at 11 months with the current PF-03 heads, which lasted five years. When those eventually failed I upgraded to the 5100 over two problem-free years ago and going strong. The $1500 printer cost was close to the retail cost of just the two heads and the twelve 90ml starter carts (replacements 130ml).

I know you're concerned about printer IQ, and I'd be happy to mail you 12x16 prints of the two printer test images I use - Outback's and Digidog's composits - or any of your choice, on my RR UltraPro satin proofing roll paper, which matches my Ilford GFS presentation paper quite nicely.

Pete

[jduncan]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the only direct competitor to the 4900 - the Canon iPF5100 - which has all the Epson features and more: 12 inks with auto, lossless black switch, and most importantly, thermally activated head nozzles with a huge auto-remapping redundancy for burned-out nozzles. Heads fail eventually when spare nozzles are exhausted, but heads are user-replacable at about $400 each (2), generally lasting several years.

What this means is total freedom from nozzle check prints and no forced cleaning cycles. Yes, TOTAL, until a head error message comes up and time for head change (takes about 15 minutes). In my iPF5000 the original heads were replaced under warranty at 11 months with the current PF-03 heads, which lasted five years. When those eventually failed I upgraded to the 5100 over two problem-free years ago and going strong. The $1500 printer cost was close to the retail cost of just the two heads and the twelve 90ml starter carts (replacements 130ml).

I know you're concerned about printer IQ, and I'd be happy to mail you 12x16 prints of the two printer test images I use - Outback's and Digidog's composits - or any of your choice, on my RR UltraPro satin proofing roll paper, which matches my Ilford GFS presentation paper quite nicely.

Pete

Hi,

Do you use a Mac or have any experience using this printer with Mac OS X?
can you comment a little on panoramas?

Thanks for your help.

[digitaldog]

I don't print on a daily basis.  Once or twice a week is typical.

That's part of the issue. I too had the same experiences with clogging. I didn't use the printer every day. I got it unclogged and setup a script to print something small every day, the clogging all but disappeared. That said, I got fed up with the printer and got rid of it. So I'm suggesting that unless you are willing to setup some routine to make a small print every day, pass on getting another 4900.

[JRSmit]

That's part of the issue. I too had the same experiences with clogging. I didn't use the printer every day. I got it unclogged and setup a script to print something small every day, the clogging all but disappeared. That said, I got fed up with the printer and got rid of it. So I'm suggesting that unless you are willing to setup some routine to make a small print every day, pass on getting another 4900.

print on Daily basis and with some volume, it is a fine printer. Else do not buy.

[digitaldog]

print on Daily basis and with some volume, it is a fine printer.

To prevent clogs, I only had to print a tiny sized color image. Just enough to keep inks flowing throughout on a daily basis. But should I have to do this? NO!

[Mark D Segal]

................... But should I have to do this? NO!

I'm not sure that is either the question or the answer. The initial issue is what this printer was designed for. Based on all I've heard, it was intended for a commercial production environment where high speed, highest print quality and robust continuous performance are the desired features - hence the 360 nozzles per inch, green and orange inks and very robust build quality; used on a fairly continuous basis one hears it churns along really well. People printing more casually would be better served with a 3880 from a maintenance perspective, if remaining within the Epson family. Maybe Epson should have done done more to clarify this from the get-go, so perhaps it was not well enough known and the implications not well enough understood; as a result photographers buying these printers and using them less intensively than they were designed for are having these issues. I do use mine roughly every other day, but it still needs periodic "pairs" cleaning cycles to clear-up minor discontinuities in the check pattern. I'm prepared to tolerate this baby-sitting because it's delivering the best ever print quality I've experienced since I started using Epson professional printers 15 years ago (roughly when desktop archival inkjet printing first became accessible with the Epson 2000P).

All that said, it has been on the market for about 3+ years now, and one wonders whether the dream printer is around the corner: all the gamut and quality with almost none of the clogs. I suppose only Epson and their hairdressers know, but wouldn't that be nice!

[digitaldog]

I'm not sure that is either the question or the answer. The initial issue is what this printer was designed for.

Whatever it's design aims, the damn printer shouldn't clog without being used every day. That's a design flaw. I know of no other Epson that suffers this issue as severely as the 4900. I've owned other "large format" Epson's and this was never an issue. Even in production environments, one can be expected not to use the printer on say a weekend or over a holiday. My experience with the 4900 was I could unclog it on Monday and try printing on Wednesday and find some clogs. Totally unacceptable.

[Mark D Segal]

Did the other large format Epson printers you owned have 180 or 360 nozzles per inch?

One could think of certain issues as flaws, or as compromises - it depends.

[Mark D Segal]

Also did they have the same inkset producing the same large, brilliant gamut?