Suggestions Add Canon Colorado 1650/M3 or Epson S60600/S60600L?

[White Haus]

So our daily driven Roland XR-640 is dead in the water and no solution in sight. Our only other roll to roll printer is our Mimaki UCJV.

I'm looking at either a 1650 or M3 (CMYK) or Epson S60600/S60600L. Don't need/want white....already been down that road and have other printers for that.

Primarily printing equipment/vehicle graphics, the odd banner and the odd partial wrap. Need good, repeatable color and quality and the ability to print fine text and barcodes at a decent speed. Our current workload doesn't justify the impressive speeds/output of the Colorado but there are times when it could really come in handy.

I've done a bit a research on both and know that they're not in the same ballpark in terms of build/capacity/price, but I can see advantages to both. Colorado is 2.5ish times the cost of the Epsons.

We can either go the cheapest route with the S60600 and get us back up and running, or go with something that will be a step up and can grow with us (Colorado M3).

Service is out of town/province either way, although we have had great service and support from Canon in the past. Same goes for demoing the units - both are out of province and I'd probably have to fly out to check them out.

Power requirements for the Epson are straightforward and we would just swap out for our Roland. Would need to add another sub panel to run (2) 220V plugs for Colorado (someone please correct me if I'm wrong there)

Anyone running both these options or one of them? I know feedback has been pretty good from what I've read here for both....and not sure how many members/shops have the new M series installed yet.

I welcome any thoughts/suggestions/feedback - I'm being forced into this decision since we can't make due with just the Mimaki UCJV and it's not as exciting as the usual hunt for new equipment.

Thanks in advance.

 

[MarkSnelling]

As a guy who sells Roland and Canon.....

I have the last new 1650 in a crate, but I don't think I can ship one to Canada, so consider my input just my two cents.

If color consistency is a priority, the Canon does it better than anyone. The red you print today can usually be reprinted five months from now. It is pretty incredible. The speeds are great at around 400sf/hour for most applications (depending on what cast vinyl you like you may dip down to the Specialty mode which is in the low 200's sf/hour range). Paper and banner can really fly...you can print at 600-1200sf/hour sellable.

Consider the ink costs....speaking in US dollars, almost all of my customers claim to be at $.08/ft2 or less. That will put you around $70/roll cheaper in ink costs when you compare a Roland or Epson to the Colorado Gel inks.

The M3 is a cool design because you can upgrade the speed by simply cutting a $27K check and that will activate the speed license and turn your unit into a M5. No need to add another printer when your production demands grow. The same is true if you should need to add a white print head...it can be done in the field.

In the end, you can never go wrong with a quality Roland or Epson. The prints will be incredible....but the long term costs of slow speeds and inks will usually close the gap between the purchase price of the solvent devices and the Colorado. Consider how many rolls a month you print and even if you say it is $50/roll less in ink to be conservative, then that could help you possibly justify the Colorado. I'm always happy to talk if you want to give me a ring.

 

[balstestrat]

I would ask to print a sample panel from Colorado and then try to wrap the most complicated thing you do. I know it works but it doesn't stretch like Roland does. Which wouldn't be a big problem if you had a solvent sitting around but...

Otherwise I hear it's great. Just got to make it work to pay back.

 

[garyroy]

Why not a Roland EJ-640 Soljet? Pretty fast.

 

[White Haus]

As a guy who sells Roland and Canon.....

I have the last new 1650 in a crate, but I don't think I can ship one to Canada, so consider my input just my two cents.

If color consistency is a priority, the Canon does it better than anyone. The red you print today can usually be reprinted five months from now. It is pretty incredible. The speeds are great at around 400sf/hour for most applications (depending on what cast vinyl you like you may dip down to the Specialty mode which is in the low 200's sf/hour range). Paper and banner can really fly...you can print at 600-1200sf/hour sellable.

Consider the ink costs....speaking in US dollars, almost all of my customers claim to be at $.08/ft2 or less. That will put you around $70/roll cheaper in ink costs when you compare a Roland or Epson to the Colorado Gel inks.

The M3 is a cool design because you can upgrade the speed by simply cutting a $27K check and that will activate the speed license and turn your unit into a M5. No need to add another printer when your production demands grow. The same is true if you should need to add a white print head...it can be done in the field.

In the end, you can never go wrong with a quality Roland or Epson. The prints will be incredible....but the long term costs of slow speeds and inks will usually close the gap between the purchase price of the solvent devices and the Colorado. Consider how many rolls a month you print and even if you say it is $50/roll less in ink to be conservative, then that could help you possibly justify the Colorado. I'm always happy to talk if you want to give me a ring.

Thank you Mark, very good points you make there. I might take you up on that offer for a chat as we continue our research.

 

[White Haus]

I would ask to print a sample panel from Colorado and then try to wrap the most complicated thing you do. I know it works but it doesn't stretch like Roland does. Which wouldn't be a big problem if you had a solvent sitting around but...

Otherwise I hear it's great. Just got to make it work to pay back.

Good idea, I'll request some samples from both and see how they compare.

 

[White Haus]

Why not a Roland EJ-640 Soljet? Pretty fast.

We've had good success with Roland for the past 10+ years but I'm not interested in their new models or business model. Time to move into something else.

 

[CanuckSigns]

Pat, I think I've told you a out my thoughts on our epson s80600, it's been a real workhorse with minimal maintenance needed. If I had to buy a new printer tomorrow it would be another epson.

The Colorado looks like a great machine, but it's waaaaayy too much printer for us. Yes at times it would be handy to have, but most of the time our printer is not the bottleneck. The epson should be about 2x as fast as your old epson and better quality.

If you end up flying to Toronto to see either of these machines let me know we'll grab a beer!

 

[Evan Gillette]

We have a 1650 and an s40600, both machines are great. We print temporary high production on the UV and all our permanent signage or wrap work goes to the epson. You do not know how nice the speed is until you have it, but that being said the price difference is hard to sell. Ink cost is a decent saving but ONLY if you are cranking out the volume of prints. If you are printing more than a roll or two per day I would say look hard at the canon and evaluate if the ink is something you could put your name on. If less volume than that hop into an Epson and save for other workflow upgrades, you will be plenty pleased with the results. Today what printed on the Epson (about 3/4 of a roll of vinyl) for maybe 3-4 hours I printed about the same length of 63" banner on the canon in 40 minutes.

 

[KEYSER SOZE]

We have a 1650 and an s40600, both machines are great. We print temporary high production on the UV and all our permanent signage or wrap work goes to the epson. You do not know how nice the speed is until you have it, but that being said the price difference is hard to sell. Ink cost is a decent saving but ONLY if you are cranking out the volume of prints. If you are printing more than a roll or two per day I would say look hard at the canon and evaluate if the ink is something you could put your name on. If less volume than that hop into an Epson and save for other workflow upgrades, you will be plenty pleased with the results. Today what printed on the Epson (about 3/4 of a roll of vinyl) for maybe 3-4 hours I printed about the same length of 63" banner on the canon in 40 minutes.

Is the inference here that you trust the Epson ink to be more durable than the 1650 ink ?
I think you may have it the wrong way round.

When Epson first released the s80600/s60600 we looked at them to add to/replace our 2 Seikos which were due for retirement.
The Epsons had very nice resolution but the blacks and reds on the s60600 weren't as gutsy as the Seikos, and lack of speed on the s80600 were deal breakers.
The unlaminated ink was also very easy to scratch on banners and pullups, we ended up with 2 new OKI M64s (familiarity and all that).

Durability in the Australian sun is the major concern for us, I run the test below for printers we've looked at and/or bought in the last 20 years.
We get A3 size blocks of solid colours printed on premium polymeric vinyl, laminate in matching gloss poly, stick it on ACM, then put it on a 45 angle northern roof (keeping identical copies in a filing cabinet for reference).
In terms of fade, after 2 years the Epson s80600 prints held up okay, but the fade/shift was certainly more noticeable in reds/yellows/oranges than the Seiko prints which had only moved a little.

When we got our first 1650 4 years ago we did the same thing, after 2 years there was virtually no colour shift at all.
After 4 years it's still barely noticeable, even with the vinyl starting to look dodgy.

We'd have over 100 B-double trailer sets printed on our 1650s travelling Australian roads now, I think you'd be happy putting your name on the ink.

 

[MarkSnelling]

I realized I made a mistake in quoting $.08/ft2 for ink costs. If you bring in a M3 then you are restricted to the 700ml bottles which are more expensive than the 1 liter bottles. With the 700ml bottles you should expect to spend more like $.11ft2

 

[MarkSnelling]

Why not a Roland EJ-640 Soljet? Pretty fast.

I sold four EJ printers and three of them were returned and replaced with 2 RF 640 units due to how easily the ink scratches. If you are laminating everything, then the EJ is sweet....but banners, paper, and anything unlaminated scratches very easily on the EJ. At least that was the experience my customers had. I was really excited about that unit when it launched.

 

[frankzilla]

If that's your spectrum of device choices, I would do research on getting the Epson R5070 instead for the best of both worlds in terms of cost, time, ink durability, etc. It's a water based resin printer and will prob use similar power req as the Canon. I added 2x 240v 20a lines specifically for it and added 2 step down reducers to get the exact voltage requirements of 230v requested. That was tedious work and added up some for materials. I highly suggest a professional to help.

Tack on an ONYX license though as I feel it is not to it's potential without ONYX vs using the out the box Epson Edge Print.

I came from having a Roland VSi, Mimaki CJVs, and Epson S80600. (Dissolved partnership and left printer with old partner, otherwise, Id still rock the S80600 until the legs fall off, but having used the R5070, I don't regret my decision and haven't looked back since).

See my old comments on the printer and any questions they may answer.

 

[Evan Gillette]

Is the inference here that you trust the Epson ink to be more durable than the 1650 ink ?
I think you may have it the wrong way round.

When Epson first released the s80600/s60600 we looked at them to add to/replace our 2 Seikos which were due for retirement.
The Epsons had very nice resolution but the blacks and reds on the s60600 weren't as gutsy as the Seikos, and lack of speed on the s80600 were deal breakers.
The unlaminated ink was also very easy to scratch on banners and pullups, we ended up with 2 new OKI M64s (familiarity and all that).

Durability in the Australian sun is the major concern for us, I run the test below for printers we've looked at and/or bought in the last 20 years.
We get A3 size blocks of solid colours printed on premium polymeric vinyl, laminate in matching gloss poly, stick it on ACM, then put it on a 45 angle northern roof (keeping identical copies in a filing cabinet for reference).
In terms of fade, after 2 years the Epson s80600 prints held up okay, but the fade/shift was certainly more noticeable in reds/yellows/oranges than the Seiko prints which had only moved a little.

When we got our first 1650 4 years ago we did the same thing, after 2 years there was virtually no colour shift at all.
After 4 years it's still barely noticeable, even with the vinyl starting to look dodgy.

We'd have over 100 B-double trailer sets printed on our 1650s travelling Australian roads now, I think you'd be happy putting your name on the ink.

That is good info, and I appreciate the input!

We only run cmyk with the Epson (40600 in single cmyk 60600 is double cmyk and 80600 adds red orange if I remember correctly). From what I had read people have had problems with the durability of the red and orange inks fading. We have had no issues with fading or scratching on any materials provided the ink is allowed to outgas/dry completely. We have eco-solvent prints that still look good after 10+ years (from Mutoh inks previous to the Epson) so to us it is a proven system.

As for the canon inks, I believe you and am glad to hear this, that's what the salespeople tell me but I always have a hard time believing it when we constantly see UV prints that are badly faded after only a couple of years. I do think that Canon probably has one of the better UV inks on the market.

 

[greysquirrel]

I'd steer you toward the s40 before the s60(more profiles available and cheaper price point. You can almost double up on s40's for the price of one s60. If you go One, get the M. Buy it with the options you need, speed white etc...But these two platforms have a huge price difference.

 

[White Haus]

Thank you all for the great feedback - that's really helpful. I get that they're 2 drastically different platforms but they're the 2 we're considering right now.

My train of thought was that we either get into a S60600 to get us by for now at the lowest price point, or take the plunge and invest into something that can allow us to grow and crank out more volume.

I'll be speaking to our leasing guys today and see what the payments look like for both. Not a great time for rates but can't exactly afford to pay cash for any of the options.

Will hopefully be checking out a local shop that has a S60600 in the next couple of days to see one in person and run a couple of test files.

I'll keep y'all posted with what we decide.

 

[White Haus]

Pat, I think I've told you a out my thoughts on our epson s80600, it's been a real workhorse with minimal maintenance needed. If I had to buy a new printer tomorrow it would be another epson.

The Colorado looks like a great machine, but it's waaaaayy too much printer for us. Yes at times it would be handy to have, but most of the time our printer is not the bottleneck. The epson should be about 2x as fast as your old epson and better quality.

If you end up flying to Toronto to see either of these machines let me know we'll grab a beer!

Hey Scott I completely forgot that you had an Epson! Glad to hear that you've been happy with yours. Realistically the Colorado is probably too much printer for us too but I can see it potentially replacing both our current printers.

I wish I had an excuse to come to Toronto so we could grab a beer! If anything I'd probably fly out to Vancouver to check out the Colorado at Canon, but we'll see. Of course Canon and the Epson dealer (Starts with G....lol) both want to close a deal this month which is adding more pressure that I like right now.

 

[MarkSnelling]

Not only are the UV Gel inks strong at resisting UV fade, but they are incredibly durable. Hard to scratch and can even withstand a lot of chemicals. Take a look at this 2:00 video: