Roland ECO Solvent vs HP Latex

[ProntoSigns]

I have been printing on Roland printers for 10+ years and overall have been pretty happy with the machines. We currently run an EJ and (2) XR-640's. We are hearing more and more about the HP Latex printers and are wondering if any Roland users have made the switch to HP and what your results are? Speed, cost of consumables, technical issue / support

 

[StarSign]

We ran a Roland for 7+ years, when it finally decided to quit on us we moved to a 25500 it was great for the first year and a half or so then we started seeing problems. Being told that the bugs had been worked out we then added a 210 and it made it about a year before the same problems. It's about time for a new printer and really it's a coin toss, do we get a Roland that we feel pretty good on getting 6+ years out of or do we stay latex and just plan on replacing every 2 years.

 

[PRS Bryan]

I would search the forums, there has been much debate and discussion.

I still run both and would say if you are doing large volume roll to roll printing go with latex. If you are doing small runs and concerned about waste go Roland.

A search will give you more comprehensive opinions.

 

[rjssigns]

I would search the forums, there has been much debate and discussion.

I still run both and would say if you are doing large volume roll to roll printing go with latex. If you are doing small runs and concerned about waste go Roland.

A search will give you more comprehensive opinions.

I agree with using Roland's for small runs and being aboe to use scrap from other jobs. HP is a no-go for me since the smallest piece you can load is around 42".

IMO the all the HP's are designed around load a roll, send the job, and walk away production.

They must figure we're either to stupid to load media or every shop does nothing but use the same media everyday and never changes it out.

BTW I run both and I don't care for the loading scheme of the HP's.

 

[Tim Aucoin]

Went from an older Roland to the L25500. The L25500 lasted 4 years, needed $3000 in parts, so decided to "trade it in" for the L360. Going on year 3 with the L360 and it has been flawless. I think I got a great printer, as I've had ZERO issues with it to date.
I won't go into Latex vs. EcoSolvent, as I think both are excellent when using good RIP software and an operator with common sense and a few smarts. I still run a small EcoSolvent printer for T-Shirt work and specialty decal work.

 

[JasonMeisnerSTS]

Roland VS HP Latex

This is a great question and topic for discussion. Our customers seem to be split 50/50 on the matter. Roland printers are work horses and always seem to last much longer than the expected life of the printer. Roland plotters are build very well and seem to be the preference for vehicle wraps as well as outdoor signage.

Latex plotters have made a strong push in the market over the last few years. The HP L25500 was a failure in my opinion but it setup the next few generations to be pretty successful. The HP L26500 and the 310, 330, and 360 series are gaining stronger market presence and seem to be popular for trade show displays as well as outdoor signage.

The pros with the HP in my opinion are the cheap print heads which are consumables versus Roland plotters which use Epson print heads which can range from anywhere from $890-$2000. That being said, there are more technicians versed for Roland printers and they have proven to withstand the test of time. The HP Latex printers still have several years to go to prove their longevity.

I hope this was somewhat helpful.

-Jason Meisner

 

[tylercrum]

I don't know about all this "HP's don't last long" or "the L25500 is a failure" business...we've had an L25500 running for over 6 years now, we've run literally hundreds of thousands of square feet of material through it...everything from vinyls, banners, posters, tradeshow graphic materials etc etc, as with anything if you maintain it, you get out what you put in. We also run a 360 and we love both of them.
I will admit that it's been a long time since I've run anything besides an HP. Before that it was mimaki's. So I can't compare the Roland's to the HP's. That said, I vote HP latex all day long.

 

[JasonMeisnerSTS]

I have nothing negative to say about the HP 360 as we have a demo unit in house and it is a great printer. For me, I still need to see the test of time. I agree with regular maintenance for any plotter however, Roland's can take more abuse so to speak. At the end of the day, Mutoh, Roland, Mimaki, and even HP are all great printers. I just have many customers with Roland plotters that are 8+ years old and they still run like champs. At the end of the day, personal preference like anything is a factor and someone more versed with HP plotters may prefer them versus someone more versed on Roland plotters. I base the " L25 was a complete failure" comment on the word on the street from my clients for the most part and how quickly all my clients who had those scrambled to get the next generations which are quite successful.

 

[nate]

Latex plotters have made a strong push in the market over the last few years. The HP L25500 was a failure in my opinion but it setup the next few generations to be pretty successful. The HP L26500 and the 310, 330, and 360 series are gaining stronger market presence and seem to be popular for trade show displays as well as outdoor signage.

I was one of the first adopters and at one time had more than ten of the L25500 units. To say they were a failure is a pretty harsh statement. The machines worked well. We ran them for 12-16 hours a day, running at 4 pass bi-directional. They were great.

We run several HP latex machines including the LX850 and the Latex 3000 as well as the smaller machines. This is a tried and true technology that continues to blow other technologies out of running. HP pretty much put their eggs in the latex basket for roll to roll and it's been a success.

 

[FrankW]

Advantages of Roland over HP:

• Bigger variety of models (small ones, print & cut, metallic and white)
• Depending of the model smaller dots, sharper edges
• Easier loading of pieces

Advantages of HP over Roland:

• Easier Maintenance (user replaceable heads and maintenance units)
• Better quality on printed areas, nearly no banding issues
• Immediately dry, very high scratch and chemical resistance
• easier to use (highly automated, for example feed adjustment, jet mapping, touchscreen, online help)
• more functionality (specially 360/370/560/570 with double sided printing, ink collector and so on)
• more media printable (good results on textile banners and paper too)
• Profiles for more than 600 Medias available for download, every of them works with every RIP
• internal profiling, specially when ICC-profiling included (Latex 360/370/560/570), leads to a much higher colour quality then using a hand full of default profiles
• High production speeds (not only engine speeds, but speeds with acceptable quality)
• High integration with the internet, could check for firmware updates itself, Apps available for mobile devices to monitor the printer remotely from everywhere in the world

 

[Kentucky Wraps]

I was one of the first adopters and at one time had more than ten of the L25500 units. To say they were a failure is a pretty harsh statement. The machines worked well. We ran them for 12-16 hours a day, running at 4 pass bi-directional. They were great.

We run several HP latex machines including the LX850 and the Latex 3000 as well as the smaller machines. This is a tried and true technology that continues to blow other technologies out of running. HP pretty much put their eggs in the latex basket for roll to roll and it's been a success.

I think perhaps it's a little premature to call Latex a "tried and true technology".
It seems every other year or so HP seems to be releasing newer models to fix (improve upon) the issues of each previous model. That's the opposite of tried and true, that is a "developing technology". I'm not knocking it, but rather showing that it's still a newer technology and I know there are many shop owners that are still waiting on more conclusive results as owners of Latex continue to swap out their HP's for the newer models. This has been happening from 2008 with the L25500 , 2012 L26500 to 2013 300 series now the 500 series. They keep working out the kinks they find via end users. Do the previous gens become obsolete? No. Are they inferior? Yes. Have there been a lot of issues to work through over the past 8 years? Absolutely. This is why I would NOT call it a tried and true technology. Though there does seem to be some stability with the 300 series among users in here, that's only been 3 or 4 years. I still have 3 print heads on my Roland that are over 8 years old and running strong every day. (ahh crap....gotta knock on wood now)
I'm not anti-latex by any means but I've been watching this from day one closely as I'm always considering new technology. It does look promising buuuut,
Solvent based printers are the real "tried and true" technology for now. I'm excited about the leaps and bounds of Latex and perhaps even the hybrid Aqueous IR/UV systems hitting the market now.

 

[FrankW]

That's the opposite of tried and true, that is a "developing technology".

Every of that technologies are under continued development. Why the eco-solvent inks have switched to a second generation in 2003, a third in 2006, a forth last year and so on? Do you know the improvements Roland have made with the Soljet Pro III (2006) because of known issues with the Pro II (2001)? Printhead drive system, Ink supply and so on? Why we don't print with Epson DX2-heads anymore in our Rolands, Mimakis and Mutohs? Why Roland have introduced a Soljet Pro IV in 2012? Have you ever read a firmware revision record of a well known, popular model from Roland or Mutoh for example? Summas S-Classes are proven technology since 2005, but they are now at firmware version 39, the last revision is from 2014 (9 years after introduction). The next generation S-Class2, introduced in early 2013, is on firmware revision 17.

No company, if its name is Roland, Mutoh or HP, closes down R & D just because they have successfully developed one printer model. Of course they check feedback from the market and try to improve their products, and we should be grateful for that. A lot of people using their L25500 since years, and they are happy ... but of course the second generation have improvements, as the third generation too.

Using heat to create a layer of latex polymeres with embedded pigments is the basic technology which works since 2008, with the advantages over eco-solvent like immediate drying, more scratch resistance, water-based and better results on paper and textiles than eco-solvent. Todays latex printers have even more scratch resistance, higher printing speeds, faster heating and so on, and improvements in user interface, colour management and much more ... not a single innovation to blame them for.

 

[Kentucky Wraps]

Every of that technologies are under continued development. Why the eco-solvent inks have switched to a second generation in 2003, a third in 2006, a forth last year and so on? Do you know the improvements Roland have made with the Soljet Pro III (2006) because of known issues with the Pro II (2001)? Printhead drive system, Ink supply and so on? Why we don't print with Epson DX2-heads anymore in our Rolands, Mimakis and Mutohs? Why Roland have introduced a Soljet Pro IV in 2012? Have you ever read a firmware revision record of a well known, popular model from Roland or Mutoh for example? Summas S-Classes are proven technology since 2005, but they are now at firmware version 39, the last revision is from 2014 (9 years after introduction). The next generation S-Class2, introduced in early 2013, is on firmware revision 17.

No company, if its name is Roland, Mutoh or HP, closes down R & D just because they have successfully developed one printer model. Of course they check feedback from the market and try to improve their products, and we should be grateful for that. A lot of people using their L25500 since years, and they are happy ... but of course the second generation have improvements, as the third generation too.

Using heat to create a layer of latex polymeres with embedded pigments is the basic technology which works since 2008, with the advantages over eco-solvent like immediate drying, more scratch resistance, water-based and better results on paper and textiles than eco-solvent. Todays latex printers have even more scratch resistance, higher printing speeds, faster heating and so on, and improvements in user interface, colour management and much more ... not a single innovation to blame them for.

Whoah there! I didn't say Roland and other solvent printers don't update their technology. Just because there are "some" L25500 customers since 2008 doesn't prove the point that Latex is a "tried and true" technology. It's still going through growing pains. Of course all technology continues to improve. Let's not be ridiculous here.
My ENTIRE point though was that Latex is the new kid on the block EIGHT YEARS. Solvent has been around 3 times as long with many more manufacturers in the mix.
I also said I'm not against Latex AND I'm excited about where it's going. But lets just use common sense because "words" mean something. "The tried and true technology" makes it seem like it is more established than solvent. This is patently false.
I didn't mean to threaten your shares of HP and nothing negative was actually said about Latex. You must have some emotional attachment or something. You read into it more than I said.
I'm a fan of Latex. Whether it's HP or Mimaki. I'd just like to hold off until there's been a good solid Latex on the market for some measurable time. I'm curious to hear how many L25500 users are happy with their 8 year old printer compared to an 8 year old Roland. (this aughtta be good)

 

[P Wagner]

No company, if its name is Roland, Mutoh or HP, closes down R & D just because they have successfully developed one printer model. Of course they check feedback from the market and try to improve their products, and we should be grateful for that. A lot of people using their L25500 since years, and they are happy ... but of course the second generation have improvements, as the third generation too.

Using heat to create a layer of latex polymeres with embedded pigments is the basic technology which works since 2008, with the advantages over eco-solvent like immediate drying, more scratch resistance, water-based and better results on paper and textiles than eco-solvent. Todays latex printers have even more scratch resistance, higher printing speeds, faster heating and so on, and improvements in user interface, colour management and much more ... not a single innovation to blame them for.

I agree with all of this. The only additional point that I would make is that unlike most manufacturers of eco-solvent printers (excepting Epson and possibly Seiko), HP patents cover all of the basic technology building blocks that are used in Latex printers. These include ink chemistry, printheads, media transport sensor systems, and much more.

Because of this, constant improvement and evolution is possible at a much faster rate, and that is exactly what we have seen to date with HP Latex printers.

Eco-solvent printer manufacturers like Roland, Mimaki, and Mutoh are wholly reliant on the basic building blocks made available to them by their technology partners (Epson or Ricoh make the PHs used in virtually all current eco-solvent printers).

P Wagner

 

[Gino]

After all that, I think it all boils down to personal preference. What you feel comfortable using. What you learn to use and how you use it. They all have their ups and downs and we all learn to work around them with our own machines. Your aimed target market is what might determine what you want to put in your shop, more than some poll taken where everyone gives their opinions based upon personal and sometimes emotional opinions. Just like any other track records out there from pharmaceutical to political polls, they're all tainted with what information they put in..... or not. The days of some piece of equipment coming to the foreground and being considered number one by the industry are long gone, just like clothing or hair fads.

Ya know, when Gerber plotters and software came on the market, there was no one else on the block, let alone the universe for years, so they were King. Everyone expected Gerber to stay on top and with good advertising and participation, they did, but other companies passed them by. They did make a tank out of their sprocket fed cutters, but most of the rest of their stuff, was just mediocre. While we expected a lot from them, they are now mostly in the dust. New kids on the block and lots of them have taken over, but like so many things.... we are all the guinea pigs paying for this stuff, passing back reports and they remain quite, slowly giving us what we need. Then, when they have it perfected...... they come up with something else and the game starts all over again as a new generation of piggies come to market.

Sometimes, ya just hafta take the plunge and just do it and make the best of it, as there really is no right or wrong. So, do your research on what kinda prints you'll be needing, and get the appropriate machine for you and your customers, not what some body doing just wraps has or someone doing airport backlits is using. Heck, for that matter, farm out to different wholesalers and see what machines do the best work.

 

[FrankW]

@ Kentucky Wraps:

If you feel more secure with a technology of an older origin, you are free to use that technology. But for example, early adopter of an Epson Eco-Solvent in 2013 (proven technology from a technology leader) would have regretted quickly. And I know people who regrets to buy a roland or mimaki too, the same with HP. None of current available technologies is a solution for every difficulties and diseases.

And: with an installed base of more than 30'000 units (industrial too), market leadership in most european countries (not shure about the US) and so on I think it is not wrong to say the latex technology is "tried and true" ... even if the basic technology is 8 years on the market only, while eco-solvent is 5 years more.

 

[Gino]

I only know what I know about latex machines by what I read here and some other forums and magazines. To me, it seems like any trade magazine or trade show demonstration is not showing true results. They are completely controlled environments. Now, switch to the end users that you read about at a place like this and you find mixed feelings. Nothing new...........

I guess my beef is, in the beginning of sign computers and apparatus back in the early 80s, we paid outrageous prices for industry only equipment. When all these companies flooded our industry with all the different pieces of equipment and were finished using us to help them design better equipment, they then started selling to our customers at far better prices than we were ever offered. The numbers from back in the 80s and 90s were staggering compared to what you pay today. So, how can I believe anything some manufacturer says or some salesman says ?? It's all about selling a machine........ any machine, regardless of what you really want or need.


So, anyway, take the automobile, it's a vast improvement over the horse and buggy, but in the wrong hands or envirnoment, it could be a disaster. Same thing with something only 8 years or 15 years old. Not enough input, yet. So, make the best of your situation, but don't tell me it's the be-all-end-all. For our industry...... I can decide that........ not someone who depends on a commision.