• I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...

Third Party Ecosol Max inks, Cuantek Review?

MakeMyGraphic

New Member
okay... so I have some concerns. I am looking for people who are using Cuantek inks for their Roland machines. My machine warranty ended in late 2013 and I therefore decided to switch over to using Cuantek inks, it took me a while to go through my 440ml of original Roland OEM Ecosol Max cartridges, eventually I managed to switch to Cuantek and had a mixture of inks in my system and for a while it seemed that the inks were just as good, but recently in this past year I have been receiving a HUGE amount of customer emails regarding the fact that my decal prints did not last the 3 years I touted they should.

Please note that appart from the ink manufacturer none of my practices have changed at all. Same machine, same material (Oracal 651 yeah not top but whatever my customers are ok with this stuff) NEVER laminated, same transfer tape, same weather and so forth. Only change was the ink.

Here are two of the oldest decals I have access to which are currently placed on my old 1986 Ford Econoline van, that sits in the HARSH Escondido, CA sun 7 days a week, I took all these pictures around the same time, these were made BEFORE I switched over to Cuantek inks.
TeaL8U6.jpg


then there is this one also made around the same time using same OEM inks:

FKbE9Uy.jpg


now... I am not as busy as most of you guys business-wise. But I do have a steady stream of customers, it therefore took me about a year to transition over from using up all Roland inks to going 100% Cuantek which I was told was VERY comparable and 100% compatible with no need to flush my lines. I did not receive any complaints during this time. However, now that I am 100% on Cuantek inks (as of late 2015) and I noticed that a few of my newly made decals that I was using 1st hand (Bowie Memorial decal) had actually faded and it was of a concern to me,

dQtuUxC.jpg


I figured maybe the sun was particularly harsher this this past year but then I looked back at my old decals (above) and that is when I became suspect, contacted my Bro in law and asked him to send me a pic of a decal I made for him when I had actually transitioned 100% to Cuantek (Doge Decal)

zX5s7i2.jpg


well... to me it became apparent that there was definitely something wrong with either the batch of inks I received from Cuantek, so I decided to wait a little... but then I started receiving more and more emails and messages from old customers from less than 2 years ago regarding the fact that my decals were NOT lasting as long as I thought they should last IF in fact Cuantek inks were like OEM Roland inks which I said 3 years to all my customers, figuring that was a decent amount of time considering I had first had experience at this point with hold old my oldest decals were lasting on my old Van.

I therefore decided to contact Cuantek, a gentleman who had been helping me for years named Francisco. I brought up my concerns and asked him if there was a bad batch or an ink formulation change. He told me nothing had changed and suggested that perhaps my customers were using harsh chemicals to wash their vehicles therefore making the decals lose vibrancy. and here is what i said in response to that:

i would accept that as a reason (that maaaybe customers are using bad things to wash vehicles with), however the customers in question that I am receiving this feedback from are my own family members as well as myself. Occasionally I will get a bad review on one of the printed products in my shop site, but none of my family use harsh abrasive solutions on our vehicles when we rarely do wash our cars (SoCal so the most car washes most of us get are when it rains once in a blue moon haha) my van has been sitting in direct sunlight for years with the older decals not being affected. no lamination at all.

Unfortunately the only factors that have changed here that I can think would be affecting color vibrancy are the inks since I change the inks more often than I do everything else:

Same Printer since 2011
Same material since 2010
Same weather since 2010
Inks have been changed out from Roland to Cuantek
no decals have been laminated since 2010 ever (I can walk out my door and look at one printed before the ink change in 2013)

so I guess if this is normal then, it took me almost 3 years to start to notice the fact that the colors aren't lasting as long. This might be due to color mixing of original Roland inks with the Cuantek inks. So now the only thing left for me to do is to actually try a different manufacturer :(

I wanted to share this experience with you all here since I am just a little guy(Gal), and I felt that the claims Cuantek has made thus far have not held up to the test... I am now switching back to OEM Roland inks unless I can find an actual third party manufacturer that will actually stand by their products on this matter. I was wondering if anyone else here has any stories regarding Cuantek inks? Or maybe help me figure out why my prints are not lasting as long? (No I am not willing to laminate my prints sorry...my customers would not appreciate the upcharges I would need to do to make that work) I have a Roland BN-20 Versa Studio. Thank you.
 

BigfishDM

Merchant Member
One of the many pitfalls of using 3rd party ink, I would stick with the original inks and forget 3rd party. They all lie and say they are compatible and say you will never have any issues. 3rd party inks ruin printheads faster also, in my opinion.
 

rjssigns

Active Member
Things are great when you're lining their pockets, just don't call with an issue. Guaranteed it will always be your fault.

I wish I had the disposable income to send these "just like OEM" inks to a lab. That would put an end to all the BS.
 

JasonMeisnerSTS

New Member
Unfortunately like everything, there are good and bad products out there whether it is OEM or aftermarket. I am not familiar with the ink supplier you mentioned but there are tons of inks flooding the market; Some are good, some are bad.

I represent a US ink manufacturer where our ink is made here in Florida and we support many local customers as well as distributors throughout the world. you certainly wouldn't have those fading issues with our product as we have very harsh conditions here for outdoor signage.

Let me know if I can help; We have all of the lab equipment here as well so we can perform many tests others cannot.
 

Gino

Premium Subscriber
You are doing things rather wrong in accordance to how a digital print should be produced. Whether or not it affected your OEM inks, it is definitely affecting these inks.
  • You should be printing to a good grade of digital media, that is honestly supposed to accept inks.
  • You should also be laminating these things.


Technically, no third party ink is made to perform as well as the original inks. It is simply not possible, from a patent/legal standpoint to the ingredients. From temperatures, to the actual ingredients, they may not copy to make it perform in the same manner, so they substitute the best they can..... and they do quite well at it, bit not good enough in most cases. The same thing applies to why Avery can't duplicate 3M or OraCal to Arlon or each other. They cannot copy someone else's recipe.... anyway, not unless they hide it somehow.
 

premiercolour

Merchant Member
One of the many pitfalls of using 3rd party ink, I would stick with the original inks and forget 3rd party. They all lie and say they are compatible and say you will never have any issues. 3rd party inks ruin printheads faster also, in my opinion.

"They all". What? Are you telling me that I was one of them who lied about aftermarket ink that we believe works as good as OEM? I remember you were sitting in my office saying "____ " eco solvent ink was the best in the world before. Now everyone is lying about it? I am sure you didn't mean everyone. Please be specific.
 

premiercolour

Merchant Member
You are doing things rather wrong in accordance to how a digital print should be produced. Whether or not it affected your OEM inks, it is definitely affecting these inks.
  • You should be printing to a good grade of digital media, that is honestly supposed to accept inks.
  • You should also be laminating these things.


Technically, no third party ink is made to perform as well as the original inks. It is simply not possible, from a patent/legal standpoint to the ingredients. From temperatures, to the actual ingredients, they may not copy to make it perform in the same manner, so they substitute the best they can..... and they do quite well at it, bit not good enough in most cases. The same thing applies to why Avery can't duplicate 3M or OraCal to Arlon or each other. They cannot copy someone else's recipe.... anyway, not unless they hide it somehow.

Nicely put. Keep in mind someone else is making these OEM ink for Roland, Mutoh and Mimaki. I am sure that "someone else" is not the best eco solvent ink maker in the world. I believe It is all about the opportunity and little bit of luck.
 

GaSouthpaw

Profane and profane accessories.
The question of the reliability of non-OEM inks is somewhat moot here. Whether you got good results with OEM inks or not- you're using media that's not suitable for what you're doing with it and you compound your initial error by not laminating the prints. So even if you were using digital media for these prints, they were bound to fail sooner or later.
Use the correct media and laminate it. If you still have a problem with fading after that, then the ink might be at fault.
 

MakeMyGraphic

New Member
Hi guys! Sorry I hadn't actually looked at any responses and TBH had forgotten that I even made this thread until this morning one of the reps from Cuantek contacted me asking me to heed advice on my thread responses of which led me here right now :) thanks I read all the posts and I laughed a little at the idea that two guys so far thought I had no idea that I was using what is technically the WRONG media for print jobs. YES I KNOW 651 is not labeled to work for such things but I have used it for years even when I had my thermal printers and it had been working just fine.

Oracal 651 is a vynil made for cutter nor for printing, the fact that can be printed on is a different thing, ORAJET is the printing vynil.

I knew that from the get go, and I made my own decision to move forward with this, I am not wrapping vehicles and my decals are not really intended to last longer than the shelflife of said vinyls anyway so I was fine with that. The issue at hand here in this thread is the fact that the OEM inks that are unlaminated and printed on this technically non-compatible media are STILL lasting longer than those of the 3rd party. IF I hadn't actually mentioned that I was using 651 then what? the inks would have still faded in less than a year's time.

The question of the reliability of non-OEM inks is somewhat moot here. Whether you got good results with OEM inks or not- you're using media that's not suitable for what you're doing with it and you compound your initial error by not laminating the prints. So even if you were using digital media for these prints, they were bound to fail sooner or later.
Use the correct media and laminate it. If you still have a problem with fading after that, then the ink might be at fault.

this goes again along with what I said above for Catalina. I am not laminating any of my prints since I don't consider them to be made for over 5 years of life. Most I expect without lamination is 3 years, but I'm not even getting 1 year out of these 3rd party inks so no I don't feel I have made an error as I never intended to have them laminated, and again I go back to saying the prints of the media I used with OEM inks is still nice clean and colorfull all these years later whilst the 3rd party inks are fading in less than 1 year. no lamination, you guys are kind of looking at the wrong details of this thread... again I could have simply left off the fact that I used 651 the inks would have still faded even if I had used 3M, Avery, Xpel, and/or Suntek vinyls (of which if I did I would never leave unlaminated anyway but this is just not the point I was trying to make)

again thanks everyone for your feedback I just felt like pointing these out since Cuantek was trying to use CatalinJ and GaSouthpaw's posts as examples why their inks were failing XD all my fault of course
 

Cuantekusa

INKS FOR WIDE FORMAT PRINTERS cuantek-usa.com
Dear Laura / Makemygraphic, first of all thank you for the review on our inks, we are pleased to hear that our EcoSolvent ink lasted for more than two years in the Southern California sunny weather without lamination on a vehicle, and on a material that is not intended to be used for digital printing.
Our inks performed as promised, and did not clog the printer's head and there was no need to change the profiles of your Roland BN-20, so at the end you were able to print with the same quality at a lower ink cost.

Here is the specsheet of the material you used for your decals, it clearly states it is for "Cutting application" not for digital printing.
http://www.orafol.com/tl_files/cont...ldatasheets/americas/en/oracal/oracal-651.pdf

We stand behind our products and we are always available to help with advice and tips, We are located in Texas, I would like to extend an invitation to anyone to try our inks and receive a 20% discount by mentioning this post on your first order.
We have a wide database of customers with Roland (max/max2), Mimaki (SS2/SS21/ES3), Mutoh EcoUltra, HP, Seiko, Epson printers, etc.

Feel free to contact me directly with any questions.

Francisco Garcia
francisco@cuantek-usa.com
(210)388.2993 cell
 

nate

New Member
One of the many pitfalls of using 3rd party ink, I would stick with the original inks and forget 3rd party. They all lie and say they are compatible and say you will never have any issues. 3rd party inks ruin printheads faster also, in my opinion.

This is not accurate. When I had several Rolands years ago we ran Triangle and Solaris w/o any issues, and have documented several times on this site as to how good they were for us.
 

nate

New Member
Hi guys! Sorry I hadn't actually looked at any responses and TBH had forgotten that I even made this thread until this morning one of the reps from Cuantek contacted me asking me to heed advice on my thread responses of which led me here right now :) thanks I read all the posts and I laughed a little at the idea that two guys so far thought I had no idea that I was using what is technically the WRONG media for print jobs. YES I KNOW 651 is not labeled to work for such things but I have used it for years even when I had my thermal printers and it had been working just fine.

I knew that from the get go, and I made my own decision to move forward with this,

Right here you shot yourself in the foot.
 

nate

New Member
Technically, no third party ink is made to perform as well as the original inks. It is simply not possible, from a patent/legal standpoint to the ingredients. From temperatures, to the actual ingredients, they may not copy to make it perform in the same manner, so they substitute the best they can..... and they do quite well at it, bit not good enough in most cases. The same thing applies to why Avery can't duplicate 3M or OraCal to Arlon or each other. They cannot copy someone else's recipe.... anyway, not unless they hide it somehow.

I'd be willing to bet that some of them are even better than the OEM. We had great luck with Solaris and Triangle. Both worked really well. I'm no chemist, but it seemed to me that both inks were "hotter" solvent wise and bit in to the media better. I guess the moral of anything third party is how much risk you want to take (I think these two brands had little to no risk), how much printing you actually do (does it warrant going bulk?) and do you mind experimenting to see what's right for you and your company.
 

Gino

Premium Subscriber
Hi guys! Sorry I hadn't actually looked at any responses and TBH had forgotten that I even made this thread until this morning one of the reps from Cuantek contacted me asking me to heed advice on my thread responses of which led me here right now :) thanks I read all the posts and I laughed a little at the idea that two guys so far thought I had no idea that I was using what is technically the WRONG media for print jobs. YES I KNOW 651 is not labeled to work for such things but I have used it for years even when I had my thermal printers and it had been working just fine.



I knew that from the get go, and I made my own decision to move forward with this, I am not wrapping vehicles and my decals are not really intended to last longer than the shelflife of said vinyls anyway so I was fine with that. The issue at hand here in this thread is the fact that the OEM inks that are unlaminated and printed on this technically non-compatible media are STILL lasting longer than those of the 3rd party. IF I hadn't actually mentioned that I was using 651 then what? the inks would have still faded in less than a year's time.



this goes again along with what I said above for Catalina. I am not laminating any of my prints since I don't consider them to be made for over 5 years of life. Most I expect without lamination is 3 years, but I'm not even getting 1 year out of these 3rd party inks so no I don't feel I have made an error as I never intended to have them laminated, and again I go back to saying the prints of the media I used with OEM inks is still nice clean and colorfull all these years later whilst the 3rd party inks are fading in less than 1 year. no lamination, you guys are kind of looking at the wrong details of this thread... again I could have simply left off the fact that I used 651 the inks would have still faded even if I had used 3M, Avery, Xpel, and/or Suntek vinyls (of which if I did I would never leave unlaminated anyway but this is just not the point I was trying to make)

again thanks everyone for your feedback I just felt like pointing these out since Cuantek was trying to use CatalinJ and GaSouthpaw's posts as examples why their inks were failing XD all my fault of course


wrong quote
 

Gino

Premium Subscriber
I'd be willing to bet that some of them are even better than the OEM. We had great luck with Solaris and Triangle. Both worked really well. I'm no chemist, but it seemed to me that both inks were "hotter" solvent wise and bit in to the media better. I guess the moral of anything third party is how much risk you want to take (I think these two brands had little to no risk), how much printing you actually do (does it warrant going bulk?) and do you mind experimenting to see what's right for you and your company.

Let me see here...... you'd be willing to bet, but you have no proof whatsoever of what you're saying..... it's just an emotional outburst.

Having great luck is a lot different than what works best. The only thing 3rd party ink has going for it is this..... it's cheaper and with cheap, guess what you get........??

You're no chemist, but you're willing to bet. Based upon what ?? Some tests ?? Some testimonials ?? Like any other report, you're only gonna report the good ones and let go of all the bad ones.

Can it outperform the original ink ?? Perhaps, but only once in a while a good one will slip through.

I don't wanna hamper your sales and I'm sure I'm not, but at least be honest with the people and let them decide for themselves if they wanna take a chance of ruining their machine to save pennies. That's all it amounts to..... pennies per print you save. If you go through a gallon of ink a day in 6 colors, it might be worth the risk. However, if it hurts your machine and doesn't put out as good a product, who's saving what. No time to do it right, but time to do it over.....?? Not a good money plan.
 

nate

New Member
Let me see here...... you'd be willing to bet, but you have no proof whatsoever of what you're saying..... it's just an emotional outburst.

Having great luck is a lot different than what works best. The only thing 3rd party ink has going for it is this..... it's cheaper and with cheap, guess what you get........??

You're no chemist, but you're willing to bet. Based upon what ?? Some tests ?? Some testimonials ?? Like any other report, you're only gonna report the good ones and let go of all the bad ones.

Can it outperform the original ink ?? Perhaps, but only once in a while a good one will slip through.

I don't wanna hamper your sales and I'm sure I'm not, but at least be honest with the people and let them decide for themselves if they wanna take a chance of ruining their machine to save pennies. That's all it amounts to..... pennies per print you save. If you go through a gallon of ink a day in 6 colors, it might be worth the risk. However, if it hurts your machine and doesn't put out as good a product, who's saving what. No time to do it right, but time to do it over.....?? Not a good money plan.
No. Just usage. We had several of the XC-540/XJ740 for at least 3 years? 4 years? a long time ago. Don't really remember. Anyway, the first thing we did with all of them was to run 3rd party so we could use the bulk. The Triangle worked well but the local dealer stopped selling them so we went to Solaris. So while I am no chemist, I do have great experience with both of those and would highly recommend them.
 

GaSouthpaw

Profane and profane accessories.
I had a nice, well thought out and carefully worded response typed out- but I'm going to skip that and just say you got lucky with the OEM inks, plain and simple.
 

Michael-Nola

I print things. It is very exciting.
Man people are really passionate about hating or loving on aftermarket inks huh??

I can tell you this, I have worked with people on the back end of the ink industry and it's not all as complex as it seems. There are really only a few large ink manufacturers in the world and they make the ink for everyone else. All of the smaller ink sellers are total crap, don't use them. But really, chemistry is chemistry, all of these ink companies that have been making these chemicals for screen and offset presses have the knowledge and know-how to step into the piezo digital world, and they're doing it just fine.

I won't specifically say who's making who's ink or I'm sure I'll get tracked down and sued, but I can assure you that the Triangle replacements for vutek machines are absolutely equal to the OEM 3M product. The Bordeaux replacements for the vutek machines are fantastic and have no issues whatsoever, they also make a lot of brands' OEM inks. All of the Bordeaux stuff is equal to or better than the original manufacture. Ink Mill and Avery's merge is public knowledge, that was an obvious move to stop Ink Mill from side selling just like 3M's digital ink vendor is doing. Solvent inks are so easy to manufacture, as long as it's a big name company you wont have an issue. Digital UV is more complex, but this is also why the top 4 ink manufacturers in the world are making it for everyone else.

Bottom line, your printer company isn't making their own inks anymore - especially as they specialized and became so good at it and as the inks become more complex. Even more so, some inks really did have historical issues because print manufacturers did try to make it themselves, and they sucked.

I have always customized my printers, whether it's a $10k unit or $300k, and I have used 3 ink manufacturers that make the OEM's and side-sell without issues for years. IF you know what you're buying, you can absolutely buy the exact same manufactured product at a 40%-ish discount by going direct to the chemical company. Oh and the chemical company usually owns the patent, not the printer! No one said it was smart to go buy Chinese ink ... these big guys are all right here in the US of A.

Either way ... it gets more complex the more you dig into it, but if I can do it ... it's not rocket science, it just takes some extra effort.
 
Top