DX5 head source fo JV33 etc

[ruckusman]

HI All,

Just thought I'd share this info for anyone with any printers that use DX5 heads, the info was posted to the jv3 yahoo group mailing list

I don't have a DX5 series printhead printer, but this is worth sharing

Ha! On JV33 and other machines that use a DX5 head - it has quietly become
fun to simply buy an Epson R1900 desktop printer for a few hundred, gank
the printhead and sell the printer as scrap on eBay - always a few of them
on there with no printhead. Same thing though - have to change the manifold
out for a solvent resistant one. Works perfect otherwise. Recently did this
myself about a month ago. DX5 heads run from around $700 to $1500. That
R1900 printer has a nice new one sitting in it. Granted this is off the
subject slightly but you gotta be resourceful.

 

[thewood]

I saw that on the JV3 forum yesterday and saved it for future reference. Very interesting.

 

[SightLine]

That was me that posted that..... :Big Laugh

Here is another tip. Epson usually has some of the R1900 on their clearance/refurbished direct site. The R2880 desktop printer also uses a DX5 head as well as a couple of others.

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/BuyEpson/ccProductCategory.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=-13267

I got mine as a factory refurb from Epson. As far as I could tell the head and printer were brand new. I reckon if anyone can fix a DX5 print head it would be Epson themselves. Got my R1900 for $299. Only one they have right now is the R2880 for $349 which is still a steal for just the printhead.

Like I said though - you MUST use your current manifold. Those printers are for water based inks. It is also a small bit of work to remove the printhead from them. Then swap the manifold over and slowly over about 30 seconds per nozzle inject about 25cc of solvent flush into each of the new heads channels. Install it and print away.

One catch though. The head rank on the new head will not be accepted by your Mimaki. Only thing you can do is simply leave your old head rank in. I did mine about a month ago and its been printing 100% perfect since. There is a slight chance though that the head rank issue might cause nozzle deflection or some other anomoly but it's not likely.

 

[FatCat]

Interesting...

 

[artbot]

the rest of the thread was very interesting too. a "genuine" epson water based head with a "genuine" solvent roland head rank sticker underneath it, and then a "genuine" solvent mimaki head rank sticker underneath that. i bet they'd have put a "genuine" mutoh sticker but it started looking a little thick.

let's face it. epson is what it is. a semi-rotten ex-renaissance company that spends more time charging with the market will bear rather than making a good product and selling it for HONEST buck.

they lie to their customers and i'm figuring print part suppliers have a certain amount of hush factor to keep those parts on the shelf.

 

[Letterbox Mike]

This makes me hate my GS6000 and Epson even more...

 

[SightLine]

Epson has pretty much locked down all Epson part distributors on heads as well. Even a repair facility ordering a replacement head MUST provide the Epson serial number of the machine before they can order a new printhead. No serial number, or non-epson serial number - tough luck. This goes for DX4, DX5, and DX6 heads. If you want them from Epson you are going to provide and Epson printer serial number. Otherwise go through whoever makes your printer or find them in other ways...

An intersting Flaar report http://www.wide-format-printers.org...position_Epson-DX5_DX6_printhead-printers.pdf

"Epson keeps trying to squeeze money out of Mimaki, Mutoh, and Roland by not allowing them to enter certain markets. Epson also charges a fee for using their heads based on the ink that flows through any Epson head. The result is simple: the new Mimaki outdoor printer will no longer use Epson heads at all: the new Mimaki printer uses a completely different brand.

If Epson continues to demand an ink “tax” from printer manufacturers, one by one these manufacturers will stop using Epson printheads. So the most intelligent thing for Epson is to allow their printheads to enter the Chinese printer manufacturing market."

Another good Flaar report... http://large-format-printers.org/co...X5-DX7-printheads-Lexmark-Lenovo_printers.pdf​

 

[signage]

From what I am seeing it is Epson and these other makers looking to make more money.
Epson charges these manufactures about what most individuals are finding the heads at at Epson repair centers for technicians. The problem is that Epson isn't making any money on the ink and more head are being sold at a lower price, so they want to know who is getting them and charge accordingly!

 

[artbot]

it's also a corporate pricing decision. there was a day that a dx2 was pricey. eventually as the tech got older the heads were very cheap. with the dx4's they just adpoted a different pricing structure. keep 'em high and force upgrading to the next head tech. i've busted a dx4 open and there is a about $65 worth of manufacturing if they wanted to price accordingly rather than the bleeding edge maximum price.

 

[BigfishDM]

Great info, thanks for sharing guys thats crazy.

 

[Arstron]

I have been wondering if these desktop printers print heads would work as a replacement (I actually have a mutoh). When I ordered my new print head 4 years ago, it was around $800, now the price has doubled, that is just crazy.

 

[artbot]

i would quit discussing this. or it won't be long before epson put on some kind of printer recognition chip. much like the chip on an oem cart.

 

[SightLine]

Kinda makes you wonder what "retailer" also is onto this and has been making a killing....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/180686715831 Already sold 53!!!! lol

 

[artbot]

i can get that thing running for $900.

 

[SightLine]

Mimaki has already started adding head detection crap to newer firmware on DX5 based machines to try and prevent people from using any old DX5 head. On the JV33 it was introduced at firmware version 3.2. Not all but some heads will give the printer a "device construction error". Revertign the machine below version 3.2 and it works just fine. Nice huh...

I think Epson probably strongarmed Mimaki into do that myself.

i would quit discussing this. or it won't be long before epson put on some kind of printer recognition chip. much like the chip on an oem cart.

i can get that thing running for $900.

lol or just buy a new one for half

 

[artbot]

think about the math on this. the r1900 costs around $450 retail. that means epson sold the entire printer plus the boxing for about $225. that means the printhead inside the printer is worth about $112 wholesale to epson. and most likely even less... $85?

 

[FatCat]

think about the math on this. the r1900 costs around $450 retail. that means epson sold the entire printer plus the boxing for about $225. that means the printhead inside the printer is worth about $112 wholesale to epson. and most likely even less... $85?

Sickening - especially when you consider those poor folks that have paid $1500-$2000 for one of these "genuine" solvent heads.

Ridiculous...

 

[ruckusman]

That was me that posted that..... :Big Laugh

One catch though. The head rank on the new head will not be accepted by your Mimaki. Only thing you can do is simply leave your old head rank in. I did mine about a month ago and its been printing 100% perfect since. There is a slight chance though that the head rank issue might cause nozzle deflection or some other anomoly but it's not likely.

Quick question for you, does the R1900, R2880 head have a head rank printed on it at all?

Consumer laws aren't spectacular here in Australia, and we wouldn't have the numbers to really make an impressive case for this.
But I'm surprised that in the US with stronger consumer laws and enforcement (that's how I perceive it to be anyway), why hasn't Epson at least been taken to task over the pricing of replacement print heads?

It's common knowledge that the consumer/desktop printers are sold at a loss, same could be said for larger Epson units also - they are all considered "ink delivery devices" with the money coming from ink sales.
But I think the stepper motors would be the more expensive components, not the print head(s).

Artbots observation about the amount of manufacturing and the cost per printhead is likely a good appraisal.

Without going after the printer manufacturers - Roland, Mimaki, Mutoh et al
Is there any consumer protection to stop manufacturers (Epson) or OEM's - Roland, Mutoh, Mimaki etc from selling spare/replacement parts at extortionate prices that bear little or no relation to actual cost of production?
As there is only one source of origin, that falls immediately into the monopoly category in my opinion.

just putting it out there...

peace out

 

[SightLine]

Dont know for sure on a R2880 DX5 head but the head from a R1900 does. Even the same format as a Mimaki head rank. If you try to enter it the Mimaki will say "error 30 - input is unusual". Like I said though you can just leave the existing head rank and it will work.

The monopoly issue is not one I'm so sure on. Dont get me wrong, I think Epson way overcharges for these heads. However I cannot even fathom the development cost or the costs to setup the manufacturing. Granted the raw material costs are not massive but the other costs have to be very high. I feel Epson could easily charge well under half what they do. Then again if I invented something and people were willing to pay a lot for it and since it was my invention and idea I'd be pretty upset if some government stepped in and told me how much I'm allowed to sell it for. Plus the whole issue of the US trying to stop a foreign company from doing something.

I also cannot deny - for the most part, Epson peizo print heads last a darn long time considering the amount of ink we push through them day in and day out. They generally print darn nice too.

 

[ruckusman]

Sorry re-reading what I wrote, it's not clear
What I was pointing out was fo example the R1900, which has a DX5 head, the entire printer can be bought for less than a replacement DX5 head via Mimaki, Mutoh, Roland etc.

Now we know that the the R1900 cost is subsidised, in anticipation of ink sales - That's the business model. But a replacement DX5 head purchased for a R1900 is going to be substantially less direct from Epson and spare parts are typically overpriced.

I believe the same can be said for the Epson 10000/10600 heads, three costs less than just one DX4 from the OEM's.

But Epson will not let anyone without a 10000/10600 serial number purchase them.

Further - It's exactly the same design and manufacturing processes for the heads in the $49 (disposable) printers. So regardless of the destination, we know that the heads are produced cheaply enough.

So controlling the price, or restricting access to lower priced sources depending on the final usage is to me very iffy business practice, and I would have thought pushing the bounds of what is legal.
From a Monopoly perspective I'd hazard to say that's a restriction of trade

peace out