Laser printer gloat

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 06:28:37 GMT, "William R. Walsh"
<newsgroups1@idontwantjunqueemail.walshcomptech.com> wrote:

Or perhaps it is in the page coverage percentage. Printer makers express
toner cartridge life at a given % of coverage on a page. I think the usual
figure is based on a 10% coverage.

HP originally used 5%. That resulted in yields for US and EU being
slightly different due to the differences between letter size and A4
size paper. Since 2004, everyone uses ISO/IEC 19752.

More on how page yield is measured:
<http://www.hp.com/pageyield/articles/us/en/MonoLaserJetYieldArticle.html>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_19752>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[PeterD]

On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:12:44 -0800, isw <isw@witzend.com> wrote:

In article <hd003e$q6$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>,
Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com> wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 11/3/2009 9:39 PM Bob Larter spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

One thing I really don't like about this, and really most HP printers
that I've used, is that it hates to print on the back of printed
sheets. Usually it eats/shreds about half the sheets one tries to
print this way. Yeah, I know, you can get HPs with "duplex" options,
but to me, that's utter bullshit. I remember the old Panasonic laser
printer my old office had. It was a huge beast, and certainly no
better than the HP we also had at the time (LJ 4???), but the
Panasonic would feed *any* paper you put into it, even if it had just
been run through the printer on one side. I'd always use it to print
out my manuals on 2 sides for proofing.

It'll work better if you ensure that you print on the correct side of
the sheet first. Check your paper packet for an arrow, & a label
saying "Print this side first", & load your paper tray accordingly.
It'll also help to riffle the stack of paper before loading it into
the cartridge. Give the paper cartridge a shake to even up the edges
before putting it in the printer.

I've done all those things; none of them make the slightest difference.
(As a former printer, it's an automatic reflex for me to fan paper
before inserting it into a paper-eating machine.)

Well, something is clearly wrong. I serviced Canon-engine lasers for
many years, & all the larger models (ie; with more metal than plastic,
such as the CX, SX & MX engines) had really good paper-handling, & could
cope just fine with double-sided printing.

The old Apple LaserWriters with Canon engines are nearly unkillable, if
a bit slow. The most jam-prone printer I ever saw, though, had a Xerox
engine! You'd think that if anybody knew about paper handling, it'd be
them...

My Xerox (a 5400) has been very good, about one jam every six months
(usually after loading the tray). Does reasonably on double sided, but
not perfect (I really would like to get the duplexer option, and am
watching eBay for one). I actually am picking up a second 5400 this
morning, too, for either spare or second use.

 

[David Brodbeck]

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Nope. Not the problem. It's inherent in the lousy HP feeder design. I've
never seen a LaserJet that would print on the back side of just-printed
sheets even when brand new.

I've done it all the time on LaserJet II, III, 4m, and 5 printers. (I
often keep a tray full of scrap paper that's already printed on one
side.) It works best if the paper has chance to cool and lose its curl,
though. If it's hot out of the machine you may have problems. Sometimes
if the weather is try the paper will come out with a static charge that
makes it stick together and misfeed, too.

 

[David Brodbeck]

D Yuniskis wrote:

I couldn't *kill* my LJii! I finally had to get rid of it as
the electric costs were ridiculous (though the toner carts
were awful cheap!)

The fuser eventually went out on my II, after many years. I got rid of
it and replaced it with a heavily (ab)used 4m, surplus from a college
computer lab. Used that for three or four years until the output
rollers got too warn and it started to jam; I could have fixed it, but
at that point I was sick of how slow it was, so I went to the local
computer recycler and bought a lightly used 2300n. These HP laser
printers are so cheap on the used market and hold up so well in home use.

 

[David Brodbeck]

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 11/5/2009 7:05 PM Bob Larter spake thus:
Well, something is clearly wrong. I serviced Canon-engine lasers for
many years, & all the larger models (ie; with more metal than plastic,
such as the CX, SX & MX engines) had really good paper-handling, &
could cope just fine with double-sided printing.

Yes, but those were Canon-engine printers, not HPs.

The HP LaserJet II, III, and 4 series printers all used Canon print engines.

As Jeff L. pointed
out, the HP design suffers from an abrupt turn right at the paper-pickup
point, which seems to be the snag that makes printing on just-printed
sheets very problematic.

The II and III suffer least from that problem, because their trays
project out the front. It makes them very bulky, though.

 

[Bob Larter]

William R. Walsh wrote:

Or perhaps it is in the page coverage percentage. Printer makers express
toner cartridge life at a given % of coverage on a page. I think the usual
figure is based on a 10% coverage.

5% coverage. AKA the "Slerexe Letter". cf:
<http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enAU342AU342&ei=EFj2SsfeB4uNkAWCyO2wAw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQBSgA&q=slerexe+letter&spell=1>

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Bob Larter]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:05:41 +1000, Bob Larter <bobbylarter@gmail.com
wrote:

Well, something is clearly wrong. I serviced Canon-engine lasers for
many years, & all the larger models (ie; with more metal than plastic,
such as the CX, SX & MX engines)

Ummm... I think you mean CX, SX, and NX. There is no MX.
http://www.printerworks.com/Catalogs/LaserJets.html

Yep, you're right. It's been long enough that I just misremembered.

All the HP (something)X LaserJet printers were made by Canon.

Yep. I first learned to repair lasers when I worked for Canon. That
knowledge came in very handy for fixing other brands.

[snip lots of useful info]

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Allodoxaphobia]

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:56:06 -0800, David Nebenzahl wrote:

This inspired by the mini-thread in the thread up yonder about HP
DeskJet printers. Actually something of a reverse gloat, along the lines
of "my old printer still works; does yours?".

Got my HP LaserJet 2100M (600 DPI w/PostScript capability) ca. 2000. Not
only is the printer still working perfectly, but I'm still using the
same cartridge I got with it!

Our home office printer is an HP LJ III which we purchased new on
July 27, 1990. I have the exact date at hand because we came across the
canceled check several years ago and taped it to the cover of the
printer. $1,872.50 - IN 1990 US$$$!!

All-in-all, I've been able to keep it supplied with toner cartridges by
buying them in unopened boxes at 2nd-hand stores-- which were no doubt
dropped off by folks that just had to 'upgrade' to the troublesome
inkjet printers.

Admittedly, it does not get heavy use. The only repair I've had to
do to it is replace the fuser assy -- about 2 years ago.

Jonesy
--
Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux
38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2
* Killfiling google & XXXXbanter.com: jonz.net/ng.htm