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!

Which is a little puzzling; while the printer hasn't exactly been used
in a production environment, I have put plenty of pages through it:
printed out many entire manuals, etc. I'm just waiting for the cartridge
to empty out, but it still hasn't come close. (I even have a 2nd
cartridge I got with the printer, still in its foil package.)

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 bull****. 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.

Other than this, the LaserJet is a fine piece of equipment.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

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!

Which is a little puzzling; while the printer hasn't exactly been used
in a production environment, I have put plenty of pages through it:
printed out many entire manuals, etc. I'm just waiting for the cartridge
to empty out, but it still hasn't come close. (I even have a 2nd
cartridge I got with the printer, still in its foil package.)

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.

Check that there's still some tread on the rollers, and maybe the
separation pad.

Yeah, I know, you can get HPs with "duplex" options, but to me,
that's utter bull****.

All the duplexers do is flip the paper over so it can refeed. Printing
on the blank side of once-printed paper shouldn't be a problem.

Several brands of big office copier/printers used to provide me with
lots of hundred-page PostScript misprints. That once-printed paper
worked fine in LaserJet 4050 and 4350 printers.

--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
.com...
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?".


**I was just saying to my partner last week, that what I hated most about my
HP Laserjet 5MP (ca. 1994) was that the damned thing refuses to stop
working. I've fed it with more than a dozen cartridges (around 60,000 pages)
and it simply works and works perfectly. Print resolution is flawless, paper
jams almst unheard of (one every thousand pages or so). I've even been using
re-filled cartridges (despite HP's dire warnings), which cost around
AUS$60.00 apiece and it just won't stop. As of 2009, it can only be regarded
as a slug (6 pages/min), but it does the job. Damn it! I really wanted an
excuse to buy one of those all bells & whistles, HP colour laser printers.

FWIW: In the time I've owned the HP, I've thrown out four ink jet printers,
of various brands. They are, on the whole, utter crap. My HP will probably
still be working well into the next millenium.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

David Nebenzahl wrote:
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!

Which is a little puzzling; while the printer hasn't exactly been used
in a production environment, I have put plenty of pages through it:
printed out many entire manuals, etc. I'm just waiting for the cartridge

Most toner cartridges are designed for thousands of pages.
(e.g., 5,000 pages -- 10 reams of paper)

to empty out, but it still hasn't come close. (I even have a 2nd
cartridge I got with the printer, still in its foil package.)

I've had the same problem -- though I consider it an *annoyance*!
I routinely rescue color printers (not the cheap inkjets), run
them until they run out of ink/toner and then scrap/recycle them.

Unfortunately, even printing 8.5x11 photos (i.e., 100% ink coverage)
I haven't been able to "empty" any of them! I've been concentrating
on a Phaser 8200 for the past year and it looks like there are
still many months more of service left in the "ink tray" :

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

You've either got bad rollers, a bad fuser or "off brand" toner.
I haven't had problems with any LJ (I currently have an LJ4M+
and an LJ6P) printing "back side" (the LJ4M+ has the optional
duplexer so it *wants* to print "verso")

way. Yeah, I know, you can get HPs with "duplex" options, but to me,
that's utter bull****. 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.

Other than this, the LaserJet is a fine piece of equipment.

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!)

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
.com...
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?".


**I was just saying to my partner last week, that what I hated most about my
HP Laserjet 5MP (ca. 1994) was that the damned thing refuses to stop
working. I've fed it with more than a dozen cartridges (around 60,000 pages)
and it simply works and works perfectly. Print resolution is flawless, paper
jams almst unheard of (one every thousand pages or so). I've even been using
re-filled cartridges (despite HP's dire warnings), which cost around
AUS$60.00 apiece and it just won't stop. As of 2009, it can only be regarded
as a slug (6 pages/min), but it does the job. Damn it! I really wanted an
excuse to buy one of those all bells & whistles, HP colour laser printers.

Think carefully before buying color. Decide what you really need
from the printer (I recall going through this exercise at a company
where we were *designing* a printer). I use different printers
for different jobs.

E.g., LJ6P for low volume B&W printing -- when I want to
print a web page or "copy" a document (using a scanner);
LJ4M+ for big B&W jobs (I think it is 12PPM and duplexes
so it saves me paper); a Sony DPP-EX50 for postcard photographs;
Phaser 560 for high volume color "documents"; other "solid
inkj" phasers for large color photos; R1800 for big photos
and/or CD labels; etc.

If all you need is "multicolor business documents" (i.e., where
ICM isn't important) you can more effectively trade money for
speed, reduced supply costs, etc. OTOH, if you want to print
photos, you will find the cost of printing "business documents"
to be much higher than you would like.

FWIW: In the time I've owned the HP, I've thrown out four ink jet printers,
of various brands. They are, on the whole, utter crap. My HP will probably
still be working well into the next millenium.

HP inkjets are total crap. Some of the high end Epson's are
respectible -- *if* you maintain them well (I have an R1800,
SC3000 and SP2000P which have all performed well -- though
Photoshop doesn't like the oversized pages on the SC3000)

On 11/3/2009 5:46 PM Warren Block 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.

Check that there's still some tread on the rollers, and maybe the
separation pad.

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.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

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?".

A better question would be "What's the useful lifetime of your
printer" or perhaps "How many pages did you print before it ended up
at the recyclers"?

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!

I used to have one of those at home. The HP2100 series will do
1200dpi, which looks really nice for photos. However, the stupid
driver install defaults to 600dpi. Most people fail to notice until I
change the settings.
http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=bpl06416&locale=en_US&prodSe riesId=25469&prodTypeId=18972#A3

My 2100n worked ok but had a few issues. The fuser and fan are
thermostatically controlled and would cycle all night, which tended to
keep me awake. I don't mind listening to noise when it's printing,
but don't need the noise when it's idle. The power saving standby
function apparently didn't include the fan. 10 pages per minute was a
bit slow for me.

My current 2200dtn solved these problems. It uses the same cartridge,
prints on both sides, does not make noise when in standby, has 2
trays, and never seems to jam if I use decent paper (except when
printing my tax returns).

Incidentally, on the paper issue, I've found that thin 16 lb paper
tends to jam far more often than the 22 and 24 lb stock I'm currently
using. I've fixed many a paper jam problem by simply switching paper.
My neighbor is into recycling everything which includes saving old
printed pages and printing on the back side. The result is toner all
over rubber parts of the fuser roller assembly, where the previously
printed toner transfers to the roller when heated.

Which is a little puzzling; while the printer hasn't exactly been used
in a production environment, I have put plenty of pages through it:
printed out many entire manuals, etc. I'm just waiting for the cartridge
to empty out, but it still hasn't come close. (I even have a 2nd
cartridge I got with the printer, still in its foil package.)

The 96A cartridge is rated for 5000 pages in econo mode (600dpi). My
guess s about 4000 at 1200dpi. That's about 2-3 times what you might
get from some of HP's low end printers, such as the HP1012 with a 12A
cartridge (rated at 2000 pages).

However, my favorite office production printer (of the week), the HP
LaserJet 4300, uses a 39A cartridge, which is rated for 16,000 pages.
Some vendors claim up to 30,000 pages, but I don't believe it. Last
year, my tax prep customers averaged about 18,000 pages per cartridge.
The problem is that the stock HP carts cost about $120. There are
refills available for as little at $30, but the chip on these carts do
not show toner status. They also require a minor button pushing
ordeal to get rid of the "non-HP cart inserted" message.

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.

True. The printers expect the pages to be flat. Pages that have gone
through the printer tend to be slightly warped. That causes paper
jams. Remelting the toner on the back side of the page sometimes
causes the toner to stick to the rubber roller in the fuser, causing
exit jams. Paper doesn't like to slide smoothly off the stack in the
tray when there's printing on the back side. That's an especially bad
problem if you print a stack of paper, and then feed the stack back
through the printer again to print on the back side. The pages will
stick together. The rubber "feet" above the feed tray don't like to
push against printed paper, where the black areas are much slicker
than the unprinted white paper. It's usually not a problem with a
fairly new printer, but after the rubber feet get worn and slick,
things tend to slide.

Yeah, I know, you can get HPs with "duplex" options, but to me,
that's utter bull****.

Ummmm... well, ok. The duplexer will slow down the printer, even when
printing one page on one side. The duplexers I have on various 2100,
4200, 4300, and older HP printers work just fine. I can't say the
same for flipping over the stack and feeding the pages through again.

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.

I suppose that's an advantage if you run a mix of paper. The printers
I run into all run 20, 22, or 24 lb white paper in the main tray, and
some heavier stock (for cover sheets) in the 2nd tray. Sometimes,
some colored paper in the 3rd tray and possibly an envelope feeder or
pile of envelopes in the "multipurpose" tray.

Incidentally, many of my customers are buying office copiers that can
also act as a printer. This is becoming quite common. Printing speed
is greatly improved and it eliminates a redundant printer. However,
just try juggling paper around reprinting the back side in one of
these high end office copiers. They get some of their speed and
reliability by being optimized for a limited range of paper weights
and types, and will screw up badly if fed used, damaged, or wrong
paper.

Other than this, the LaserJet is a fine piece of equipment.

Yep. Plug:
http://www.fixyourownprinter.com
http://www.printerworks.com
http://partsurfer.hp.com
One reason I like HP is that I can get information, parts, refurbs,
software, hacks, 3rd party parts, etc.


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

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:45:34 -0700, D Yuniskis
wrote:

HP inkjets are total crap.

Not really. The DesignJet plotters are quite nice. Also, every
vendor has its winners and losers. Current HP inkjet printers seem to
be aimed at the very bottom of the market. They're little better than
throw aways. However, some of the more expensive HP inkjet printers
are tolerable.

Some of the high end Epson's are
respectible -- *if* you maintain them well (I have an R1800,
SC3000 and SP2000P which have all performed well -- though
Photoshop doesn't like the oversized pages on the SC3000)

Yep. However, I don't like Epson because of the difficulty in
obtaining parts, and their refill protection scheme. In addition,
having access to parts is often not enough as proprietary software is
required to align and calibrate the printer. There is a hack:
http://www.ssclg.com/epsone.shtml
http://inkjetprinterhelp.us/epsonSSC.html
to get around this, but Epson also juggles the firmware to compensate.
Epson may make better high end inkjet printers, but if I can't
maintain them, they'll probably end up at the recyclers.

I dunno about the "oversized pages" problem. I use various HP
plotters for large format print jobs but don't use Photoshop.



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

On 11/3/2009 8:35 PM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:56:06 -0800, 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.

True. The printers expect the pages to be flat. Pages that have gone
through the printer tend to be slightly warped. That causes paper
jams.

Exactly. (And to the person in this thread who responded to this with
"bull****", I say "bull****!" right back atcha.)

In case I wasn't clear, the problem I was referring to was printing a
document on both front and back, where you first print the odd pages,
then run the stack back through on the other side and print the even pages.

Every non-duplexing HP LaserJet I've ever seen will **** up and jam if
you try to do this. The problem, as you said, is the curl imparted to
the paper by the fuser. I have had some success taking the first-printed
stack and "working" it vigorously to remove the curl, but it's a pain in
the ass, and not guaranteed to work.

Since there are other laser printers that don't have this problem, I can
only conclude that HP LaserJets have inferior feed mechanisms.

And I do know what the hell I'm talking about: in a previous life I was
a printer (as in a real printing press, not desktop computer printers),
so I've dealt with lots of machines that eat paper.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

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 bull****. 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.)


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 11/3/2009 5:46 PM Warren Block 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.

Check that there's still some tread on the rollers, and maybe the
separation pad.

Nope. Not the problem. It's inherent in the lousy HP feeder design.

Hmm. The LJ2100 feeder is kind of poor, like a lot of the earlier and
lower-end LaserJets. The 4050 and up have the best I've seen. I've got
some LJ2100s and will give this a try.

I've never seen a LaserJet that would print on the back side of
just-printed sheets even when brand new.

Have you tried a 4050 or newer?

--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA

On 11/3/2009 9:20 PM Warren Block spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

I've never seen a LaserJet that would print on the back side of
just-printed sheets even when brand new.

Have you tried a 4050 or newer?

No; I should have said that my experience with these printers is as of
about 5 years ago. Let us know how the feeding experiment with the 4050
goes.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:07:50 -0800, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

In case I wasn't clear, the problem I was referring to was printing a
document on both front and back, where you first print the odd pages,
then run the stack back through on the other side and print the even pages.

Every non-duplexing HP LaserJet I've ever seen will **** up and jam if
you try to do this. The problem, as you said, is the curl imparted to
the paper by the fuser. I have had some success taking the first-printed
stack and "working" it vigorously to remove the curl, but it's a pain in
the ass, and not guaranteed to work.

Yep. You also have to let the stack cool down a bit. I also listed
some other problems that can cause paper jams when trying to print
double sided without a duplexer.... (cut-n-paste):

The printers expect the pages to be flat. Pages that have gone
through the printer tend to be slightly warped. That causes paper
jams. Remelting the toner on the back side of the page sometimes
causes the toner to stick to the rubber roller in the fuser, causing
exit jams. Paper doesn't like to slide smoothly off the stack in the
tray when there's printing on the back side. That's an especially bad
problem if you print a stack of paper, and then feed the stack back
through the printer again to print on the back side. The pages will
stick together. The rubber "feet" above the feed tray don't like to
push against printed paper, where the black areas are much slicker
than the unprinted white paper. It's usually not a problem with a
fairly new printer, but after the rubber feet get worn and slick,
things tend to slide.

Since there are other laser printers that don't have this problem, I can
only conclude that HP LaserJets have inferior feed mechanisms.

Yep, but there's a bit of a complexication. HP likes to built
printers that have a small footprint. That means that the paper
trays, which are always at the bottom of the pile, have to feed the
paper to the printer after making a 180 degree tight turn out from the
tray. The Panasonic 450(???) printer you mentioned had an externally
projecting paper tray, that allowed for a more straight line paper
input feed. That 180 degree turn is always a problem.

However, I do agree that HP could do a better job with their feed
mechanisms. The fix is rather simple. The typical Laserjet has the
absolute minimum amount of rubber in contact with the paper. Large
copiers have similar mechanism, but with much larger rollers on both
sides of the paper to maximize grip. They also have much thicker and
softer rubber feed rollers to maximize friction. If you want a really
reliable paper feed, it will look like a straight line offset press.

If you look carefully at the typical HP Laserjet, there are at least 5
feeds. I'll use the HP LJ 4000 as an example. The first is a simple
roller in the paper tray to get the paper started. After a 180 degree
curling turn, it goes to 4 D-shaped pickup rollers, which really do
the work. Under the paper is the separation roller, which supplies
pressure to the imaging drum. The paper then gets fed into the fuser
roller, and then to a series of exit rollers. Any one of these can
screwup and cause feed problem. Most common is the separation roller,
which is made of foam, getting clogged with toner. Next is the
polishing of the D-shaped pickup rollers from sliding across the paper
when the feed rollers slip slightly. The paper tray input roller
usually feeds correctly, but the paper can jam up against dirt and
filth on the tray in the area around the feed roller. Shredded paper
in the fuser assembly will usually stop the paper and cause a jam.
Exit rollers are usually fairly reliable, except when the fuser craps
out and the rollers get covered with toner.

And I do know what the hell I'm talking about: in a previous life I was
a printer (as in a real printing press, not desktop computer printers),
so I've dealt with lots of machines that eat paper.

Full disclosu I sometimes fix HP Laserjet printers. However, I'm
not factory trained or authorized. In the 1970's, I briefly owned a
commercial print shop. Mostly AB Dick and some Gestetner. I didn't
do the printing, but I sure got the complaints when they didn't work.
I also ran the college print shop and got some experience on hot lead
Linotype presses and Compugraphic (Harris) typesetters.

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

On 11/3/2009 10:25 PM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:

However, I do agree that HP could do a better job with their feed
mechanisms. The fix is rather simple. The typical Laserjet has the
absolute minimum amount of rubber in contact with the paper. Large
copiers have similar mechanism, but with much larger rollers on both
sides of the paper to maximize grip. They also have much thicker and
softer rubber feed rollers to maximize friction. If you want a really
reliable paper feed, it will look like a straight line offset press.

Yeah; if only we could have desktop printers with feeders as reliable as
the one on the Heidelberg Speedmaster I used to "own" ... now *that's* a
feeder!


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

David Nebenzahl Inscribed thus:

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!

Which is a little puzzling; while the printer hasn't exactly been used
in a production environment, I have put plenty of pages through it:
printed out many entire manuals, etc. I'm just waiting for the
cartridge to empty out, but it still hasn't come close. (I even have a
2nd cartridge I got with the printer, still in its foil package.)

If I remember correctly the toner cartridge was good for about 10K
pages.

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 bull****. 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.

Other than this, the LaserJet is a fine piece of equipment.


The old Panasonic's were great printers ! As you remark it would print
on anything including the back of already printed sheets. Ours was
used with two and three part NCR paper. The hard part was the software
to ensure that it registered and collated properly.

The bottled toner was very cheap as well which made the machine very
economical compared to similar machines.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

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!


My *OLD* apple laserjet II is on it's bizillionth cartridge and still
printing. We do bulk printing of both card stock for bin lables, and
product instruction sheets (quality is really not the most important
factor for these...) We tell it to print a 100 sheet group (limited by
that tiny tray!) and set it going. Later someone grabs the sheets,
reloads the tray and off it goes again.

We are (sadly, or gladly, not sure) migrating to high speed Xerox
printers. Easily ten times faster than that Apple, and 500 sheet trays
too.

Then the LWII retires to just bin label cards, something that is done
about two times a month.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:34:53 -0700, D Yuniskis
wrote:


Unfortunately, even printing 8.5x11 photos (i.e., 100% ink coverage)
I haven't been able to "empty" any of them!

You are just not printing enough!


You've either got bad rollers, a bad fuser or "off brand" toner.

Pickup rollers probably, clean with acetone as a first step try. Then
replace 'em.

...
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!)

Make a wonderful space heater for winter, however. Keeps my office
toasty warm!

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.

My 4M will. However, there's no question that it's not a bad idea to let the
paper cool down and flatten out.

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:30:22 -0800, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

Yeah; if only we could have desktop printers with feeders as reliable as
the one on the Heidelberg Speedmaster I used to "own" ... now *that's* a
feeder!

Ummm.... su
http://www.heidelberg.com/www/html/en/content/overview1/products/sheetfed_overview-qg
I'm not familiar with it, but my guess is that it uses vacuum pickup
to handle large format and heavy items, such as box cardboard. Such
technology doesn't scale well for the home and small biz printer.
Ignoring the size, price tag, skill level, ink handling, and required
accessories (i.e. dryer), the home version of this beast would
probably make so much noise that it would be unsellable. Still, it
might be possible to borrow some of the paper handling technology and
use it for small printers. For example, instead of pick and plop
vacuum paper handling, the feed rollers could use vacuum to grab,
hold, and eventually release the paper. I suspect that this may also
become a vacuum cleaner, sucking up dust and filth from the
surroundings, but that can be handled by occasionally reversing the
air flow and blasting the dust back into the owners face, until they
get the clue.

Having seen miniature engines, metal working machinery, and
automobiles, I suspected that someone might build a miniature offset
press that could be adaptable for home use. There's a 1937 patent:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=fOo-AAAAEBAJ&dq=2099962
which is not very useful. Google found some vendors in China and
India that sell miniature offset presses. However, their idea of
miniature is about the size of refrigerator. I couldn't find anything
the size of a typical inkjet printer. So, there's your dot.com
opportunity. Design and sell mini-Heidelberg style offset presses for
those home users that need to print on all manner of wrinkled,
pre-printed, warped, filthy, and disgusting paper without a paper jam.
Incidentally, forget about cut sheet paper. Roll feed is far faster,
cheaper, and generally better.

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

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:12:18 +0000, baron
wrote:

The old Panasonic's were great printers ! As you remark it would print
on anything including the back of already printed sheets. Ours was
used with two and three part NCR paper. The hard part was the software
to ensure that it registered and collated properly.

The old Panasonic KX-4450 series laser printers were awful. When
clean, they would work just fine. They didn't jam because the
projecting paper trays would simulate a straight line paper path. They
did bar codes, which was a big attraction at the time. However,
keeping them running and clean was a challenge. I had one in a
machine shop that was as good as dead after about 30,000 pages.
Another was in a small factory next to a farm that ate enough dirt to
destroy almost all the rubber parts. The toner overflow mechanism was
messy and would frequently dump toner everywhere. It was instant
quality problems from "clumping" if someone dumped the "waste" toner
back into the toner bin. Much as I liked the economy of the bottled
toner, it was messy to refill. Because of the open toner bin
construction, I couldn't keep it clean with an air hose. There were
two in relatively clean environments that lasted to about 70,000
pages, but they required almost constant cleaning to remain
functional.

The bottled toner was very cheap as well which made the machine very
economical compared to similar machines.

True.

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

On 11/4/2009 8:01 AM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:

On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:30:22 -0800, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

Yeah; if only we could have desktop printers with feeders as reliable as
the one on the Heidelberg Speedmaster I used to "own" ... now *that's* a
feeder!

Ummm.... su
http://www.heidelberg.com/www/html/en/content/overview1/products/sheetfed_overview-qg
I'm not familiar with it, but my guess is that it uses vacuum pickup
to handle large format and heavy items, such as box cardboard.

Yes. Like most real printing presses (as opposed to smaller "presses"
that are somewhat disparagingly called "duplicators"), the feeder uses
vacuum pickup, assisted by air blowers to separate the top sheets of the
stack. The Heidelberg feeder was pretty cool: it somewhat
counterintuitively picked up the sheet at the *back* and fed it forward.
Really cool to see a "stream" feeder in operation. When properly
adjusted, performs flawlessly.

Still, it might be possible to borrow some of the paper handling
technology and use it for small printers. For example, instead of
pick and plop vacuum paper handling, the feed rollers could use
vacuum to grab, hold, and eventually release the paper.

That would be kewl.

Having seen miniature engines, metal working machinery, and
automobiles, I suspected that someone might build a miniature offset
press that could be adaptable for home use. There's a 1937 patent:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=fOo-AAAAEBAJ&dq=2099962
which is not very useful. Google found some vendors in China and
India that sell miniature offset presses. However, their idea of
miniature is about the size of refrigerator. I couldn't find anything
the size of a typical inkjet printer.

Ackshooly, the AB Dick 320 offset duplicator was a table-top model only
slightly larger than the larger laser printers of the early days. I
first learned to print on one of those, using direct paper plates (you
typed and wrote directly on the plate using special ribbons and pencils,
almost like a mimeograph). But the 320, being a dinky "press", used
friction feed (rubber rollers) which of course isn't nearly as good as
vacuum feed.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

About 10 years ago, I maintained a few HP4 series printers. A billing
service had one with 300,000 pages. I replaced some minor plastic
parts that had worn out, and I think it ran for another 20,000 pages
before being retired. My HP4Plus went to about 130,000 pages. I know
of several others that are around 100,000 pages. Yep, they last as do
the older HPII and HPIII series printers.

I know of at least one LJ4050 that's over a million pages, and others
approaching that. The fusers wear out a bit earlier than predicted
(170-180K pages instead of 200K) and of course they've been through a
couple of sets of rollers. My old LJ4M still works, but it's not
anywhere near the class of those printers. Sometimes "new and improved"
is actually true.

--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA

On 4 nov, 15:40, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2009-11-04, David Nebenzahl wrote:

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!

My Canon LBP-430 (same as an HP LaserJet 4L) is still soldiering on
after 15 years. I have changed the cartridge a couple of times, and
recently scored a few very inexpensive toners at a thrift store
to keep it going another 15 years. :-)

I have a canon LBP-4u which is also a Laserjet 4L in disguise. It was
a skip find a few years ago, and works like a champ. I also salvaged
some 4l toners to use with it should the need arise. Not sure what
resolution it is, I think it could probably be better in this
department.

-B

On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:45:31 -0500, Meat Plow
wrote:

They upgraded to a 6p dual tray and gave
me the 4 rather than binning it. That was in 2001.

About 6 months ago, also I recycled 3ea HP LJ 6p printers I was saving
for parts. I was down to one customer with a 6mp so it wasn't worth
saving much. I needed the space more than the parts. I built up one
printer and gave it to the neighbors kids. No complaints so I guess
they're either using it effectively for school work, or have totally
destroyed it by now.

The 6p was reasonably state-o-de-art in 2001 but is a loser by today's
standards. It's very slow (8ppm), very slow to start (90 sec), a
slight power hog, and a desk space hog. 600dpi is ok for everything
except photographs. There are a few minor mechanical issues, but
basically it's a decent printer (once it warms up). I don't like the
large footprint, but the fairly low profile offers opportunities to
hide the printer where the taller equivalents (i.e. LJ4) don't fit. As
long as the rubber parts are clean and soft, I haven't seen many paper
misfeeds. The HP 03A toner cart is rated at about 4000 pages (at 5%
coverage), and seems to deliver (I've never kept track).

Most of the real failures I've seen on the HP LJ 6p series were blown
electronics. There doesn't seem to be a pattern as most were caused
by power glitches which seems to do random damage. I usually replace
the main pickup roller on the 6P and similar construction 4P when
diving in because it usually requires total disassembly to replace the
roller and I might as well do it while disassembled.



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

On 11/5/2009 7:05 PM Bob Larter spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

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

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.

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

Believe me, I've tried this many, many times, as I prefer to print long
documents on both sides of the paper.


--
Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress
blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?

- harvested from Usenet

In article ,
Bob Larter 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 bull****. 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...

Isaac

Hi!

Actually something of a reverse gloat, along the lines of "my old printer
still works; does yours?".

Since you asked, yes, it did. I had an HP LaserJet III that I ran the page
counter over to all zeroes. All it ever asked for was the odd new pick
roller and toner. It never gave any power supply trouble. In fact, the only
thing it didn't have was enough installed memory to handle some jobs.

It worked great until a basement flood came along. And it might have worked
even then, but it disappeared before I could even try to clean it and see
what would happen.

It was pretty weird seeing a printer that old reporting a page count of a
few hundred after it rolled over.

More recently, I saw a Sharp AR-M450P unit make 1.5 million copies with only
routine maintenance. Ironically enough, it was more reliable than the newer
(330,000 copies) AR-M450 that replaced it.

Which is a little puzzling; while the printer hasn't exactly been used in
a production environment, I have put plenty of pages through it: printed
out many entire manuals, etc. I'm just waiting for the cartridge to empty
out, but it still hasn't come close. (I even have a 2nd cartridge I got
with the printer, still in its foil package.)

Maybe you got a never-ending cartridge? :-)

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. If I'm remembering it right, 10% coverage
on a page is actually a lot closer to being "fully loaded" than you'd think.

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.

Evidently nobody ever told their dot-matrix printer design team that it was
possible to do this. I had a KX-P2123 whose tractor feed had to be set up
*precisely* or it would tangle and eat the paper. I knew of many others that
had the same problem. I finally dumped it in favor of an Epson ActionPrinter
T1000 (a printer that proved so tough that vandals with a baseball bat
couldn't break it). I haven't powered it on in a while, but I'm sure it
would still work fine.

William

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:05:41 +1000, Bob Larter
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
All the HP (something)X LaserJet printers were made by Canon.

had really good paper-handling, & could
cope just fine with double-sided printing.

Let me try to explain again, for the third time (with some additions).

The printers expect the pages to be flat. Pages that have gone
through the printer tend to be slightly warped. You can demonstrate
this by finding a truly flat and smooth surface, and plopping a piece
of printed paper onto this surface. Flip it over and compare how it
lies on the flat surface to that of a clean unprinted page. It
invariable has a lump on one side or other. That's fatal to many feed
mechanism, especially those that use only a single foot or roller in
the middle of the page.

Remelting the toner on the back side of the page sometimes causes the
toner to stick to the rubber roller in the fuser, causing exit jams.
Take a page of recently printed paper and slide an unprinted page over
the printed page on the flat surface. If you're careful, you can feel
the increased and erratic drag. If your not a believer, hang an
alligator clip on the end of a fish scale. Plop the printed page into
a stack of new unprinted paper. Pull and measure the tension required
to pull the paper out of the stack. Now, do the same think with an
unprinted page. Depending on the height of the stack, the printed
page has increased drag over the unprinted page. Yes, I know that the
printer does not pull paper from the middle of the stack. The weight
of the paper pile is to simulate the pressure supplied by the rubber
feed roller.

That's an especially bad problem if you print a stack of paper, and
then feed the stack back through the printer again to print on the
back side. The pages will stick together because the black plastic
toner is fairly lumpy and slightly sticky. Printing on the back side
also tend to transfer some toner from the back side to the rubber
roller in the fuser assembly. The HPII and HPIII were especially bad
at leaving impressions on the roller. Later printers uses a mylar
sheet between the fuser and the rubber roller. Reheated toner on the
back of the page would not stick to the mylar.

The rubber "feet" above the feed tray don't like to push against
printed paper, where the black areas are much slicker than the
unprinted white paper. It's usually not a problem with a fairly new
printer, but after the rubber feet get worn and slick, things tend to
slide. I just fixed an HP 4000 printer with this problem.

In my never humble opinion, the Canon printer feed mechanism sucks.
It's major problems are the reliance on a single rubber feed roller
located in the middle of the page. When everything is proper (new
rubber, good flat 20 lb paper, no printing on the back, etc), it works
just fine. When something changes, it has so little friction surface,
that it screws up badly. If there's any crud in mechanism, the center
feed will cause the leading edge to misalign or corrugate, resulting
in a guaranteed paper jam.

The solution was provided in the 4000 thru 4300 series printers (and
some others). It has 4ea "D" shaped rubber feet to feed the paper off
the top of the stack. If one foot slips a little because it's sitting
on some printing or a bulge, the others will still feed the page in a
fairly straight line. The "D" feet are also very easy to replace.

These later printers also solved another problem. The HP LJ4 series
had two sets of coupled rollers contact the paper at the same time. If
there was even a slight difference in roller diameter, the paper would
either wrinkle, or the rollers would slip, and the paper would jam.
Bad design. This was fixed in later models by either having only one
set of rollers make contact, or adding a clutch to allow for changes
in roller diameter.

Incidentally, the HP4300 records the number of pages printed on a chip
attached to the toner cart. The printer records errors including
paper jams. I just connected to a customers network via VNC and
looked at their 4300 log file. About 10,000 pages on the toner cart
with 8 paper jams. I don't think I could ever come close to that with
a Canon SX series printer. This particular machine has a duplexer,
but it's normally not used for tax returns. I've seen this printer
grind through piles and piles of printed tax returns without ever
jamming. Their previous printer was an HP4si, which would jam at
least 2-4 times per ream of paper.


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

On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 06:28:37 GMT, "William R. Walsh"
m 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
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:12:44 -0800, isw wrote:

In article ,
Bob Larter 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 bull****. 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 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.

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 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.

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