New MP4000 Dev Unit

[Lagonda]

[quote=Wishbone;67666]incorperate a transfer belt unit that also houses the waste toner.quote]

Thats an aspect of the design of these boxes that has allways puzzled me.
The Russian range have a simular setup with the drum over the dev unit but dont need a cleaning station on the transfer roller. The high volume B&Ws do have a cleaning station on the transfer belt but you are lucky to get a spoonful of toner in a million copies. To put such a large waste toner tank on the transfer belt of the Adonis range leads you to suspect that they expected it to chuck a lot of loose toner around from Day 1 of the initial design!

[DH1980]

Has anyone tried the new toner, Drum unit and New Developer unit?

[Pandy]

I guess the new units are scarce. The design worked a whole lot better in the older series, even if the pm was stretched. These last two series suck!

[aabarnes1]

We have tried all the mods ricoh have suggested and additional mods of our own ie drum grounding, the only thing that has workrd so far is using 2035 dev(Ican't recall the pn) and increasing the doctor blade gap. So far so good, no call backs on 6 of these machines that I've done

[Wishbone]

So you are using type 26 dev. in these machines? I figure that can go one of two ways.

[tcs04]

I posted this on another thread earlier, may shed some light on the situation (?)

.....................

I have noted this problem on about 40% of MP4000 / 5000 machines (so far) as as a result my company requested a number of kits From Ricoh. They initially refused our requests on the grounds that the problems were not severe enough to require modified units (!). Suffice to say, I now have a number of modified Dev Units ready to fit.

I spoke to a Ricoh Helpdesk Engineer (One of the good ones, known him for years and trust what he says) face to face on Thursday and this is the latest as I recall.

This is the same problem, to a much greater degree, that we have all experienced in the past on AF1035, AF2065, AF3045, MP4500 and now on MP4000 / 5000.

The problem has become worse as the amount of wax in the toner has increased through the model series with the objective of reducing adhesion to fuser rollers and lowering energy consumption (Lower fuser temp).

We (in the UK) can, if we shout loud enough, obtain modified Dev Units and a bag of Dev (NOT modified) from RUK. Earlier inquiries may have received complete PCDU kits.

The Dev units suppied have a similar doctor gap and a new coating (Unspecified) on the mag roller.

THIS IS NOT THE "FINAL" FIX. However "Trusted (ex Ricoh) engineers have fitted the new units and report that they work"....... (until the coating wears off ????)

Ricoh are expecting to provide a "New" toner "in June" (containing less wax?) "which will be a final solution to the problem".

I assume (Didn't ask) that there will be developer incorporating this new toner supplied at the same time.

I did make the point that this problem had become worse over time (agreed) and that if fuser cleaning efficiency had been an issue, it should have been cured by the fusing web now fitted (agreed).
.................

One problem we will all face is that unless we are supplied with both kits and toner for ALL mp4000 / 5000 machines, there will be a mix up of toner or dev at some point, especially at customers who have multiple units.

I suppose we should look on the bright side in so much as this will keep our work levels up during the credit crunch!

I have tried the Drum earth solution even to extent of adding an extra contact (similar to AF2090) with liitle change in the outcome.

I had also considered the AF2045 dev / toner approach and would be interested to know if if works, I suspect it will in the short term at least. Does the AF2045 toner bottle fit this machine??

(Thanks to aabarnes1 in this thread re the AF2045 dev, will now try this on a tame customer. Makes sense as the AF2045 dev is probably coarser and the toner contains less wax? Are you using AF2045 toner???)

[stephend]

Hi Lagonda,

part number is D0092301. Modify voltages like for a Ricoh 3500/4500.

My opinion is clear: this new combination of toner/dev used in 4500 & now 4000/5000 is a bad one....but those are the efforts made to be "green" + because of the market & competition....latest models are not tested enough in different environments....they just launch them as soon as possible to be one step aheat competition

[Shadow1]

latest models are not tested enough in different environments....they just launch them as soon as possible to be one step aheat competition

...that's not a good thing if they end of the path is the company's grave. Ricoh has totally destroyed their reputation for this speed/niche machine. I bleed Ricoh Red right to the core, but I have to tell anybody thinking about getting one how bad they suck. Good encouragement to go color, but here's an interesting question: If the customer has to have a 40ppm b/w machine would you give them a MP4000 and let them think Ricoh machines are all that bad or should you be honest and tell them this particular model is a dog but the >31 and 51< machines are great even if it means they buy from a competitor???

NOTE TO Ricoh Corporate: It's pathetic you've allowed the engineers to drag their feet through 2 generations of machine and still not have a fix (if it fixes it) in widespread release and make us ask questions like this.

NOTE TO Engineers: The problem is the toner. Always has been. B079 supplies will work fine if you modify the machine to accept the toner.

[cobiray]

...that's not a good thing if they end of the path is the company's grave. Ricoh has totally destroyed their reputation for this speed/niche machine. I bleed Ricoh Red right to the core, but I have to tell anybody thinking about getting one how bad they suck. Good encouragement to go color, but here's an interesting question: If the customer has to have a 40ppm b/w machine would you give them a MP4000 and let them think Ricoh machines are all that bad or should you be honest and tell them this particular model is a dog but the >31 and 51< machines are great even if it means they buy from a competitor???

NOTE TO Ricoh Corporate: It's pathetic you've allowed the engineers to drag their feet through 2 generations of machine and still not have a fix (if it fixes it) in widespread release and make us ask questions like this.

NOTE TO Engineers: The problem is the toner. Always has been. B079 supplies will work fine if you modify the machine to accept the toner.

I completely agree with this statement and have stated so on the board numerous times. Almost two and a half years for a solution? That is more than unacceptable. Technicians fixing machines with old supplies; repeated bulletins that don't resolve the issue; having dealers continue to throw developer, dev units and drum shafts to no end. It all seems like they really don't care about this segment of machine, how poorly it runs or how much they're affecting dealers and their bottom line. We've lost customers because of the last two models of machine!!! Not just one or two either. Several. And we're not that big of a dealership. We've tried to eliminate the sale of these as much as possible, but it's really hard to go against competitors with a smaller or larger segment machine. It ends up being over worked or over priced. Not that the salespersons really give two shakes about the service side (until they want to sell new equipment). It's really a no win situation for everyone. It's been seriously looked at to go with a second brand to sell just this segment. That doesn't end good for Ricoh, even if they did buy out Ikon.

Sorry for the soapboxing, needed to get a little rant out.

[tcs04]

Hi Lagonda,

part number is D0092301. Modify voltages like for a Ricoh 3500/4500.

My opinion is clear: this new combination of toner/dev used in 4500 & now 4000/5000 is a bad one....but those are the efforts made to be "green" + because of the market & competition....latest models are not tested enough in different environments....they just launch them as soon as possible to be one step aheat competition

I was told by Ricoh Tech that the main source of the problem was the amount of wax added in greater amounts to each "upgrade" of the range (AF1045 onwards).
If we assume this wax is the material which accumulates on the mag roller, it is possible that heat would contribute to the problem.

The main difference between the dev units, aside from the coating on the mag roller (it looks the same) seems to be a change to the filter on the new unit which is MUCH larger and now extends the full width of the roller, I imagine his would have a considerable effect on airflow and therefore cooling of the unit which may help maintain a temperature below the melting point of the wax.
I would not be suprised if the "new" toner is simply AF2045 toner (Less wax?) in MP4000 bottles. If the combination of less wax and lower temperature was the cause of the problem it may be that this new setup WILL cure the fault.

The acid test will be when the new toner arrives in June.

Time will tell!!