Which copier was the biggest piece of crap ever?

[ExXeroid]

I would have PAID to see that Fire at Drupa
Popcorn and everything else

I have several friends that still work over at company X, we never talk shop and they ALL sent me a link to that video.

[copyguy2]

Ricoh's flagship color production unit C900 has fuser oil aswell....

[copyguy2]

you got it. there were more retrofits on that machine than any i can remember

[Robert Sveinson]

hey, did anyone work on the XEROX 5322 series? early to late 90's...

If my memory hasn't failed, I believe that I did work on the Model Xerox 5322, and its relatives.
Seems to me that I was sent for factory training, and then I trained all the others involved.
It's been 16+ years since then!
Only one of those machines (5322) became my favourite!
It had been rolled down a staircase and I condemned IT! WHOOPEE!

IIRC it had 2/3/or 4 power supplies in the base of the machine and they
were heavy and akward to work on.

I always maintained, much to my manager's consternation that this machine
was the result of a Xerox engineering department's attempt to make a
machine that size using all the most complicated methods to make a copy!

There was a copy quality problem that affected every machine
at one time or another: we called the flaws "spaceships, or flying
saucers". I was gone before there was an answer for this! How sad!



I had only one in my patch, and I always managed to con the rookies
on the team to take any call on it!

Horror of Horrors!

[Robert Sveinson]

The fuser agent bottle sat in the trough. The bottom had two openings, one for dispensing and one for recovery. Fuser agent was supposed to circulate through the system. If the top of the bottle (where agent was filled) was not sealed or if the bottle was filled past the max level there was a problem.

The Xerox 4000/4500/5400/5600 had storage for a decent amount of fuser oil,
so that if it dumped god help..............

I had a 4000 whose tale I told here before, but I enjoy
telling this on!

For weeks/months or years before it became, MINE fuser oil leaked out of various
orifices and fortunately (perhaps) it all ended up in the sump/container under the
optics cavity. Saved the floors.

The sump didn't ONLY store the leaking oil, but it also caught and stored
many pounds of toner. Once more: saved the floor.

The oil and the toner became a cold slimy mass, and there was lots of it.

Some one else got stuck cleaning if for me, and
that was very nearly a disaster.

[Robert Sveinson]

I wonder if anyone out there still uses some of those older X machines. An acquaintence had acquired a 1090 about a year ago but I don't know where he'd get parts for it. It's my understanding that a lot of foreign countries grab up our older and off lease machines. I've even heard tales of some countries still using (and apparently very fortunate to have) some old diddo and mimeograph machines.

The wide format Xerox Models 2510, 2515, 2520, 3001, 3030, 3040, 3050, 3060,
8830 all used fuser oil on the heat rolls, only it came in oil soaked
pads, or in re-oiled pads!

[Robert Sveinson]

I wonder if anyone out there still uses some of those older X machines. An acquaintence had acquired a 1090 about a year ago but I don't know where he'd get parts for it. It's my understanding that a lot of foreign countries grab up our older and off lease machines. I've even heard tales of some countries still using (and apparently very fortunate to have) some old diddo and mimeograph machines.

We techie types even used fuser oil and OILED the document glass if it had
a document feeder.
I am certain that that was a Xerox stipulated action.

[kingpd@businessprints.net]

Dude the 1048 was worse. That duplex tray was a nightmare, anything that had to deal with two sided was a nightmare in that machine. That is why most guys hated the "B52s" did you ever work on a B52?

What's a "B52"?

[Jimbo1]

I remember putting a really lite coat of fuser oil on the glass years ago. But mostly Brillianize works best.

[slybot]

Those that I have had the privilege of working on that should be on the list are Konica 2020, Mita Ai3030, early Panasonic analogs, but the worst of all time (of those I worked on) would be the Sharp CX7500 analog color machine. When the color balance was right, it made a decent copy. An hour later color balance would be off. Not to mention oil spills.

holy hell, i remember that POS. oil leaks were an absolute shocker. i remember being told where we had one that it never worked properly from day one, and they even got the sharp 7500 guru over to go over it with a fine toothed comb. it worked well for about a couple of days then crapped itself again. absolute snotbox

[slybot]

In the late 70's The Sharp 726 and Royal RBC III had toasters for fuser units and could literaly burn a building down because the paper that jammed in the heater grid would occasionaly catch fire. In the 80's my vote goes to ANY Panajunk ... I mean Panasonic. in the 90's Canon had a stroke of genius adding a mountain of corona wires, that needed constant tweaking and adjusting. "No Sir, this isnt a suicide attempt.....I know it looks bad that its been 3 HOURS restringing this corona unit..But" And finally my choice of WORST: reliability wise, copy quality wise and consumer ripoff via brain washing (Govt cospiracy?) Xerox is BAR NONE consistently and shamelessly, pedaled the biggest piles of shit in the guise of a photocopier. (The company has Sharp make the little turds and then charge double the toner price because Xerox is on the label). They have tried monopolizing parts (Why? Its junk) in the past and lost a lawsuit when they fought it in court. If not for US Government contracts, Xerox would have been out of bussiness years ago. The Xerox engineers designing these piles of shit they call copiers, should be working at the car wash. Oh by the way, to keep us independents out, they can only be serviced with a laptop. Woop-De-Do! Like i give a shit!

i couldnt have said it better about xerox

[slybot]

Mita DC513 before the mods, and mods of mods........

=^..^=

all of which never worked

[kingpd@businessprints.net]

In the late 70's The Sharp 726 and Royal RBC III had toasters for fuser units and could literaly burn a building down because the paper that jammed in the heater grid would occasionaly catch fire. In the 80's my vote goes to ANY Panajunk ... I mean Panasonic. in the 90's Canon had a stroke of genius adding a mountain of corona wires, that needed constant tweaking and adjusting. "No Sir, this isnt a suicide attempt.....I know it looks bad that its been 3 HOURS restringing this corona unit..But" And finally my choice of WORST: reliability wise, copy quality wise and consumer ripoff via brain washing (Govt cospiracy?) Xerox is BAR NONE consistently and shamelessly, pedaled the biggest piles of shit in the guise of a photocopier. (The company has Sharp make the little turds and then charge double the toner price because Xerox is on the label). They have tried monopolizing parts (Why? Its junk) in the past and lost a lawsuit when they fought it in court. If not for US Government contracts, Xerox would have been out of bussiness years ago. The Xerox engineers designing these piles of shit they call copiers, should be working at the car wash. Oh by the way, to keep us independents out, they can only be serviced with a laptop. Woop-De-Do! Like i give a shit!

I feel the same way. Xerox sucks!

[slybot]

gee, i had to read the whole post to be sure but........

anyone, does mita dc-412re and mita dc-142re ring-a-bell.....

i think 412re is worst than 513z... 412re is the mother of all multiple jamming in mita 3 digit series. very bad drive clutches... while 142re is worst ever clamshell designed. skewed copy coz of poorly designed clamshell hinge. and the scanner drive is even your worst nightmare...

remember both of these now that you mention it. hated the dev replacement on the 412. (add this much then use a teaspoon to add enough until.....) why not make the bottle with the correct amount for sucks fake... and the exposure adjustment??????? adjust the dev bias instead of the lamp adjust like the book says.......sad!

[Canuck]

hey, did anyone work on the XEROX 5322 series? early to late 90's...

Mono component garbage....couldn't get a black copy....just dark gray