Xerox B9136

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: Xerox B9136

The B9136 can handle 125,000 no problem. The rated monthly volume for it is up to 700,000. And the duty cycle is 3,000,000. (But again, duty cycle isn't really a very useful statistic.)

I think once you mentioned the C7785, the conversion became a little confused, but I think we're straightened out now.

You'll still have "smells" coming from the B9136. After all, you're still doing 125,000 prints. The B9136 can handle that volume no problem, but it still doesn't have an exhaust. And because it does have a cleaning web, and it does have oil impregnated into that cleaning web material, there could be some smell from it, too. The higher temp of the B9136 could, as you surmise, also make it smell a little more than a B9125 or a B9110, but none of this would be unsafe. Just... smelly.

Phil brought up a good point I think when he mentioned the matte paper, because he was referring to matte COATED paper, and I didn't think of that because I never use coated papers. There may be some terminology differences between the US and NZ printing worlds, but when we use the term "matte" here in the US, we are (usually) specifically referring to matte COATED papers. Uncoated papers are, by default, matte. But they're just uncoated. Matte/silk/dull/gloss COATED papers might have more issue in the built-in trays of the B9136, they are not rated for coated papers. Only uncoated papers. (You can select "coated" for them I believe, because they do allow you to TRY, but in the Expectations Document they specify that feed performance on the internal trays for coated paper is not expected to match the HCF. Different brands of paper will yield different results, too.)

And, in my experience, some coated papers can REALLY be STANKY when they cook in the fuser. Since I almost never use them, it always surprises me how much they STINK. Again, not unsafe, just unpleasant. Not really an office environment application. Because none of these smells or fumes would be even a little bit of concern in a print shop environment.

So, in summary, now that I think I've understood your situation correctly... In terms of volume, the C7785 is definitely not capable of 125k. You'd need 2, or really, 3. And as I recall you don't have the space or you'd just throw the HCF onto the B9136 and be done with it. The B9136 can easily handle 125k, with one hand tied behind its back, but you're having feed issues making it problematic. (And since none of these machines you'd be using vent to the outside, you will be facing some smells.) If what you are feeding is UNCOATED plain paper, you've got a lemon because there is zero reason for the B9136 be struggling on that paper in the slightest. If it is COATED 80-90gsm paper, then yes, there was a breakdown during the sales process because the B9136 is not "strong" on coated paper feeding from the main trays and should never be sold as such.

Hope you find a decent resolution.

I'm not familiar with this machine but it doesn't pass the sniff test.

What are the specs for tray 2? Most machines there's little difference between tray 1 and tray 2. Sounds like they just want to get you to upgrade because they can't or don't want to fix it.

Edit: I quoted the wrong person. Sorry.

PS - Whatever the rated monthy duty cycle listed for the machine...cut it in half. Most manufactures grossly overstate it.

[Caffeine]

Re: Xerox B9136

I'm not familiar with this machine but it doesn't pass the sniff test.

What are the specs for tray 2? Most machines there's little difference between tray 1 and tray 2. Sounds like they just want to get you to upgrade because they can't or don't want to fix it.

Edit: I quoted the wrong person. Sorry.

PS - Whatever the rated monthy duty cycle listed for the machine...cut it in half. Most manufactures grossly overstate it.

They all grossly overstate the DUTY CYCLE, as I've mentioned, but the average monthly statistic Xerox provides is safe and reliable in my experience. (In any event, the rated monthly average for this model is 700,000, so even half would be 350,000, which is way above his 125,000... The B-series is a pretty heavy duty family, and has a good, reliable history.)

On this model, Tray 2 is the "highest capacity" tray of the built in ones, so it is no wonder he wants it to work. It also has a "bridge" to carry paper across Tray 1 to the feed zone. That bridge could be part of the problem because it is the only real difference between 1 and 2.

It still sounds to me like either it is coated paper (in which case the feed reliability for trays 1-4 is not great) or a lemon/software problem.

[tsbservice]

Re: Xerox B9136

I'm not familiar with this machine but it doesn't pass the sniff test.

What are the specs for tray 2? Most machines there's little difference between tray 1 and tray 2. Sounds like they just want to get you to upgrade because they can't or don't want to fix it.

Edit: I quoted the wrong person. Sorry.

PS - Whatever the rated monthy duty cycle listed for the machine...cut it in half. Most manufactures grossly overstate it.

Billy NP, in fact you quoted right tech as I believe Caffeine is acknowledged Xerox expert and your questions to OP are quite valid.

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: Xerox B9136

They all grossly overstate the DUTY CYCLE, as I've mentioned, but the average monthly statistic Xerox provides is safe and reliable in my experience. (In any event, the rated monthly average for this model is 700,000, so even half would be 350,000, which is way above his 125,000... The B-series is a pretty heavy duty family, and has a good, reliable history.)

On this model, Tray 2 is the "highest capacity" tray of the built in ones, so it is no wonder he wants it to work. It also has a "bridge" to carry paper across Tray 1 to the feed zone. That bridge could be part of the problem because it is the only real difference between 1 and 2.

It still sounds to me like either it is coated paper (in which case the feed reliability for trays 1-4 is not great) or a lemon/software problem.

I should have been more clear. My apologies.

He said it would feed fine from Tray 1 but not tray 2. I'm assuming he's using the same paper for both?

My question is what are the paper specs for Tray 1 and 2? If the specs are the same for both trays and he's not outside the specs for the paper he's using, I would demand they repair the machine and make them accept responsibility.

[Caffeine]

Re: Xerox B9136

I should have been more clear. My apologies.

He said it would feed fine from Tray 1 but not tray 2. I'm assuming he's using the same paper for both?

My question is what are the paper specs for Tray 1 and 2? If the specs are the same for both trays and he's not outside the specs for the paper he's using, I would demand they repair the machine and make them accept responsibility.

Right, the specs for 1 and 2 are identical, and physically, the only difference is that 2 has a bridge to carry the paper over tray 1. So assuming he is using uncoated paper, it should be equally fine in either tray. So if he is having trouble in 2 and not 1, it would either be because the bridge is causing the trouble (since it is the only real design difference between them -- they use the same feed head) or because there is some more-difficult-to-identify problem like a NVRAM corruption causing paper feeding timing issues.

If he is using coated papers, they are not expected to perform as well as uncoated, and so the results could be unpredictable and confusing. (T1 working and T2 not working for example... Again, because it is the only "real" difference between them, I'd be looking closely at the bridge.)

So yes, if it is UNCOATED paper, he should absolutely be able to expect them to rectify it. He mentioned 80-90gsm, and 80-90gsm uncoated is absolutely within spec. If it is coated, on the other hand, regardless of what the sales person may have told them, the Expectations Document says coated feed reliability is not expected to be as high as uncoated, so they don't really have to "fix" anything, as annoying as that may be.

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: Xerox B9136

Right, the specs for 1 and 2 are identical, and physically, the only difference is that 2 has a bridge to carry the paper over tray 1. So assuming he is using uncoated paper, it should be equally fine in either tray. So if he is having trouble in 2 and not 1, it would either be because the bridge is causing the trouble (since it is the only real design difference between them -- they use the same feed head) or because there is some more-difficult-to-identify problem like a NVRAM corruption causing paper feeding timing issues.

If he is using coated papers, they are not expected to perform as well as uncoated, and so the results could be unpredictable and confusing. (T1 working and T2 not working for example... Again, because it is the only "real" difference between them, I'd be looking closely at the bridge.)

So yes, if it is UNCOATED paper, he should absolutely be able to expect them to rectify it. He mentioned 80-90gsm, and 80-90gsm uncoated is absolutely within spec. If it is coated, on the other hand, regardless of what the sales person may have told them, the Expectations Document says coated feed reliability is not expected to be as high as uncoated, so they don't really have to "fix" anything, as annoying as that may be.

Good stuff, man.

There's not much that I can add other than if I were the tech working on this machine I would check to see if they're using cheap paper and bring some known good paper just to cover all bases. I've seen cheap paper cause some problems that had me chasing my tail.

[Wjameson]

Re: Xerox B9136

Thank you all for your contributions - the stock is uncoated 80 gsm, I have tried another more expensive brand and Fuji have supplied many reams of their own stock for us to use with the same result. So I have all but ruled out a paper problem. I have checked the counter today at the start of a new month and she ticked over 350000. It seems that the machine has been a lemon since day one, ( an analogy in the auto industry of a car being assembled last shift on a Friday afternoon perhaps) I'm from the Sheet fed Offset Lithography side of the printing industry so am well aware of paper varieties and qualities. One of the biggest bug bears of recent years is the sizing used on uncoated stocks, it causes all sorts of drying and picking problems. Fuji Xeroxs' solution of having two C7785 colour machines running side by side is just a cop out, apart from the speed factor I would never keep up with demand on them. If you couple that with the High Schools head in the sand attitude to a purpose set up copying room I can't see away out.

[Phil B.]

Re: Xerox B9136

Thank you all for your contributions - the stock is uncoated 80 gsm, I have tried another more expensive brand and Fuji have supplied many reams of their own stock for us to use with the same result. So I have all but ruled out a paper problem. I have checked the counter today at the start of a new month and she ticked over 350000. It seems that the machine has been a lemon since day one, ( an analogy in the auto industry of a car being assembled last shift on a Friday afternoon perhaps) I'm from the Sheet fed Offset Lithography side of the printing industry so am well aware of paper varieties and qualities. One of the biggest bug bears of recent years is the sizing used on uncoated stocks, it causes all sorts of drying and picking problems. Fuji Xeroxs' solution of having two C7785 colour machines running side by side is just a cop out, apart from the speed factor I would never keep up with demand on them. If you couple that with the High Schools head in the sand attitude to a purpose set up copying room I can't see away out.

I for one am tired of kicking this dead horse .. carry on

[Caffeine]

Re: Xerox B9136

Thank you all for your contributions - the stock is uncoated 80 gsm, I have tried another more expensive brand and Fuji have supplied many reams of their own stock for us to use with the same result. So I have all but ruled out a paper problem. I have checked the counter today at the start of a new month and she ticked over 350000. It seems that the machine has been a lemon since day one, ( an analogy in the auto industry of a car being assembled last shift on a Friday afternoon perhaps) I'm from the Sheet fed Offset Lithography side of the printing industry so am well aware of paper varieties and qualities. One of the biggest bug bears of recent years is the sizing used on uncoated stocks, it causes all sorts of drying and picking problems. Fuji Xeroxs' solution of having two C7785 colour machines running side by side is just a cop out, apart from the speed factor I would never keep up with demand on them. If you couple that with the High Schools head in the sand attitude to a purpose set up copying room I can't see away out.