-
If you really love AI, we have good news for you: RTX 5090 exhibits 27% higher CUDA performance than RTX 4090 — exceeds 500K points in Geekbench
Your printer does not have something called a Prime function. But something similar to that is in the head cleaning menu. Basically if your first head clean operation is not sufficient, you can choose to do a second cleaning, and that MAY use MORE ink to flush the head.
I just noticed you post about the BCH cleaning solution kit and watched its YouTube video. That is similar, but maybe a bit better. The fittings to force the solution through the head are better. I do NOTE that the procedure recommended is different. Instead of flushing in on shot, they simply try to fill each colour of the head with a smaller amount and let it soak overnight before proceeding. Then they do NOT force more cleaner through. Instead they re-install the ink cartridges and use a normal Head Clean step from the menu to push ink through. If this is moderately successful they do an extra Head Clean, maybe two. They appear to suggest that the entire process could be redone only if the first time around is NOT completely successful. All of that sound like a good process to me.
So, if you "new" print head still is giving trouble, you could try the BCH product and process on it BEFORE doing many normal Head Cleans, since they use up a lot of ink and may NOT do the job. I believe you already have tried that.
I just noticed you post about the BCH cleaning solution kit and watched its YouTube video. That is similar, but maybe a bit better. The fittings to force the solution through the head are better. I do NOTE that the procedure recommended is different. Instead of flushing in on shot, they simply try to fill each colour of the head with a smaller amount and let it soak overnight before proceeding. Then they do NOT force more cleaner through. Instead they re-install the ink cartridges and use a normal Head Clean step from the menu to push ink through. If this is moderately successful they do an extra Head Clean, maybe two. They appear to suggest that the entire process could be redone only if the first time around is NOT completely successful. All of that sound like a good process to me.
So, if you "new" print head still is giving trouble, you could try the BCH product and process on it BEFORE doing many normal Head Cleans, since they use up a lot of ink and may NOT do the job. I believe you already have tried that.
@Paperdoc I did try to remedy the situation with a CQ163-80060 printhead originally but didn't do any printhead cleanings until it started giving me attitude a couple months after original installation or so. The printhead cleanings were fruitless, so that's where I'm at now.
So sounds like I should put the C2P18A in and see what happens without any printhead cleanings correct? Then if things aren't good go the BCH product route. Thanks again.
So sounds like I should put the C2P18A in and see what happens without any printhead cleanings correct? Then if things aren't good go the BCH product route. Thanks again.
The C2P18A is your NEW (well, reconditioned) print head, right? You say it worked OK, then got troublesome but you have NOT tried the normal simple Head Clean in printer menu. If so, TRY that first - maybe twice. If that does not make a big improvement, then I'd suggest getting one of those BCH head cleaning kits and use that.
The C2P18A is my new one but I haven't installed it yet. I tried with a CQ163 previously which started malfunctioning after a couple months with blank lines in the black printouts. Three printhead cleanings did not help. So I'm going to install the new C2P18A but have not yet. Just wondering whether I install it and see how things go, or install it and immediately do printhead cleanings. Thanks.
I would do at least one Head Clean right away. Whether that process automatically prints out a test page at the end, or whether instead YOU have to request that, get the print-out. Then you can judge whether more cleaning is need, or the print is near-perfect.
@Paperdoc Thanks that's the answer I was looking for!
@BFG-9000 @Paperdoc @USAFRet A followup question ... what brand printer do you guys prefer for reparability and reliability? HP deeply offends me using fixed heads that can't be replaced through them for a 3 year old printer. Definitely incorporating your guys preference for laser printers into my modus operandi. I'd like a printer that lasts 10-15 years and can repaired if necessary.
@BFG-9000 @Paperdoc @USAFRet A followup question ... what brand printer do you guys prefer for reparability and reliability? HP deeply offends me using fixed heads that can't be replaced through them for a 3 year old printer. Definitely incorporating your guys preference for laser printers into my modus operandi. I'd like a printer that lasts 10-15 years and can repaired if necessary.
History from me. As we created a small retail business in 1993 I got an HP LaserJet monochrome printer. VERY reliable and great quality, not cheap! It lasted a long time. About 7 years later I got our first ink jet, also from HP, particularly for printing high-quality photos from our daughter's wedding. That was a really good printer, too. At that time all HP inkjets used ink cartridges with built-in print heads, so the heads were NOT part of the printer and were replaced with every new cartridge. I even refilled carts with ink so they were re-used several times before printing flaws triggered replacements. It also has a paper feed system that allowed printing long banners on Z-fold paper in colour, VERY handy for our store!
In 2011 I believe the LaserJet had developed continuous problems with paper handling. I expect it was the rubber rollers had aged enough that they just could not grab the paper reliably. I considered having it rebuilt for that, but decided instead to go for a colour laser from Lexmark, their C543dm (now long since discontinued). It was great! Colours were very good, pretty speedy printing on plain paper, high resolution 600dpi. On a few occasions I had performance problems, and some were settled with advice from Tech Support over the phone. A couple times they shipped me replacement parts to fix the issue, no change!I used third-party toner cartridges after the first few years, no problems there.The only real downside is you can NOT print high-gloss photos on such a machine. I tried using common high-gloss photo paper for an inkjet, and the toner never adhered to the paper - it just brushed right off when handled! However, printing the dame photo on its normal paper makes a VERY good print with a matte finish. I often put such into a frame with a front glass, and you get some "glossy" look that way.
After about 10 years that Lexmark developed a major failure. I believe it was that the heating filament in the fuser unit burned out and would need replacement. I considered doing the job ,myself but could not fins clear instructions how, nor easy parts availability. So now I have a Brother HL-L3290CDW colour printer. It is just like a colour laser with the exception that the light source is not a laser bean that scans over the drums. Each of the four printing units has an line of tiny LED's to expose light on its drum, still using the Xerographic printing technology. Native 600 dpi resolution, automatic double-sided printing on regular laser printer paper, single paper input tray plus a manual-feed system, and excellent software tools for customizing many printing profiles for re-use for different jobs. PLUS it has a great 600 dpi Scanner in it (can do copying, of course). Prints are great with good colour rendition and resolution. Connects via WiFi, so it is a general network printer for several computers in our house. I chose this because of very good user reviews, and notes on the internet that it is easy to use third-party toner cartridges with a small adjustment to set its copy count records for each cartridge.
I still have two HP ink jet printers (one from my son), but rarely use either. Both show printing flaws I have not been able to correct despite cleanings etc. Along the way, though, for snapshot PHOTO printing for the last 20+ years I have used two Epson PictureMate printers. These are small units that print only on 4" x 6" photo paper and produce wonderful high-res prints in beautiful colours. That's why I replaced my first (when it failed) with another from them. Prints are completely dry and smudge-free immediately after emerging, and they claim the colours are stable for 100 years. I'll never test that! With those I have experimented with third-party ink cartridges that printed OK, but found they never gave the print yield that the genuine Epson ones do, so the costs made no sense. The Epson print packs I buy now promise 150 prints with the ink cart and 150 glossy sheets in the pack. I keep spare extra Epson paper because I get reliably 155 to 160 prints per pack.
Finally, to your question. I was very happy with HP ink jets and their quality 25 years ago, even when refilling their ink carts with others' ink. But I have no experience with their most recent printers. Personally I resist systems that refuse to allow me to buy and use third-party consumables, and most of my experience with those has been good IF I choose carefully and stick with ones I find to be reliable. As you can see, I now much prefer colour laser type printers. They are expensive up-front, but high-yield toner carts can be had relatively cheaply so per-print costs are better then ink jets. They cannot clog up. The also can NOT print high-gloss photos, though, but matte-finish photos on plain paper are quite good.
In 2011 I believe the LaserJet had developed continuous problems with paper handling. I expect it was the rubber rollers had aged enough that they just could not grab the paper reliably. I considered having it rebuilt for that, but decided instead to go for a colour laser from Lexmark, their C543dm (now long since discontinued). It was great! Colours were very good, pretty speedy printing on plain paper, high resolution 600dpi. On a few occasions I had performance problems, and some were settled with advice from Tech Support over the phone. A couple times they shipped me replacement parts to fix the issue, no change!I used third-party toner cartridges after the first few years, no problems there.The only real downside is you can NOT print high-gloss photos on such a machine. I tried using common high-gloss photo paper for an inkjet, and the toner never adhered to the paper - it just brushed right off when handled! However, printing the dame photo on its normal paper makes a VERY good print with a matte finish. I often put such into a frame with a front glass, and you get some "glossy" look that way.
After about 10 years that Lexmark developed a major failure. I believe it was that the heating filament in the fuser unit burned out and would need replacement. I considered doing the job ,myself but could not fins clear instructions how, nor easy parts availability. So now I have a Brother HL-L3290CDW colour printer. It is just like a colour laser with the exception that the light source is not a laser bean that scans over the drums. Each of the four printing units has an line of tiny LED's to expose light on its drum, still using the Xerographic printing technology. Native 600 dpi resolution, automatic double-sided printing on regular laser printer paper, single paper input tray plus a manual-feed system, and excellent software tools for customizing many printing profiles for re-use for different jobs. PLUS it has a great 600 dpi Scanner in it (can do copying, of course). Prints are great with good colour rendition and resolution. Connects via WiFi, so it is a general network printer for several computers in our house. I chose this because of very good user reviews, and notes on the internet that it is easy to use third-party toner cartridges with a small adjustment to set its copy count records for each cartridge.
I still have two HP ink jet printers (one from my son), but rarely use either. Both show printing flaws I have not been able to correct despite cleanings etc. Along the way, though, for snapshot PHOTO printing for the last 20+ years I have used two Epson PictureMate printers. These are small units that print only on 4" x 6" photo paper and produce wonderful high-res prints in beautiful colours. That's why I replaced my first (when it failed) with another from them. Prints are completely dry and smudge-free immediately after emerging, and they claim the colours are stable for 100 years. I'll never test that! With those I have experimented with third-party ink cartridges that printed OK, but found they never gave the print yield that the genuine Epson ones do, so the costs made no sense. The Epson print packs I buy now promise 150 prints with the ink cart and 150 glossy sheets in the pack. I keep spare extra Epson paper because I get reliably 155 to 160 prints per pack.
Finally, to your question. I was very happy with HP ink jets and their quality 25 years ago, even when refilling their ink carts with others' ink. But I have no experience with their most recent printers. Personally I resist systems that refuse to allow me to buy and use third-party consumables, and most of my experience with those has been good IF I choose carefully and stick with ones I find to be reliable. As you can see, I now much prefer colour laser type printers. They are expensive up-front, but high-yield toner carts can be had relatively cheaply so per-print costs are better then ink jets. They cannot clog up. The also can NOT print high-gloss photos, though, but matte-finish photos on plain paper are quite good.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Microsoft 365 sees 43% price hike thanks to Copilot — existing customers safe until renewal- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
-
News RTX 5090 exhibits 27% higher CUDA performance than RTX 4090 — exceeds 500K points in Geekbench
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 20
-
-
News AMD says Intel's 'horrible product' is causing Ryzen 9 9800X3D shortages
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 88
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram