Chromalife100 vs Chromalife100+ fading test, Update 18. June 2021

[Ink stained Fingers]

Has anybody actually given these inks a fade rest on Canon paper?

They are not shipping outside the U.S., and I'm pretty sceptical about such exaggerating claims , I have seen enough of those, and I see much less need for such 3rd party inks since the OEM Chromalife 100 and Epson Claria inks are available as bottled inks at very affordable prices. If you want to go cheap there are plenty offers on the internet but if you want OEM like performance just get OEM inks.

 

[The Hat]

If you want to go cheap there are plenty offers on the internet but if you want OEM like performance just get OEM inks.

Yes that’s correct, when you consider the cost of 3rd party inks + the P&P, OEM bottled inks are a very good cost alternative, but the down side is there’re not available for some printers Yet.. You can’t beat OEM quality, plus your printer will love them..

Because so many print heads are showing signs of early faults from using some 3rd party inks..

 

[Artur5]

I'm wondering if you have factual proof of printhead early failures being always because of poor 3rd party inks.

Sorry, today I'm playing devil's advocate, ( as @stratman doesn't seems to be available at present ).

 

[stratman]

There have been no randomized controlled studies AFAIK. The forum consent is based on data reported by victims users, the preponderance appearing to favor when aftermarket inks used. No one has kept count of OEM vs aftermarket ink use AFAIK and there most likely is sampling bias skewing the result.

Since the forum has seen nozzle thermal damage with OEM ink then it may be possible that ink is not always the culprit but rather a design/manufacturing weakness/flaw of the print head.

Unlike the ease and relative rapidity of testing the theory of a hidden secondary Maxify ink level monitoring system, which is rather straight forward and can be done using well defined and easily controlled parameters, testing a print head for pigment ink nozzle warpage from an aftermarket ink is long term and difficult to recruit sample numbers let alone control for variables that might affect the results.

You could do a retrospective study using the forum for data collection on OEM vs aftermarket ink use. Let us know what you find.

 

[The Hat]

I'm wondering if you have factual proof of printhead early failures

We have countless users on saying their print head is showing signs of a double image on their nozzle printouts and all of them have said the use 3rd party ink, most if not all have the newer desktop printer, not the older Cli-521/Cli-8 type printers.

This is just an example..

 

[Artur5]

Not arguing with the well reported problems caused by poor ink but then, as you say, older printheads using BCI6/CLI8 inks seem to be much less prone to this issue. Could be that Canon, in the last years, tried to stop the sales of third party inks by designing very vulnerable printheads.. ?. That seems unlikely to me. Problably, they did it in order to save manufacturing costs.
I've been using unexpensive compatible inks on a bunch of Canon printers for the last 20 years or so. I never experienced the double image syndrome in the pigment black lattice.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

The printhead design must play a very important role here,

I think there are various printhead variations/generations/technical designs of the printhead together with some driver functionality to assure a somewhat balanced use of all nozzles.
I remember printhead failures not printing half of the CMY bars anymore or not printing any other black nozzle or not printing groups of nozzles - with models like the IP 4500.
I have seen this double image syndrom several times on printers like the IP7250 and combos using the same printhead.
I'm not mentioning the dreaded B200 issue in this context.

I would assume that refill users typically print more than users buying expensive OEM cartridges so the risk of a particular failure will occur earlier.

It appears to me that another generation of printheads is used in the newest generation of printers like the TS.... versions, and reports of like failures appear to be less than in the past, but time will show when printers get older.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Epson published a lengthy advertising paper about the superb features of Ecotank printers, one page addresses weaknesses of competitive printheads vs. the Epson Piezo technology, I cannot find the original link anymore, here a copy of the relevant page



I think the comparison to NASA rockets is not really appropriate -there is a difference in the consumed power and printheads do not ignite a propellant to propel the ink droplets out of the nozzles.

But the major part of the document gives a description of the internal complexity of a thermal printhead and the major reasons that they get used up over time. It should be clear from this description that the number of pages printed is not a valid usage indicator, it's only the cum. number how often nozzles get fired.

Ink shots are actually counted in my old Pro-7600 and can be called up in the maint. menu, and I remember that the Brother firmware on my DCP-195C is counting inkshots as well . I'm not aware if Canon is doing something similar.

 

[maximilian59]

I saw less problems with these printers with my own refills (Octopus ink) from Germany than with cheap China ink. One set of bad ink and the printhead showed double lines. I have got a lot of printers for free and use them as spare parts for repairing printers. Most of them have this problem. One only with under 400 prints. The user sold the setup cartridges and started with the cheapest inks he could get. I used a MX925 for over 6000 prints with third party inks. Than I got some very cheap ones with one of the free printers. They killed the printhead starting with the first PGBK and after the second one the problem was clearly visible in the text. I got a MG7750 with under 1000 prints and the gap between the lines in the nozzle test pattern is more than 2 mm. Also only used with super cheap cartridges. On a MG5753 that had very little problems on some nozzles in the mid, I was able to print another 2.500 prints with my refill ink before it started getting bad.
I also saw this missing half of the nozzles on IP4500 and IP5200 with not that much prints. It’s not a mainboard problem. Checked it with different printers.
Having no problems with my Pro-100s neither with OEM nor Precision Colors inks till now after a few 100 prints.
Cheers
Maximilian

 

[maximilian59]

Epson published a lengthy advertising paper about the superb features of Ecotank printers, one page addresses weaknesses of competitive printheads vs. the Epson Piezo technology, I cannot find the original link anymore, here a copy of the relevant page

View attachment 13179

I think the comparison to NASA rockets is not really appropriate -there is a difference in the consumed power and printheads do not ignite a propellant to propel the ink droplets out of the nozzles.

But the major part of the document gives a description of the internal complexity of a thermal printhead and the major reasons that they get used up over time. It should be clear from this description that the number of pages printed is not a valid usage indicator, it's the it's only the cum. number how often nozzles got fired.

Ink shots are actually counted in my old Pro-7600 and can be called up in the maint. menu, and I remember that the Brother firmware on my DCP-195C is counting inkshots as well . I'm not aware if Canon is doing something similar.

Good explanation. That’s the reason why the printheads from canon are replaceable. But the prices with of 80€ for consumers is mutch to high. A widely used printhead design since years does not justify the price. A maximum of 30€ would be ok and a lot of printers would be saved from the garbage bin. It’s not very friendly to the environment and I bet Canon still earns a lot of money with the printheads, compared to printers sold for less the 80€.
Cheers,
Maximilian
PS
But a really clogged Epson printhead is pain in the ass.