Xerox "wax stick" laser printers for decals?

[C855B]

It's time to replace our color laser printer (needed overhaul + toner > cost of new), and the line of Xerox printers that use "solid color sticks" caught my attention as potential for printing decals. I'm familiar with the basic technology from waaaaaay back in the early days of Postscript printers when it was Tektronix. What I recall from then was the printed image had a thick waxy/sticky feel to it, and had poor durability, where the image flaked off the page.

Does anybody have any hands-on with the latest versions? For one thing, I'd like to know if the image quality and durability has improved. Do they work with decal paper? And... does anybody make non-CMYK color sticks?

[peteski]

That sounds like the Xerox Phaser I used to have at work (based on the Tektronix printers).  It was a hot-wax printer which used solid wax "bricks".  It would be perfect for decals except (like all the other CYMK printers) it uses transparent inks which depend on the substrate being white to properly render the colors.  So if you print color decal image on clear decal paper and apply it to a dark model, the colors will not show up properly. And of course there is no white inks.  As far as durability goes, the Xerox waxy ink is very similar to the Alps MicroDry ink.

Even is someone made a white ink for it that means you would have to dedicate a printer just for white printing.  Otherwise (if you could somehow get the printer driver to work properly), you woudl somehow need to fully purge the previous load of wax before printing white.  I also was not able to get it to print in "spot colors" like Alps does. So you couldn't for example print white then retain the paper in the printer to print the CYM inks over the white ink.

IIRC, its resolution was 1200 dpi (BTW, Alps is 600dpi and that is quite sufficient for most N scale needs).

[C855B]

Yes, the early Xerox Phasers were little more than rebadged Tektronix. In 1999 or 2000, we had one in our office for a month for demo/testing, and said "No, thanks." Aside from the waxy texture and flaking of large solid areas, another thing we found is that anything over 160% coverage resulted in significant issues including blurry prints and image transfer.

That's why I'm asking about experience with the newer models, "ColorQube". They are 2400x2400 and use a different style and allegedly a different formulation of the ink sticks. Unfortunately, they are more expensive than the SO/HO printers the local Office Depot/Stapes/whatever carry in their stores, so are online only. IOW, I could use some hands-on knowledge with the current product.

Anyway, I popped by the local Staples today in this Quixotic quest. Seeing the huge price drops in color lasers, I'm tempted to solve my office color printing problem with a cheap Lexmark and solve the decal issue later. Heck, the printer and starting supplies are half the price of replacing the toner carts alone in my HP 2605.

[peteski]

The printer I had my direct experience with was not the earlier model. It was around year 2006 or 2007 and it was Xerox Phaser (IIRC was Phaser 8500 series).  I still have the test prints somewhere (now if I could only find them).    What I recall about that printer was that the shape of the "brick" or "nugget" was different for each color, so you couldn't mistakenly feed the wrong color into the printer.  Just like it is shown in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Ink

My test prints did not show any flaking (although I didn't abuse them).  But as I said above, the inks are transparent and no white printing is possible.  Since I don't have access to those printers anymore, that is all I'm going to say here.

[C855B]

Thanks, that does clarify it. The new 2400x2400 printers use the same keyed bricks, so obviously that chemistry has been around a few years. The earlier models used sticks that more or less resembled artist's pastels, and they actually were a bit on the opaque side. In fact, the one big plus of the older Tek printers was very rich colors on transparencies, provided you handled them very carefully.

Anyway, now it seems there's no apparent advantage to the technology other than a reduction in the size of the consumables - not the cost, however! I'll get the Lexmark for the office printer and call it done for the time being.

Appreciate the comeback.

[sirenwerks]

Mike,

I used a Xerox 6000-series at the nonprofit I used to work for, as Xerox had a sweet free lease program for NPOs.  I put that thing through the ringer, performing monthly personalized mailings with mad varieties of paper stocks and envelopes, and it performed flawlessly, with excellent coverage and color quality.  Feeding envelopes was a bit limited but meh... The toner was thinly applied and flexed well on thin paper stock; I never had any cracking or flaking issues.  I never tried decals on it (left before I could) but the unit was an excellent machine (two years and no out-of-the-ordinary service required) and I highly recommend the product, for general use at least.  Especially if any company other than Xerox starts making the toner blocks and there's some price competition to drive that cost factor down.

[wm3798]

We had a Xerox Phaser at my store that I inherited from the other office, and I hated every second I had it.  Took forever to warm up (we didn't to a lot of copying) and it was generally riddled with paper jams etc.
Not sure what vintage it was, but we ended up buying out the lease, then taking it to the Chesapeake Center to be recycled for parts.

Lee

[C855B]

Thanks, guys. Lee, that sounds like one of the early Xerox/Tek units like we had. Now that you invoked unpleasant memories , the demo unit liked to jam if there was too much ink coverage. Apparently any large patch of heavy ink wanted to stick to the rollers in the fuser. Even at that, the thickness and opacity of the ink on those earlier units would be interesting for decals... provided you could get it through in one piece.

I've read some online reviews about the ColorQubes, and they're just OK. One commenter wrote two paragraphs on the limitations of the melt-type toner - can't laminate, as the laminator heat re-melts the image, and can't use for multi-pass printing, such as using the color printer for letterheads and then printing body copy on a normal B&W printer. Apparently the toner re-melts in the second printer's fuser station and creates a big mess.

[peteski]

Mike,
I wasn't going to comment any further on this subject but the way you described the printing process is not quite correct and this bugged me.

First of all, all the negatives you read about this printing technology are true and they are also mentioned in the article I linked to earlier ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Ink ).  But other printers which also use thermally transfered wax/resin ink (such as Alps MD printers which are widely used for printing decals) have similar limitations. But how often do you either laminate your custom-printed decals, or pass them through a laser printer?  I don't and I don't see a reason to ever do it.

The thing that really bugged me is your mentioning that Phasers use a fuser.  They don't.  A fuser is used in laster printers to melt a powdered toner onto the print media (which is the final step in laser printing).

Phaser printers do not need a fuser.  Think of them as a special ink jet printer which instead of water soluble liquid dyes uses liquefied colored hot wax.  Also the Phaser's print head is a giant fixed head (with thousands of jets) which is the same width as the widest print media and it is stationary.  During printing the head squirts dots of hot liquid wax onto a transfer drum. That drum then touches the print media where it deposits the liquid wax.  This part of the process is similar to offset printing. At that point the wax cools and hardens on the print media before it is ejected out of the printer.  That drum does not function like a fuser.  There, I feel better now. 

[C855B]

Consider my chops duly busted. I could have sworn that the old Tek-based printers had a re-melt station that was called a "fuser" for simplicity's sake, the re-melt because some media wouldn't fully adhere the wax when it was applied. I'm definitely recalling an outboard heated roller at the end of the paper path that the paper wanted to wrap around; I have the burn scars to prove it, although I could possibly be remembering (12 years ago now) that the wrap-around-the-"fuser" problem could have been with our Tek's successor.

Anyway, the new versions certainly don't have a fuser, but look around and you will find the "maintenance kit" called a fuser kit by some vendors, although we know it's not a fuser. Mostly an excess ink collection tray, I think.

As far as lamination goes, I did lots of ad hoc lamination in my graphic arts years, so it was a problem. No, you're certainly not going to laminate decals, but decals are not the only thing I would have such a printer for.

And glad you're feeling better.