Toner on back of page, etc. (HP LaserJet 4600n)

[starman7]

I wanted to give a solution to this problem, which, as far as I can
tell, currently appears nowhere on HP's website (troubleshooting or FAQ
sections). I had to call HP tech support, and just barely escaped the
39.95 fee for this info. I had to wait on hold ages for a supervisor,
and make a case that this info 'should have been online', as there is
no way to troubleshoot this symptom.

We began to see color toner on the back of printed pages, first magenta
then cyan. Looking inside, there was toner on the rubber transfer belt.
"Aha," I said to myself, and replaced the transfer kit (over $200.00),
it was at 8% remaining, so not a big risk - we'd have to replace it
soon anyway.

Well the problem came back, this time with cyan. So I looked high and
low, wide and far, and found no info on this symptom - on the usenet or
at HP.com. Additionally, I found scant info on the symptoms indicating
the need to replace a "transfer kit" or "fuser kit," etc. Except that
you're supposed to: do it when the printer tells you to!

I'd replaced the magenta cartridge earlier, and the problem went away,
but it started soon after with cyan. For some reason, I did not put two
and two together, linking the problem with the cartridge. How could it
be two in a row? It's never done this before?, etc. I should've made
the connection.

It turns out, it was the cartridge. Apparently, HP warrants the color
cartridges for up to 80% (20% remaining) use, or 8,000 pages -
whichever is first. We were at just over 10k pages, and 32% remaining
of cyan, or, out of warranty by pagecount. HP should warrant the
cartridge for 100% use, since that's what you buy, and as you probably
know, they're not cheap.

If necessary, they should over-engineer them to last as advertised. I
have a bad feeling they are manufacturing them to last 80% or 10,000
pages, because this problem has happened with two cartridges in a row;
and had not happened previously in over a year's use. We'd always
replaced them when the printer told us to! It sounds like a plot to
sell more cartridges.

So, if there's toner on the back of your page, (and your cartridge for
that color is at over 10k printed pages, or under 20% remaining)
replace that color.

Please save someone 39.95 by posting your solution here.

 

[Tony]

I wanted to give a solution to this problem, which, as far as I can
tell, currently appears nowhere on HP's website (troubleshooting or FAQ
sections). I had to call HP tech support, and just barely escaped the
39.95 fee for this info. I had to wait on hold ages for a supervisor,
and make a case that this info 'should have been online', as there is
no way to troubleshoot this symptom.

We began to see color toner on the back of printed pages, first magenta
then cyan. Looking inside, there was toner on the rubber transfer belt.
"Aha," I said to myself, and replaced the transfer kit (over $200.00),
it was at 8% remaining, so not a big risk - we'd have to replace it
soon anyway.

Well the problem came back, this time with cyan. So I looked high and
low, wide and far, and found no info on this symptom - on the usenet or
at HP.com. Additionally, I found scant info on the symptoms indicating
the need to replace a "transfer kit" or "fuser kit," etc. Except that
you're supposed to: do it when the printer tells you to!

I'd replaced the magenta cartridge earlier, and the problem went away,
but it started soon after with cyan. For some reason, I did not put two
and two together, linking the problem with the cartridge. How could it
be two in a row? It's never done this before?, etc. I should've made
the connection.

It turns out, it was the cartridge. Apparently, HP warrants the color
cartridges for up to 80% (20% remaining) use, or 8,000 pages -
whichever is first. We were at just over 10k pages, and 32% remaining
of cyan, or, out of warranty by pagecount. HP should warrant the
cartridge for 100% use, since that's what you buy, and as you probably
know, they're not cheap.

If necessary, they should over-engineer them to last as advertised. I
have a bad feeling they are manufacturing them to last 80% or 10,000
pages, because this problem has happened with two cartridges in a row;
and had not happened previously in over a year's use. We'd always
replaced them when the printer told us to! It sounds like a plot to
sell more cartridges.

So, if there's toner on the back of your page, (and your cartridge for
that color is at over 10k printed pages, or under 20% remaining)
replace that color.

Please save someone 39.95 by posting your solution here.

I don't diasagree with you but to be fair to HP the warranty is based on an
average toner cover on the page of (I think) 5%. It may be that the 80% figure
is to make allownaces for that.
Tony

 

[Fred McKenzie]

So, if there's toner on the back of your page, (and your cartridge for
that color is at over 10k printed pages, or under 20% remaining)
replace that color.

Starman-

I learned about this problem from the printer people at work. Last year
when I purchased my HP 4600, I found it also had toner on the back of
pages, and the page count was extremely low! The "cure" is to replace the
toner regardless of how many pages it has printed. In my case, I just let
the cartridge run out since most of my printing is one-sided. If you do
duplex printing, HP should replace the defective cartridge.

HP is aware of the problem, and made a change in the design of their
cartridges. Some stores still have old cartridges in stock. When you buy
a replacement, look for one that lists both the HP 4600 and 4650 printers
on the box to be sure you get the updated version.

I'm jealous of your 10K printed pages per cartridge. Much of my printing
is of full-page color photos, so I use a lot of color toner. I'm starting
my third set of cartridges and the total page count is only 3500. (Of
course the original set came with only 25% supply of toner.)

Fred

 

[Esben]

So, if there's toner on the back of your page, (and your cartridge for
that color is at over 10k printed pages, or under 20% remaining)
replace that color.

I haven't seen the problem only on the back side of the paper, but I've seen
a lot of toners for the 4600/4650 cause a thin layer of toner on the same
side as the print itself. They've started at everything from 20 to 80% of
usage for the specific toner. All toners were replaced somewhat free of
charge.

 

[Ben Myers]

Let's see.

So you fill up the gas tank and get a warranty on only 80% of the gasoline. I
don't think so.

So you go to a bar and order a beer on tap, and the bartender says that he
guarantees that only 80% will taste great and be less filling. I don't think
so.

Can anyone say "Piss poor engineering"? Where has all the HP quality gone?
Long time passing... Ben Myers

 

[Tony]

Let's see.

So you fill up the gas tank and get a warranty on only 80% of the gasoline. I
don't think so.

So you go to a bar and order a beer on tap, and the bartender says that he
guarantees that only 80% will taste great and be less filling. I don't think
so.

Can anyone say "Piss poor engineering"? Where has all the HP quality gone?
Long time passing... Ben Myers

Maybe I didn't make myself clear, if the average toner cover per page for a
particular user is higher than the 5% (or whatever) stated by HP (or any laser
manufacturer) then the cartridge will print less pages than the anticipated
maximum (based on 5% cover), the converse is also true. In that case it is
reasonable, I think, for the manufacturer to be conservative. It is stated in
their terms of trade etc.
I don't think your examples are in any way comparable. If the measure was based
on grams of toner provided in the cartridge then your analogy would be correct.
The fact is that a toner cartridge should always deliver the amount of toner to
the paper that it contains except for the waste toner that laser technology
always produces. I know that the amount of toner in cartridges from all
reputable manufacturers is exactly measured because of the process that is used.
I also believe that HP engineering is not what it used to be, I guess that
market pressures are the cause of that. Sad but inevitable unless you can
concentrate on a niche market that is prepared to pay a premium.
Tony

 

[Esben]

Let's see.

Let's see. The specified yield is 8.000 pages at 5% coverage. If the actual
coverage is only 2,5%, then you should in theory be able to reach 16.000
pages. The toner cartridge, however, consist of more parts than just the
toner tank, and those parts are not necessarily built to last for 16.000
pages.

 

[Ben Myers]

If I pay for a toner cartridge, I expect to use maybe 99% of the toner inside,
regardless of the coverage per page. I do not think that is an unreasonable
expectation. It is the HP warranty that is unreasonable, covering up (once
again) piss poor engineering design. The color cartridges are expensive enough
as it is. A warranty for only 80% of the toner is effectively a 25% price
increase. Nope, I'm afraid HP has lost it. Question is: Who is finding it, in
the market for laser printers, color or B&W? ... Ben Myers

 

[Tony]

If I pay for a toner cartridge, I expect to use maybe 99% of the toner inside,
regardless of the coverage per page. I do not think that is an unreasonable
expectation. It is the HP warranty that is unreasonable, covering up (once
again) piss poor engineering design. The color cartridges are expensive enough
as it is. A warranty for only 80% of the toner is effectively a 25% price
increase. Nope, I'm afraid HP has lost it. Question is: Who is finding it, in
the market for laser printers, color or B&W? ... Ben Myers

I think that OKI will continue to take some market share for colour lasers, not
sure about monochrome, their colour lasers are very well engineered and I know
that their reliability is a worry to some of their service agents (good for the
customer). There is a good reason for this, OKI never produced any inkjets so
they "missed out" on the inkjet revolution; they have put enormous resources
into engineering reliable colour lasers with good functionality like straight
paper paths, user replaceable toner, drums, transfer belts and fusers, the
quality of photo prints is just amazing for a laser on heavy or light laser
stock. Just my opinion but watch this space. Not sure about monochrome lasers
but Lexmark seem to be getting some good press (their inkjets are an entirely
different story!) and I am seeing more and more of them in customer's premises.
Tony

 

[Tony]

Let's see. The specified yield is 8.000 pages at 5% coverage. If the actual
coverage is only 2,5%, then you should in theory be able to reach 16.000
pages. The toner cartridge, however, consist of more parts than just the
toner tank, and those parts are not necessarily built to last for 16.000
pages.

Most cartridges with built in drums will last for more than one toner fill,
simply the way they are engineered. Some drums will last 2 fills, some less,
very few will last more than 2 fills.
Having said that, just filling toner cartridges for a second time is not the
same as remanufacturing which takes into account all of the parts that wear and
the removal of waste toner which can be 5% or more of the original fill.
Obviously the way they may be chipped will affect the actual useful life but
physically the drum will nearly always fail before any other part of the
cartridge, however they are designed so that the toner runs out before any
physical parts fail all things being equal.
Tony

 

[Arthur Entlich]

I'm not sure I understand your response to this posting. It would be
very rare than someone used less than 5% per page average of a toner
color. In fact, most people use well over that. A photographic image
could easily use 40-60% cover per color. In that case, the page count
would be considerably less than the 8-10K HP suggests, since the
cartridge would just run out of toner.

HP should guarantee the cartridge for the full charge of the toner
within in, or should reduce the yield at 5% to express only 80% of the
toner. If they are providing a 20% questionable "bonus" amount of
toner, and it often means backs of the pages are colored as a result,
they should not use that in a page count for the yield advertised.

Art

 

[Arthur Entlich]

I suppose there are examples of less than 5% per color averages
occurring with a printer, but I believe they are rare unless only text
is printed and spot color is used.

Art

 

[Esben]

I suppose there are examples of less than 5% per color averages occurring
with a printer, but I believe they are rare unless only text is printed and
spot color is used.

No, less than 5% pr. color is actually very normal for an office printer
that prints letters and occasional brochures. If you ask copy machine
manufacturer, they will probably say that 20% is normal on a b/w office
printer.

You can see the historical toner usage on many newer HP printers, and
there's a third party solution, that you can install on the printer for even
more detailed information.

Here are some examples of actual coverage for about 30.000 pages:
LJ 9000: 2.31 %
CLJ 5500: 3.61% 1.87% 2.23% 1.59% (KYCM)

Obviously they are not used for full pages photographs, but a lot of these
jobs are spreadsheet, Word docs and CAD drawings.

 

[Tony]

Art
I was trying to make the point that most cartridge manufacturers estimate (not
guarantee) the number of pages that will print from the cartridge at an average
of 5% cover (some quote 4%). Clearly this is going to vary from user to user.
So a guarantee of 80% of the estimated usage may not be unreasonalbe. I am no
defender of misleading claims but since the only way to make a real guarantee
is based on the amount of toner that the cartridge will lay down (almost
meaningless to someone trying to make a purchase decision) it seems to me that
the 80% (or similar) figure may be reasonable. I am aware of several laser
laser users that lay down only a tiny amount of colour on a page (e-mail
address or URL only). This of course begs the question of drum life since that
really is measured in terms of pages printed and has no relaitionship to the
amount of toner used. This complicates the calculation for printers that have
cartridges with integral drums. This in turn could lead to discussion on the
relative merits of carousel versus flat bed colour lasers!
Tony

 

[Arthur Entlich]

Interesting, and admittedly not what I would have expected.

Thanks for the detailed reply!

Art