Spongeless vs. Sponged Carts

  • Thread starter Thread starter One4All
  • Start date Start date
O

One4All

Can someone tell me which is better: spongeless or sponged carts? I'm
planning to do a run of about 200-300 different 11x14 color prints on
my Epson 1280, & I want to order a CFS system from either MediaStreet
or MIS. I will get prefilled carts, as I don't want to mess with
refilling carts in any way, shape, or form.

But, I have the option of the spongeless/sponged carts & don't know
which to get. Which should I get? TIA.
 
One4All said:
Can someone tell me which is better: spongeless or sponged carts? I'm
planning to do a run of about 200-300 different 11x14 color prints on
my Epson 1280, & I want to order a CFS system from either MediaStreet
or MIS. I will get prefilled carts, as I don't want to mess with
refilling carts in any way, shape, or form.

But, I have the option of the spongeless/sponged carts & don't know
which to get. Which should I get? TIA.
Click to expand...

I've been using spongeless cartridges from MIS since January '06 on ten C84
printers and one R 1800 at this point. On occasion I've had one or two of
them leaking. Usually it will stop when resetting the valve with the push of
a paperclip. Of the 48 original cartridges I'm using I'd say I've had to
replace two of them, so I'm pretty pleased with how they're working, even if
they're $5.50 each.

I'm trying to fathom why it would make a difference between sponged or
spongeless running a CIS, since you won't be filling the cartridges
themselves.
The only thing that I could consider is if there were impurities in the ink
then the sponged cartridges might capture those impurities before entering
the printhead. However, I have heard that after awhile the sponges
themselves start to deteriorate and break down, which would send debris to
the printhead and cause possible head clogging in itself.
 
In general, I prefer spongeless, if properly designed. I have no
association with any product lines, but the Ink Republic designs tend to
be well reported about, and they recently have upgraded some models.

The reason for the sponge was to keep the ink from sloshing around, to
help prevent ink leakage, and to allow the ink to be fed in a somewhat
even manner to the heads.

The problems with sponges are, when being used long term, they can dry
out at the top surface or the foam can degrade, the ink can develop
residue which can clog them, they can develop bubbles or foam in the
foam material which can make the ink flow unreliable, and as they get
toward the end of their "fill" (in the case of ones not being fed by a
CIS), they tend to develop ink starvation when the ink demand is high.

However, spongeless cartridges have to be properly designed to avoid
leakage, ink starvation. They need to have a damper system in their
design to maintain even ink flow. They tend to avoid the other sponge
related problems.

Art
 
Thanks, Jan & Arthur. I also presented the question to MIS. Their
response is below:

You will want to go with the spongeless cartridges. These are a
new technology and less
maintenance when compared to the sponged cartridges.

FWIW, I was shopping for a CFS that came with prefilled carts. MIS
seems to be the only vendor that offers such a kit. So, I asked MIS,
just out of curiosity, why other ink suppliers don't offer a kit with
prefilled carts. They do offer CFS's with empty carts. As I said, I
don't want to mess with refilling carts. Here's their response:

Other companies do not manufacture their CFS systems like we do.
Therefore, most companies do not
know how to fill and reliably ship a filled unit like we do.

I'm not becoming a mouthpiece for MIS, but I'm impressed by their
reputation, the info on their website, the choices they offer in
CFS's, and their responsiveness to my questions. I'm looking forward
to their product.

To answer Jan's question of why I should be concerned about the
difference between sponged and spongeless carts, is that I wasn't
aware of a choice until searching for a CFS. Once aware, I needed to
know the advantages/disadvantages. I suppose it just gets down to
personal preferences for any number of reasons. Also, Jan's pointing
out some minimal problems he/she's had is helpful.

MIS's response jibes with Arthur's re: maintenance problems with
sponged carts (eventual clogging, etc.). Arthur's emphasis on
"properly designed" is well taken. I can only assume MIS has properly
designed their spongeless carts. At any rate, I'm going with the
spongeless.

Thanks, again.
 
I need to add that MIS is the only vendor that I could find that
offers a CFS with prefilled carts for the Epson 1280 printer.
 
One4All said:
I need to add that MIS is the only vendor that I could find that
offers a CFS with prefilled carts for the Epson 1280 printer.
Click to expand...

It's encouraging to hear that you're doing research on your own to finalize
your decision. As I think I mentioned, I've done a fair amount of business
with these folks for a year and a half and found them to be reliable, and
getting ink and cartridges to me in a timely fashion. They were instrumental
in the beginning to suggest that using dye base ink in a C84 printer might
very well work. Since I've been using it with their spongeless cartridges
I've had no trouble at all with the ten printers and am very grateful that
these machines are still running. Had I used the Dura-brite ink that came
with them from Epson I'm certain they would all be sitting in landfills at
this point just like the first 6 printers that I set up using their ink; all
within a two year period.

By the way, I am a male. I appreciate that you took the trouble to question
the name as a lot of folks assume wrongly.
 
One4All said:
Thanks, Jan & Arthur. I also presented the question to MIS. Their
response is below:

You will want to go with the spongeless cartridges. These are a
new technology and less
maintenance when compared to the sponged cartridges.
Click to expand...

You should also ask them who the mfg/formulator of the ink they sell and
post that back.
FWIW, I was shopping for a CFS that came with prefilled carts. MIS
seems to be the only vendor that offers such a kit. So, I asked MIS,
just out of curiosity, why other ink suppliers don't offer a kit with
prefilled carts. They do offer CFS's with empty carts. As I said, I
don't want to mess with refilling carts. Here's their response:

Other companies do not manufacture their CFS systems like we do.
Therefore, most companies do not
know how to fill and reliably ship a filled unit like we do.

I'm not becoming a mouthpiece for MIS, but I'm impressed by their
reputation, the info on their website,
Click to expand...

I have not seen a full disclosure of what they are selling on their website.
 
You should also ask them who the mfg/formulator of the ink they sell and
post that back.
Click to expand...
At this point, it's irrelevant. I've done enough reading books &
lurking in this NG to know that 3rd party inks are widely accepted,
even on the commercial level. Give it a rest, Sir. It's the old
"socialized medicine" scare tactic that you use.
I have not seen a full disclosure of what they are selling on their website.
Click to expand...

Again, irrelevant. 3rd party ink suppliers would not be in business
for this long if their inks were as inferior and problematical as you
continually suggest. This NG would be the first to alert users about
defects in 3rd party inks. In about a year of lurking & occasionally
posting in this NG, I have yet to read a single significant complaint
about 3rd party inks. Your complaints have not been significant.

I ordered an MIS CFS system, today, for my Epson 1280. Maybe Epson
should take the hint & start offering competing CFS systems for their
printers. If Epson offered prefilled spongeless carts in a CFS for the
1280 like MIS does, I'd probably go for it, even at some higher cost.
Epson doesn't, so I don't.

Give it up, Measekite. You're fighting a lost battle. People like me
want to produce quality inkjet photographic prints as cheaply as
possible. If the quality isn't there, that would be an issue, but so
far, I haven't read or seen that as an issue. 3rd party inks, as well
as 3rd party papers, are a fact of life, now. Get over it. It's good
that Epson, HP, Canon, etc., have this competition. After all, it's
the American Way!

Until I see on this NG damning testimony, other than yours, about 3rd
party inks, I'm going with the MIS CFS for my 1280. I'll keep this NG
posted as to failures/problems & ask for help, if needed. MIS will be
my first source for help. Successes, I won't waste my time posting.
I'm not into arguing.
 
Back
Top