Who uses compatible cartridges?

[Sebby]

For a while now, we've been using compatible cartridges in our Brother MFC-465CN. No real problems - the quality isn't as good as genuine Brother, but they were cheap and cheerful. A couple of weeks back, the cyan stopped printing altogether. The cartridge still had plenty of ink in. I did a few cleaning routines to no avail. So I changed the cartridge; still the same. Loads more cleans, but just nothing. A quick Google revealed that the culprit was probably the compatible cartridge.

I took a slight risk (the risk being potential money down the drain!) and bought a genuine Brother cyan cartridge. Unfortunately, still nothing. Ran a few more cleaning routines, and voila, it started working again.

This leaves me feeling slightly uneasy about using compatibles again. What does everyone else do? And if you do use compatibles, which ones?

[Ray]

I don't use them, Sebby I had a similar experience to you 3 or so years ago with an Epson printer, I've always used the printer manufacturers ones ever since.

[Rik]

Same here, the short term saving can be quickly wiped out by the long term costs.

[Sebby]

That's exactly what I'm thinking.

[kinmel]

I changed over to laser printers, hardly any dearer to buy initially and much more cost effective long term.

[Sebby]

The problem for me is I need an all-in-one, colour printer, and the lasers that fit this bill tend to be very big.

[Baz]

I use them for my Epson.Have done for ages and had very little trouble. I get them from here.

have had a few 'bad' cartridges and just sent off an email to them and another one was in the post the same day without having to return the duff one.

very good service from them too.They sometimes have offers on where you can make up your own combo package of 10 cartridges

[Sebby]

You're the second or third person that's recommended Choice Stationery.

[Rik]

The name does seem to crop up quite often...

[Den]

I had problems with my previous Canon Printer when it clogged up and swore I would only use Canon cartridges in future. Then the price of the Canon ones went up and up. I then realised that if I did not buy canon ones the savings would be such that I could buy a new printer every 18months and break even. 

[Simon]

You're the second or third person that's recommended Choice Stationery.

I was probably one of the others.  Their compats are not 'cheap and cheerful', but very good quality, for which you pay a bit more, but nothing like the cost of originals.  I've been using them in my Brother AIO, and have had no problems whatsoever, apart from one black one which was a bit of a bugger to insert, due to a slight difference with the casing.  Print quality is as good as the originals.

[Dangerjunkie]

Hi,

I've got an HP colour Laserjet 2820 and the cost of the consumables is ferocious. I wouldn't recommend this printer for anything more than very light use on cost grounds.

The biggest hit is the transfer cartridge at £123 (recently down from £160) for 20,000 pages but the highest cost are the cartridges at £83 for each of the 4 colours for 4000 pages. When I was given the printer (I later found out I was given it because its former owner worked out just how much it cost to run) it had a compatible ink cartridge in it and the print quality was terrible. I have no proof but I wouldn't be surprised if the printer was deliberately degrading the quality if it detects "bad" cartridges (one of the HPs at work goes on a go-slow if it doesn't have a genuine cartridge in it). When my next cartridge is nearly empty if I've got the compatible one I'll swap the chips between them so the printer thinks the genuine cartridge isn't. If the printouts instantly go to poo and recover when I put the original chip back I'll video the demo and shame HP on YouTube.

I'm currently on a very tight budget and couldn't afford a new transfer cartridge. I found a place in Germany that sold me a new chip for the transfer cartridge for £10 that made the printer think it was new. They also allege that there is twice as much toner in the cartridges as the printer will let you use. I may try getting chips for those and see how long they last. If I get more than 500 extra pages then I'm in profit.

If I was still using ink jets I would look at the new Kodak printers that promise to save big percentages by having cheap cartridges.

I've refilled my Samsung mono laser printer cartridges at my local Cartridge World and not noticed any difference in quality. I would be a little more wary of refilling colour laser cartridges in case it took out the transfer kit. Ink jets where the print head is built into the cartridge are a no-brainer as there's nothing to damage. I wouldn't be happy refilling cartridges where the head was part of the printer as a bad batch of ink could take the printer out.

Cheers,
Paul.

[scook94]

We have an Epson and compatible cartridges are just so cheap compared to Espon ones. Very rarely do we get a bad one, but if we do then throwing one away that cost a pound or two isn't that big of a deal.

[Sebby]

I was probably one of the others.  Their compats are not 'cheap and cheerful', but very good quality, for which you pay a bit more, but nothing like the cost of originals.  I've been using them in my Brother AIO, and have had no problems whatsoever, apart from one black one which was a bit of a bugger to insert, due to a slight difference with the casing.  Print quality is as good as the originals.

Thanks, Simon.

[sobranie]

Always had great results with jettec cartridges. Using now on epson stylus photo RX685 and previously with epson stylus photo 750.

[JB]

Another vote for JetTec. I have always used them on my old Epson Stylus 680 which is still working after quite a few years.

Kiss of death now I suppose!

[talos]

Another vote for JetTec, I've used them on Epsom and Hp printers without problems, the only one I ever had trouble with was Inkrite.

Kiss of death now I suppose!

Me too, better start looking for another printer

[Sebby]

Thanks, guys.

[alhenderson]

For a while now, we've been using compatible cartridges in our Brother MFC-465CN. No real problems - the quality isn't as good as genuine Brother, but they were cheap and cheerful. A couple of weeks back, the cyan stopped printing altogether. The cartridge still had plenty of ink in. I did a few cleaning routines to no avail. So I changed the cartridge; still the same. Loads more cleans, but just nothing. A quick Google revealed that the culprit was probably the compatible cartridge.

I took a slight risk (the risk being potential money down the drain!) and bought a genuine Brother cyan cartridge. Unfortunately, still nothing. Ran a few more cleaning routines, and voila, it started working again.

This leaves me feeling slightly uneasy about using compatibles again. What does everyone else do? And if you do use compatibles, which ones?

I've been contemplating a similar situation with my Canon i850.  Had it for about 6-7 years.  When I got it, printing was fantastic, would do great looking pictures etc.  For the last couple of years or so I have been using compatible cartridges.  Whilst I have not experienced any problems with them, per se, its now not even worth bothering to print photos.  They have lines all over them and the colour is dreadful.  I am close to giving it up and getting a new one, but from other posts on here it sounds like it might be worth trying genuine canon cartridges again.

Mind you, there are other reasons for replacing it - its not ethernet or wireless and it takes an age to start printing anything, it makes an absolute racket, jiggles the print head around a lot and then decides to print.  Fairly sure it didn't use to do it..

Any hints on the cheapest printers to run?  I know when I bought the canon I decided against HPs as the cartridges were very expensive.

All in all, I'm not that impressed that after 7 years I might have to replace it, its not as if its got many miles on the clock, either!

Al.

[Rik]

I run an HP multi-function, using fast draft mode most of the time, and reckon I spend about £50pa on ink plus some 12,000 sheets of paper. I've also got a Canon 6700 specifically for photos, that's a lot more cost effective and faster than the Epson I used to run, which wasted copious quantities of ink in self-cleaning. Brother are meant to be cheap to run as are the new Kodak printers.

[alhenderson]

I run an HP multi-function, using fast draft mode most of the time, and reckon I spend about £50pa on ink plus some 12,000 sheets of paper. I've also got a Canon 6700 specifically for photos, that's a lot more cost effective and faster than the Epson I used to run, which wasted copious quantities of ink in self-cleaning. Brother are meant to be cheap to run as are the new Kodak printers.

Cheers Rik.  Hadn't really considered Kodak or Brother.  Mainly because I associate Brother with typewriters and Kodak with cameras :-)  I'm a great believer in sticking to what you're good at, which makes me a little suspicious when companies start offering things they're not known for doing.  Doesn't work all the time, of course..

[Rik]

Brother have been making printers since at least 1982, as that's when I bought my first one. Kodak are new to the field, but it's a natural extension of their photo lab work.

[alhenderson]

Brother have been making printers since at least 1982, as that's when I bought my first one. Kodak are new to the field, but it's a natural extension of their photo lab work.

Fair points.  I was too little to be buying printers in 1982   

[Rik]

I'm giving my grey hair away.

[Den]

I'm giving my grey hair away.

I will have a big bag full please Rik