Digital BW, The Print

Actually both the CIS and CFS have their good and bad points. The CIS 
is less hassle. The CFS cheaper.

What is this thing with Piezo inks not absorbing in the 1280 sponges 
equally for all 1280 carts? If this affects all pigment inks, could be 
a real headache for the CFS. I guess Cone is going to make sure the 
CIS units are consistant? Any ideas on this?

To answer the retracting question, no, I only got maybe two-four inch 
air gap in some of my six tubes. But Kevin, you could have pinched 
your tubing farther downstream then I did, thus giving you more air 
gap.

My air gaps quickly went away after only a few cleaning cycles. And I 
don't seem to get the barometric pressure related retraction mentioned 
by MIS.

If you install the CFS and it doesn't print, you can remove the extra 
air using the MIS recovery method by removing carts and sucking out 
the ink/air through the bottom, but I have a feeling this won't be 
nessecary.

Some air in the cart is needed to prevent ink draining from bottles 
into printer. It acts as a siphon block, according to MIS.
Jim H.






--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Sam A. McCandless" 
<samcc@v...> wrote:

> I'm not suggesting the CIS is better than the CFS, which I think Jim 
> Hayes prefers after much more experience than I've had. And I 
suspect 
> both the CIS and the CFS are better than the reverse-engineered, 
> no-manufacturer-named "knock off" cis'es I think are being sold by 
> retailers who don't have NoMoreCarts' permission to sell the real 
CIS.
> 
> Sam McCandless                samcc@v...
> 
> 
> >Just received my 1160 CIS replacement cartridges [snip] (in the 
> >instructions it mentions something about ink retraction over half 
> >way of the tubing, however that was referring to after the 
catridges 
> >had been installed, which is not the case for me and the problem 
> >seems to have occured earlier in the filling up stage)
> >
> >Kevin.