reman laser or new chinese laser

[Kev Williams]

Horrible comparison? As I said: based on the machines I'm familiar with, and I gave all "high detail" marks to the western machines.

And by the way:

If he would have said that he's buying it to mark Stainless, then you'd have to state how the 20 year old machine smokes the 1 year old Chinese machine.

From my post above:

. However, I can't get it to Cermark SS like I'd hoped, but I need some time to fiddle with speeds & such. And Chinese machines are slow to raster.

so, I guess I did?


Second of all, the two LS machines are 10 (mine) and 7 (my BIL's) years old, all 3 western machines are running Synrad lasers. My nearly 20 year old 25w ULS's new tube installed a couple of years ago tested at 36w. In the 10 years I've been using my LS900, one setting I've had to change is from 9 speed to 8 speed to cut thru 1/8" rowmark in one pass. I've never had to change any other settings that I've made from day one. If it HAS lost any power, it ain't much.

I stand by my comparison-- which btw was based on Ross's contention that: " Assuming you get something around 35W, you're engraving time will still be faster than a 60-80W Chinese machine". For 'superficial' wood engraving, yes. For DEEP engraving, I don't think so.

So how about a side-by-side comparison: I just engraved the ends of a pine board with my Triumph and LS900, at as close to identical speeds and resolution as I could get them.

Lines per inch was 300 for LS900, which measures .00333" line spacing, gap on the Triumph was set at .09, which equals .00354 spacing.

Power on the LS900 was 100, Triumph was 85 (which is 28mV@vector, I could go to 95% since I'm rastering, but I prefer not to overdrive it)

Speed on the LS900 was set to 18, which just was nearly identical to the 500mm/second of the Triumph.

The Triumph took 48 seconds, the LS900 51 seconds.

Below are the results. First 3 pics are the Triumph, second 3 the LS900. The grain of the pine made for an un-even bottom for measuring, but the Triumph depths measured from .022 to .054", the LS900 from .008 to .021". That's getting close to 3x the depth in the same time.

Anyone with a 35 watt laser and a piece of pine, the font is Benguiat BK BT in BOLD, at 51.73 points (about 1/2" high). Set your laser to run 300 lines per inch, then figure out the speed you need to enter to get it run at 47 to 52 seconds. I'd love to see the results.


test1.jpgtest2.jpgtest3.jpgtest4.jpgtest5.jpgtest6.jpg

[Scott Shepherd]

You can engrave 100 more projects and show the end results, it's still not valid to compare 10 year old machines to 1 year old machines. It's like saying "My Chinese machine I bought last year is faster than the Epilog Summit I bought 10 years ago, so I'd go with the Chinese machine if I have to pick one today".

[Scott Shepherd]

Pine, .140" thick. Burned all the way through it when I slowed it down to take that long. 52 seconds. Had to slow it down to a speed of 9 to get it to take that long. Plus, that's 333 dpi, so it's 10% more dense, but it's the only choice I have unless I go to 250 dpi.

photo 5.JPGphoto 6.JPG

[John Noell]

Steve (Scott), why is the output from my 10 year old Epilog mini (with a newer tube) supposed to be different than when it was one year old? I know I'm slowing down but I don't see it in the Epilog. Just asking.

[Scott Shepherd]

John, your output isn't, it's just that lasers have gotten faster over the years. A Helix is faster than a Summit. Kev is comparing older technology against newer technology and calling it a fair comparison, which I disagree with.

[Ross Moshinsky]

I don't consider 1/32" depth superficial. That's engraved at a more than acceptable depth for most projects. At 1/32" depth you're deep enough to color fill, sand, finish, ect ect ect.

I have a very similar laser to you Kev. I engrave wood at 500 dpi, 100 power, and 50 speed on lighter woods like Alder. I take it out of focus a bit to get a darker mark. If I need to color fill with transfer tape, I run it at 25 speed in focus. This is with an 8 year old 30W tube. I have no clue what the actual wattage is but I cut Romark all the way through at 8-10 power just like you so I'd say we're on a pretty level playing field.

The big difference between the Chinese laser and the Western lasers we're talking about is the Chinese laser can run at max speed and you have power in reserve to go deeper. That's what your test illustrated to me. The 30W LS900 engraved deep enough to color fill easily. Take it a bit out of focus and you'll get a darker mark. Also remember, the original post I said 35W. That extra 5W is significant. It should allow an increase in speed of roughly 15% or simply have that little bit of extra power to make that mark just a little deeper and darker.

[Rangarajan Saravana kumar]

I have a thought that the cutting takes more power with cost ratio in western machine rather chinese machines. So my suggestion is keep chinese for cutting rather engraving, because you
might do photographs, which is major minus in chinese and use a used small area western machine.

[Clark Pace]

The jcut is only 3500 and it's a 2013 model the laserrpro is a 2006 and rabbit is new

Are there other laser companies in the area? If there are several competition could be a factors. Is it a hobby? If so chinese may be a great way to go. Are you a little mechanical. That can help with chinese lasers.

I have run 3 universal lasers for a few years, but have 2 chinese lasers myself. Nice thing about the the china lasers is you don't have to go into a bunch dept to get started on a small business. My engrave quality is still really good, and I'm satisfied with the cutting.

I spent $3300 on my Redsail, and have been very happy. The software is ok. I still use corel and export my files into the program.

Would i like to have univeral. Of course, but I would have to spend $30k.

-------------

I would also add it also depends on what kind of money you make. Of course if you are pretty wealthy 30k may no be much to you with income to dept ratio.

[Kev Williams]

Pine, .140" thick. Burned all the way through it when I slowed it down to take that long. 52 seconds. Had to slow it down to a speed of 9 to get it to take that long. Plus, that's 333 dpi, so it's 10% more dense, but it's the only choice I have unless I go to 250 dpi.

And you did that with a 75w synrad, yes? Which I already agreed a 60w version of would equal or best my results...

I don't consider 1/32" superficial.

Doesn't matter what you, or I, think. It's what the customer thinks. I don't have a lot of 'wood' customers, but the first question out of nearly all the mouth's of those I do have, is "how deep can you go?". They don't want superficial.

Bottom line, then I'm done with this topic: The OP wanted to know the differences between used synrad lasers and new china lasers. AND his main purpose for a laser is to engrave logos and pictures into wood. ALL that I've done in this thread is to exactly and objectively illustrate those differences, because I just happen to have used synrads and a new china laser. And I did so by running a side by side test. And my comparisons were labeled "horrible".

[Scott Shepherd]

The OP wanted to know the differences between used synrad lasers and new china lasers. AND his main purpose for a laser is to engrave logos and pictures into wood. ALL that I've done in this thread is to exactly and objectively illustrate those differences, because I just happen to have used synrads and a new china laser. And I did so by running a side by side test. And my comparisons were labeled "horrible".

Only because you are comparing an OLD machine to a newer machine. Compare a 35W new Western machine to that, and it's a fair comparison. I see it all the time with computer related stuff. People say "I'd never use Apple, they are horrible", then you find out they are comparing Windows 7 to Apple's OS they tried once in 2004. All I'm saying is you need to compare similar year machines.

Speeds have been limited over the years on Western machines by the pulse rate available, not the speed available to them in the motors. Over the years, they have refined the pulse rates to allow higher speeds, which is why I say it's not right to compare ANY 10 year old machine to a machine made today. If you take offense to that, then I'm sorry, but it's a valid point when considering any laser.

[Niklas Bjornestal]

One important thing is, what will happen if the machine break down? If you can live with the machine standing still for 1-2 weeks and you have some technical skills the chinese laser will work fine. If you have time critical jobs or need a "plug and play" solution go for the laserpro or other "western" laser.
When i bought my first laser (a 40w redsail china laser) i was impressed by the quality (of the machine), but when compared with the laserpro i bought later the laserpro the quality of the laserpro was much better. I never had any big problems with any of them, but the laserpro felt much more reliable.

If i was to buy a new laser (i have sold the ones i had), i would buy a chinese laser if for hobby use, if i was to use it in a business i would buy either 2 chinese lasers just to have one as backup, or one western laser depending on the budget. I wouldn't trust just one chinese laser if i needed it to earn my living.

[Bert Kemp]

If you go with the Rabbit they have any parts you need in stock in Ohio. When I was there Ray gave me a tour and the parts room was loaded with pwr supplies, tubes, mirrors, lens, belts, just about any part that might need replacing he had in stock, and I'm sure its no more then 3 days anywhere lower 48 and overnight if you have to.Now if you import that might be a different story .

[Lucy Lee]

If you choose Chinese laser machine ,60w is better on the photo engraving than 80w and with more compatible price

Thank you guys for the help. My primary purpose is engraving logos and pictures on top of wood boxes. 8 inch by 8 inch is typical some a little bigger or smaller. Doing 15 or more a day. Hope that helps refine your answer as I am ready to purchase.