Trotec VS Epilog (yes, another thread)

[Rich Harman]

I don't have an answer for you but I can say that I've had the same experience with a Universal laser. The Universal had more power but would cut the exact same file about 1/4th (probably slower) as fast as my Shenhui. It was painfully slow. I think it had to do with the path having many short segments. They were 120 tooth gears, each tooth being about 1/8" with a proper involute shape. It didn't matter what speed we told it to cut at, larger features would cut normally.

Why my cheap Chinese laser can follow the path at speed just fine and the expensive mainstream brand can't, is a mystery to me.

[Keith Winter]

I have been a big supporter of Trotec, but I would say I was very impressed with Universal's newer job control like software. I saw it last week show and I thought wow, this is very much like job control, it even had a few features I would definitely use and liked better than Job Control. Also Universal has the ability to cycle through and run jobs from the laser itself which is an advantage for repetitive jobs over Trotec. Does Epilog have the ability to scroll jobs and run them from the laser lcd screen itself like universal? If so that would be an advantage I would think.

I know your question was Epilog vs Trotec, however I would say in my opinion, it's now a closer race between Universal and Trotec, instead of Trotec vs Epilog. They all three are very nice lasers, but I think Epilog has fallen behind a bit. Trotec 1, Universal 2, Epilog 3 is how I would rate them, with universal making big gains in the past year or two closing the software gap. Epilog really hasn't closed the software gap Trotec has over the other lasers at all in my opinion. Also I see more complaints of Epilog issues on this board than Universal or Trotec. Leading me to assume (please correct me if I'm wrong) that they have more issues than Universals or Trotecs.

Hi,

I know, we've got lots of threads about which one is better but most of them got the same answers:
Choose based on support you get from your rep, Trotecs built like tanks, Epilogs are USA made etc.
But, having two of Epilog machines (Zing and Fusion M2) I want a Trotec machine, because most of you say Trotec is so much better. But why? Really?

I've tested the Trotec Speedy 360 before buying Fusion M2 and it cuts the files we normally cut much slower than Epilogs machine.
The files had lots of small details and that's where Trotec had problems. For example if we run the job at 100% speed it would take 28 minutes to complete, more than 3 times longer. The same file took 8 minutes on Epilog (Mini/Helix takes about 8min 30 seconds). When we adjusted Speedy's speed to 1% it would cut the file within 11-12 minutes, still 50% longer. Do you think it is a machine, or driver's issue?
Speedy 400 and SP500 machines are even slightly slower (close to Zing's speed).

Another thing is a Job manager. You always have to send a file to Job Manager on Trotecs machine first, then place them on the bed and then start the job. With Epilog you can send directly to machine from Corel Draw. No need to send it to Job Manager. Epilogs job manager gives you a preview of your job and the name of your file. Trotec doesn't have previews and you've got to rename the jobs as they don't transfer files names as job names. I know might sound as not an issue but when you have 100+ jobs to run through the day, it does make a difference.

Another thing - networking. It is very handy to have your machine connected to your network and not to one machine with USB. Not sure why Trotec doesn't have that option.

Yes, we don't engrave much, but is it really the only benefit from having a Trotec? Faster engraving, and, maybe, longer tube life?
I don't say Epilog is better. Every time I call their support I promise myself it will be the last my call to them - just useless. Also every day I find some new bug with the job manager and Fusion machine (Zing/Mini works just fine), Epilog says it's a "feature", not the bug.
Are there any owners of both brands working with them on daily basis? Which one do you like the best? I hope you can convince me to buy Trotec as our next machine but at the moment I can't see that selling point.

[Keith Winter]

I would add to this, cutting isn't a great measure of the Trotec speed. Typically when cutting you are limited by the power of the laser much more so than how fast the laser can go. When cutting you are running at fractions of the total speed the laser can go when engraving. Great speed is not required to cut. Engraving is where the Trotecs excel, so if you are mainly cutting that levels the field significantly for all lasers no matter the brand and should run similar cut times just as Ross Said in this quote.

1. Were both machines the exact same power?
2. Did you actually monitor the cut order?

My guess is the Epilog, for whatever reason, did your cut job in a logical way. My guess is the Trotec, for whatever reason, jumped around doing a little cutting here and a little cutting there. If that was the case, it will add a serious amount of time to the cut job because the laser is constantly "wasting" time moving while not cutting.

The reality is, the two machines, if they have similar power tubes, should run similar cut times. The only reason they wouldn't is inefficient path planning.

[Scott Shepherd]

I have been a big supporter of Trotec, but I would say I was very impressed with Universal's newer job control like software. I saw it last week show and I thought wow, this is very much like job control, it even had a few features I would definitely use and liked better than Job Control. Also Universal has the ability to cycle through and run jobs from the laser itself which is an advantage for repetitive jobs over Trotec. Does Epilog have the ability to scroll jobs and run them from the laser lcd screen itself like universal? If so that would be an advantage I would think.

I've said for years that I think Universal has the best software in the business. My perfect machine would be a Trotec with Universal's software.

[Ivan Shuliak]

Hi Keith,
Yes, laser cutting speed should be about the same in theory, but they depend heavily on driver's side. You could tick a few boxes here and there and the machine will cut 3 times longer with the same speed and power settings.
I've never seen or test Universal machines, but will be at large show next month so will test as many vendors as possible
What I also like with Epilog, that they've got a dashboard and your jobs temporarily stored on the machine and you can scroll though them without the need to use your computer every time (probably that's what you meant with Universal).

[Keith Winter]

Hi Keith,
Yes, laser cutting speed should be about the same in theory, but they depend heavily on driver's side. You could tick a few boxes here and there and the machine will cut 3 times longer with the same speed and power settings.
I've never seen or test Universal machines, but will be at large show next month so will test as many vendors as possible
What I also like with Epilog, that they've got a dashboard and your jobs temporarily stored on the machine and you can scroll though them without the need to use your computer every time (probably that's what you meant with Universal).

I mean there is a physical lcd pad on the laser you can scroll through on the universals and rerun the job from that. Trotec has no such feature.

[Ali Kemp]

I would be curious to test this file too. I have an 80w speedy 400.

[Ivan Shuliak]

I mean there is a physical lcd pad on the laser you can scroll through on the universals and rerun the job from that. Trotec has no such feature.

Yes, trotec doesn't have that but Epilog does and it is indeed very handy.

[Keith Winter]

Ivan one other thing to look at. Since you cut a lot this might be important. The Trotec is at a disadvantage when it comes to smoke removal when cutting by the choice to use a 2" port on the downdraft table. This essentially cripples it's ability to remove the smoke from the bottom and it has to be dragged across the top of your material to the much more powerful top vents when cutting on the 400, there is simply not enough airflow from that 2" port. Universal on the other hand uses (two) 4" ports on their larger machines and has engineered them in such a way the downdraft table can take advantage of the full airflow of both ports. Top airflow can even be blocked increasing bottom airflow more. If you attempted to block the Trotec upper flow you would end up with a smokey mess because the one upper 4" port is completely separate from the one 2" lower exhaust meaning you'd only have a 2" port pulling smoke out unlike the universal where you'd get full pull from both 4" ports regardless of if the top is blocked off or not.

[Scott Shepherd]

I believe all machines have their strengths and weaknesses. I haven't seen the perfect machine yet. I believe I can craft a file that will show the strengths of each machine and highlight the weakness of the competitors. I think ideally, we'd like to see features from the Epilog, Universal, and Trotec, all in one machine. There are things that each brand excels in, and that's why I believe it's near impossible to give someone an internet recommendation for a machine when we don't know any of the things they will do.

Just as an example, I've always said that I think the Epilog's driver system is superior for people that are into art and making unique things. You put it on the screen, you hit print, and it goes. The Universal always felt more like it was suited for mechanical people, like engineers, etc. If you want to control every little thing and be able to tweak things that wouldn't matter to an artist, then that's a better machine. I think the Trotec is like that as well. It you want to push the limits of what can be done, then it's incredibly powerful. However, most people don't have a clue what their machines are capable of.

I'd like to see the Trotec with Universal's software and a LCD screen on the machine, like the Universal PLS series (if they still put them on those machines- they seemed to remove them from some models).

It would also be REALLY nice if actual users had a LOT more input into the features. Sadly, that's not the case. I made my case for changes 3-4 years ago and I have yet to see them in the software.

[Brian Leavitt]

The only things that really bother me about both Trotec and ULS (newer ones) is the fact that the PC has to be on and connected in order for either of them to run, and at least with ULS you can only run one machine per computer. Neither of these is the case with Epilog. I run all my lasers from one PC and I really couldn't have it any other way. Also, I can send a file to all of my lasers, shut off the computer, and still be able to run them without issue. Of course, my Epilog has not been without its problems. I got the Fusion when it first came out and I had a ton of issues with it. They were all finally sorted out a few months ago, and it's been great since then, but for a while there I hated Epilog.

[Gary Hair]

the fact that the PC has to be on and connected in order for either of them to run

That is good and it's bad, depending on your situation. My GCC had a job history that I could scroll through on the panel, and I used that quite a bit to rerun jobs. At first I missed that on the Trotec but it lost its draw when I saw that being connected had its benefits - WYSIWYG for one, and interactive settings changes for another. The biggest one, however, is the ability to move the carriage to where I need it on the job and then place the job in Job Control how I want it relative to that point - centered, top left, bottom right, etc. Can't do that with a disconnected machine.

and at least with ULS you can only run one machine per computer.

The Trotec is USB so you would only be limited by the number of USB ports on your computer. I figure if I have more Trotecs than USB ports then I can probably afford another computer...

[Keith Winter]

Gary for people like us that appreciate the LCD job screen on the laser itself, you might be interested to know on the Universal it's not an either or type of thing. You wouldn't have to give up that lcd screen or give up job control. On the Universal you get both. Whereas on the Trotec you give up the lcd job screen on the laser, and on the Epilog you give up the Job Control software but gain the lcd screen. I've expressed my desire for them to add an lcd screen to the Trotec National Sales manager and many others at Trotec but they said that's not likely to happen. Maybe if enough people asked they'd consider it. However for now you really have to decide what's important to you...

The Trotec is USB so you would only be limited by the number of USB ports on your computer. I figure if I have more Trotecs than USB ports then I can probably afford another computer...

I think you're incorrect there. You must have a separate job control to run each laser, you couldn't have two lasers running from one machine I don't believe.

Now let me give you another possiblity. Hypothetically using a 2 laser setup you would need at least 2 pcs however YOU CAN use a third pc also if you'd like to make all the job control files and set it up with file sharing and the other two pcs actually running the lasers would pull the files from the third pc essentially making the two pcs attached to the lasers dummy pcs. Why you would want to do this you might ask? Let's say you had another 1 or 2 lasers. So 4 lasers total. If you had a 5th pc creating all the files you wouldn't have to train the operators of the pcs to actually do anything other than select the file and press play. So one guy could be making all the files, and the other could be changing out all the materials and pressing play for the next job. Or if you were a single operator you could make all the files in the morning on one pc and print them all in the afternoon. It's meant for a high production area. I've never tried it myself but all of this is possible according to Trotec if you were so inclined.

[Keith Winter]

See my post above, you could use $350 pcs to power the lasers and one pc to create all the files. So all you're talking about is a few hundred dollars per pc extra. In the grand scheme of things I wouldn't eliminate Trotec for this alone, it's not as bad as you think. Additionally perhaps ULS has something similar I don't know.

The only things that really bother me about both Trotec and ULS (newer ones) is the fact that the PC has to be on and connected in order for either of them to run, and at least with ULS you can only run one machine per computer. Neither of these is the case with Epilog. I run all my lasers from one PC and I really couldn't have it any other way. Also, I can send a file to all of my lasers, shut off the computer, and still be able to run them without issue. Of course, my Epilog has not been without its problems. I got the Fusion when it first came out and I had a ton of issues with it. They were all finally sorted out a few months ago, and it's been great since then, but for a while there I hated Epilog.

[Gary Hair]

I've expressed my desire for them to add an lcd screen to the Trotec National Sales manager and many others at Trotec but they said that's not likely to happen. Maybe if enough people asked they'd consider it.

That would take a major redesign of the laser and from what I've been told, they don't like to do big changes, they prefer small incremental changes. It wouldn't stop me from buying another Trotec, the other features make me forget about that very small loss.

I think you're incorrect there.

Wouldn't be the first time...

You must have a separate job control to run each laser, you couldn't have two lasers running from one machine I don't believe.

Considering that JC is interactive with the laser, you are absolutely right. But could you have multiple instances of Job Control running on one computer?

Now let me give you another possiblity. Hypothetically using a 2 laser setup you would need at least 2 pcs however YOU CAN use a third pc also if you'd like to make all the job control files and set it up with file sharing and the other two pcs actually running the lasers would pull the files from the third pc essentially making the two pcs attached to the lasers dummy pcs.

I'm doing that now. I have my main design computer and a secondary computer that runs my DCS UV printer and the Trotec. I have JC installed on both computers and process jobs on either computer, whichever is handy at the time. I guess it would be fairly easy to set it up so you save the files on your "design" computer and then place them in the proper folder for the working computers.