Direct to Garment > DTG Equipment

EPSON F3070 vs Brother GTX Pro B, and why we are going with the EPSON.

(1/7) > >>

blue moon:
As many here know, I was sold on the EPSON very early on, but I also promised to reach out before buying anything and give Brother a chance.
Jon Potter brought up some very good points about Brother so I decided to dig into it deeper.

For those that don’t want to read the whole thing, Brother is nice, but EPSON is better and cheaper to run.

Now, back to the story. . .
EPSON has some pretty amazing technology built in. The first step was making sure that the Brother was not behind and in any of the areas offered by EPSON.

-While the printers are not the same, they are very similar and white ink circulation/re-circulation was addressed in both units.

-bulk ink storage is used in both, but EPSON requires daily shaking of the white ink (probably the biggest negative it has) while Brother GTX Pro B has a small impeller that does that for you. Win one for Brother! On the other hand, Brother has to be refilled from a large bulk container and that does not really sound like a good idea. Swapping a bag with ink certainly sounds a lot cleaner if nothing else. We’ll call this a tie with an edge to Brother if ties were not allowed.

- One trick that EPSON has allows it to finish printing correctly even if a nozzle(s) clogs up. It is rather clever and will provide correct image even if there is a problem. Both printers have stellar designs to make sure there are no issues with clogging, but EPSON goes a step further and it assumes there will be clogs (which I wholeheartedly agree with based on our experience) and it figured out how to keep printing CORRECTLY even with heads not firing at 100%. Score EPSON.

-Similarly, Brother seems to have spent a lot of effort to design a new head that would be reliable and long lasting. EPSON has done the same, but then went a step further and made it work in any condition possible including low/high humidity and high dust and dirt. Their system is loosely based on technology used to print on roll fabric in industrial settings that has been around for almost 20 years. Their goal was to make it work anywhere. To me Brother feels like something designed for desktop/office environment and EPSON feels like something that belongs in a factory. I think this is a big departure from the current idea that the DTG needs to be in humidity, dust and temperature controlled environment. While those are available, for many of us that meant setting up in office space rather than on the production floor. I should not have to tell anybody reading this how much lint, dust and heat are produced by our dryers! EPSON supposedly will not care where it’s set up. If it proves to be true, advantage goes to EPSON.

-To really make it industrial, EPSON has designed the F3070 so any repairs are quick and easily done on site by the staff. For example, the head change is only 2-3 minutes and it’s user replaceable. I think Brother said something like 20 min for theirs which is really good, but still shows that EPSON F3070 is a step ahead. EPSON supposedly will ship replacement parts overnight. I am not sure what the Brother’s policy is, but they were proud of their customer support rating and it seems they have earned it. Overall customer satisfaction was the biggest reason Brother was even considered as an option. But in the end, EPSON wins as the design is more industrial which translates into easier repairs and maintenance.

-One new feature that BROTHER keeps bringing up is the high-low platen sensor. This is a good idea as we have had cases where we printed a shirt after a hoodie and forgot to adjust the distance. The print does not come out as crisp and often needs to be redone. BROTHER GTX Pro B has addressed that with a high and low platen sensor. If I understand correctly, and I did ask, after the warning, operator has to adjust the platen height. I have no idea how long that takes, but it's probably rather quick. EPSON on the other hand decided to take it a step further and the printer auto adjusts to the correct level! So the operator can feed a hood and then a t-shirt (or the other way around) without any other interactions needed. Printer reads the distance and self adjusts to the correct height. Score one for EPSON.

-One thing caught my eye on the EPSON. It has dedicated maintenance and cleaning solution tanks alongside the inks. As I understand these will reduce the amount of wasted ink when a head clearing or some other maintenance is required. Not sure if Brother has anything like it. There are only 5 containers in the images, but maybe there is an internal tank somewhere. No call here as I don’t know enough, but so far it looks like EPSON.

-Both printers are supposedly designed for a contract decorator, but BROTHER has a high cost of ink which on average costs $0.25 per shirt more than EPSON. I used the equipment, labor, speed and ink cost in the calculations and even presented it to BROTHER, but they were not willing to budge. Their ink cost is $170 per liter while EPSON is at $150. Additionally, Brother does not offer discounts on ink unless you buy 9! (yes, nine) units and EPSON is providing an ink discount at 2 and then at 5 again. For a large multi unit (contract) decorator, Brother ink is about 40% more expensive! Many of us will never need that many units, but I can see us using 2 easily. In that case Brother is 20% more. In our world a $0.30 difference in ink cost is more than the total margin on product and we just can NOT justify the extra expense. When asked, Brother leadership said they were OK with being more expensive as they bring other things to the table. They mentioned better tech, better service/relationship with customers and lack of integration with production software on the EPSON's side. I have a feeling they did not really understand what is inside the F3070 and that there are several companies out there that will integrate the EPSON F3070 into the complete production and fulfillment package (we are going with smake). As far as the service, Brother is taunting how good they are and by all accounts that seems to be the case. Complaints about Brother seem to be very rare I am not aware of any. That does not happen very often in this industry, there is always somebody with an issue. But this also presumes the EPSON service is sub par or somehow unacceptable. Even if it is not up to Brother’s level, EPSON has good service and takes care of its customers. So not an issue either. In the end, cost of ink trumps and slight service advantage Brother might have. EPSON tech seems to be better so we will chalk this one to EPSON.

-Speed. . . Brother lists 42 full front shirts per hour and EPSON says 80 or slightly more. That is about double! Speed on its own is not everything as in some cases it might be more than the employees can handle. Additionally, Bother is cheaper by a good amount which would bring the cost per shirt down if there wasn’t for the cost of ink. But for those of us that will be looking to print as many shirts as possible,  EPSON has a leg up. It leaves more room to grow without having to buy another unit. On the other hand, two GTX Pro B’s will print at about the speed of one EPSON F3070, but will also provide redundancy. The problem is, two Brothers are more expensive than one EPSON. Considering that these printers are designed to run one, two or even three shifts per day at full speed, I feel that the EPSON is a better fit for such market. Brother requires you to print something like 1,500 shirts per month to justify buying the unit. If not, supposedly the ink goes bad since it has a 3 month shelf life and the containers they sell it in hold 4500 shirts worth of ink (as I understand it). In any case, EPSON is faster and cost of ownership per shirt if we don’t include the ink is about the same as Brother. Buying a Brother would be like getting a 6 color automatic press instead of an 8 color. Another one for EPSON.

-For anybody interested in EPSON’s garment decorating history, here is a video showing them working with Robustelli all the way back to 2001. My understanding is that the F3070 is like a mini Monna Lisa. Not sure how much technology transferred over to the F3070, but at least it shows they have a significant history of decorating fabric in industrial settings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-poLUYKmew

Please consider the information here as an opinion. Neither of the units is in regular production (Brother started shipping few weeks ago so a very limited number might be out and the EPSON is still about 4-6 weeks away from first units being delivered to the customers) and I have not used either of them. All the opinions are just that, opinions based on the conversations with the manufacturers and the manufacturer’s reps. In EPSON’s case I had an opportunity to go to their R&D lab and get some inside info. Some confidential knowledge was shared about the Brother by one of the beta testers/person involved in development. While only the time will tell which unit is more reliable and thus most likely the better choice, at this point they both look good, but EPSON just offers a bit more.

 Pierre

blue moon:
please let me know if you see any gaping holes in the logic here. Any criticism (of the constructive kind) is very welcome. Since we have not yet placed the deposit, I will gladly order a Brother if it is the right choice (means I am a dumbass and missed something really important).
thanx,
pierre

ericheartsu:
this info rocks Pierre. thank you!

brandon:
Thank you! Going down this road soon

zanegun08:
Great write up, but what pre-treater are you getting it with? 

Also what is the ballpark on cost of these?

If I were to get an entry level DTG,  I like the Epson over anything else, however I still don't love the quality of DTG, and the industrial ones at 300k+ are too expensive for an ROI unless you can really automate your workflow and have the business which we do not.

Always interesting technology though, I missed this one at Impressions Expo, I saw the smaller ones but probably walked right by this bigger one as it looks the same!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page