Brian/Jeff, we are putting a lot of resources towards the pair of you.
But, I do want to point out that we have made some suggestions as well as sent certain items for testing on one of your ends and we have not heard back. We have also provided free return shipping labels to get "defective" carts back for us to test - and my understanding from TS is that we have not received back from you. At some point in a technical support exchange - part of the process weighs on the user to perform things that we ask. Without it - we can only try and duplicate on our end - and we thus far have not been able to duplicate the issues from either one of you.
Here is what we have done over the past week and half:
1) Kelly pulled 4 sets from inventory for testing this specifically. She tested one entire set with PK ink in each position to test both the cartridges and the PK ink. We tested PK because you both mentioned that the PK cart leaked. We thought there could be a possible connection. So, we tested the ink and the carts at the same time. Everything passed.
2) Because we use the R2880 as one of our ink QC testing platforms we checked with QC to see if they have experienced any problems. Within the same time frame and actually longer as your reported problems, QC has used more than 20 sets from the same cartridge production build. QC wasn't testing cartridges per se, but there were no problems with the cartridges either. (also no problems with the inks we were testing!)
3) Our R2880s are impeccably maintained. But, we also keep an R2880 that has a crappy head and is about 5 years old and we do not maintain it at the same level as the others. We're testing three sets of cartridges on it to see if these problems can be duplicated due to poor maintenance or substandard equipment. This particular R2880 is not a dog by any means - it is just in rough shape by our standards. It could be more indicative of a users printer than a printer maintained for R&D or QC.
This is a lot of resources we are putting towards this. But, we also want back your cartridges that were leaking or draining so we can see if there is a flaw or/and we can duplicate your symptoms on our end with your specific cartridges. Very important!
FWIW, I use the R2880 for much of my R&D because the cartridges are easy to work with and very bullet-proof. I wrote the first half of Piezography PRO on it - and we designed the preliminary new Piezography PRO inks on it. We will finish the design and initial testing of the new Piezography PRO inks on it. Nearly all of our inks which we manufacture are roughed in using an R2880, then alpha and beta on the R2880, and then final approval on the R2880. Even our Claria replacements for six ink printers are proofed on an R2880 - even the HDR inks - and all of the many inks we produce for other ink companies. We use all ink channels on an R2880 to test one particular ink color or shade not because its an R2880 but because the cartridges are just so bullet proof. The R2880 is no better than the other platforms we use for QC and testing. But, as a result we go through 100s of sets of these R2880 cartridges ourselves. Because we sell and use so many, we have enormous build runs made for us using an approved build list. And they have to be perfect because I use this platform for the majority of my development. I do not believe that there is a more proven product anywhere.
Epson has their cartridges manufactured in China - so this is not a China vs OEM thing. I do not believe that there is any fundamental flaw in the design or that they are substandard in any way. But, I do believe that you both have something in common that is causing your similar problems and we just do not yet know what that is. And it would be enormously helpful to us both and possibly others if you would just please send us your "defective" or mis-performing cartridges. That more than anything would be really really helpful. There is nothing more we can do for you guys on our own that we are not already doing!