Here are the thoughts I recently gathered:
GC/MS Instrument Proposal December 13, 2012
Eight years we have relied upon Agilent for all gas chromatography of our products and Shimadzu for our mass spec testing. During the ninth year we were able to rely upon Agilent for our GC testing perfectly well. We were not able to rely upon our Shimadzu for GC/MS.
We are now met with the replacement of this critical instrument in our lab. The challenges of the past year are able to be removed. The opportunity in front of us is the decision for how long we keep these issues away.
The choices presented to us range from $20,000 to over $250,000. Our best choice lies somewhere in the middle.
The Choices:
Of the many options to be considered in this opportunity there are only four worthy of mention:
A. Used Shimadzu QP 2010
B. New Shimadzu QP 2010Ultra
C. Used Agilent 6890/5973
D. New Agilent 7890/5975
Option A:
A used Shimadzu has been quoted at $23,900 for a QP2010 system by GenTech Scientific. The advantage is that this is the cheapest system and is a direct replacement of what we currently have.
The disadvantage is that this is a direct replacement of what we currently have. There is no logical reason to expect this instrument to perform any better than our current model. Shimadzu’s engineering cycle for the 2010 is at the end which means parts will not be available in five years. The $23,900 plus and additional estimated $5000 for unknowns makes this an expensive short-term solution; expect up to $6000/year cost of ownership of instrument only.
Option B:
A new Shimadzu is quoted at $71,356.94 for an Ultra model. This is a step up from what we currently have as it allows two injectors and columns into the MSD which allows for all testing we do on GC to also be done on GC/MS. This would greatly improve our production troubleshooting as well as hasten research discovery.
However, the disadvantage is that this is another Shimadzu and their engineering cycle will become obsolete in an unacceptable time. There is no reason to expect more than ten years from this option rating it around $7100/year cost of ownership of instrument only.
Switching to Agilent:
Something interesting happens when considering Agilent: We achieve redundancy.
Agilent’s systems are able to be configured to run multiple detectors at the same time which means an investment in an Agilent system grants us an immediate redundancy of our current GC. Should anything happen to that instrument we would be devastated for up to the three months; the lead-time their service department is currently running and is expected to maintain through 2013. Having the redundancy is a value of $17,500 from the quotes of a used 6890; our current workhorse.
Option C:
A used 6890 with a 5973 attached is quoted at $57,915 and is reasonable to expect an addition $10,000 to have it configured to run multiple detectors as would be best for our company. This is the previous model of Agilent for both GC and MS. However, Agilent’s engineering is based upon improving their previous models and the 5890’s we used in college are very similar to the 7890’s being made today. Our nine year old 6890 has performed flawlessly and parts are expected to be available for ten additional years. The 6890 is slated for obsoletion in the next two years. We should achieve a life expectancy of 15 years making cost of ownership $4533/year; instrument only.
Option D:
A new 7890 with a 5975 attached is quoted at $82,421.40. This price is configured to how it shall be used within our company and the installation costs are expected to be plumbing gasses only; plan around $500. The new model allows for all of our testing being able to be done by GC or GC/MS at the same time and grants immediate security in our testing/research by having another instrument to runs our methods. University of Cincinnati’s GeoChem department purchased this instrument earlier this year and it has the reliability that is expected to be had by Agilent. This product is expect to have a life of 25 years in our lab making cost of ownership $3320/year; instrument only.
Recommendation: December 13, 2012
Shimadzu has harmed us. A short life cycle in our conditions and an engineering cycle of seven years leads to a higher cost for the instrument despite appearing to be a lower price initially. Choosing them again at this critical juncture shall harm us again within the next decade.
Agilent has 80% of the market for good reason. Our Agilent has spent its entire life a mere three feet from our Shimadzu. Yet it remains in proper operation and has no expectations of changing.
Our Shimadzu is dead.
We will best set-up our Senior, Research, and Analytical chemistry needs for success by selecting the most versatile and reliable tool for the jobs. Agilent should be the only consideration. The cost savings of the used and previous generation instrument is expected to be consumed by its life expectancy and proper configuration.
The Agilent 7890/5975 is the best choice for our company.
We must make this decision before December 31, 2012 to take advantage of $35,700 in competitor trade-in. This may not be available in 2013. There is also the issue of advanced depreciation through the IRS’ Section 179 which may make more sense of 2012 purchase.
