Agilent 7000

[cat4lyst]

Hello,

Is anyone here familiar with the differences in various iterations of agilent TQ. Specifically the difference between the 7000B, 7000C, 7000D and the 7010B mass spectrometers. I have found it a difficult to locate any specific differences in each generation.

thanks

[cat4lyst]

Seems like mainly it is scan speed differentiating these models.


Anyone care to chime in about running one of these in SQ scan mode only. Interestingly the data sheet shows the scan rates of the 7000B model is lower than a 5973 with performance electronics which seems odd. Am i missing something?

[Rndirk]

7000C user here. I think the difference between B and C was a slightly difference source design, EI versus EI extractor. Simply leading to more ions reaching the detector: a higher sensitivity.

I would not worry about the scan speed in scan mode. Quadrupoles (SQ or TQ) are not made to scan.

If you want to measure a lot of compounds in one run (like for instance pesticide screening) an important factor is the MRM speed; the amount of transitions it can scan in one second.

[cat4lyst]

Thanks for the reply. I believe the extractor source is an option on the 7000B as well as on the C model according to the literature.

Maybe i misunderstood your comment about quads not being made to scan. At my lab we routinely run several environmental methods written for full scan acquisition. Believe it or not there can be advantages to full scan depending on the work your doing. It I ask because the flexibility would be nice to have as an option with this mass spec.

Have you used your 7000 to acquire data in SQ mode?

[James_Ball]

We have the 7000C and use it more in full scan single quad mode than in MRM mode. It works great in both modes as well as SIM. We need it for doing some Pesticide work requiring MRM (Pesticides in Poultry Fat as one example) but it pays more bills running single quad full scan samples for volatiles and semivolatiles.

The vacuum system is far better than on any single quad instrument which gives it great sensitivity and low background.

There are no auto tune macros for doing BFB or DFTPP tunes so you have to manually tune it from the standard auto tune until it passes, but if you have experience manual tuning it is not a problem. I run most of my standard single quad analysis with the Gain Factor set to 0.1 - 0.3 which gives sensitivity comparable to our 5973 and 5975 instruments.

[cat4lyst]

Awesome. James I appreciate you chiming in. Your usage sounds similar to what we have planned for this instrument and this feedback is exactly what I was hoping to hear. I think manual tuning should be fine but i did not know that piece of information, thanks for the heads up.

We have a few a couple "comparable" bruker TQ's in house, it will be interesting to examine performance between these.