Chromatography Forum

Hi,

I am in the process of obtaining quotes for a single quad GC-MS workhorse as a replacement for our aged Agilent 5972/5890 and Thermo Trace MS systems.

I am looking at the Agilent 5977MS/7890GC with auto sampler due to familarity with Agilent software and ease of maintenance. As we are a UK university, the chosen system will be based on price, future flexibility i.e allowing solid samples or attaching an headspace to the inlet and also the ease of software use by the students to run/interpret their own samples.

In the past, Waters have given high price quotes and my analyst experience 10-15 years ago of Empower (Waters) / Turbochrom (Perkin Elmer) was that they not user friendly. Shimadzu is not liked by a supporting academic also.

Is there any comparable systems that are worth a look i.e. from any of the above suppliers, Bruker, Thermo or another supplier I have missed?

Thanks in advance

I would have a look to Agilent with Gerstel sampler (upgraded CTC, with better integration in Chemstation), so with all the upgrades sampler offer there is no need for Christmas tree.

I think Agilent is best choice. there is no close instrument in comparison to Agilent, so go on and get 5977.

In July, I got a new 7890 with a 5977 and Agilent's version of the Gerstel sampler. I was also able to get the column-switching (Dean's switch) option. To me, real samples are too complex not to be able to do heart-cutting. Very happy with it. In my career, I've been fortunate to not have to purchase anything else. Every time this comes up, I push very hard for Agilent because it's the most reliable equipment out there. You pay a little more up front but later, you'll be very happy that it's running every day. Good luck!

I have been using Agilent(HP) since the 5995 and 5970 all the way up to the 7000QQQ with the exception of the 5977 and I have always been happy with them. If you can still use the Chemstation option as the data analysis it will probably be a little more user friendly than the Mass Hunter version, but either should suit your purpose. There should also still be some built in user controls so that you can lock students out of certain parts of the software if necessary.

Agilent are certainly very good, so you can't go far wrong with them, and there are so many Agilent instruments around that even when they become officially obsolete, it's usually possible to find someone to keep them going for quite a few more years. They are a good choice.

On solid samples: I think that's a bit of a Thermo speciality, isn't it? I don't know who else offers this. They have the special police-truncheon thing that can be used to introduce a source under vacuum, complete with solid sample. The question is: how often do you actually need to do this?

On Shimadzu and your "supporting academic": I would guess you are buying this equipment with public funds. I understand completely how this happens in UK universities, but frankly, it is just unacceptable to discount a reputable manufacturer on the basis of personal likes and dislikes when using public money. I take the view, very strongly, that anyone spending public cash is under an obligation to get quotes and carry out a proper, balanced assessment. Otherwise we get into a situation where (a) the public don't necessarily get good value, and (b) public funds are being used to support one commercial organisation to the prejudice of another, which is fundamentally unfair. If you go over a certain limit within the UK (I can't remember what it is, off-hand, but I'm pretty sure it's way more than a typical GC-MS), you are in any case obliged to go through the EU tender process, and if you go to tender, you can expect to be queried on your decision by unsuccessful suppliers. It's happened to me on the last two purchases I've made. I've noticed, too, that auditors are getting very canny.

The other difficulty with the opinions of individual academics is that they're often misguided: based on one bad experience as a PhD student, using an instrument that is no longer in production, supported by an engineer who's retired, and set up badly in another university by someone who's also long gone. I've gone through phases of heartily loathing Agilent, Waters and Bruker, and deeply mistrusting Thermo and Shimadzu, but have come to realise that every one of them (and of course there are plenty of others too; they're just the companies whose equipment I've used) has a great deal to offer, with a lot of really good instrumentation out there. No more loathing, I actually quite like all of them now!

Sorry about the rant.