Choosing between Thermos's ICP and Perkin-Elmer's

[Dwain Zsadanyi]

We are in the process of purchasing a dual view simultaneous ICP. We
have to make a choice between Thermo Scientific's ICP 6300 Duo System
or the Perkin Elmer Optima-7300 DV. We would like to get some
opinions.
Thanks for your time,
Jesse De La Cruz
jdelacruz at oecusa dot com

[Joerg Hau]

Post by Dwain Zsadanyi
We are in the process of purchasing a dual view simultaneous ICP. We
have to make a choice between Thermo Scientific's ICP 6300 Duo System
or the Perkin Elmer Optima-7300 DV. We would like to get some
opinions.
Thanks for your time,
Jesse De La Cruz
jdelacruz at oecusa dot com

Hi,

independent from the kind of instrument in question, I usually apply the
following rules:

(1) Define what the instrument MUST be able to do in YOUR lab. That may be
something technical ("exceed resolution X at point y"), or a specification
like "quantify x pg of compound A per kg of y".

(2) Define what the instrument SHOULD be able to do ("nice to have").

(3) Define your budget.

(4) Contact the manufacturers, tell them them (1)-(3). Set a reasonable
deadline for the answers.

(5) Collect the answers and make a (pre-)selection.

(6) If necessary, request a date in the demo lab where they can measure
your "real" samples, either in your presence or without you. Run the same
(!) samples with all potential manufacturers.

(7) If you're still in doubt, watch the service they can provide you, the
interoperability with your other equipment, the data format used, etc.

Cheers + HTH,

- Joerg

[DTM]

Post by Dwain Zsadanyi
We are in the process of purchasing a dual view simultaneous ICP. We
have to make a choice between Thermo Scientific's ICP 6300 Duo System
or the Perkin Elmer Optima-7300 DV. We would like to get some
opinions.
Thanks for your time,
Jesse De La Cruz
jdelacruz at oecusa dot com

I recently went through this same scenario last year and was trying
to decide between these same two systems. I finally bought a PE 7300
DV for the following reasons;
1. pricing was about the same
2. We previously had a Optima 3000 DV and were very familiar and happy
with the software/hardware. The software upgrade to the 7300 DV was
not a giant leap in technology. The software was very similar but had
some nice added features. Shallow learning curve.
3. This is , I believe, PE's 3 generation system whereas it was
Thermo's 1 st generation system (of this type).
4. I wasn't completely sold on Thermo's smaller is better footprint
for the 6300. I had a bad experience a number of years ago with a
Nicolet/Thermo system (FTIR) that used the same principle (smaller is
better) and have been cautious every since. Even the service engineers
complained about accessibility.
5. Service (in my area) for PE has always been good.

I also used some of the rules defined by Joerg for my decision. Main
one, run YOUR samples on each system see that they can do the job.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Dan Mathers

[Samite Alchemist]

Another way to decide is with references _that do the same type of
analysis._

If you are doing unusual matrices, tungsten, for example, then a
positive referral from an environmental lab won't mean too much.
Sample load should be on par, too. If you process thousands of
samples per month, your needs will be different than the once-a-week
lab.

Samite Alchemist
(who used to work for an ICP manufacturer)