The following questions recently appeared in the sci.chem.analytical newsgroup when a customer inquired whether some brands of GCs resolve peaks better than others:

Mr. Steve Bentjen wrote:

We have recently started working with a Shimadzu brand GC-FID. Previous work with the same samples/analytes on a HP [Hewlitt Packard] brand gave more resolved peaks---especially near the baseline. We would like to get similar peaks using the Shimadzu [GC].

We have checked out quite a few potential problem areas in conjunction with the manufacturer and all seems to check out fine (gas leaks, carrier gas flows, etc.). The column (DB5) when taken out of the Shimadzu and used in the HP yields nice sharp peaks. So it [the column] checks out okay.

Does the GC-FID brand make that much of a difference? Has anyone out there had a similar experience?


The following response was posted to Mr. Bentjen's query:

To: sbentjen@idaho.tds.net
From: edkchem@aol.com

Does your Shimadzu still use a steel clad column vespel or graphite ferrule with a split nut? We use to have fits, especially on temperature programs with the column nuts coming loose. Also, if you have a [Shimadzu] GC-14A.... toss it!

How important is customer satisfaction to Shimadzu? Where is the customer follow-up after the sale? One has to wonder where the Shimadzu sales, tech support and service personnel are hiding? Don't go in search of problems....buy from a respected vendor!

n.b. Prospective customers should note that Shimadzu manufactures and sells a GC-8, GC-14 and a GC-17. The Shimadzu GC-MS is usually coupled to the GC-17. If customer(s) are reporting problems with the peak resolution of a Shimadzu GC-14, what are the chances of recording poorly resolved peaks when using other Shimadzu Gas Chromatographs including the GC-17? It would seem that the customer who recommended the "tossing" of a Shimadzu GC-14 is speaking from first-hand experience. Take this advice to heart before signing any sales agreement with Shimadzu!