MBM Triumph 4305 Stack Paper Cutter Review

MBM Triumph 4305 Stack Paper CutterAre you in the market for a stack paper cutter, or do you use a cheap stack cutter that is inaccurate or seems to fall apart at the most inopportune times? One great stack cutter you should look at is the MBM Triumph 4305 stack paper cutter (found here). This is a great new or upgrade cutter for your business. This is my review.

MBM manufactures Destroyit paper shredders, Kutrimmer guillotine paper trimmers and Triumph stack cutters. One thing all these machines have in common is German engineering and build. From the ground up, these machines are designed to hold up and last.

The Triumph 4305 is a manual stack cutter. Don’t be fooled by thinking manual means this cutter is basic or entry level. It is geared and designed to cut up to 1 ½” of paper in a single pass. I can tell you from personal experience that the cutting handle is extremely easy to use. I have even used my own pinky finger to pull the handle and cut a stack of paper. It really is that easy.

For those of you who do not know, the Triumph 4305 is the successor to the VERY popular Triumph 4205, which was the successor to the Triumph 3905. Basically this cutter is the next in a long line of very popular stack cutters.

You can use this stack cutter to trim or cut paper, card stock, laminated material, chipboard and much more. I have personally used stack cutters to create my own business cards (on a large scale) and cut down card stock for use as report covers. You will find the Triumph 4305 in copy centers, print shops and more.

You can view a few additional details on the Triumph 4305 in this video:

The blade in this machine is razor sharp, made from Soligen steel. Unlike many comparable stack cutters, the blade can be re-sharpened up to 3 times before needing to be replaced. This is a huge money saver as new cutting blades can cost hundreds of dollars. The cuts are extremely accurate and the blade easily cuts through the entire stack.

Removing the blade from the cutter is extremely easy. A blade removal tool is included so that you don’t have to personally touch the blade with your hands, which is excellent for safety reasons. Once the blade removal handle is attached, the bolts holding the blade in place can be removed. Unlike some of the older versions of this cutter, the 4305 doesn’t require the cover to be removed.

Setting up the 4305 for cuts is very easy. It uses a spindle-driven back gauge. A specially calibrated crank, located on the front of the machine, can be turned clockwise or counter clockwise to brink the backstop forward or back. A measuring device is located next to the backstop, letting you know where it is in inches or cm.

While I still recommend taking safety precaution around stack cutters, MBM has implemented several safety features into this machine. This includes a couple of transparent safety guards (front guard is hinged), a safety catch and much more.

The build quality on this paper cutter is solid. The tolerances are tight and the accuracy is excellent. The only weakness you may find is cutting glossy or slick paper. This is because the clamping mechanism is dependent on the operator and how tight the clamp it down. If the paper is too glossy or slick, some shift could occur in the stack. I have never personally experienced this issue, but thought you may want to know.

Overall I rate this cutter a solid 5 out of 5. It is tough, durable and made out of metal components. It is excellent for daily use and can be used for light to medium-volume cutting. Very little effort is needed to operate the machine, cutting down on operator strain.

You can find the MBM Triumph 4305 stack paper cutter and our entire selection of stack paper cutters here.

Keith Barlow

Keith is a third generation office equipment expert. ABC Office was started by his grandfather back in 1980 and he is proud to be caring on the values that made ABC Office what it is today… unsurpassed selection, detailed information, low prices, and courteous support.

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply