Softproofing - a way to tell printer quality?

I am, like many others, debating who has the better quality. And although I'm a diehard Canon guy, I believe Epson may have an advantage when it comes to printing. In looking at the epson 3800 (now 3880) and comparing to various Canon printers (pixma pro 9500 mII, ipf5100, etc.) and am finding that Epson is kicking the tail off Canon in regards to color accuracy when softproofing in photoshop. Now, I realize that softproofing is not going to be the ultimate matching method, but should give me a fairly decent estimate of the printers capability, right? What I'm finding is that by comparing profiles between the Epson and Canon, there is VERY little change in colors with the Epson 3800. By the way I am working on a calibrated monitor in ProPhoto inside PS CS4, and choosing files with a large variety of colors that would show the most significant change from either converting to a smaller color space or going straight to print using icc profiles (flowers).

I'm wondering if anyone else has done this to compare printers - another method i'm using is taking these same icc profiles for both Canon and Epson and displaying inside Gamutvision's viewer which also shows Epson to have some larger gamuts than Canon...

I am going to be buying a printer for my own prints, but am not going to be satisfied until i'm convinced which side has the better color gamut to reproduce the most colors - quality is the main concern. So far it seems Epson is winning - anyone else have any thoughts/experience?

Luminous Landscape compares an iPF5000 to an Epson, and in some colors the Epson has a bigger gamut, in others the Canon...

I won't get involved in the original topic as I don't own an Epson or a Canon printer. However... I also like to research before buying, but if I had done all the diligent comparisons you've done, I would have bought that Epson printer weeks ago. You're about 10 clicks beyond where I would have made a confident buying decision.

Though I'm pretty wrapped in the Canon machines, I don't generally engage in the Canon/Epson, Canon/Nikon, Ford/Chevy, Honda/Suzuki/Yamaha conversations.

Considering all the variables....... with printers, profiles. displays, calibration devices, print media choices, personal taste in processing, "reviews" by websites that are on a mission to sell advertising and/or count on the click factor in banner ads......I find softproofing to be fairly worthless when making a decision about what's best.

A million dollar print machine can make a bad looking print on the wrong choice of paper.
A 200 dollar printer can make a work of art, given the right image on the right paper choice.

Epson, Canon, HP, Roland all make good printers. If they didn't, they wouldn't be known in the print world.
For me, a person that prints wide format for many others, I stay with Canon, considering the investment in inks, software, media, computers and familiarity that lets me be efficient and productive, and knowing that I've never sent a print to anyone they were unhappy with.
If I'd spent the same time. money, study time on say..an Epson series of big printers, I'd still be secure in knowing the customer was happy with the end result.

That old phrase "practice makes perfect" didn't invent itself.