RE:
You can do almost all of that by layers.. for dark layers you only need one layer height (0.2). For lighter colors, you will need 2 or 3.. but you can do that by layers and it will look 90% as good as that image there.. in fact I would say that 80% of that image has color by layers. You just get used to designing that way. But you are right.. in that there is a limitation that you can't get 100% of that image.. but you can get pretty close.. and that is just the limitation of the AMS/MMU/one extruder technology. We have a dual extruder S3 at our College and I'll bet that 2nd extruder gets used 1% of the time..
If you don't want to do color change within a layer then how do you do this? See attached file.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
My bad, I do see multiple colors within the same layer!
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
If I were to pick up a MMU3 it would purely be for using different coloured layers without having to manually change each colour - that way I can set a print and walk away. I’m not too interested in printing mixed coloured individual layers.
RE:
Look closer. Every layer has blue unless you want horizontal stripes when looking at the side. Since it is a coaster, the inner layers and outer orange are at the same level. Thus when the top layer of the outer orange prints you have to get at least green in the center. In actuality it prints orange white and green in the center at the same level as the outer orange. Then add in the blue for the outer coaster ring and you have a layer with blue, green, white and orange. Print time for a plate of 4 is around 8 hours if I remember correctly. Filament purge overhead isn't horrible but I don't remember the number. Since I have the Michigan posted I downloaded it and sliced to check the numbers. Print time is 6h23m at standard speed. I haven't had success at the faster speeds. Michigan with an M with white border uses 40.50m of material for the coaster and a purge of 0.84m. That is with the purge multiplier reduced from 1 to 0.3 which seems to work well.
Michigan is here https://share.icloud.com/photos/0dc_AJEqFH7wp5UrAHCwHaH4Q
I am attaching a photo showing some of the different coaster prints. This is what I like doing and the AMS is wonderful. The color change is automatic. To be fair, I did a small bear eating popcorn and I think the purge was more than the model itself. The coasters, since it is only a few layers, don't have that problem. Since I print 4 at a time, the penalty is spread over all 4. Also, I understand that team coasters might not be everyone's "thing" but for me it has been fun.
Look closely all seperate layers.
RE: AMS issues
I love the Bambu AMS but there can be issues. I put in a new filament roll at work and it won't read the RFID tag. I have the same issue at home. I am wondering if the tags get broken when placing the filament on the spool since Bambu ships without spools on a lot of their filament. I am thinking that the twisting action to lock the spool halves could be causing an issue. I say this because the previous roll in that slot was OK as far as the RFID tag being read. My home unit could also be a bad AMS. I need to experiment more.
If you use abrasive filaments then the intake funnels on the AMS will wear down. Glow in the dark filament is apparently the worse.
On a few filaments, I have retraction failures. The "fix" is easy. I remove the PTFE tube in the back of the printer, pull the filament out and hit retry. This may be do to how my system is set up but others have the same issue. My AMS units sit to the left of the X1C whilch makes the tubing long with several bends. Worse, I am currently using Creality Capricorn tubing which has an ID sub 2mm while Bambu recommends 2.5mm ID for the tubing to the AMS. I plan to change out the tubing and see if that helps. Matterhackers Quantum reliably as a problem with retraction.
Not an AMS issue but the slicer doesn't always map correctly to the AMS units. As long as you check the mapping you are fine.
Overall, the AMS is a big plus. Even when printing single color parts it makes life easier.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
You can do almost all of that by layers.. for dark layers you only need one layer height (0.2). For lighter colors, you will need 2 or 3.. but you can do that by layers and it will look 90% as good as that image there.. in fact I would say that 80% of that image has color by layers. You just get used to designing that way. But you are right.. in that there is a limitation that you can't get 100% of that image.. but you can get pretty close.. and that is just the limitation of the AMS/MMU/one extruder technology. We have a dual extruder S3 at our College and I'll bet that 2nd extruder gets used 1% of the time..
If you don't want to do color change within a layer then how do you do this? See attached file.
That's an option but what I like to do is to print the surface upside down as that gives you a totally smooth unitary surface. You need intralayer filament change for that. With the MMU that is also absolutely no issue at all, given how few tool changes that are needed it is not even that much longer and more wasteful.
Dual extruder is probably mainly about the ability to print with soluble support. If that is commonly needed it definitely pays off. If you print mostly objects not needing soluble support that is.
Mk3s MMU2s, Voron 0.1, Voron 2.4
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
Without seeing the RFID tag, it is hard to tell the type it is. Yes, RFID tags can be damaged if they are flexed in the wrong way. There is a little chip with the information and antenna in the tag that can be damaged. Contact the company, maybe they can/will mail you a new tag for the spool. Or you may have to return the spool.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
The RFID issue isn't a huge deal since I can manually enter what it is. I need to do some experimenting and take rolls that read fine in other slots and see if they read in the ones that are having issues. It does impact seeing remotely that a roll is getting low.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
It's great to see some progress from Prusa but it's too little too late for me. I was holding off on ordering another printer but my pre-order for the XL probably won't happen for many more months and there are no reviews or speed demonstrations for it. The MK4 is just an iteration of the MK3 and from the few reviews online, it's only about 20% quicker. With all that in mind I ordered another X1C with AMS. From a Price/Performance/Print Quality perspective it currently can't be beaten. I had hoped for more from Prusa, but it was not to be.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
But, yet you come here to post. That sends a different message.
It's great to see some progress from Prusa but it's too little too late for me. I was holding off on ordering another printer but my pre-order for the XL probably won't happen for many more months and there are no reviews or speed demonstrations for it. The MK4 is just an iteration of the MK3 and from the few reviews online, it's only about 20% quicker. With all that in mind I ordered another X1C with AMS. From a Price/Performance/Print Quality perspective it currently can't be beaten. I had hoped for more from Prusa, but it was not to be.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE:
It's great to see some progress from Prusa but it's too little too late for me. I was holding off on ordering another printer but my pre-order for the XL probably won't happen for many more months and there are no reviews or speed demonstrations for it. The MK4 is just an iteration of the MK3 and from the few reviews online, it's only about 20% quicker. With all that in mind I ordered another X1C with AMS. From a Price/Performance/Print Quality perspective it currently can't be beaten. I had hoped for more from Prusa, but it was not to be.
Endurance and Serviceability are not on your list there.
The speed on the Mk4 is not limited by its technical capabilities but by its firmware, as impact shaper is not yet implemented. That is indeed disappointing but if properly implemented I don't see why the MK4 should be much slower than the X1 once it is. I do understand those who don't want to wait for that but it is a factor that needs to be mentioned.
Unlike the X1 the Mk4 also supports easy upgrade with proper brand high flow nozzles, which is actually needed for printing that fast without compromising on the technical performance of the part. To my knowledge the X1 print settings are set faster than is actually good for its hotend design and there is no official high flow hotend system for the X1, or am I mistaken there?
Mk3s MMU2s, Voron 0.1, Voron 2.4
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
It's great to see some progress from Prusa but it's too little too late for me. I was holding off on ordering another printer but my pre-order for the XL probably won't happen for many more months and there are no reviews or speed demonstrations for it. The MK4 is just an iteration of the MK3 and from the few reviews online, it's only about 20% quicker. With all that in mind I ordered another X1C with AMS. From a Price/Performance/Print Quality perspective it currently can't be beaten. I had hoped for more from Prusa, but it was not to be.
Endurance and Serviceability are not on your list there.
The speed on the Mk4 is not limited by its technical capabilities but by its firmware, as impact shaper is not yet implemented. That is indeed disappointing but if properly implemented I don't see why the MK4 should be much slower than the X1 once it is. I do understand those who don't want to wait for that but it is a factor that needs to be mentioned.
Unlike the X1 the Mk4 also supports easy upgrade with proper brand high flow nozzles, which is actually needed for printing that fast without compromising on the technical performance of the part. To my knowledge the X1 print settings are set faster than is actually good for its hotend design and there is no official high flow hotend system for the X1, or am I mistaken there?
I can confirm that you are not incorrect.
--------------------
Chuck H
3D Printer Review Blog
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
What am I missing, isn't the MK4 a Cartesian fdm and the X1 a CoreXY fdm? Won't CoreXY always have the potential to be theoretically faster than a Cartesian fdm printer? I used qualifiers such as potential and theoretical because it really doesn't matter how well implemented the hardware is if the firmware is written poorly.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
The reason to post here is to share experiences and to express an opinion on the products discussed. It's not to be a "yes man" or a fanboy. Anyone thinking of purchasing 3D printer should be able to hear all sides and then make an informed choice. Or did I misunderstand the the name of this post "Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon"?
Some food for thought - Maybe the reason why Prusa is scrambling to catch up is too many users never pushed them to be better.
RE:
I don’t think it is that simple. From what I read, Bambu has tested its speeds but with its own filaments which have a certain flow rate at certain temps. Not all filaments are equal and so not all filaments will react the same. I have no experience in this, someone like Stephan @CNC would know how much different the flow characteristics are between different PLA filament brands. So while it might not have the flow capacity of some high-flow hotends, it might be able to achieve high-enough flow with its own filaments. It has shown fast benchies, so it had to work. I don’t have enough experience with a local X1C to know if the higher speed is significantly lowering the strength of parts.. We are building an RC car, so we should be stressing some parts. Will take some time before people really put the X1C thru its paces.. but I think right now there is a lot of conjecture, with little testing.. but that will come soon.
I will say, though.. that just because a product has the hardware to implement a certain level of performance, not having the software to take advantage of it, is no difference than having a “slow product’ and then upgrading its hardware later to be faster. I have seen too many computer based designs that made claims of performance based on software updates, that never came to fruition. Not that it will happen here.. but its not fast.. until it is..
It's great to see some progress from Prusa but it's too little too late for me. I was holding off on ordering another printer but my pre-order for the XL probably won't happen for many more months and there are no reviews or speed demonstrations for it. The MK4 is just an iteration of the MK3 and from the few reviews online, it's only about 20% quicker. With all that in mind I ordered another X1C with AMS. From a Price/Performance/Print Quality perspective it currently can't be beaten. I had hoped for more from Prusa, but it was not to be.
Endurance and Serviceability are not on your list there.
The speed on the Mk4 is not limited by its technical capabilities but by its firmware, as impact shaper is not yet implemented. That is indeed disappointing but if properly implemented I don't see why the MK4 should be much slower than the X1 once it is. I do understand those who don't want to wait for that but it is a factor that needs to be mentioned.
Unlike the X1 the Mk4 also supports easy upgrade with proper brand high flow nozzles, which is actually needed for printing that fast without compromising on the technical performance of the part. To my knowledge the X1 print settings are set faster than is actually good for its hotend design and there is no official high flow hotend system for the X1, or am I mistaken there?
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
I've put about 50kg of Fiberlogy PETG through my X1c without a single issue and little or no stringing. I haven't put the prints through any CNC Kitchen type stress tests but I can say that the prints from the X1C are just as difficult to break by hand as prints from my MK3's using the same filament. I've also used a 0.25 nozzle with PETG and all without issue.
I don’t think it is that simple. From what I read, Bambu has tested its speeds but with its own filaments which have a certain flow rate at certain temps. Not all filaments are equal and so not all filaments will react the same. I have no experience in this, someone like Stephan @CNC would know how much different the flow characteristics are between different PLA filament brands. So while it might not have the flow capacity of some high-flow hotends, it might be able to achieve high-enough flow with its own filaments. It has shown fast benchies, so it had to work. I don’t have enough experience with a local X1C to know if the higher speed is significantly lowering the strength of parts.. We are building an RC car, so we should be stressing some parts. Will take some time before people really put the X1C thru its paces.. but I think right now there is a lot of conjecture, with little testing.. but that will come soon.
I will say, though.. that just because a product has the hardware to implement a certain level of performance, not having the software to take advantage of it, is no difference than having a “slow product’ and then upgrading its hardware later to be faster. I have seen too many computer based designs that made claims of performance based on software updates, that never came to fruition. Not that it will happen here.. but its not fast.. until it is..
It's great to see some progress from Prusa but it's too little too late for me. I was holding off on ordering another printer but my pre-order for the XL probably won't happen for many more months and there are no reviews or speed demonstrations for it. The MK4 is just an iteration of the MK3 and from the few reviews online, it's only about 20% quicker. With all that in mind I ordered another X1C with AMS. From a Price/Performance/Print Quality perspective it currently can't be beaten. I had hoped for more from Prusa, but it was not to be.
Endurance and Serviceability are not on your list there.
The speed on the Mk4 is not limited by its technical capabilities but by its firmware, as impact shaper is not yet implemented. That is indeed disappointing but if properly implemented I don't see why the MK4 should be much slower than the X1 once it is. I do understand those who don't want to wait for that but it is a factor that needs to be mentioned.
Unlike the X1 the Mk4 also supports easy upgrade with proper brand high flow nozzles, which is actually needed for printing that fast without compromising on the technical performance of the part. To my knowledge the X1 print settings are set faster than is actually good for its hotend design and there is no official high flow hotend system for the X1, or am I mistaken there?
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
For me actual print speed is not that important. maintainability including reliability and parts availability is equally as important. In some ways maintainability actually manifests itself in overall print speed, having to frequently tune a printer or wait on replacement parts affects my print speed. Though I have really looked at the Bambu line for my next printer, the MK4 looks so good now, no radically new tech just what appears to be an incremental improvement to a rock solid product. If Prusa could just deliver and a good MMU that would be enough for me.
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
I've put about 50kg of Fiberlogy PETG through my X1c without a single issue and little or no stringing. I haven't put the prints through any CNC Kitchen type stress tests but I can say that the prints from the X1C are just as difficult to break by hand as prints from my MK3's using the same filament. I've also used a 0.25 nozzle with PETG and all without issue.
PETG is among the least sensitive materials in this regard with generally good layer adhesion. Other materials are considerably more sensitive, like ABS or ASA but also PLA. If PLA goes from glossy to satin or matte, the way it did in Stefan's video, you can bet that it also has an effect on layer adhesion.
I have no first hand experience with the X1 but CNCs results were pretty clear regarding insufficient heat transfer at the high stock speeds. Sure, results will vary based on a lot of factors and the result may still be good enough for your application. My intention was not to pour the X1 through the dirt, rather to talk about the potential downsides of speed optimised profiles.
A 0.25 mm nozzle should actually help and maybe even resolve heat transfer limitations, as, obviously the filament flow at the same extruder movement settings will be a lot lower than with a 0.4 or even a 0.6 mm nozzle.
Mk3s MMU2s, Voron 0.1, Voron 2.4
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
That is all fair and good but one should expect a certain robustness for the default settings of a printer regarding popular filament types and brands. At the very least a speed optimized printer would have to have the official upgrade option to a high flow hotend for more demanding filaments. So that one can print them without preventable downsides.
I guess it depends a lot on the way one is using technical parts. If parts are designed in a way that layer adhesion is not that critical in the first place, all of this might be a non-issue for the specific use case.
I am interested to see how the longest running heavy use X1s will hold up in the near future. Maintenance topics will start to gain relevance slowly and then we will get more answeres on those questions too. If the X1 should fare decently well, it would strengthen its position tremendously.
I don’t think it is that simple. From what I read, Bambu has tested its speeds but with its own filaments which have a certain flow rate at certain temps. Not all filaments are equal and so not all filaments will react the same. I have no experience in this, someone like Stephan @CNC would know how much different the flow characteristics are between different PLA filament brands. So while it might not have the flow capacity of some high-flow hotends, it might be able to achieve high-enough flow with its own filaments. It has shown fast benchies, so it had to work. I don’t have enough experience with a local X1C to know if the higher speed is significantly lowering the strength of parts.. We are building an RC car, so we should be stressing some parts. Will take some time before people really put the X1C thru its paces.. but I think right now there is a lot of conjecture, with little testing.. but that will come soon.
I will say, though.. that just because a product has the hardware to implement a certain level of performance, not having the software to take advantage of it, is no difference than having a “slow product’ and then upgrading its hardware later to be faster. I have seen too many computer based designs that made claims of performance based on software updates, that never came to fruition. Not that it will happen here.. but its not fast.. until it is..
Mk3s MMU2s, Voron 0.1, Voron 2.4
RE: Prusa MK3S+ vs Bambu Lab X1 carbon
Maybe not the right place, but any thoughts on the Proforge 4?