Is MMU2S the best approach for multimuterial?  

RE: Is MMU2S the best approach for multimuterial?

@nikolai-r

I'm not necessarily saying that tool changer will work better, but it seem to have the potential to work better. The main reason is that to does away with key disadvantages of multi-extruder printers (oozing and mechanical interference of the inactive extruder) as well as the single-extrude multi-filament systems like MMU and Pallete (hard to reliably load/unload filament 100's of times, hard to reliably splice filament together).  Can it have it's own disadvantages?  Sure.  But so far this seems like the most practical approach.  I guess we'll see what happens.

RE: Is MMU2S the best approach for multimuterial?

@mdaneman

Tool changer is still in pretty early stage. I think next year will be the first printer available with this technology. I’m also excited to see where in the market they can be placed. And how good the firmware will be at this stage.

The only concern I have is the big mechanical stress to all parts. And used parts for this are pretty expensive. I think the initial price and the maintenance will be far beyond the sub $1000 range. Especially because it only make sense if you go big and have more then two heads. 

RE: Is MMU2S the best approach for multimuterial?

The parts in the toolchanger with most mechanical stess and abrasion (Tool coupler and locking parts)  are built to be easily replaced and are penny parts. I bet as soon as the toolchanger really hits the market in some numbers we'll see those parts at a reasonable price (those are really easy to manufacture) either from e3d or (if they fail to deliver) from china.