Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL  

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

The Toolchangers needs around 5 Seconds..

I think what Bard may be got wrong is that the 45 Seconds is when you actually want to use a new filament in a given tool it takes around 45 seconds!? Of course that is highly dependent on manual user steps just like with Bamboo.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

That’s total nonsense.

My XL does a toolchange in 3-5 seconds.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

Who the heck is this Bard person? Probably yet another clueless toober. There are soooo many people who post and youtube who really don’t know what they are yapping about!

Besides the fact that the xl as a toolchanger is SCREAMING fast(compared to the 2 only other Toolchangers available), since it has multiple extruders it can print materials that don’t bond as with pla/PETG where one is used for full contact support which finally gives us clean undersides! Doing this is a real problem for single extruder solutions since you have to fully purge.

Eventually the users of the XL will catch on to doing this and it will become a standard approach for every use case. Think about it… you no longer have to consider overhangs… I.e. we all finally have what the pre open source expensive machines from companies like Stratasys have always had.

Try doing that with an mmu or that Bambu thing and watch how long it will take!

RE:

I wasn’t asking for zealous enthusiasm from the Prusa fan club. I was looking for factual information to base a decision on.  Also, I was not looking for estimates, I was hoping somebody would know the actual time for an XL tool change from start to finish.

Bard is AI by Google. The quote was a summary of filament changes from web sources. I usually cross-check and validate Bard’s answers.

As for the open source religion, the XL is really no longer an open source machine. And I haven’t seen many examples where open source results in cheaper or better anything. So I am unconvinced.

Of course there are intrinsic benefits and drawbacks of tool hangers. Those are beyond the scope of my question. Tool changers are not all a panacea, especially when printing PLA because of the cracking PLA problem inherent in any tool changer implementation (where PLA becomes brittle and breaks after a surprisingly short time.)

I had a Prusa XL5 but it catastrophically failed before I was able to do any tool changes or timing. I need to make a decision on whether to buy a replacement XL5 or go with a Bambu X1c AMS. Hence, my question.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

I gave you fact. 3-5 seconds… and I am not in the Prusa fan club as you already know.
I have no idea what you’re talking about with “cracking pla problem inherent to Toolchangers”. It’s a problem with the XL only because of the guide tube lengths for which there is already a simple solution… 

https://www.printables.com/model/32368-join-ptfe-tubes-together-magnetically

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

There is an emerging issue with the XL relating to the use of PLA filament and multiple changers:

PLA becomes brittle and cracks in the tubes to individual tools.

I say “emerging” because multiple people are experiencing it, but it’s new enough that it isn’t entirely established.

It’s unclear why this is happening. The prevalent theory is that the PLA is absorbing moisture which makes it brittle and then cracks, sometimes in multiple segments in the same tube. It’s markedly worse for PLA in the tubes than on the spool.

What is surprising is how quickly it happens…this isn’t PLA sitting for days. And it seems to happen mostly in the long feeder tubes to the tools. It’s definitely an odd problem that will take time to either understand or debunk.

This is all new and we’re still learning. I am cautious because of my bad experience with the XL5 I received. I lost over $300 on non-refundable duties and shipping when I returned my XL5. I don’t want to go through that again.

There's nothing new about it, it has always been a small problem for MMU users; the additional Y movements of the XL flex the filament a little more so it shows up earlier.  If you look back over the early days of the MMU you will see multiple drybox designs intended to address this issue.

Unshielded PLA becomes brittle.  Most of the filament, deep in the spool, is protected by the outer layers and on a single head printer it is used faster than it spoils.  On a printer using multiple filaments the ones not currently printing are just deteriorating while they wait.  The tubes are flexing in X and Y directions so naturally that's where breakages appear first.

Using the XL as a multicolour PLA printer is a mistake or a chore at best.  For decorative PLA prints you are always better off printing monochrome and painting the result. For functional prints where multiple colours are used for graticules, scales and labels then the best result will probably come from constraining the multiple colours to just a few layers and loading the other colours for only the short time that they are needed.   For jobs requiring multiple PLA filaments throughout then revisit those dryboxes.

What is surprising is how quickly it happens

Not really, I get the impression that most users don't bother to dry all their filaments before use so many of them are loading material that is already damp.  It is these same users who are more likely to try to print multiple colours to avoid the chore of painting.

Leave a good old MK3 loaded with PLA for a few days doing nothing ... the filament will break of it's own accord under just the slight stationary, restraint.

The XL concept is ideal for multiple *materials* where changes from one material to another don't incur the huge purges and waits for temperature changes that slow a single head machine.  OK, some of those materials might be different varieties of PLA; I have a design, for example, that uses plain PLA for the main body but has a rim of bronze filled filament to conduct friction heat away from the contact edge, this becomes a single print rather than an assembly but I will be taking care first to dry and then to protect the filaments while printing.

It's very simple: if you buy an XL or an MMU for colour printing then you are committing yourself to five times as much filament drying.

Cheerio,

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

while the Prusa XL's tool changer takes around 45 seconds

Tell me you've never seen the XL actually do anything without telling me etc etc.

What is surprising is how quickly it happens…this isn’t PLA sitting for days

In my experience, it literally does take several days of sitting in tubes doing no printing for it to affect the PLA in it. I'm talking more than a week of idling. Plus the 'damage' is localized to just the filament in the tubes. The spool isn't affected at all; it's not a contagious filament disease.

And all you have to do to completely avoid it is either, print more, or, unload when finished.

I can understand you've an axe to grind after getting a cursed machine, but taking AI generated gossip to heart isn't the answer.

RE:

taking AI generated gossip to heart isn't the answe

Wow, you sure aren't a nice person. Ouch.

My XL catastrophically failed before I could ever do a successful tool swap. As I mentioned, I now face making a new buying decision: Do I purchase a new XL or do I purchase a Bambu X1c? I'm trying to make an informed, careful, cautious, prudent, reasoned decision.

There aren't exactly many YouTube videos comparing filament swap times between these two units. And, I couldn't find any benchmarks, either. It's not exactly that Prusa has helped by publishing the times, either. I don't trust myself to use a stopwatch on videos because I don't know how they were edited or what the current revisions are.

So I Asked Bard. Truth be known Bard tends to be right about 80% of the time when I ask for information. It's more than gossip, although people who haven't used it don't quite understand it. But I also know to cross-check, because Bard is wrong 20% of the time. I want to make an informed decision.

What you did was attack me personally, discount that Bard was nothing more than "AI generated gossip" almost as if to imply I was an ignorant for even asking it. And then you overlooked that I had come to this (apparently hostile) forum asking for verification or actual numbers. What I got was your rather impolite zinger. Ouch again.

Perhaps if you genuinely wanted to bring humanity up a notch you would have answered my question, offered to time changes, or provided useful information. But no, you attacked me for trying to learn the truth.

Yes, I had a pretty terrible experience with Prusa...waiting two years with countless broken promises, then getting a defective machine, then losing over $300 to send it back. And, yet, for some inexplicable reason I was considering staying Prusa. Loyalty?

And then you came in and basically called me an idiot.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

My Mk3 MMU2 never really worked, so I quit using it 🙁

Apparently, Bambu retracts filament back into the AMS which serves as a dry box so presumably it wouldn't suffer as much from the brittle filament problem?

I wasn't aware of the Brittle PLA problem until quite recently.

If you dry the PLA out does the brittle problem go away, or is it permanently damaged?

There aren't exactly many YouTube videos comparing filament swap times between these two units

Not many 'inflencers' are dedicated enough to fully evaluate two printers neither of which are free, pink, fluffy, or capable of dancing to meme tunes...

My Mk3 MMU2 never really worked, so I quit using it

As long as I was careful to protect the filament mine worked OK for printing (very slowy) gaudy toys but that's not what I wanted it for.  Most of my multicolour needs are easier to manage manually.

If you dry the PLA out does the brittle problem go away, or is it permanently damaged?

If you don't leave it too long drying completely reconditions it but if you leave it out for weeks micro-cracking builds up and ruins it.

Cheerio,

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

If you don't leave it too long drying completely reconditions it but if you leave it out for weeks micro-cracking builds up and ruins it.

This is super useful to know. I didn’t realize this about PLA. I’m going to manage my spools differently as a result. Thank you.

I also found it easier to manually swap filaments than use the fussy MMU2. I do functional things so usually just needed color for superficial printing. I had hoped it would be a failover in case a spool ran out but I never got that to work.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

Wow, you sure aren't a nice person. Ouch.

One would think opening with a meme...nevermind. I make no claims to being nice, so take it which ever way you'd like.

The gossip is your claim of "PLA quickly going brittle within days" as if its the new 'big stringing problem' when it's just an old, unpopular, nothing burger that's easily avoidable.

I'm no AI specialist, but if there's no info out there then how would an aggregate chat-bot know? Bard tells you 45 second tool changes and your 'cross-checking' consists of not believing youtube videos, but believing plain text from even less reputable usernames with even less evidence? If your trust of the XL is this forgone, just get the AMS. There's no point in loyalty to a 3d printer manufacturer; if you trust a machine to do a thing then buy it, otherwise get one that you trust will.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

I think there are a few things going on here that put people at odds with your method of asking the question @SeattleDavid.  

Right at the start you didn't ask a question, but instead posted a click-bate thread title that claims something that is incredibly easy to refute.  What this does is immediately cause any reader who knows better to wonder if you might have an axe to grind.  You may not feel like you do, or maybe you have some other motivation, we cannot know.  

The second thing at play that can give some users pause when reading "reviews" or overly loaded opinions is the tendency that so many people have lately to assume that their specific printer is perfectly representative of all of the rest.  It's probably true that Prusa released the XL both too late and not late enough. 😋 It needed more time for polish, and better software development to avoid some user frustration.  However...Your printer was a lemon. Lemons occasionally happen.  They are unfortunate, frustrating, time consuming, and in your case costly due to import duties.  Lemons, however, are not singularly representative of the entire product line.  If your experience was enough to lose your faith in the XL and you buy another brand, that is a reasonable decision to make.  Nobody here is going to stop you.  However, despite the number of posts on this forum with users having to troubleshoot quirks and do the polishing work they would have wanted Prusa to do, there are many XL owners out there who have had either a smooth experience or have run into similar problems, found a solution and are quietly and happily enjoying the benefits of this one of its kind printer.  Rhetoric like "I'm quitting Prusa, and everyone else should too" (you have doubtless saw that thread as well) is indicative of a similarly self-centered attitude.  I think sometimes people forget that they have the agency to make their own decisions, and let others make theirs, and that it's ok if they are not the same.  

I wish you luck in your decision process, and suggest that you might have more positive feedback here if when you have a question, you try opening by simply asking the question.

-J

RE:

I very much appreciate your polite and detailed explanation of the events. You did a great job of wording your points.

I didn’t see and still don’t see my subject like as click bait or inflammatory. It’s a supposition, a statement put forth for challenge or review. Indeed, I was surprised by Bard’s analysis and was putting it out for challenge or concurrence. I used a writing style which I thought was compact and direct.

However, I’m a senior citizen and from generations away from the population mean. My observation is that younger people are hyper-sensitive to anything that threatens their strongly held views. I come from an era where we would put something out as a “straw man”.

I am admittedly neurotic about the XL. I think I am attached to it because I paid the price of a very long wait and because I also feel like I was constantly lied to.  I use the strong word “lied” because I think Mr. Prusa actually knew he was fibbing at the time he made statements, but to prevent people from defecting he strung us along. That’s my opinion, anyway. I installed a special, permanent countertop in my laboratory for the XL. It was custom, and it was expensive. And it sat empty for more than a year after I was promised delivery. It just there and it will forever remind me of the XL that didn’t. So I became attached to the XL and was let down.

You are correct that we all think our experiences are typical. So of course I have a bit of confirmation bias that the XL product is a lemon.

But when you look at trustworthy reviewers they are not complimentary about the XL (or the Creakity K1). They talk about sub-par printing quality and slow speeds.

In the end I wanted my XL very much. I became attached to it. But it didn’t work, Prusa support didn’t work, and Prusa still kept the shipping money (which was their contractual right) even though the printer was wholly defective. And, Prusa was not fast about issuing the refund. That is, Prusa certainly didn’t go the extra mile.

The final thing that set me off was the character attack that I would ever trust gossipy Bard. I must use Bard 20 times a day. It’s a superb AI and 89% of the time it gets it right. There was no reason for the character attack!on myself for referencing it.

Ive been loyal to Prusa for half their life and I have owned four Prusa machines. It’s just hard to switch horses or even to think about bringing in a non-matching box that has a different ecosystem.

One of the things this and another posting of mine has revealed is that I’m not into the open source religion and my 3D printer is a tool. I’m not one to enjoy changing the oil on my own car. Perhaps Prusa really ain’t where I belong.

I want a 3D printer that requires no thought. I want it to be reliable, high quality, and to “just work”. Prusa came closest to that in the past. But the bar has moved and perhaps it is time I accept that I’m not a printer hacker, I just can’t it to make things I design and not be the problem.

Prusa may be for those where the printer is the hobby. My need is for a printer that just makes things.

The handwriting is probably on the wall here. The industry has moved on. I’m now probably in the wrong spot.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

You very well might be right that this product is ultimately not for you. I am new to 3d printing, and I also share the feeling that I want to spend more time printing than fiddling.  It is for these reasons that I built an mk4 kit as my entry to the hobby.  My use cases are repair and upgrade items for around the house, projects with my son, and learning fusion360 in order to improve my capabilities.  When the mk4 came out it was slow, held yet undelivered promises for the early adopters, and had many reported issues.  By the time my kit showed up, Input shaper was loaded from the factory, slicer profiles were tweaked and I've had excellent results with very little fiddling.  If it turns out that you can't shake your intrigue with the XL, you might want to simply wait a bit before filling that space on your workbench.  Two things are likely to be addressed by waiting a bit.  1. The XL software will mature and solutions will be found for many of the issues, and 2. Bambu will have a chance to (if they are smart) take a stab at the tool changer game and put a larger format, less wasteful multi color/material option that can compete in this XL territory.

There are also a number of users who are getting great results from the XL, some of which have gotten there a bit more quickly because of years worth of 3d printing and even tool-changer experience with other products like the E3d tool changer that is no longer available.  User tobycwood is one of these users, and if you reached out directly, he might be willing to offer some of his knowledge to clear the early hurdles.  This gets back to your earlier statement though about just wanting a toaster oven level of complexity.  The XL was never supposed to offer that.  Prusa may have presented that expectation, but those with previous multi material, tool-changer experience have known for a while that it's far more complex than running a single extruder printer.

-J

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

Good words, nicely said. I concur.

Being elderly, there is a certain impatience. I have a very limited number of years left and I don’t sit and wait for the future. That’s especially why the two year XL delay was painful.

I want to get going in January when I return to my home from overseas. I think I’ll just buy whatever is the best available machine at that moment and get going. If in the future the Prusa XL or BambuXL looks to be a “toaster” then I’ll just buy it.

My mistake was probably that I hinged so much of my remaining life on getting a piece of vaporware (XL). The rule should be: never buy into any future promises made by either Josef Prusa or Elon Musk. That is, live in the moment.

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

Boy, this thread sure took off!

Unlike many of the folks here (as far as I can tell) I am a relatively advanced 3DP user. I’ve started up a 3d printing service biz 13 years ago, built more machines than I can fully recall,  applied 3DP in high value product dev, consult on it to large companies, have done open source dev with folk who have over the years become good friends, teach it in univ and maker spaces and I produce and cohost the longest running podcast on the subject(3d printing today). I am no fan of any one company.
IMO… If you’re looking for the most toaster like 3DP then your best bets are Prusa and Bambu for sure. But you will have to follow their lead on just about everything and that means you may have to continue putting up with marred undersides. Toolchanging is the real game changer for low cost fdm and it finally gives us the solution to the problem caused by break-away, single material supports. What Bambu has achieved is impressive but it still cannot easily solve this problem. Toolchanging does solve it and in my experienced opinion, the XL is easily the best of the three TCs one can buy/build. BUT… Toolchanging is way more complex for the end user than single extruder fdm. For sure the written knowledge about operating fdm Toolchangers is minuscule at best and I would really doubt the info is out there for an AI based chat system to be able to scrape and parrot it back.., so please don’t bait us with bard or ChatGPT output…ok?
The XL may be more than Dave can handle, but I don’t think so. I think if you can afford it and enjoy making things it’s worth every penny and the time… Even though Prusa does not practice proper QC before shipping. That is something everyone must take into account before ordering. However, I never thought any 3DP could do better than my E3d tc until I got the xl. 

RE: Bard says the Bambu X1c swaps filaments faster than Prusa XL

I’m sorry your first machine was a lemon, but why did you return it for refund and not request a replacement?