HT hotend for XL? Why not?
The 400 degree C HT hotend is offered for the Core and Core L.
Why isn't it offered for the XL? It uses the same regular hotend, right?
I'd be interested in the HT hotend even for lower temperature printing if it heats up faster.
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
Why not? Sadly, it's because they don't care about the XL and have completely abandoned it.
RE:
Because it does not have a proper enclosure and dry box (from Prusa itself), it does not make sense to have a high temp extruder.
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
So my XL has an original Prusa enclosure, that only costs €619, isn't that right?
RE:
Because it does not have a proper enclosure and dry box (from Prusa itself), it does not make sense to have a high temp extruder.
My assumption is that the HT hotend is higher-powered and therefor heats up faster than the stock one.
Also, there are some filaments (like PET (no G)) that require high nozzle temperatures but not an enclosure.
If the HT hotend will work in an XL, Prusa should say so.
What we end-users do with that knowledge shouldn't be a concern.
Also, FYI, my XL has both a Prusa enclosure and a two-spool filament dryer feeding hotends 4 and 5.
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
Another vote to support an HT hotend on the XL. I would purchase at least two for my 5T. I want to print better engineering filaments that require 350°C.
I've already enclosed my XL, upgraded all PETG parts to PC-CF, and added a fan to the heat bed controller.
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
If you have the PETG motor mounts, this is basically not feasible. The enclosure for our machines is an afterthought, though I like the look. They kind of designed themselves into a corner. We won't be getting a HT toolhead officially.
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
Here, too, I must say that I have been working on implementing a Prusa XL HT for a year.
No, I don't need the Prusa XL to urgently print parts that an industrial printer could also produce. It is my experiment to see what is feasible and what is not.
I will simply bypass the 290 degree limitation with hardware. Software-wise, it is feasible to unlock even higher temperatures, but I am taking a different approach.
This approach involves controlling the nozzle temperature externally via a much more accurate PID control.
Mods for Core One: Core One HT 450 degrees, Comfortable display , Very fast print start and Reducing noises
Mods for Prusa XL: Very fast print start
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
The price and potential of the XL makes it a natural candidate to be further developed. And an obvious market need with XL users, as shown in many of these posts, is to give it the potential to print hi-temp industrial materials. We use this printer also to prototype, not only to print toys. If Prusa would listen to their user base, they would provide upgrades, that they would generate nice revenue from. Unfortunately, they stopped listening to their users and get beaten up by Chinese competition (where are the times of sequential meaningful upgrades to the Mrk3?). And no Prusa, the answer is NOT that we are all going to buy a Prusa Core One printer. The maker (thus not Prusa) who can provide an acceptable XL hi-temp upgrade solution can develop a nice side business. I am interested as a customer as well as as an investor. Sincerely, from a long time customer who keeps to expressing what vendors don’t like to hear.
RE: HT hotend for XL? Why not?
I've already enclosed my XL, upgraded all PETG parts to PC-CF, and added a fan to the heat bed controller.
Ive bought the enclosure replaced all the parts that were supplied with pccf added a fan with a temperature regulator to the heat bed controller, added also a printer cover with a 5v noctua fan to the main-board but i still get tile overheating whenever i try to print ABS/ASA with the door closed. Changed the controller, changed tiles.. nothing. This thing needs proper heat sensing , not relying on the nextruder sensor for the temp in the enclosure and PROPER cooling. The enclosure has airgaps (an oxymoron of an enclosure that causes overheating errors) so it cannot be easily active heat controlled.
If you have the PETG motor mounts, this is basically not feasible. The enclosure for our machines is an afterthought, though I like the look. They kind of designed themselves into a corner. We won't be getting a HT toolhead officially.
Thats the absolute truth. An expensive afterthought , for waht it is, if i may add.
The price and potential of the XL makes it a natural candidate to be further developed.
The potential was/is there. The price is not that justifiable. It was when it first came with the promise of what it was SUPPOSED to be. Now you get a snapmaker u1 with 4 toolheads less of what the new silicon toolhead cost. And if someone wants to play around and build on a toolhead platform why go to a 4k Prusa that offers no more upgradability,opensourcnesss or expandability and not to a 850E snapmaker? I dont have one but there is not argument in favor of Prusa except the size. The name, the support? Not so much. Snapmaker seems to followed a more traditional enclosure (similar to anything else) that what that Prusa offered and its included in the price. Yes there is an additional overhead cover but Prusa is still full of airholes even with that. I dont know but personally i cant see anyone wanting to play around with Prusas 4k XL ( i mean to develop and deploy XL upgrades ) when the market now gives alternatives with far less cost. An example is the advertisment at the beginning of what multitool could offer in the long run. After 3 years we waiting to get a silicon head that costs 1k. Prusa wasnt even able to create an easy workflow for printing with multiple nozzle sizes on a project. And no going to the slicer and changing a bunch of things in the hope that it works its not a end users method. Its a tinkerers method.
Personally when i bought the XL i was waiting for a proper setup for ABS and PC. My mk3s was ok but there was not proper enclosure and warping was inevitable. When i saw the presentation of the XL's prototype i was buffled a bit with accordion part but i had faith that Prusa would provide a proper enclosure. When the 750 E enclosure came out i bought one (cheaper using a coupon) and i was really disappointed. This is what was supposed to enclose the flagship? Then i understood that Prusa was running behind other companies so they gave attention to the core 1 which was enclosed, and after the launch of BL H2C with the coreL and active heated enclosure. They ended up with an expanded line up to not fall behind other companies and in the end they left the expensive XL behind. And now with the INDX dont expect that the XL will get any attention soon. Reading the XL vs INDX blog it was a good laugh of how they try to convice that they are keeping the XL relevant. They used other companies work (silicon head) as an example. It seems, imho, that Peusa wnat for some of the lineup to die out. XL , mini and their resin printer. I mean for what other reason does the SLS1 still costs 2k and their curing station more that the Elegoo saturn 16k ultra? Which i bought by the way to replace my SLS1.
They released 3d schematics for the Core to build stuff around but not for the XL. But in any case honestly i dont want to build my printer i want to build parts with my printer. And with my 5k XL i had to start making and printing mods for it to be able to print TPU and sometimes small scale ASA with acceptable warping.
And last but not least neither the XL nor the CORE line are reprap or "opensource". Its not a bad choice is just not a "label" that Prusa should try to monetize (by elevating their brand premium) on it.