XLS/XL+ Requests  

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

I think realistically they will only fix the most glaring issues. Which most existing owners will have fixed by now to keep their printer operational. I would like to be wrong, but most likely the upgrade will not be worth it.
Specifically I mean things like better part cooling nozzle/fan, not having the filter exhaust blow on the mainboard, a different mainboard case that doesn't overheat all the time, nozzle brushes, better front panel position/installation/cable, camera, I/O board. This would be a 50-100$ upgrade. If you need these things you'll have them already and the available printed upgrades are good. I'd rather have them work faster on the firmware and the Buddy cam instead of getting bogged down with more hardware revisions.
After doing the common mods, the only thing I'd personally like to see is an internal USB that can power things. I'd also like to get active enclosure heating, but that's not realistic considering the enclosure design and thermal ratings of the dwarf boards. And if they could design a proper filament dryer that is synced with the printer ("start print when dry"), but that's another story.
I'm really not sure an XLS /+ will be a thing, more likely in my opinion is an XL2 in a couple years, that comes with a Core One-like (but active) enclosure and lessons learned from the XL. Hopefully a bit more rigid and cheaper/easier to build.

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

as @ntdesign said i would like for long needed improvements to find their way to XL before doing any additions. I agree about a better ventilated or designed main board case that has a kind of cooling effect (i  already printed one from printables with a 5v noctua fan). Prusalink is still limited (i can even use a custom password or delete multiple files), and i would like silicon nozzles brushes especially since i dont want to  use the brass DIY approach for my obsidian nozzles. Upon the first release and presentation it was hinted from prusa that it would be possible for XL to print with various nozzle sizes  on a print but it still havent found its way to Prusa slicer in proper manner. Maybe an improvement on the way it handles buffering and files . Needing to buffer to a usb (i think that what XL does) is bad design and a lot of us had issues with it. I bought the enclosure since i had a discount being a day one order, but for its 730E cost , without shipping, its REALLY REALLY overpriced. A box with a hepa filter and some leds. Why is this so pricy? I mean i would excuse a heated chamber but there are so many gaps that it will be more of a gimmick than an actual improvement. They presented the accordion cover in 2021 but they designed the printer like it would never have an enclosure. And as far as i liked the concept of printed parts the fact that everything was printed with PETG (and with the enclosure you have to change some toolhead components with pccf) it makes me question if they ever considered how to enclose this printer. All in all i dont know what improvements a 750 box with airflows can have.

Personally i get the feeling that XL is in the backseat now and Prusa is putting their efforts towards Core One for them not to loose their place in the 3d printer market. 

Bondtech is entering the multimaterial game with its indx approach ( https://www.bondtech.se/indx-by-bondtech/) which if it successful and with the cost they claim to have is going to be probably a very competitive approach to the 4k XL. Im saying this not because i don't like my 5th XL, on the contrary im fairly happy with it, but to clarify that by the time Prusa decides to bother with the XL or solve the existing issues  and fulfill some of the promises it made, the competitors may launch something better and cheaper.

RE:

The enclosure was obviously an afterthought. They probably thought it would be easier since they already had a box shape. It's so expensive because they have to build around the extrusions, which requires a lot of sheet bending. The Core One design makes a lot more sense, hence my guess they will probably stick with that when they come out with a successor for the XL.
I started out with silicone brushes and it sucked. They die too quickly and tend to leave chaff everywhere when they break, also they accumulate filament gunk which reattaches to the nozzle eventually. I have been using cheap brass brushes from aliexpress with my Obxidians (and different PCCF cooling nozzles) for a year, printer runs 6-12h every day. No problem at all, the nozzles look like new and I haven't had to replace the part cooling yet.

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

I agree that I don't care for any laser toolheads or anything like that. My printer is a printer, I don't want to get any nasty stuff on everything. 

I think there's a good deal of work to be done in the firmware for the XL. There's some bugs, some weird behavior, and some oddities. Also, when you properly set up soluble supports in PrusaSlicer, they work so phenomenally well that you'll never use anything else - so why is it hard to do this? Why do I have to disable the support sheath? Yes, obviously that's not very hard, but just make a special PETG/PLA support setting for us, it's an easy and nice bit of polish.

There also needs to be straightforward support for multiple nozzle sizes - this one is so blatantly obvious. Yes, we can do it already but it's not easy. I understand it's experimental, but let PrusaSlicer choose which nozzle size to use for a given feature unless I tell it otherwise. Pretty clearly, we want the largest nozzle to do perimeters and infill unless there is some very good reason not to. 

If, and only if, the enclosure can be improved, I'd probably like a better hotend heater as well. I'm in the minority because I actually kind of like the way the enclosure looks - it's janky and industrial, which is my aesthetic, but I doubt it's Prusa's aesthetic. I also can't use it since I'd have to replace my XY motor mounts and that just looks like a huge pain. I would love, more than anything, to print technical materials on my XL. But the enclosure really isn't ready for that yet. 

There also needs to be a tray underneath parked extruders. Ew, stop pooping on my desk, XL. 

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

It would be odd to not have an XLs.  Even an XL2 should be upgradable from the XL1 with as many things as possible still capability with it.  My XL has seen little down time though it took me awhile to get the build right.  Every issue has been fixed in at most 10 minutes and they aren't frequent by any means.  

I would like to see a filament buffer system like someone else has mentioned.  More like MMU for the XL tool head options.  Better cooling and being able to relocate the boards.  More control over the FW would also be welcomed.  Controlling things like the lights with the encloser.  

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

I would love an option to load filament from above the printer. This would allow me to but the XL in one of my cabinets like I do with the MK4S. The current complications I need to solve is the filament path, not creating a big bend. And the filament sensor cables being really short, preventing moving them behind/above the XL.

I've been doing that from the start.  I rotated the side sensor mounts vertically and stationed the spoolholders above leaving enough space for 2kg spools (click to expand picture):

The central holders are intended to be used when bypassing the side sensors and feeding direct to the toolhead; a semi drybox can be slotted over the spool if needed. 

Cheerio,

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

Interesting, didn't know that would work. I just measured, in theory that should just fit, leaving 0,5 cm to spare.

This is where the XL would ideally go.

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

John, if you do that you need to cut a hole in the back of the cabinet or the electronics enclosure will overheat within minutes. Mine sits 10 cm away from a wall, but is otherwise unobstructed, and I still had to add a cooling fan.

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

hmm, well cutting a hole in the back would be pointless, as there is a wall behind it. I could add some fans to create airflow, although normally you do not want airflow near your printer...

RE:

...and you would only circulate hot air. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Maybe you can cut holes in both sides and use air ducts, but this won't be as easy as you thought. The electronics case is really poorly designed, you can't easily relocate it and there is very poor circulation. The printed fan mods work well, but are also somewhat limited by the case geometry. I have a 50°C NC thermal switch on my board fan mod because I thought it would be nice if it doesn't always run, but it basically kicks in 2 minutes after I switch on the printer. Well, at least they thermally protect the board.
If you plan to use this as a cheap enclosure, you might also have to leave the door partially open - I don't know at what temperatures the Dwarf and bed control boards will fail. The mainboard pauses the print when it reaches about 80°C and it doesn't really cool down until the ambient temperature drops as well (which is basically never if it's in a cabinet, because the bed will keep heating).

And, might I add, with this setup you'll need a plan to remove the printer for maintenance & get to the back panel. Something like a rolling cart you can put it on. It's super heavy/bulky and you can't grab it at the top rails.

RE: XLS/XL+ Requests

It is good info, thx for that. There is no door on the front, it is always open so there is air going in, not intended as an enclosure. The shelf it would be on is intended for ovens, it has ventilation bracket in the back. I have been thinking about a rolling shelf, but it is heavy, so need to look for one that can hold the weight (not an immediate need). That being said, so far I have never had to get to the back of it for any reason, other that the on/off switch (easily solvable) and loading filament (which should not be an issue then).