RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
some notices more to my MMU3+CoreOne:
1) for me works this combo with HF nozzle very well, so I´ll stay with it
2) when you start counting money spended for this combo + aditional things(box etc)- you can buy Bambulab P1 with AMS for less money (or creality K2 combo or some of Anycubic possibilities) -and you can print without problems "out of the box"
Do you think Prusa is on the right way?
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
This is a good point - those systems are 'neat' and they just work. No messing around with bolting extra parts and attachments on. When you consider the cost, they are half the price too.
some notices more to my MMU3+CoreOne:
1) for me works this combo with HF nozzle very well, so I´ll stay with it
2) when you start counting money spended for this combo + aditional things(box etc)- you can buy Bambulab P1 with AMS for less money (or creality K2 combo or some of Anycubic possibilities) -and you can print without problems "out of the box"
Do you think Prusa is on the right way?
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
some notices more to my MMU3+CoreOne:
1) for me works this combo with HF nozzle very well, so I´ll stay with it
2) when you start counting money spended for this combo + aditional things(box etc)- you can buy Bambulab P1 with AMS for less money (or creality K2 combo or some of Anycubic possibilities) -and you can print without problems "out of the box"
Do you think Prusa is on the right way?
MMU3 has much faster filaments changes and much less wasted filament than AMS and alike systems. So yes, Prusa is on the right way. And XL is even better in time and filament costs savings. It depends mow much you print multicolour things, but those "cheap" AMS and alike solutions may not be cheap at all in the long run.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Gotta think the Bondtech Indx will be the happy medium between Prusa’s multitool and MMU solutions. Really hope to see a redesigned (simplified) XL with IndX tools and a full enclosure.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I'm hoping Core One is one of their first Indx upgrade kits so I get another option to consider before the year's done.
Gotta think the Bondtech Indx will be the happy medium between Prusa’s multitool and MMU solutions. Really hope to see a redesigned (simplified) XL with IndX tools and a full enclosure.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
some notices more to my MMU3+CoreOne:
1) for me works this combo with HF nozzle very well, so I´ll stay with it
2) when you start counting money spended for this combo + aditional things(box etc)- you can buy Bambulab P1 with AMS for less money (or creality K2 combo or some of Anycubic possibilities) -and you can print without problems "out of the box"
Do you think Prusa is on the right way?
MMU3 has much faster filaments changes and much less wasted filament than AMS and alike systems. So yes, Prusa is on the right way. And XL is even better in time and filament costs savings. It depends mow much you print multicolour things, but those "cheap" AMS and alike solutions may not be cheap at all in the long run.
Yes, you´re right, but difference between MMU3 and BBL AMS(with P1) in wasting filament is not so critical.( You can believe me, I have both here and had tested it) Of course all depends also on type of printed object etc. but all in all, if you are not printing multicolor object 20 hours/day difference in wasted fillament is accepteble. And XL is far away ahead, but it is " another level". And for me MMU3 is more than overpriced.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
@Voxel: I actually think your CoreBoxx idea is quite ingenious. But unfortunately, it's not suitable for my setup, as the printer is close to the wall and access to the MMU would always require moving forward. I agree with @iftibashir that the MMU requires the most maintenance and would therefore be better positioned outside the CoreBoxx.
In this case, a smaller CoreBoxx version would be advantageous; it could be placed next to the printer and only contain the spool holders. The advantage is a smaller installation depth. And only the side panels would need to be shortened.
I know there are other construction suggestions for this, but I would still like to have the features of the CoreBoxx.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I'm hoping Core One is one of their first Indx upgrade kits so I get another option to consider before the year's done.
I am skeptical that this will happen. I can't see Bondtech pulling off a Core One upgrade kit without Prusa's support (on the slicer and firmware side). And I can't see Prusa giving up their Nextruder and hotend concept -- which is core to the design, and a source of recurring revenue from the nozzles -- for a third-party solution.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
Thanks!
I agree that it is not ideal for some setups.
For easier access to the MMU there is also another amazing design called the MMU box, it is No.1 on the store now.
It does not include the MMU, and is only the spool management section.
There is also 1 COREBOXX user that mounted the MMU outside the COREBOXX for easier access (on the back of the service door)
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I did have a look at the MMU BOX and while it look slick a great solution, it's a LOT of printing before even getting to put it together etc. Too much for me to consider TBH.
Thanks!
I agree that it is not ideal for some setups.
For easier access to the MMU there is also another amazing design called the MMU box, it is No.1 on the store now.
It does not include the MMU, and is only the spool management section.
There is also 1 COREBOXX user that mounted the MMU outside the COREBOXX for easier access (on the back of the service door)
RE:
And there's those of us who don't need or even want a "box" solution.
If you have one printer and a handful of filaments, I can see why a box makes sense and looks aesthetically pleasing. I have several printers next to each other (so the Core's sideloading is a pain), constantly go between PETG, PLA, PCCF, ASA, and TPU (something like 80+ filaments in use and stored in a converted Billy cabinet), dry my filaments in PrintDry dryers, and feed my printers from a RepRack with filament rollers and rewinders (i seem to have settled on Filamentalist) from above.
So in this kind of environment, keeping the MMU separate from the filament storage solution makes a lot of sense. My primary interest in this discussion thread was how to get rid of the buffer with associated waste of space. After many dead ends Filamentalist has emerged as the winner for me in that department.
I hope that whatever they come up with for the current and future generations of MMU, it still allows us to mount the MMU close to the printer, easily accessible as some have pointed out, and pursue our own buffering and storage solutions. And maybe offer an integrated MMU/storage approach such as Coreboxx as an option for those who would benefit from it.
Formerly known on this forum as @fuchsr -- https://foxrun3d.com/
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I am skeptical that this will happen. I can't see Bondtech pulling off a Core One upgrade kit without Prusa's support (on the slicer and firmware side). And I can't see Prusa giving up their Nextruder and hotend concept -- which is core to the design, and a source of recurring revenue from the nozzles -- for a third-party solution.
This could be a good opportunity for Prusa to finally offer a more up-to-date default hotend, i.e. hardened and capable of heating to more than 290°C.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
[...] And I can't see Prusa giving up their Nextruder and hotend concept -- which is core to the design, and a source of recurring revenue from the nozzles -- for a third-party solution.
This could be a good opportunity for Prusa to finally offer a more up-to-date default hotend, i.e. hardened and capable of heating to more than 290°C.
You might have misunderstood my point. It was about making money with after-sales, not about giving customers more stuff for free with the original sale. 😛
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I understood, sure they need to make their investments profitable. Relying on a proven design is good to make easy profit, but in the long run they need to be more disruptive to compete with bbl. 😉
The brand is known for the innovative features they produced in the past and its "high quality", but sadly the last few years there is no more wow effect and worse, the CORE One is nothing I can name a "high quality" design. 😐
When I got my first i3 MK2 I was like a child, I couldn't sleep anymore, I was so fascinated. 🤩 The CORE One is another story, I currently prefer to keep my MK4S instead of to convert it... Quieter, lighter, more accessible, faster to start a print and... no VFAs.
But don't get me wrong, I like the CORE One too, it's a cool machine that need a bit lot more polishing.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
I hope they don’t go that route. This is such a more cost effective method with very few drawbacks. If they don’t adapt to this innovation they will be left behind. They have worked with Bondtech to adopt specific designs to the Prusa system and see no reason why they wouldn’t do the same here, even if it means modifying the Nextruder and all-around cooling.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
As announced by Prusa, a longer MMU cable will be available by the end of June 2025.
https://www.prusa3d.com/de/produkt/original-prusa-mmu3-community-version-cable-for-core-one-2/
So it should be possible to install the MMU in the right-side recess.
The standard PTFE tube could retain its original routing (with clearance) and be connected directly to the MMU selector.
Has anyone thought about this yet?
RE:
As announced by Prusa, a longer MMU cable will be available by the end of June 2025.
https://www.prusa3d.com/de/produkt/original-prusa-mmu3-community-version-cable-for-core-one-2/
So it should be possible to install the MMU in the right-side recess.
The standard PTFE tube could retain its original routing (with clearance) and be connected directly to the MMU selector.
Has anyone thought about this yet?
Does anyone know how much longer this cable is? I don't see that detail in the announcement, nor in the description of the community version of the MMU3. I offered up the MMU3 on the top-right side of the CORE One and estimated that an additional 30cm to 50cm might be needed in that location. I did join the help chat queue to ask, but the wait time was just increasing the longer I waited!
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
This is exactly what I would like. So I could have the option of removing the MMU if I needed to without having to alter the machine too much.
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
So it should be possible to install the MMU in the right-side recess.
The standard PTFE tube could retain its original routing (with clearance) and be connected directly to the MMU selector.
Not sure whether that is possible. Can the MMU reliably feed filament through the sharp 90 degree curve of the Teflon tube (which is required to keep the original lid in place)?
Prusa's MMU solution replaces that 90 degree bend with a straight entry of the filament into the Nextruder. And it adds that bulky hood to provide extra room for the wide curve of the Teflon tube. (That hood does not actually cover the MMU, which sits behind it. It seems that it only covers the moving Teflon tube.)
RE: Core One MMU3 Prototypes
When ordering the panels for the COREBOXX from Blurolls it comes with a longer cable. I don't know if contacting Blurolls they can sell the cable separate from the kit for those who can't wait for Prusa.
I've printed off the COREBOXX but waiting for an update on a rewinder system in the mean time I'm going to print off the top sitting MMU3 community version and see which of the two is most reliable: https://www.printables.com/model/1295332-prusa-core-one-mmu3-community-version