RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
Something is not right with them. They are really dim. Not a priority at the moment.
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
After seeing more of the INDX system, it honestly looks like an afterthought. I like the concept of multiple heads and INDX as an idea is exciting, but the execution feels lacking. The filament boxes or dry boxes or whatever we want to call them look cumbersome, awkward, and annoying to deal with. It is still a passive solution and filaments will eventually absorb moisture again even when stored in those boxes.
Because of that, the whole INDX ecosystem feels at least twelve to eighteen months away from being genuinely usable in a day to day workflow. I cannot help but compare it to the Bambu AMS, which is more complex mechanically but offers a far more hands off experience. What I have seen so far does not translate into a better workflow for me.
I think you are comparing apples to oranges there. Bambu's AMS is a very convenient, compact filament management solution -- but it is also very slow and wasteful when switching filaments. The INDX system is first and foremost a very fast, low-waste nozzle/filament switching solution. It gives you a lot of flexibility where to place the filament spools -- the solution demo'ed by Prusa at FormNext is just one option which may not work for everyone.
Personally I don't intend to attach the spools to the side of the Core One, but place them on a shelf just above the printer. And I will probably not buy Prusa's passive dry-boxes, but an actively heated four-spool filament dryer. The Creality Space Pi X4 looks like it has the right form factor for the arrangement I have in mind, and I like its two separate temperature zones.
What is driving your "12 to 18 months" assumption? If we assume that the INDX ships at the end of March as announced, what will be missing to use it in a practical workflow?
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
If I was Prusa, I would introduce a 4/8 filament spool enclosure to put over C1 / C1L with heat and moisture control. After all, filament info is already known by the software and it would not be a big deal to link both devices through I2C for instance.
That said, even if I disagree with a 12/18 months delay, I would not buy the 1st INDX version until it is a Prusa branded one, and I appreciate Prusa wisdom to let early adopters and enthusiasts debug this technology before getting rid of my Nextruder.
RE:
[...] I would not buy the 1st INDX version until it is a Prusa branded one,
Because Prusa are known for their utmost diligence in polishing a technology before they release it under their brand? 😉
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
You are a scholar and a gentleman sir! I am rocking Report to follow. THANK YOU!
Even with your phots, the instructions, and holding the parts in my hand, it was a head scratcher.
I did a postmortem autopsy in the problem and and have conclusive analysis to follow. Hopefully, it will help someone else...
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE:
Personally I don't intend to attach the spools to the side of the Core One, but place them on a shelf just above the printer. And I will probably not buy Prusa's passive dry-boxes, but an actively heated four-spool filament dryer. The Creality Space Pi X4 looks like it has the right form factor for the arrangement I have in mind, and I like its two separate temperature zones.
Currently in the middle of building one of these: INBXX - for PRUSA INDX
Not in a particular hurry given that I've got 3-4 months before I'll actually need it.
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
Currently in the middle of building one of these: INBXX - for PRUSA INDX
Is the INBXX intended as a pure filament storage box, or can it also be sealed and equipped with a heater?
I would not mind a solution where the filament tubes come out in the lower front, instead of the front lid connections offered by the Creality X4. But I will probably go for the ready-made Creality solution which includes heaters and control electronics, for essentially the same price as the INBXX plans and parts kit.
RE:
Is the INBXX intended as a pure filament storage box, or can it also be sealed and equipped with a heater?
There is an optional heater that I will also be installing. Here is a link to the manual: INBXX Single Manual
The active heater add-on is one designed for the CoreBoxx: COREBOXX Heated Semi-smart add-on
No idea how airtight this is though. I'll probably transfer my engineering filaments to it from a dry box and use an active heater with it. Or it could end up in the closet. Will see...
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase? Y-Axis Failure
Lessons Learned on Y-Axis self-test fail.
I now have green checks across the board! Thanks to those with constructive input.
Being that this was a problem that drug out and many had input on, as I resolved the orientation of the gantry pulleys.
I did a review and recap of things learned. When I managed IT helpdesks, I called this a postmortem autopsy, because they killed us to resolve. Hopefully, those that should review this list…will. Much was learned other than what the problem and fix was. To recap, no matter what I did, I could not get the Y-Axis test to pass. I could print things that did not approach the edges of the sheet. If I did, I got terrible layer shifts. All things here and from chat indicated a failure somewhere that was impacting the Y-Axis system. I felt from the beginning that it was probably something I had done wrong.
After hours on chat with Prusa support and repeated "check the belt tension" suggestions, I had trouble convincing them it was not the belt tension. I spent hours disassembling and reassembling the Nextruder in attempts to locate the problem and fix it. But I grew weary of the "check the belt tension" stock answer from all the multiple chats on this problem. Multiple tries, and multiple photos did not reveal a solution. A couple of days ago I used the axis move functions to watch the extreme movements of the nextruder.
I saw something that made me feel more like an assembly problem. But before I broke down the XY assembly and spent more hours reassembling, I posted a photo of the suspect issue. I was advised, correctly, that the orientation of the pulley system on the right side of the gantry was incorrect. I disassembled the gantry pulleys, re-ran the belts and put it back together. Y-axis passed!
The point of this long report here is for others’ benefit. Some of the symptoms I had were not odd, but together, they turned out to point to something other than a belt tension issue. I never had problems getting the acoustic tuner to work. Now let me list all the problems/symptoms I ran into during assembly that seemed to point to this pulley orientation problem. Some may feel these systems had nothing to do with my problem, but guess what, they all went away.
PROBLEM(S) #1. I struggled for hours assembling the belts onto the holder that attaches to the gantry. To me, they were just not long enough by a few millimeters. After assembly. The belts would pull out during tensioning.
Things I tried - I could not get the belts tensioned without them pulling free of the holder. Hours and hours of breaking down the nextruder and reinstalling, to no avail. I bought a roll of the correct belt material off Amazon to make longer belts and then trim. Worked fine to resolve the assembly problem, HOWEVER, support kept pointing to the third-party belt material as a possible problem with Y-axis (which I doubted). I got the information from Prusa that the XL belts are the same but 70CM longer and three times the price. I ordered 2 and replaced the 3rd party the other night and reassembled just so Prusa support would not say that was the problem. New MK belts installed and trimmed tuned properly, not solving the Y-Axis test failure. I guess that possibly eliminated the question of the 3rd party materials since I now had OG Prusa belts. It was after this that I spent hours moving the bed, gantry, and watching. Then I posted a photo and we found the problem.
LESSONS LEARNED #1 - It now appears that when someone is struggling with the belts just "Not being long enough" it is/may be a symptom of a pulley orientation. Sounds like having the pulley improperly installed, though it still prints, shortens the belts a few millimeters of usable length. But that is enough to cause installation and tunning frustrations. After orienting the pulleys properly, the OG belts will install now with the "4 or 5" teeth sticking out. Whereas before, I could barely get 3 and they would pull out.
Also, when the installation frustrations is taken together with belts pulling out and seeming too short, it could/may point to the pulley orientation being off. Also, the fact I only got edge and layer shifts when printing to the sheet edges seems to point to this same problem if taken together with the other 2 or 3 symptoms/problems.
PROBLEM #2. Being constantly told it was a belt tension problem and/or more or less being told I didn't know what I was doing. Seems I do. In this same train of problem solving, once the Belt Tuning Wizard came out, support seemed to think that was the cure-all for all ills. I could not get the tuning wizard to show me my belts “vibrating.” I felt that it was a white LED issue because mine were not very bright. Then I was told by Prusa support 3 times by 3 different people that the white LEDS had nothing to do with how the belt tuning wizard works. Seems they do not understand how a stroboscopic system works. FYI - The word stroboscopic means flashing light used to study motions. And this strobing solution is very old tech used on direct drive turntables 40 years ago. I had told support at one point, and posted here, that with my LEDs, I had to wait until evening for my room to be dark enough for me to attempt to utilize the strobing system. I was told by one poster here I was full of BS because I should be able to see the strobing with the lights on. That is a correct assessment...if my white LEDs were working properly, which they now are. In addition, the ever so slightly reduced length of the belts due to the pulley mis-orientation seems to impact the accuracy of the stroboscopic wizard. The visible “movement” of the resonant wave was only very slight. Reviewing my HAM radio knowledge, I now understand the impact of the few millimeters of belt length may have been dramatically impacting the vibration effect. I worked on the white LEDs so they show better now, and with the adjusted pulley, the belt tuning wizard works fine in all night, though seems to indicate 1 or 2 Hz tighter than the acoustic tuner, after fixing the pulley and the LEDS.
LESSONS LEARNED on #2. - Don't assume someone else is full of BS just because something that works on your machine doesn't work on mine and think you know all when you are not working on my machine. I had a secondary problem with the LEDS I was not pursuing because I am able to use the cell phone app fine. Saying something like this will never give you any credibility in support.
Also, once I told support the 5th to 10th time, the belts are tuned fine, it is time to move on. When the obvious solution is tried and fails repeatedly, it doesn't mean the person on the other end of the phone is incompetent or unable to follow instructions and help in the problem. I know this from nearly 40 years of online, telephone, and onsite IT support. You have to assume that if it can be assembled, installed, or done wrong and come close to working, it can be done.
When the obvious solutions are not resolving the problem and they do 95% of the time, it is time to back up and look for Murphy. During my years of computer tech support, I solved many problems that the standard solution "always" worked, but didn’t, by taking a computer completely apart and just putting it back together again. That was where I was before another person caught it with my Core One.
Also, when the stock answer does not resolve a problem, you must look for other problems you feel may not be related. Granted, you usually, and hopefully, learn by resolving the same or similar problem before. Hence, group discussion and documentation of problems are a must within a support organization.
Let us hope, that those supplying support are capable of a few things:
A system that tracks problems and solutions that is searchable. And a system that can be reviewed and retrieved based on a customer ID (or some common denominator) that will show you what 9 other techs have already tried. This keeps both the tech and the customer from wasting their time.
Also, a tracking system that shows time spent on new or recurring problems. That feedback will help with training technicians, modifying documentation and/or products to reduce calls on the same problem. This works wonders in holding down support costs to the company. Been there, managed it, got the T-shirt.
Not thinking/assuming that the right answer is always the only solution. Remember Murphy. If the obvious answer is not working, repeating the solution 20 times will not change the outcome. Remember the definition of “insanity.”
Understand how your product works and if you don’t learn. If a customer tells you that you may be incorrect, guess what, you may be wrong or lack understanding. Sometimes the customer is smarter than the support tech.
OVERAL LESSONS LEARNED FROM THIS and Suggestions to help others.
During assembly of the belts on the gantry/holder, here are some tips I discovered after numerous assemblies and breakdowns.
Pull the belts almost tight on the plate that attaches to the gantry. Not completely tight. ALSO, where it says loosen belt tensioners to help with installation, my suggestion, do not loosen the tensioners to the point the frame of that holds the actually pulley extends past the edge of the pulley holder, not the pulley itself. If you do and you pull the belts tight then screw down the plate, you may run into the problem of being unable to square the gantry contact because it is bumping against the pulley bracket, not the bracket holding the pulley assembly. If this happens, you get the joy of disassembling the nextruder and adjusting the belts. You can tell I did this...several times.
And this leads me to another strong suggestion. BEFORE you attached the full nextruder assemble to the bracket that you pull the belts through and then screw down, do a preliminary belt tensioning test. No reason you can’t at this point and it will save the joy of breaking down the nextruder to reposition the belts. Go ahead and check the gantry square, check its contact, and tune withing a few Hz. After I started doing this, my adjustments for the final belt tension were minimal.
PROBLEM #3. Early layer shifts - This was my secondary problem once I tried to print something that went from edge to edge of the plate (The MMU Community box). This drove me nuts. And guess what Prusa supports solution was--Use the fabulous cure all Belt Tuning Wizard to make sure your belt tension is correct. Even though I said, It is, It is, It is, we couldn’t get passed the only solution being tuning the belts. I have tuned the belts so many times now, I can nearly do it by ear within 2 or 3 Hz.
LESSONS LEARNED on #3. - Seems to be that early layer shifting and repeated failures to print from edge to edge (and the pattern tests usually passed), could indicate the pulley orientation problem, IF it is taken together with the other symptoms. Layer shifting can have numerous other causes, OTHER THAN BELT TENSION. Here, I am taking the problem together with the other problems.
Another lesson learned during all my assembly and reassembly of the nextruder looking for solutions - Suddenly having filament grinding issues and head banging. Though, not sure how the head banging goes with this. If you suddenly get filament being chewed up after working on the nextruder and/or the gears...make sure the tiny thin washer is still between the gears and the motor mount! Yes, I did this a few times. Amazon has them by the dozens cheap. Also, make sure you replaced the tube the idler arms rides on and the grub screw in it is tight. Yes, I lost the tube once, and no, you can’t get them off Amazon, or anywhere else I think.
The only easy solution if you misplace it is to buy a $13 MK parts kit from Prusa, plus shipping. You can't get just the tube from them. I managed to cut some brass tubing and make one...serious PITA.
I know that the searches for problems looks at titles and hopefully the body. But here are words and phrases that should be a part of this problem search.
Y-axis self-test fails
Belt tension fails
Core One belts seem to be short
Core One belts pull out of holder
Early layer shifts
First or second layer shift
Cannot print to edge of plate
These three symptoms/problems taken together – Y-axis test fails - Early layer shifts – Belts seem to short and pull out.
Some possible solutions to prevent this compound problem
In the instructions on assembling the XY assembly. Keep the photo and instructions information orientation constant for Front and Back.
Since some of these parts are ambidextrous (may not be a good thing) document/photograph correct assembly and orientation if there is potential problem of incorrect orientation, dur to parts orientation not being unique and ambidextrous. The cost savings of printing one part instead of two may be less than the cost of support issues. Track and find out. Support cost money and so does customer frustration
I am not fully faulting Prusa support here. The 24/7 support availability awesome, but this industry is relatively new and growing pains are inevitable with product development and support. And you are putting a highly technical product in Murphy’s hands. I did this type of support and managed the same during the early days of computers for nearly 20 years. Murphy is more of an expert than any of us will ever be!
I developed a database system that analyzed problems and retrieved possible solutions based on similar problems. This was before SQL and AI. The solution retrieval system we developed was available by calling into a server and looking up your symptoms after our regular hours and on weekends. Sounds simple, but this years before the internet. Some of the products we manufactured in those early days allowed the addition of a number terminals on a server. No Networks like Novel in those days. Unix only and serial terminals. Downtime on the a meant someone’s company was down! We sold international so the development of an afterhours system that supplied the same information we used internal for after hours on dialup was an industry leader in those days.
Support costs a lot of money and if the tools are not used to track problems, time on problems, analysis of problems, and training solutions, or not making changes to product, documentation, or other, the support cost to reduce support issues and costs, it can turn into no repeat customers due to frustration. Online/phone support is a hard job, and failing to analyze support issues adds more hard costs as well as costs in sales. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt(s)! Retired after 40 years of it. Don’t miss it at all!
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
Hi @Mac-N4MCC, (I preferred McCluskey btw, easier to type...),
Thanks for the extensive review. If I may complement it with one more recommendation for general troubleshooting: Keep an open mind and don't rule out the possibility that you may have made a small mistake somewhere. In fact, assume that you probably have made a mistake... 😉
Hence, always take a step back to double-check your work; or ask others to do it. In the present case, the incorrect assembly was easily visible by looking at the printer or sharing a photo. Also, process any feedback with an open mind -- in this case, @hyiger's first response to your posts in both threads was "if the belts appear too short, something might be wrong with the belt routing".
-- Separate from that: What was the problem with your LED illumination, and how did you fix it?
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
The "War and Peace" of forum posts. I asked the friendly neighborhood AI to summarize it for me:
The author recounts a prolonged troubleshooting process for a persistent Y-axis self-test failure on a Prusa Core One that ultimately traced back not to belt tension, but to an incorrectly oriented gantry pulley; this subtle assembly error shortened the effective belt length by a few millimeters, causing belts to feel too short, pull out of their holders, defeat the belt-tuning wizard, produce early layer shifts, and prevent reliable edge-to-edge printing, even though the printer otherwise seemed functional. After reorienting the pulleys correctly, all issues—including Y-axis test failures, tuning problems, and layer shifts—were resolved. The post emphasizes that clustered symptoms matter more than isolated ones, that support should move beyond repetitive “stock” solutions when they fail, and that both assembly documentation and support systems would benefit from better tracking, clearer orientation guidance for ambidextrous parts, and a more systematic, experience-driven diagnostic approach grounded in real-world troubleshooting lessons
RE:
My friendly (?) non-artificial intelligence summarized it as: "Support could have given me better advice. I don't think I had anything to do with the problem." 😉
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
I would not be so demanding against support, because I experienced also a problem:
My C1 assembly was really smooth, following each and every page and checking each and every bit of hardware. Of course the corexy assembly is a bit tricky, but following the above rules, I was able to make the 1st run smooth the 1st time.
golden rule here : TAKE TIME, each day was for one or two chapter(s), with a mandatory re-check of the previous step, no exception.
Then came a funny story. After a dozen hours, printers stopped abruptly with the kind of error that any moderately skilled guy could diagnose as an electronic failure. No communication between main board and io.
support reacted in few minutes, sending a new io board without any problem after having instructed me to do a couple of manipulations.
after few days, received the board, changed it, and the same fault appeared.
Support again, but a different guy who was aware of my problem and after a few minutes, main board was sent.
Few days again then the C1 ran like a charm and so does since 3 months.
Morale: don’t be too impatient when you assemble a complex machine, don’t expect it to run smoothly the 1st 100 hours if no factory test was run, I mean running a few hours in max load.
Assembly of a 3D printer is not a junior game, and yes, electronic can fail after a few hours, electronic engineers call this infant mortality and this is why a burn-in is requested in factories.
The only thing I could really complain against Prusa, is probably to rely only on statistics to handle electronic quality, but I have no info on this.
And I have to say that each and every contact with support went really smooth and professional.
I understand then why Prusa did not sell C1L in self assembly.
Support could not handle the pain of having a customer stuck to a main AC cable hundred of miles away without any solution to call the emergency force.
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
For me the Core One goes from hero to zero on a regular basis, it works fine for a while and then just has a problem. It feels like a constant stream of issues that just stops progress which is frustrating. It also so slow to do anything useful, I understand about the heating up, etc but nozzle clean - deeply irritating, bed levelling - really re-measuring the same spot multiple times then failing, it was fine for the print that had just finished. You upgrade Prusa Slicer and now get random problems in prints, the list just goes on and on.
I do not want to have to contact support to get it working every time as it just wastes my time, I need a reliable, robust printer - the Core One isn't it.
Genuinely if I had the funds I would just buy something else, the Core One was supposed to be a solution but is becoming a frustrating problem.
This is a good summary of my experience as well. Prusa's "open source" philosophy and security stood out when I was researching printers for my business and we settled on the Core One. I was the one responsible for the research/purchase and am the only one that operates the printer. I ordered fairly early after launch and it took way past the lead time to arrive with multiple delays. While the initial lead time was expected, the additional delays did leave a sour taste from the beginning. The Core One does not produce any of our products; it is used to make some R&D prototypes, but primarily jigs and upgrade/repair parts to our other equipment. Usage goes in waves depending on our work. We have 334hr printing this month (December) and 557hr in total. The heavy December usage is normal as that is our slowest time when we typically work on facility upgrades. Statistics say we use ASA 42%, PETG 29%, and PLA 29%. This is a great demonstrator of how we use the printer - 29% of the time we are doing fast prototyping, the rest of the time is making functional parts. I state this because I feel that an individual's usage of the printer dramatically changes their perspective of it.
The Core One annihilates PLA as any printer should. PETG is nearly problem free, I can only think of one instance where we had an issue (layer shift). However, ASA has really brought out this printer's weak points. Our success with ASA is 50/50 at best. I have a stack of PC, Nylon, and PET sitting on the bench that I haven't touched with STL's in cue. The Core One should have no issues with these filaments, but I haven't yet even attempted them due to our issues with the much cheaper ASA. Just the time I think I have the printer dialed in, I get another massive failure. Here is the summary of my complaints.
- Belt tension just isn't consistent. There are reports on this forum of the tension going out of spec with temperature, and they are correct. A good belt tension at room temp will print PLA and PETG for days straight with no problems. Run ASA with a 55C chamber and I get layer shifts. Change belt tension to match 55C and then the head banging comes back when homing with the occasional layer shift with PETG. This isn't a scientific process since there has been many updates since launch that directly affect belt tension/homing and I rarely print the same gcode multiple times, but gut feeling says the Core One is incredibly sensitive to belt tension. This is bad when it can't maintain tension across a fairly narrow working temp range.
- The passively heated chamber design is worthless. This will heavily depend on your climate/work area, so hold the pitchforks. In the winter the office runs 12c and no matter the print time I can only reach 40c chamber with added insulation and closing the holes in the panels. We reach 22c in the summer and can hit 45c chamber. This isn't good enough and doesn't match advertised specs. Add in the fact that it takes many, many hours to reach these temps and the printer shuts heating off with inactivity, frustration is a mild understatement. I added a chamber heater design from Printables and can hold a steady 55c in less than 2 minutes. This would have been so simple for Prusa to add to the design. Maybe it was just my inexperience in 3d printing, but I strongly feel the passively heated chamber was oversold in its capability. Considering I primarily print ASA (and PC/Nylon if I can gain faith in the printer), this is a major miss. However, a solvable miss...that uses parts from a competitor.
- The MMU3 was a major selling factor and I ordered it immediately upon release. It is another disappointment. I have done some multi-color prints (PLA and ASA) with it and that works fairly well. The MMU3 is time consuming to get setup, but it has functioned well as a color changer. Multi color isn't something we normally do, however. However, using it as a multi-material unit? That is unreliable at best and more time consuming to clean out all the debris when it does fail. Our main plan behind the MMU3 was as a material selector and to use different material for supports. That has not worked well for two reasons. 1. Different materials can require different tension settings to feed properly. 2. The buffer unit is wide open exposed, not good for material that needs to be printed from a drybox. Our MMU3 is still installed, but bypassed. In fairness my issues with the MMU3 are mostly that it did not meet my expectations and my research should have been deeper before purchasing, but it is called multi material afterall.
- That was your excuse for feet, really? They didn't last a day and the printer scratched my solid maple top. Luckily, Printables to the rescue.
- The speed complaints are real. It is slow to get going.
Summary of my praises:
- Support has been great. I've only contacted support a couple of times (thermistor failures) and they've quickly sent a replacement. I've not contacted them over my other complaints as I know what the answer will be.
- Beautiful looking machine. Chrome doesn't make it go, but fit and finish is nice. The MMU3 on top does ruin that a bit.
- Serviceability has been reasonably easy. Nozzle changes could be simpler, but we don't change very frequently. 0.6 hardened is a workhorse.
- When it works, it works great. The prints right out of the printer with no clean up has received endless praise from everyone. Print quality is noticed. The prints are dimensionally accurate out of the box as well.
- Some of our prints are proprietary and guarded, what drove us to Prusa, and we feel confident that they remain secure.
- Made in the EU. Prusa's history of long term product support.
As inbox stated, my feelings towards the Core One go back and forth. Sometimes it saves the day, sometimes it ruins it. In the end I personally am still a Prusa fan overall, although the Core One hasn't done much to win over our Bambu fan employees. I'll leave you with my single biggest issue with this printer: Prusa's marketing department. Prusa loves making announcements and teasing products and then the Core One L and INDX came out of left field (at least for me, I never seen anything prereleased, but we are not in the 3d printing industry and its not really a hobby either). It appears that the L and INDX is exactly what we needed, not the Core One and MMU3. A better chamber heating system and what should prove to be truly multi-material. In the end I'm left feeling like the Core One was a beta product that we paid good money for. For this reason, despite initial appearances of the L and INDX, we will not be purchasing, at least until it is proven out.
Lastly, for those that do not care for these "complaint threads", I feel it is good info to have out there. Prusa can use the feedback for improvements and potential customers can get a better idea of the product. Yes, one is more likely to complain the praise, but the sour taste last longer than sweet for many.
Lost another 12hr ASA print last night from a layer shift nearly at the end. Belt tension at 103/100 at 55c chamber temp. Lowered belt tension and trying again. About 10 layers in now, so hopefully I can sign off and not babysit it. Wrote this novel in the time it took from hitting print to 10 layers, with an active chamber heater.
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
I have been there in my 20 years of doing high level tech support. But, I was sure I did something wrong, but after the 10th, "your belts are not adjusted right..." it got old.
Doing tech support is a hard job, but the pat answer does not always work.
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
Sorry about the diatribe. That comes from working on thingsin the middle of the night. Your summary is better! 😀
We do learn from doing, and redoing...
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
The acoustic tuner worked for me do the LEDs were not a priority, but now that they work they are great.
I pulled them completely out and rerun the cable. While checking I found a small pinch on the wire. I feel like it may have been a partial short in a pinch. Cleaned it all up and they work. You know how it is, sometimes taking something apart and just putting it back together will fix it.
Even after someone else saw the pulley orientation issue, I sat an scratched my head looking at the photos and instructions again for 20 minutes. I would have killed for people being able to take a photo and send it to me 30 years ago. I had tobwork in an environment of multiple DIP switches and jumpers.
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
I humbly suggest the fastest and cheapest (in the end ) solution to all this trouble and agravation : get rid of that overpriced lousy POS that Prusa named Core One and get a sensibly designed printer build with good quality components, preferably running on Klipper. Choose your brand, but not a Prusa XY core machine, please, The gantry of the Core One is an abomination designed by clueless amateurs.
RE: Core One owners regretting their purchase?
In the overall assessment of all my problems, most were s Forrest problem they support didn't catch right off the bat.
During my 30 years of doing tech support the most important thing I learned is that if a user can, they will! I just waited too long to through the problem out to the entire knowledge pool.
We just had to get past the stock answer of "reboot, reinstall, check for upgrades..."
I was completely open to the problem being something I did wrong, just had to wait until someone smarter than me figured it out!
Extra HAM Radio - N4MCC
RE:
Thanks for your detailed posts, I like to deep dive before assembling a big project and this will help me avoid the pitfalls as I begin the process today, appreciate your detailed breakdowns.