It’s printing. 9 and a half hours from now, we’ll know. 
I’m not using support interface material for this print. I wonder changing the cooling will fix one issue, but create another one with the supports welding. There’s probably a setting for that somewhere…
Thanks.
I use the default mounts and they work perfectly.
For what it is worth, this has been my identical experience with my Core One+ looking significantly better than my H2C prints. I’m not a fanboy of either company and just enjoy great tech and good competition. What I do know is that the H2C is still phenomenal and I know there’s no way it is a hardware limitation - I’m sure everyone else is right that it is firmware and slicer tweaks that will get it there. At first I thought maybe it was hardware with the heavy H2C tool head but no matter how slow I go it doesn’t matter. I would say my biggest comparison note is that overall the Prusa Core One surface finish is significantly more uniform and polished looking. I know in the next H2C update we have some awesome features to look forward to, but I am curious to see if Bambu does some quality tweaks on that side as well. Regardless, I know it’ll get there soon enough and I feel it is more than good enough where I don’t feel like I’m beta testing the printer.
Here is the backside of the print with the changed cooling settings. It is MUCH better and resulted in no printing issues.
Core One L left, H2C right.
It’s not a guess game on Core One L because it doesn’t have a chamber heater.
With H2C’s active chamber heating, a lot of settings need to be tested and tweaked.
Thanks so much for sharing these and your findings. I’m working hard trying to find different settings as well. That seems like an improvement! Do you agree the Prusa still looks better overall? I noticed similar things where the Prusa has more pronounced VFAs at times but still looks more uniform.
Sorry if you brought this up already, but have you looked at identical matching settings to the Prusa as best as you can? I know you can’t do everything the same due to hardware differences, but I’m going to person a test where I set all acceleration and speed settings to be identical. However, my concern is the heavy weight of the H2C will not make it a valid comparison. Also, I was going to use a standard calibration cube for comparisons, unless you have something you think would be better?
I have to remind you that C1L lacks a chamber heater so the printing chamber temperature is drastically different between the machines. Which is why it requires a tweak for H2C because different filaments might behave very drastically different.
What type of build plates and especially which color build plate did you use?
The fact that it only seems to happen close to the build plate makes me think that there is a difference there.
A hot black build plate emits quite a bit of heat towards a black object. A light colored build plate would have less of that effect.
EDIT: just read that the chamber is not heated on the Prusa. Definitely a huge impact on cooling. Had not read the entire thread yet.
Hey guys,
Not sure if the chamber heater parts were addressed to me, but this is with any build plate from Textured PEI to BIQU Cryogrip as well as any type of filament even when the chamber heater is off. Doesn’t matter if it’s ABS or PLA. I don’t want to hijack his thread too much as I was just chiming in mainly, but I can do some direct comparisons tomorrow. It’s not just limited near the build plate in my case at least. The differences are seen mostly on the Z axis. It almost looks like some z banding but I don’t think it actually is, just more inconsistencies. It does make me wonder if the cooling like you guys mention is the culprit due to uneven cooling times.
Again, while the Prusa does look significantly better, that doesn’t mean the H2C looks bad, but I know there’s no way the hardware isn’t capable to look as good as the Prusa. I have to imagine there are slicer settings as well as firmware updates that will put it on par if not better.
I’m definitely all ears to run some tests if anyone wants me to test something. I’m sure OP is as well. I think what I’m talking about will be more clear when I send pictures tomorrow. I’m only sharing them here since it reinforces what OP was sharing.
both look pretty good, for me the h2c looks a bit more ‘crisp’ and to my liking, but it’s really only nitpicking, they are both solid
bambu by default enabled some features that tend to be over protective and can cause wall shine look very different. an example is pre-start fan time, and keep fan on. this could be the culprit of many wall defects but it does help to prevent catastrophic failures in other prints. thus it’s important to check the slicing results especially, fan speeds view and layer time view.
They both look decent but not good. What i see is that the prusa stacks layers in the z, way better. The Bambu has way less VFA and a better PA setting. Every printer should have 1.5 belts now
The chamber on the Core1L isn’t heated with a dedicated chamber hater, but it has a recirculating fan setup that uses the fans under the heated bed to effectively heat the chamber, and it can maintain a consistent 55C, and actually won’t start printing until that temp is achieved. It’s a different way to get there and I never really ran my other printers with dedicated heaters above 55C for ABS.
The X1C also doesn’t have a chamber heater and generally wouldn’t ever achieve 55C, maybe 45C in my cool basement, but would make rather perfect ABS parts of the same style and size from generic ABS. I don’t think adding the chamber heater to the H2C inherently made worse parts - I think it’s just the generic ABS profile for the H2C hasn’t been dialed in. I got used to Bambu doing this kind of thing in advance. I understand it not being dialed in for some esoteric filament that is seldom used, but ABS is probably one of the top 3 3D printer filaments in use.
Both Core1L and H2C printers had their textured gold colored PEI build plates installed.
The solution was turning the fanspeed down overall on the H2C to never exceed 50%, and down to 25% on overhangs. It might also help to reduce the chamber somewhat. But reducing the fan speed made the H2C parts similar to what the Core One parts looked like.
They both look decent but not good.
Well, the parts in the hand look good. As I said earlier, I delivered a set of these Core 1L printed parts to some plastic engineers, and they were very pleased with the results. I purposely made those photos as unflattering as I could to zoom in and see every possible flaw, and I think they worked for that. The other side of this part is the ‘working’ side, and on that side, both machines did a very fine job even before the fan speed changes.
Sorry, I just meant both printers have room to grow. Im sure the parts look great in person.
Seems the Core One has the nicer parts except for the VFA’s.
I also get the “Z-banding” look on my H2C prints. But when doing a Z banding test, it looks nice. So it has to do with layertimes/uneven cooling I guess. I even see it on my PLA prints.
I didn’t have this on my X1C, but I was using Orca slicer there.
Thank you so much for your tests, I’m saving your settings to my abs profile, thanks friend
Could you send screenshots of your layer fan settings in the slicer?
I didn’t change anything anywhere else but what I’ve showed in the filament profile.
Filament matters. I print 99% in ABS and have a fleet of H2C’s and D’s. (around 300kg a month worth).
You are using, IMO, one of the worst brands of ABS I’ve ever tested. I print 45 degree overhangs constantly and they always look amazing - top, bottom, sides etc.
I’m also doing this all with HF nozzles and at 30mm3/s. Bed temp is always 100 degrees for ABS. Everything comes out perfect.
I always use at least 3 walls for ABS prints as well.
Wow! I’m impressed. The same roll of filament was used in both machines the same part in both machines. One of them printed it much better than the other. Not sure what else to tell you. Thanks for stopping by and letting us know.
