H2D 0.4 nozzle “0.20mm Balanced Strength” profile with 2 walls - is this a joke?

Bambu Lab Software Bambu Studio
1

I’ve been using an X1C for a couple of years and just got an H2D, and I was honestly shocked by the included profiles.

Standard: 2 walls.
Balanced Strength: also 2 walls, with basically just an extra top/bottom layer. Same 15% infill.

Meanwhile, the X1C Strength profile uses 6 walls 25% infill.

Is this actually intentional? Calling 2 walls with 15% infill a “Balanced Strength” profile feels like a joke. I really hope this is just a configuration bug.

Please guys sort out printing profiles. Strength for 0.4 nozzle is missing and instead have this “Balanced”. Have some consistency

BS - 2.8.2.61

2

The profile names have been updated several times to better match what developers learned over the years. Since the X1 was Bambu’s very first printer, some of the original names and settings weren’t ideal simply because the team didn’t yet have the experience they have today.

Strength is mainly influenced by the infill pattern and infill percentage, with layer height also playing an important role. Over time, they’ve moved away from treating wall thickness as the only indicator of strength. That is why the main change when switching from H2D “standard” to H2D “balance strenght” is an increase in infill.

Of course, the number of walls is important, no question about it, however, there are now more balanced approaches.

It also helps to keep the terminology in mind: X1C uses “strength,” while H2D uses “balanced strength”.

Because of this, the profiles aren’t directly comparable. It’s more that, based on everything we know now, the X1C profile is simply outdated - but Bambu keeps it available because many users are familiar with it and still like using it.

So this isn’t a bug.

It’s a deliberate effort to update the profile names so they better reflect today’s understanding and real-world behavior of 3D printer. And remember, this represents nearly three to four years of slicer development, including all the improvements made along the way.

Of course, I can understand the frustration. :+1:

I’s just that over the years, both the names have been updated and Bambu has gained more knowledge on the subject. The classic, uncompromising strength profile is no longer available in the H2D, but you can easily create your own: Take the standard balanced strength profile, apply six walls, and save it. :+1:

3

Of course I’m perfectly capable of increasing the number of walls myself - and that’s exactly what I did. That isn’t the point.

What bothers me is buying a much newer and more capable machine, with better material support, heated chamber, filtration, etc., and then finding the supplied print profiles in this state.

If Standard and Balanced Strength are both still 2 walls, 15% infill with GRID that is strong only in certain directions, then I honestly don’t see where this supposed “balanced strength” improvement is coming from (+1 to bottom and top shells compared to original 4 and 5 that were there already).

I understand that this apparently isn’t a bug. I just didn’t want to call it what it is - negligence and laziness. The presets look unfinished and inconsistent, and for a machine at this level that simply doesn’t look serious.

Bambu really needs to go through the profiles across its printers and nozzle sizes and bring some consistency to them. I’m not saying every Strength profile needs 6 walls, but surely a strength-oriented preset can at least increase the wall count by one or two instead of leaving it identical to Standard. + I can see that HF nozzles have same destiny.

And if maintaining every possible profile internally is too much, why not have a proper community profile library in Bambu Studio? Profiles could be uploaded for specific printer/nozzle/material combinations, rated and voted on by users, and the best proven ones could eventually be reviewed and promoted into the official presets.

That would be far more useful than having users independently recreate the same sensible profiles over and over again.

4

I understand your complaint and what you mean. Here’s what I’m thinking:

What you’re asking for here is a feature request, not a bug report. So, basically, it’s a request toward Bambu to release a proper strength profile for the H2D. Basically, “Strength Plus”!

As I said, it’s just an idea, but maybe you could rephrase the topic as a feature request? It’s just an idea, though, you don’t have to do it. :grin: :+1:

5

That’s fair, but honestly I’m wondering if profiles are even the right answer anymore.

How many times on your old printer have you used a profile with absolutely zero changes of any sort?

On my X1C I can say almost never. At minimum, I have to flip wall generation over to arachne and change infill to not be grid - and often turn on supports, tweak number of top/bottom layers, and walls.

Then, at the same time, I’ve also never used half the profiles on my X1C.

As the number of available settings increases, the chances of a stock profile being right decreases, which takes me to my original thought, maybe profiles isn’t the right answer anymore.

I’d like to have most of my settings preset right out of the gate, and then just something like a “strength slider” and “quality slider”, then the slicer takes care of walls, top/bottom layers, infill density, and layer height.

6

I think the real confusion is that we have always interpreted “Strength” to mean a fully optimized profile, but the old preset didn’t actually do that, it just blindly added mass via extra walls and infill to brute-force toughness.

The new H2D “Balanced Strength” profile finally introduces the actual engineering optimizations we’d expect, like dropping acceleration to 4,000 mm/s² to maximize layer bonding and eliminate high-speed defects. The disconnect is that while it fixes the internal physics, it strips away the physical material completely by leaving it at a standard 2 walls.

It feels like the old profile gave us the mass without the optimization, and the new profile gives us the optimization without the mass.

I do like @CarbonForge’s idea on a slider that can optimize both?

7

I’ll probably go this way - just checking how many others have same issues, how this has been discussed in the past etc - don’t want duplicates as to be honest wasn’t expecting such mess.

Cause my lasty FR raised in may 2023 guys implemented in BS 2.7.1 in June 2026 :slight_smile:

8

what stops you from increasing wall strength to however many walls you want?

ah yeah right, you’re just trying to stir up a problem and pretend there to be an issue where there clearly isnt…

9

I usually touch brims/infill type/support type/ironing/wall generator/seams and very rare speed /fuzzy skin.

That’s actually where intent-based slicing gets interesting: not just “more strength”, but watertight, stronger in X/Y/Z, impact resistant, dimensionally accurate, best surface finish, fast prototype, etc. The slicer could then adjust walls, infill, speeds, layer height, seam position and even orientation.

I’d also really like profiles to explain themselves. Have one baseline, then show only what changed and why: walls 2→4, infill 15→25%, speed reduced, etc., with a short explanation of the benefit.

That would also make inconsistencies between printers much easier to understand instead of just wondering why X1C has profiles that H2D doesn’t.

It’s just either do it properly or better don’t do it at all. Cause right now it’s a zoo of profiles. x1c has 2x0.08mm, 2x 0.12mm for some high and extra high quality like H2D is not capable of doing the same.

10

I already said I increased the wall count myself, so clearly that isn’t the issue.

The discussion is about badly named presets, presets that barely change anything related to strength, and inconsistent profile sets across printers using the same nozzle sizes and capable of comparable results.

If your answer to all of that is “just increase the walls yourself”, then you either didn’t read the discussion or don’t understand what’s being discussed. Neither is really my problem.

11

Found this one from last year H2D Process Profiles Are Inconsistent and Incorrect. · Issue #6594 · bambulab/BambuStudio · GitHub

I raised this topic cause I started printing KWS rack and I didn’t like PETG-CF part I got with 2 walls that I can ruin with my fingers. My impression is that Bambu is aware - but that is just not a priority and users are sorting out this thing for themselves so they don’t touch it. Maybe there will be again at some point reddit AMA session - can fire this profile question there. It was was speaking to you guys) Everyone have a nice morning/day/evening.

13

@user_837469558 You’ve attacked the OP twice now without provocation, I don’t know what your deal is but that’s not how we do things here.

You can debate the ideas, but if the best argument you have for your opinion is an insult, then go away, we don’t want you here.

14

Personally I wish I could load presets for just the “Speed” process settings. For one thing a lot of times that depends on the filaments being used (I know overall speed can be limited by filament flow settings, but that doesn’t change accelerations, for example). 2nd, for me (H2C) these settings translate pretty much directly to quality (I’m oversimplifying, but speed/accel is a huge factor). Then we got so many of them… left/right, HF/regular (and now E3D as 3rd type for some reason), and if using hybrid flow nozzles in the Vortek rack then there are 3 sets of just “speed” settings for each project. And one can’t copy “regular flow” speed settings over to the “high flow” types and vice versa (for some reason). So much tweaking!

Cheers,
-Max

16

I think I lost the thread a bit here. What fact were you stating?

17

This is a user feedback forum. People ask for things they want. It isn’t “behavior”, and it isn’t your job to call it out.

There seems to be a bit of a disconnect happening for you, so let me help you out there, champ.

Screenshot_2026-09-02-20-31-22-27_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b12
Screenshot_2026-09-02-20-31-22-27_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b121080×1418 233 KB

Screenshot_2026-09-02-20-31-36-60_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b12
Screenshot_2026-09-02-20-31-36-60_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b121080×1804 237 KB

Screenshot_2026-09-02-20-32-00-87_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b12
Screenshot_2026-09-02-20-32-00-87_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b121079×1350 172 KB

Learn it, live it, love it.

19

Take a break. Go touch some grass.

20

So, I can save filament settings. Can I not save my own presets? I could start with one of the standard presets. Modify it as I want. Save it. Use that preset the next time I start a print and be done.

Is this not possible?

21

Are you answering or asking?)

Of course I can change the settings and save a profile. I can fix lots of incorrect defaults myself - that doesn’t make them correct.

If a spool is red PLA but the system identifies it as black, I can change the colour manually. Does that mean there’s no issue? If a “0.12 mm Fine” preset actually prints at 0.20 mm, I can change the layer height myself. If a PETG profile contains PLA temperatures, I can correct those too.

That completely misses the point.

Bambu created a separate preset and called it Balanced Strength. If it keeps the same 2 walls, same 15% infill and same infill pattern as Standard, it’s reasonable to ask what exactly makes it a strength preset.

And this matters even more for new users. Experienced users will inspect and modify everything anyway; beginners quite reasonably assume an official preset does roughly what its name says.

If the preset isn’t intended to meaningfully increase strength, don’t call it Balanced Strength. That’s much better than expecting every user to discover and correct it themselves.

22

To be fair, there are other things it could be doing to make a stronger part beyond cranking up walls and infill, a line by line comparison of all the settings in each preset would be required.

23

Sure, there are other settings that can affect strength - speed for example( I can see that one is different from standard), etc. But walls and infill are among the most significant ones, and there are plenty of practical tests showing that increasing wall count is often a much more effective way to gain strength than simply adding more infill.

And that still leaves the consistency problem. If Bambu’s newer understanding is that 2 walls is perfectly appropriate for a “Balanced Strength” preset, then why does the X1C Strength preset still ship with 6 walls?

Either update the older presets too, or explain why two printers using the same nozzle size need such radically different definitions of a strength profile.