If you just scroll up and read the full thread you will see the issue and how it was solved. Speed is pretty much the same on X1 and H2D on single color and faster with two filaments as expected.
2 Likes
Does anyone know why the H2D takes longer to print vs X1C? Same file and settings sliced.
Im literally switching between printers and slicing, And i get much slower print times on the H2D with single color.
Also same Layer Height 0.12 fine is being used on both printers.
It’s because the H2D’s 0.12 mm profile isn’t exactly a “standard” profile compared to their other printers. It’s even slower than the “High Quality” preset. I would assume that Bambu will still add the other profiles (like Fine and Draft) because right now the majority is missing.
Yep, 4 extra top layers and 2 extra wall loops will bump print time up substantially.
1 Like
There’s another thread that addresses exactly this.
This is now the 3rd thread on this topic. Please read the thread below … I think would be useful if the moderators made it a sticky.
3 Likes
I would urge EVERYONE affected by this to raise a ticket with Bambu Lab. They probably already realise that there is more work required to be done on the print profiles, but the more people who raise this with them the greater the chances are of that work being prioritised.
I am hoping that it will not become another “folders on the SD card” issue, where a feature that is clearly important to the user base is simply ignored (and I remain flabbergasted that we still cannot use folders on the X1 family, and worse that the H2D USB stick has the same damned issue).
5 Likes
I would check the slicer profiles between the two. On mine, the 12mm profile inexplicably prints 4 walls instead of the standard 2 walls. its the only profile that is set like this.
Actually, that makes sense to me, but should probably be called a “High Quality/Strength” profile.
This isn’t something that I would consider an “issue”. You can definitely request more profile options, I don’t want to discourage you to do that. But its not something I’d spend time on. If I wanted a quicker profile I can see where to remove extra toolpaths. Also the extras they added do make the prints feel better and more solid. So, in effect, they made the quality higher for high quality prints. Are the extras overkill… that argument can be made, but, I’ll let each person decide that on their own.
Id say even with same number of walls and all that stuff, the X1C will always be faster printing than the H2D (in single colour), it’s just physics, everything is bigger and heavier on the H2D, so no surprises there
1 Like
Yeah, the H2D is just a slower machine. It is comparable to my A1 in print times and I don’t know why people expect the H2D to be faster than (or even as fast as) the X1C. The X1C is built for speed and the H2D is built for versatility
3 Likes
For those looking to complain about something, complain about the incorrect/false marketing on acceleration speeds. The slicer caps it at 16,000 mm/sec2 vs the advertised 20,000 mm/sec2. Is it a big deal, no, but it was a mistake at best, or an a lie at its worst. Interestingly, the only 20,000 acceleration limit on the machine is the extruder. So if that was the point of calling it a 20,000 mm/sec2 machine, that is just wrong.
1 Like
44 replies before anyone even suggested that the profiles are not Apples to Apples comparisons because X1C has “standard” speeds while H2D has “high quality” speeds
2 Likes
I’m pretty confident that the full spec sheet explicitly says “toolhead acceleration” at 20,000. It makes me wonder if (hope) there’s a bug in the slicer.
Edit:
I question of what practical use either the 16,000mm/sec^2 or the 20,000/sec^2 numbers are in reality when none of the default slicer profiles exceed the following numbers anyway:
That’s a snapshot of the 0.24mm layer height profile, which exhibits the highest default slicer accelerations. The smallest are in the 0.08mm layer height, as you would expect, and some of those those are dialed down considerably even more:
Has anyone here found satisfaction in using higher accelerations than what is in these Bambulab slicer defaults? Are both the 16k and 20k accelerations kinda meaingless or untrustworthy, similar to most of the advertised lumens on most of amazon’s LED flashlights or like the advertised wattage on a lot of the aliexpress solar panels? i.e. inflated beyond belief for advertising purposes and, meh, nobody ever seems to check what the truth is anyway? Well, I doubt it’s really that bad, since I doubt even one of the “million lumen” flashlights gets anywhere near their advertised number even in principle, whereas maybe these printer accelerations are achievable, even if totally unpractical at generating even partially decent print quality. I only pose the question. I’ve not yet looked into finding the true answer, but maybe some among us already have done their own discovery process and can comment.
1 Like
I have not used faster accelerations on my H2D yet, but i frequently printed on Ludicrous mode on my X1 and P1 with high flow hot ends and dual AUX fans. The quality is not as good as 10k standard but not too far off.
I have used ludicrous mode and it went surprisingly well. I was too late for the music box contest and I had only 4 hours left for the 6h+ top of my Lego music box. It did almost all of it at this speed and +10c:
Including the tree supports which look great as well:
(I did edit the model afterwards where it doesn’t need support at all, shaving 3h off as well)
And so do the outer corners (they are chamfered though):
But after closing up on top of the supports:
It ripped the infill to shreds with its fast pace, luckily I saw it just in time to slow the printer down to 50% and it needed almost the rest of the height to get the infill somewhat passable again for the top surfaces, luckily the worst infill was right beneath the studs (so you can’t really see it):
So that was my first and only experience with ludicrous. Normally I’m far from in a hurry with 3D printing so it might also be my last. It printed very well for the speed but things can go wrong just as fast. I hope this is some useful insight though
Like the rest of you, I’m looking for the silver lining. Maybe one area where (perhaps unfairly) the H2D could beat the speed of an X1C would be where an H2D with a 0.4mm High Flow nozzle is printing a large model with lots and lots of sparse infill:
In such a case, the H2D could, at least in theory, reach a speed of 600mm/s while printing the sparse infill, as compared to an X1C with 0.4mm standard nozzle:
I couldn’t find any slicer profiles for an X1C running an Obxidian high flow hotend, so maybe that would make it a wash, and if so, it is the the reason I mentioned it might be an unfair comparison. I just don’t know, as I don’t own an X1C 0.4mm Obxidian high flow hotend, nor do I have any other data in that regard.
Also, this is just comparing default slicer profiles, and so maybe if the profiles were fully optimized before test prints were run, then maybe that too could affect the comparison’s ultimate outcome.
Anyhow, irrespective of how the two Bambu printer models might compare under the harsh glare of their respective popularity, it seems like both printers would likely enjoy a popular reception if put on display in local venues in order for the public to inspect and perhaps run test prints. Maybe someday someone with all the right parts to outfit a proper apples-to-apples comparison after outfitting both H2D and X1C with Bambulab High Flow 0.4mm nozzles, will then run the test and report back here how it went, and which one won the race, and by how much. 
For everyone, I read something that showed the X1/P1/A1’s Ludicrous and Sport modes largely used acceleration for speed increases, not print speed. Many of them doubled (effectively using the max acceleration). So its important to those who like to use those modes, but personally, I never do.
Now, I didn’t see the proof of that myself, so read into that as you will.
Given enough room to accelerate, the H2D will reach higher top speeds than the X1/P1/A1 printers. It has a significant travel speed advantage. As well, the sparse infill will print quicker (given enough room to accelerate and decelerate). However, back to the acceleration, its no secret acceleration number are probably more important to print time, because top speed is capped by how quick it can get up to speed.
But like you elude to, IMO, its not really important. At least to me. The fact they could put significantly more weight on the toolhead and gantry, add a second print head/nozzle and only lose a little acceleration all while largely improving print quality for a larger area… I’m OK with that. Keeping the old limits would have cost a fortune.