Hey everyone. Happy Friday!
Let’s not indulge in any frenzy fanboyism and holy wars. I like what competition is doing and I think some gut punches from Prusa (especially about the heat bed and power consumption) is something that Bambu Lab can and should learn, especially while working on a high-end machine like H2D.
Afterall - we all win from companies competing.
P.S. My P1S and A1 Mini are finally gone. No more trying to fix my lemon P1, haha (sarcasm). Got H2D.
That comparison picture should really include the length of time that picture was taken from when the bed heating was started. Both beds will start with a picture on the right and end with a picture on the left as the bed heat soaks.
That is not the case, you should educate yourself better on different heatbed designs.
And even after the heatsoaking the delta is there and it’s quite different.
It is the case as both beds use AC heating elements which generate heat from the element. The element outline will show up with a thermal camera when you first turn on the bed.
True, but it all comes down to the resistive elements and their location. There is a difference between a large kettle water heater in H2D and smaller more uniformly laid elements.
It is a first AC heatbed from Prusa (as older were 24V), but they have a track record of having a very well made heat beds.
And we have a Bambu, which has a track record of poorly made heat beds (early warped X1 beds and H2D bed abomination).
Of course it’s a marketing material, right? So we can always wait and see the actual thermal results.
So let’s wait. But you are likely to run away and will not respond hahah.
Of course! Without the parameters between both of the tests. There is no way to draw a clear conclusion from those images. We don’t know how long the print bed has been on, what temperature, and ambient conditions.
I think the big one is time. The Prusa uses a considerable piece of aluminum while Bambu machines rely more on the heater itself.
Prusa does have some very well made heat beds. They overbuild everything. Bambu falls behind when it comes to this because they want to reduce price and weight.
Although, I agree with Jon. This is obviously not a fair test. They are over exaggerating the benefit.
Let’s wait until a unbiased party does some testing
Of course, as well as with any testing.
This was very unnecessary
I personally could care less about the new printer but the silicone printing for the xl is so cool though
Silicone, not silicon. Different things.
But yeah, it is a cool thing. Prusa as always upgrading their printers. Good thing for what, 2 years old printer?
Will be interesting as a 9 tool Bondtech INDX though - cost though I estimate about $2500 including 9 INDX tools, and build size only about 300 x 271.
Render of what it might look like with INDX on it - with normal CoreOne next to it.
It is as if you are attempting to solve a problem that does not exist. I have been using several Bambu Lab printers for about 2 years with thousands of hours of printing time and have never had a problem due to uneven distribution of heat across the build plate, and I regularly print from edge to edge of the build plate with confidence. In fact, errors of any kind are extremely rare.
Talking about competition, the fact of the matter is that in the consumer 3D printer market, Creality sells more than all others combined. Bambu Lab sells more than all others combined except Creality. Anycubic comes in third with Igloo in forth place. Almost as an afterthought, there is Prusa, struggling to stay relevant.
I would love to see the numbers as my gut feeling is that this is no longer the case since the decline of the Ender 3.
There are a few metals that can beat a proper, thick block of Aluminum. A proper, thick block of copper comes to mind. Except it’s more expensive.
If they’d added "for the lowest cost, " in front of “nothing” there’d have been nothing for me to complain about…
That little fan dongle is hilarious, janky, and silly.
All in all it looks like a great iteration. I love that you can tell their initial design constraint was “Dude, this machines external dimensions cannot get any bigger”
Surely motivated in part because they looked around, and saw the insane amount of shipping mishaps on huge packages (cough h2 cough xl cough k2)
Carriers just don’t do big stuff well
I wish it were priced more competitively but I get it.
If you look from a pure thermal transfer perspective - sure, you are correct.
However copper oxidize and relatively easy to warp under thermal stress.
Lol, spot on the packaging. Their current packaging is janky at best.
My C1 got delivered like that:
https://www.reddit.com/r/prusa3d/comments/1kfndwz/fedex_at_their_best/
This and many people on this forum upon H2 release would disagree with you, good morning.
