I had a dual head printer some time ago and for a for a long while.
Only thing I hated about and modified early on was the missing head room above the extruders.
The filament being bend around all the time wasn’t ideal, not even with teflon tubes.
Now I have a fancy P1S combo for a while and keep wondering what on Earth Bambu was thing with the drag chain mounted tube going through the back of the printer as the only option.
Sure, take the lid of, mount the AMS on the wall and have it feed directly into the extruder.
Fine for PLA or such, not so much for high temp filaments or those sensitive to temperature fluctuations in the build chamber.
I would really appreciate some proper addon to replace that glass lid.
Like a pyramid style polycarbonate cover with the tip at the sweet spot to prevent bending of the teflon tube.
And rather than having a grip type connector one that allows the teflon tube to freely move in and out would guarantee far less wear on that tube while also making things much easier for flexible or fibre filled filaments…
Why not just print one?
I prefer see through and printing would mean printing frames to put plastic or glass panes in.
So might as well just laser cut the panels glue them together.
But I think such an addition should be considered by Bambu.
Especially in regards to all those high volume users out there trying to make a living from 3D printing things.
Doubt BL will change the design for any of its existing models, as it would require changing its production line and increase production costs, and as you have most likely noticed, some parts for P1 series are also to be found on the X1 series.
I’m not saying it can’t be done should BL really want it. I’m just saying that there were many improvement suggestions brought up by many users, most of which were really making sense and would have greatly improved users’ experience and machine reliability, not to speak of rendering some of the replacement parts processes less tedious and time consuming.
There is even a topic on the forum created by users dedicated specifically to this: desired improvements. To the date nothing has happened and it looks like while this information is viewed and most likely collected by BL staff, BL hasn’t done a thing to either acknowledge users’ requests nor has it implemented anything of value from those suggestions. That is not to say that we might not get surprised by BL when launching its next printer to see some or parts of those ideas implemented in it. Remains to be seen.
You can either speak up on the forum (like you currently do) in the hope that BL will hear you out and (perhaps) will do something, or you can simply get to work, developing and implementing what you want to have.
There are plenty of models developed by users and freely shared on Makerworld and Printables that have definitely helped many others in particular, and the community in general, to achieve some necessary and very much requested improvements to BL printers.
You have a clear vision of what you want improved, so instead of waiting for BL to come up with something that might or might not be what you wanted, better design your own model, publish it, and very likely there will be others to take up your model (if they deemed necessary) and tweak it even more.
Eventually, your model(s) could prove successful and really appreciated by the rest of us.
To be honest, I think I haven’t understood yet, what is wrong with the current design and why someone would need such a modification.
Yes, the PTFE tube makes a surprisingly tight bend before the toolhead. But did this cause any problem for you? I didn’t have a single issue in the last year. And I’m convinced that Bambu have tested that very thoroughly.
This unconventional design definitely has advantages. It considerably reduces height which is great when you put the printer in a cabinet like me. You can put the AMS or other stuff on top. I also find the flat glas helps accessibility.
In my opinion, your suggestion is a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist.
maybe your older printer had 2,85mm filament? That would require a much bigger bending radius.
Maybe your old printer wasn’t direct drive, so the extruder has to push the filament and doesn’t like resistance in the tube that is less critical with a direct drive extruder.
Maybe your old printer had less grip on the filament and was more susceptible to resistance.
And finally: maybe your old printer would also work fine with the same tight bend and the manufacturer just didn’t even consider it.
Just because the Bambu printers do it differently than many others doesn’t mean that it is wrong and the conventional way is right.
On contrary, I perceive that as innovation, questioning established habits and introducing new ways to do things.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, based on their own experiences and needs. While you may be satisfied and happy with how your printer is and runs, others might think differently and want more. It’s nothing wrong with wanting more for the money one pays for a printer (especially when it’s about an X1 combo series). Everyone of us hopes for, and expects that, each new printer, through innovation and improvements, to provide its owners with the most exhilarating and worry free experience. I don’t see anything wrong in thinking so.
If there weren’t people like them, our printers (and not only them) would have stayed in the “stone age” like 10-15 years ago. BL has brought innovation and improvements or else you would have bought something else instead.
There are many users who have designed amazing improvements for BL printers, some of which I’ve never thought of, but I’m very happy to use, as these improvements have rendered my life (and the lives of many others like me) way more simple and satisfying when using my machine.
I fully agree with expectations on the performance or features. But I don’t understand why they have to be achieved in a certain way. So if the unconventional solution by BambuLab works flawlessly, then I don’t understand the complaint.
Simply because he has the right to have complaints on the build. One doesn’t necessarily have to agree with him, but also one cannot deny him the right and opportunity to do so. At the end of the day, he’s also, like we are, a customer of BL, that after running for a while the printer he’s bought has been faced with some issues (that you might not view as such), issues he’s asking BL to address (if willing and if possible). That’s it.
I fully agree. It’s just that he hasn’t told us those issues. That is what I’m asking for.
If I read the first post correctly, he has faced issues with the older printer which could be solved by giving the tubes extra room. The P1S has even less headroom, so he asks for the same solution without having the same problems.
I just wanted to motivate him to think again if the requested change is actually what he needs. I have the feeling that he fell into a trap by thinking that the BambuLab solution is inferior while it actually works fine in the P1S in contrast to his old printer.
I am neither assuming things now demanding a change.
I only tried to point out that the flat lid and how the feed tube runs is not ideal for all cases and all users.
Let me to explain it a bit better
The Bambu lid works fine, same for the tube solution in the back - for most users without any complains.
My Beetle from the 70’s does the same, works fine, runs well, have no complaints but that does not mean a Beetle is the best option when you want to drive a car these days
I am NOT saying Bamabu has to change things, I merely pointed out that a cover option with a top feed does have real benefits.
Call it a personal thing if you like…
But in quite a few cases the drag chain solution is far from ideal.
Not just in terms of wear and tear when using certain filaments but mainly in terms of how much force is required to get the filament to the extruder.
Bambu uses a brute force approach on the filament, works great For the majority of cases and makes sure users have not too many related issues.
But this also deforms the filament and leaves bite marks already by the AMS feeders.
A top feed system requires far less force than the drag chain solution, especially if the buffer is relocated to allow for a more straight feed.
Printing the softer types of TPU and not just 95 wouldn’t be problem unless you go ultraflex.
So, no we don’t a change for everyone but having this option officially supported and not just in the form of user mods still makes sense, at least to me.
You don’t have to agree of course as everyone has their own view on things…
I’ve toyed with the rerouting idea but for the most part can’t see much advantage in adding extra length to the filament travel from where my AMS are located (2x left side). For TPU and stiff filaments I can see the advantage and maybe there’s a call for someone to craft up an external tripod spool holder of sorts to mount on top. Still I haven’t had failures or issues with my current setup and am at an age where I don’t need to break things that work
I think the current design has proven itself across the X/P series even if its “flawed”. Adding extra height means more bodywork etc in manufacturing, more box/shipping/warehouse space etc and thats all taken into account. The next big thing could change the look altogether.
Somehow, and I’ll bet a little bit on it, I believe Bambu put a minute or two into thinking these things out. I would trust them over someone else needing to “fix” it when there hasn’t been a call to fix such thing en masse.
Forgive me if that’s been covered. I’m going by the replies because I tend to ignore a person here and there for various reasons and can’t see everything. Some times a point doesn’t need a book but a pamphlet.
It’s just that the P1S/P1P/X1C are able to print at more than 40mm³/s with the stock filament path and extruder. So it better compares to a Porsche. The bend really doesn’t seem to limit performance in any way. And even for soft material it shouldn’t make a difference as long as the filament is pulled and not pushed through the bend. For that, only the filament path after the extruder is crucial.
When you realise that forces of 5-10kg are needed to push the filament through the nozzle at these higher speeds, then the additional friction really doesn’t make a difference.
