|
|
|
|
|
|
by agent462
908 days ago
|
|
|
So your theory is anecdotal. You should also check out multi-color print times on the XL vs the ASM or any other solution. I think what Bambu has done is incredible but these are different machines for different reasons. The XL has a massive print area compared to the Bambu printers and the toolhead design I prefer. I just gifted an x1-carbon to my mom for Christmas. I'm not a hater or Prusa shill but people are just spouting opinions without data or truly understanding the differences between the machines. |
|
|
It's based on basic engineering principles. Prusa can't magic away physics and these are lessons the rest of the community learned years ago. E3D had to course correct on some of the same mistakes with their toolchanger. There are good reasons why nearly every other CoreXY design you're going to encounter uses a closed frame (and the best will use structural panels).
>I think what Bambu has done is incredible but these are different machines for different reasons.
Sure, it's got its niche. But the drawbacks will narrow that niche. Prusa's ever narrowing niche is kind of the focus of the OP.
> The XL has a massive print area
Which makes running slow compared to other designs more painful since print times are cubic with volume.
>just spouting opinions without data or truly understanding the differences between the machines.
If you showed me a square wheel, I can tell you it's not going to roll particularly smoothly without needing to perform extensive testing on that specific implementation of square wheel. I can do that because it's something that's been tried elsewhere and we already know the results.
This style of open frame has been tried before. We know Prusa didn't choose to use it because there's any sort of engineering advantage because Jo has explicitly told us why they're using it.