Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)EL
Posts
1
Comments
221
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • The P1S does seem like a good value overall.

    I've heard the screen is quite primitive with the P1 printers, and I expect that will become your primary interface with the printer if you are not using the cloud print functionality.

    You will also not get the benefit of the automatic calibration features.

    For myself that makes it less desirable. However, there is also some value in understanding the manual filament tuning and printer calibration process as it helps you troubleshoot when things go wrong.

    If the P1S existed when I was getting into 3D printing, I likely would have purchased it. It's at a similar price point without the AMS to the Ender 3 S1 Pro (which is what I learned on) and the P1 has many more capabilities.

  • I do not expect that the Mk4 will have caught up to the Bambu in 1 year since it's missing physical hardware that seems necessary to do so. Here are some examples:

    Input shaping calibration for a specific machine benefits from having an accelerometer. The Mk4 needs a module that can attach to the extruder and the bed. The current beta firmware with input shaping only allows for Prusa's universal preset setting instead of allowing you to measure the frequency responses of your own machine. Critical reviews of the current input shaping implementation show subpar performance with excessive smoothing and high frequency artifacts. I expect that comes down to inability to calibrate your specific machine and environment.

    When you print with a new filament, especially a new manufacturer, you usually need to tune a filament profile to get better printing results. With the Mk4 this is a manual process, and this is where many new to 3d printing quickly get frustrated with failed or poor quality prints. The lidar system on the X1 has been fantastic for automatic pressure advance and flow calibration right out of the box and I've found I largely do not need to maintain custom filament profiles for the Bambu.

    Webcam support and failed print detection are absent from the Mk4. The closest feature the Nextruder assembly supports is crash detection via its load cell sensor and I'm not entirely sure if the Mk4 even has that enabled. If you attach a webcam to the frame and run octoprint / something else standalone, you've again thrown off the preset input shaping calibration.

    It's an i3 style printer or "bed slinger," which is fine on it's own, but it will never reach the same speeds as core-xy because it's physically moving the mass of your printed object sitting on the bed. Printing speeds aside, you'll potentially run into taller objects wobbling slightly as they are moved.

    I really like Prusa's open source commitment, and I'm still in line to purchase a multitool Prusa XL, but I cannot recommend waiting for the Mk4 to improve and reach parity with the Bambu if that's your expectation. If it doesn't do what you want it to do today, I'm not sure it ever will.

    As for cloud connectivity on the Bambu, you'll really have to consider just how important that is to you given the significant tradeoffs. Minimally you can print from the sd card or use lan mode. It looks like you currently lose the camera and mobile app connectivity with lan mode, but I haven't tried this myself and these are at least software aspects that could easily improve.