Re: [MakerBot] Ultimaker vs. Replicator

[Zip Zap]

What you've read varies from person to person and all the minor settings you have to account for.  Both machines use stepper extrusion and a cantilever belt X/Y axis system.  PLA will get you to the last leg of finer resolution you can ever achieve for both machines.  Speed is the biggest advantage for the Ultimaker due to Jetty firmware upgrade.  I don't know if a version of Jetty has been made for the Replicator. 

The Replicator advantage is that it's ready out of the box.  If this is your very first 3D printer then that's the way to go.  You can envy the speed difference later.  Right now you just want to print high resolution objects.  That's not to say you might not have to mess with the hardware with the Replicator.  But that's minor compared to putting together a kit.  Depending on your schedule, it might be at least two weeks to finally get the Ultimaker put together and moving.

---

From: Blizzard <frac...@hotmail.com>
To: make...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 3:06 PM
Subject: [MakerBot] Ultimaker vs. Replicator

Hey guys,

I'm thinking about buying a 3d printer. I've read a lot about different printers and now my choice is down to these two printers. It's really hard to decide so maybe you could help me out, especially it would be helpful if anyone has worked with both of those systems.

I want to print prototypes of product ideas I have. These are all mostly mechanical, so I'd need a printer which is as accurate as possible. Eg. if I have a part in my CAD which is 5.00mm long it should be 5.00mm long as exact as possible. I know it's not possible to get 100% accuracy, but I want to get as much as I can, but I'm not sure which of those printers is more accurate. I don't really care about speed. What I find interesting is that the Ultimaker is able to get incredible resolutions, as where the Replicator is still experimental at lower resolutions, so does anyone know if the Replicator is able to achieve a resolution of 0.1mm or smaller? I've heard of people who have been able to do it, even down to 0.04mm, which is what I've heard from Ultimaker users too, but more often and it seems to be more likely possible. The big plus of the Replicator would be the dual extrusion, so I could print in 2 colors or with different materials or even support structure in PVA, also that it's prebuilt. Not that it would be a problem for me to actually build the Ultimaker, but it's still a time-saver and I can be sure the machine is assembled properly and I have full guarantee in case something happens. I've seen a lot of people with the Ultimaker getting problems with stringing - is that still an issue? I'd like to have as minor finishing of the models as possible, I don't want to spend much time on the models itself once they're printed, so they have to come out great right out of the printer. I don't know which of those printers can achieve that better. Is it possible to print ABS with the Ultimaker? AFAIK the Replicator can do both, while PLA is still experimental. Also, I'd like to know how the maintenance is with both printers. From the Replicator I know you have to grease the rods every now and then and also level the build platform, but I haven't found anything for the Ultimaker. Do you also have to do some kind of maintenance frequently like the leveling of the build platform on the Replicator? I heard that you have to do it quite often which would be a disadvantage, as I want a machine which just works.

I hope that's enough information for now, and I also hope that someone could help me on my decision.

Thanks in Advance,

Blizzard

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/xY8Adq-UE2sJ.
To post to this group, send email to make...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/makerbot?hl=en.

[Shawn]

I have some experience with both.

In terms of reliability and low maintenance - Replicator.
In terms of raw printing speed and print quality - Ultimaker.

Both are great printers, but have some trade offs. There is a reason I
don't run Gentoo Linux on my servers anymore, or host my own mail server
- I value my time more than the satisfaction and trust of doing it
myself. So I went the low-maintenance route with my servers. The same
argument is why I currently favor the Replicator. BUT - that's just my
view, your's may be different.

Shawn

[Aljosa]

My opinion will be biased naturally and I own both, however I just want to throw a little side note out there that people may or may not be aware of but the Replicator both Dual and Single heads can handle speeds in excess of 100mm/sec while printing. The accelerated firmware is still fairly new so there's still some tweaking to be done, that being said the machine is absolutely mechanically capable of higher speeds. Iv done quite a few prints at 150mm/sec here at work =)

[ddurant]

Do you still work for MakerBot too, Aljosa?

[Elbot]

If you'll look at the hardware specs, both machines are for all practical purposes, alike, except that the Ultimaker has a larger build volume and the Replicator has dual extrusion. The accuracy, resolution, and speed of build is all just firmware. I think that the Replicator probably is just a bit more conservative with their firmware upgrades than the Ultimaker. The Replicator is capable of the same print speed and resolution, after a long awaited firmware upgrade. Also, the resolution and print speed could be adjusted with the ReplicatorG software that generates the g code the machine runs on, to some extent. Therefore, base your purchase decision on these factors;
1. build volume = ultimaker wins
2. dual extrusion = replicator wins
3. customer service = replicator wins, especially if you're American. That's because if the Ultimaker is in the Netherlands, if something is wrong with it, they'll be more reluctant to ship a replacement part. Also, because it is a kit, it is YOUR FAULT if it doesn't work. You're stuck with a massive paperweight. However, with a replicator pre-built by the factory, if it doesn't work, it is MAKERBOT's FAULT so they will inexpensively (less expensively than international shipping) ship you a replacement part. I've dealt with Makerbot's stellar customer service before and they're very professional, courteous, and helpful above and beyond what you would expect.

In other words, unless those few inches of extra build volume really matter to you, just get the Makerbot Replicator. Keep in mind that the Replicator has a build volume the size of a loaf of organic bread (organic bread is smaller loaves than the cheaper bread). Welcome to the wonderful world of 3d printing!

[Blizzard]

@Aljosa I've heard from Makerbot TV that you experimented with the Replicator at a resolution of 40 microns, did you have any success? I've never seen the results somewhere.
Thanks to all who have been helping so far, I think I'm a big step forward in my decision, but I'd still like to hear some opinions before I male the final decision, so feel free to post.

[randyzimmer]

Do you leave the computers in your home alone or do you feel compelled to open them up, if only just to see what it looks like in there?
Add a video upgrade or more memory?
If you aren't even curious, it may be too early to get into this.
A toaster has one dial, these baby's have hundreds and in combination, millions of settings!
The Replicator has reduced the variation a bunch and is getting there but it still isn't a toaster.

[Sean Tu]

Blizzard, as an engineer, you should know if you're looking at a 3D printer as a tool for rapid prototyping, the absolute limits of what people have done really doesn't matter. You need to look at what the thing can consistently do without too much maintenance.

I'd guess most of the reports of high resolution/accuracy are from people who are tuning their printers to see what can be achieved, not people using the printer as a tool. When putting together my ToM I spent quite a bit of time learning how things work to get it printing right. After a while, I got it working reliably with a level of quality that meets my requirements. I'm sure I could get the thing to print better but my excuse for getting the thing was to print out of production vintage RC car parts (the PEZ and bobble head projects came about later), not as an experiment in the limits of low cost 3D printing.

Personally I would use the 0.10mm number for the Replicator as a conservative estimate of the resolution for normal use. I don't know enough about the Ultimaker to know what it can realistically produce.

[Aljosa]

@Dave Yep I still do!

@Blizzard I have actually gone as low as 20microns, however my prints keep getting stolen from me! Iv been meaning to snap some photos but just haven't had the time. Regardless I don't really think layer height is a good metric to determine what printer to get because I'm pretty sure all the current kits out there can achieve it one way or another.

On Monday, July 16, 2012 6:59:42 AM UTC-4, Blizzard wrote:

[alex e]

Assuming you were ordering today?  I'd go ultimaker, then solidoodle, then replicator.  

[ddurant]

>> Do you still work for MakerBot too, Aljosa?

> @Dave Yep I still do!

 

You really should disclose that when offering opinions about a product you have a vested intest in...

[Blizzard]

@randyzimmer That's no problem. All of the PC's I own are selfbuilt (except my latest iMac, which is an exception which I run besides my Windows workstation) so I have quite some experience here, that's why I won't have any problems building a bot. But if I can save time by not having to build it myself, apart from the advantage that Elbot already said very well. If something happens, I can always contact Makerbot Support and tell them the problem and they can't blame it on me (since I didn't build it myself). If I built the Ultimaker and I made a mistake building it I would have several hours of troubleshooting completely on my own, and maybe relate more on the community than on a support.

@Sean Tu yes... you're absolutely right.. I wasn't meant to ask what's possible, I planned on using 0.1mm or less, I just wanted to ask what the experiences were, what resolution is the lowest possible, still having good and reliable prints. I was planning to using 0.1mm anyway, so I guess that's a good number. But from what I've heard people can get easily down to 0.04mm with an Ultimaker with a profile in Netfabb, so I wanted to know if there's something like that with the Replicator.

@Aljosa wow, 20 microns? That's insane. But you're getting a good point. For me accuracy is still way more important, but there seem to be no exact numbers from comparison studies? I've just seen some documentation on a accuracy study of the Ultimaker, which wasn't overwhelming, so I also wanted to know if the Replicator is better or worse. Is there anybody who can say more about this? Maybe someone with a Replicator could print out a 10x10x10 cube and measure with calipers the deviation of the length? That would be quite interesting to know. Also, it would be interesting if it's possible to print threaded objects with either printer? As with technical objects this is not avoidable.

[Jetty]

I believe he alluded to that:

>My opinion will be biased naturally and I own both

[66tbird]

This thread got me to wondering about a .1mm print on my Replicator. So I tried it with the MULHER figure. I set the speed at 60/80 and 240/110C on the ext-HBP.  I came out great, its that simple. One Issue is that as the amount of area in a layer gets small it spends more time heat soaking under that hot nozzle. I'm talk parts like a single 1/8'' standoff size. I'm sure there is a wait feature in there somewhere. I'll cross that bridge when I need to.

I've built hundred of PC's and the only ones that came close to the three cnc machines I've built were custom case water cooled experimental overclockers.  Even that was less of a headache than my first cnc machine. It was a great first kit but took me years to get it stable running year in year out. Plus it took many of the tools in my shop to build and do those mods.

 My Replicator is so thought-out locked in square and true and so easy to adjust I see it doing its job a long time. Which is great. I spent time designing and not tinkering. It's great having a customer describe his needs and the next day I'm handing over a part.    ''Wow, that's great, and you snuck a solar cell in there too, Sweeeeet, should work perfect' You want cash or check?''

[Aljosa]

Hrmm I figured that 

"My opinion will be biased naturally and I own both"

and

"Iv done quite a few prints at 150mm/sec here at work =)"

would have given that one away. That and the few other printing related threads I have posted in should have made that one clear I would think. None the less I'm not advising him to get either, however I will correct missing or incorrect information I see about layer heights, speeds, what the gantry can handle, and so on that I see about the Replicator to which there is quite a bit.

@Blizzard there are happy customers with all the kits, and machines on the market as well as unhappy ones. Looking at the market these days its amazing how rapidly things change. The one piece of advise I will give you is decide whether you want to put a product together or receive one ready to go. Like with buying anything you can read into reviews and opinions for an eternity, but at some point you have to go with your gut instinct. 

Id recommend you hurry up, and pick one and start enjoying making the things you want to make, its really quite addictive. 

[ddurant]

Seriously?? :O

 

Just saying "I'm biased" or "I did stuff at work" is not what most people would think of as disclosure. If I spoke about the benefits of my companies products on the internet and without disclosing that I worked there, I'd probably get fired.

 

Maybe you're new to MBI or something but that's something I'd probably ask the boss about. Or maybe they don't care about such things.

 

 On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 7:41:53 PM UTC-4, Jetty wrote:

I believe he alluded to that:

>My opinion will be biased naturally and I own both

[randyzimmer]

I caught it right away and I didn't have any previous knowledge to go on.
Ax to grind?

On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 9:17:30 PM UTC-4, ddurant wrote:

Seriously?? :O

 

[Herón Ordóñez Guillén]

@alijosa: I guess it would be nice to put something on your signature. nothing too official, something along the lines of what Far does works

not that I'm complaining, I already knew you work there and I got the clues right away to remind me.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/pJMJ1alcMG0J.

[Aljosa]

I wasn't aware of a way to add a signature =/ other then in the gmail settings for your actual email account. Problem is I come to the group to read, and reply I don't do it  through my email. Whats even more annoying is that we can't use our Makerbot emails in this group. 

Regardless for anyone that might have missed it ill cover all my bases yes I work for Makerbot don't think I ever tried to hide that. I'm an R&D Engineer, and I was at the heart of the Replicator project. I designed all the injection molded parts that you see on the machine (the black ones). Among other things I'm also the one responsible for the profile you use when using the machine.

I think that should cover it hopefully that puts us back on the right track.

On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 10:48:18 PM UTC-4, Herón Ordóñez wrote:

@alijosa: I guess it would be nice to put something on your signature. nothing too official, something along the lines of what Far does works

not that I'm complaining, I already knew you work there and I got the clues right away to remind me.

El 17/07/2012, a las 21:42, randyzimmer escribió:

I caught it right away and I didn't have any previous knowledge to go on.
Ax to grind?

On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 9:17:30 PM UTC-4, ddurant wrote:

Seriously?? :O

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/pJMJ1alcMG0J.
To post to this group, send email to make...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to makerbot+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[ddurant]

> Ax to grind?
 

Nope. Why do you ask that? Did I do anything more than say he should disclose that he is being paid by the company he was promoting? It's common to fully disclose such things when speaking about a product in public and many companies have strict rules about such things.

[ddurant]

It wasn't a huge deal, though you might want to keep it in mind when speaking about MBI products vs. ones from another company. I was more surprised at the people who could glean that you were an MBI employee from such little data...

 

And, before anybody asks: no, I don't work for Ultimaker or any company that does anything with 3D printing. I've probably given more money to MBI over the years than I have to Ultimaker.

 

> I'm an R&D Engineer, and I was at the heart of the Replicator project

 

This I didn't know. When did you start at MBI?

[Len Trigg]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Aljosa <anom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> read, and reply I don't do it through my email. Whats even more annoying is
> that we can't use our Makerbot emails in this group.

Why can't you use your makerbot emails in the group? It would be quite
helpful to see when we get at least semi-official responses. (At times
it almost seems that barely anyone at MBI reads the group, although
maybe a hands-off approach with operators is what MBI want).


Cheers,
Len.

[Jetty]

Personally, I didn't realize he worked for MBI, he said he was biased,
so I figured
he's gotta be biased, good enough for me. I'm sure if I looked into
his previous
posts I could have found out why. After all the title of this group
is "makerbot", I would
expect most posters to be biased on this forum in the direction of
makerbot equipment.

The reality is, he hasn't attempted the hide the fact, it's
unreasonable to expect
everybody on this form to qualify the exact circumstances of any bias
on every post they
make. Plus he owns both, regardless of if he works for Makerbot or
not, I'm sure he's
capable of giving useful comparative and honest information.

I just hope he continues to contribute after the poor response he's
received this
time to the help and time he's generously provided.

And congrats Aljosa on the molded parts. Particularly that spool
holder, if
I'd have printed it myself it would have broken already, and it's
holding up well for
the amount of bending and pressure it's subjected to when the spool
goes on. Also, love
the way it clips in, can't come out with a spool on, but has enough
movement that if you knock
the back, it doesn't break. Also that it can be easily removed when
servicing the bot
or for transport.

On Jul 17, 11:20 pm, Len Trigg <len...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Cymon]

Why isn't this post getting more attention?

On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 5:54:32 PM UTC-6, 66tbird wrote:

This thread got me to wondering about a .1mm print on my Replicator. So I tried it with the MULHER figure. I set the speed at 60/80 and 240/110C on the ext-HBP.  I came out great, its that simple. One Issue is that as the amount of area in a layer gets small it spends more time heat soaking under that hot nozzle. I'm talk parts like a single 1/8'' standoff size. I'm sure there is a wait feature in there somewhere. I'll cross that bridge when I need to.

I've built hundred of PC's and the only ones that came close to the three cnc machines I've built were custom case water cooled experimental overclockers.  Even that was less of a headache than my first cnc machine. It was a great first kit but took me years to get it stable running year in year out. Plus it took many of the tools in my shop to build and do those mods.

 My Replicator is so thought-out locked in square and true and so easy to adjust I see it doing its job a long time. Which is great. I spent time designing and not tinkering. It's great having a customer describe his needs and the next day I'm handing over a part.    ''Wow, that's great, and you snuck a solar cell in there too, Sweeeeet, should work perfect' You want cash or check?''

You set your layer height to 0.1 and printed and just like that it worked great? Are you kidding me? This whole time I could have been printing at half the current layer heights? I thought there was some reason I couldn't so I never tried less than 0.2. Now I have to decide if I want to...

 

[ddurant]

Good grief, Jetty.. 

 

>  it's unreasonable to expect everybody on this form to qualify the exact circumstances of any bias on every post they make

 

And did I say that he should do such a thing?? No, I did not.

 

If compare product A and product B in a public place and have a financial interest in the success of one of those products, you should disclose that fact. This is a very, very common thing and is not an attack on Aljosa or MBI or your firmware or anything else.

 

> I just hope he continues to contribute after the poor response he's received this time to the help and time he's generously provided.
 

What poor response???

[Martin Galese]

Cymon, 

0.1 mm layer heights on the Replicator are more or less my default and I suspect others are doing that too.  With acceleration, that's a much more tolerable printing time than it used to be.  My "default" ABS settings lately have been .1 mm layer heights (with the Skin plugin at 4x for an effective quality closer to .05 mm) printed at 100 mm/s feedrate and 150 mm/s travel rate.  Print temperature has been the default 230, but I suspect I could lower it.  

The result is that the printing times aren't that far off .1 printing times, but the quality is on the order of .05 mm for outside layers.  Doing that, a full plate build of this  http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:25086 takes a bit less than the estimated 16 hours. -- but that's for a Replicator-max height print at very high quality.  Most objects take less.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/ZuSVf1XxepYJ.

To post to this group, send email to make...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/makerbot?hl=en.

--
Martin Galese

[Blizzard]

@Martin Galese
What do you mean by set the Skin plugin at 4x?
Thanks for all the responses so far (even though some went a bit offtopic), also I'm glad this thread could help Cymon with now having the convenience of printing at 0.1mm. I think I'm most likely getting the Replicator.

[Blizzard]

[Blizzard]

[ddurant]

Skin is a skeinforge (skeinforge = software that chops up the model to gcode, which the machine can understand) option that splits up the outer surfaces of an object into multiple layers.

 

The result is that the visible portions of the object get printed at a higher resolution than the interior of the object. There is disagreement on how valuable this is but worst case, you get nicer prints without the added time-expense of doing the infill at high resolution.

[ddurant]

>> I'm an R&D Engineer, and I was at the heart of the Replicator project
> This I didn't know. When did you start at MBI?

 

Also: I'm still quite curious about this, Aljosa, if it's not secret info...

[Joseph Chiu]

When you turn on skin, do you use a slower feed as well on the skin, while keeping fill faster?  I recently saw a really slow and thin print on a Bukobot, and I have to say that the quality was fantastic.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/wu41J7mygwgJ.

[ddurant]

On machines that support 5D, SF will calculate the correct flow rate to match whatever the desired feed rate is. I'm not sure what it does for non-5D machines (almost everybody uses 5D).

 
On Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:00:13 PM UTC-4, Joseph Chiu wrote:

When you turn on skin, do you use a slower feed as well on the skin, while keeping fill faster?  I recently saw a really slow and thin print on a Bukobot, and I have to say that the quality was fantastic.

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:07 PM, ddurant wrote:

Skin is a skeinforge (skeinforge = software that chops up the model to gcode, which the machine can understand) option that splits up the outer surfaces of an object into multiple layers.

 

The result is that the visible portions of the object get printed at a higher resolution than the interior of the object. There is disagreement on how valuable this is but worst case, you get nicer prints without the added time-expense of doing the infill at high resolution.

 
On Wednesday, July 18, 2012 4:01:10 PM UTC-4, Blizzard wrote:

@Martin Galese
What do you mean by set the Skin plugin at 4x?
Thanks for all the responses so far (even though some went a bit offtopic), also I'm glad this thread could help Cymon with now having the convenience of printing at 0.1mm. I think I'm most likely getting the Replicator.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/wu41J7mygwgJ.

To post to this group, send email to make...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to makerbot+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Laird Popkin]

I'll second this - I just printed http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1216 on a Replicator using the new firmware at 0.1mm layer height and the default accelerated speed of 80 mm/s, and it looks amazing when I compare it to my previous prints And it printed fast enough that I think I'll be using 0.1mm layer height more often. Yeah, it's a little slower, but not much slower, and it looks great. Hats off to the folks that made the hardware and software that can deliver this level of performance!

[Elbot]

Actually, I spoke with Bre. The 7 day lead time is just a an overestimate to make sure that they can keep their promise. Many times, replicators are shipping out the same day that the order is received. Place an order for one and you might be pleasantly surprised. My 2nd replicator arrived 2 days after I got off the phone with makerbot.

nobody else in the 3d printing biz has that fast a delivery time and stellar customer service.

On Friday, August 3, 2012 11:24:56 AM UTC-5, fluxline wrote:

The Replicator 7 day lead time is also a consideration that people looking to buy need to be aware of.  The Ultimaker 'implied' lead time of 9 days when I purchased mine has since upped to 14, and after asking today it looks to be another week at a minimum making it almost a total of 30 days when ordered in mid July.  I think UM has a great product but could do better at customer communication in many areas.

[Elbot]

I don't mean to imply I actually was speaking in person with Bre (i wish!). It was an email exchange.

[jesse.d...@gmail.com]

Our replicator also shipped within just a couple of days, and that was when they claimed 30 day lead time (just before they dropped it).

We ended up deciding on the replicator over the ultimaker because we want to design and print models more than work on the machine itself.  Life demands that we prioritize. :-)  

We've been extremely happy with it so far, although we're trying to switch to PLA and have been having some trouble with that.  I'm confident we'll get that worked out, though.


Jesse

---

On Aug 3, 2012 9:39 AM, Elbot <tomas...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't mean to imply I actually was speaking in person with Bre (i wish!). It was an email exchange.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MakerBot Operators" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/makerbot/-/PALbHqWszQ4J.

To post to this group, send email to make...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.

[James Walker]

My Ultimaker shipped within 4 hours of placing the order.

[fluxline]

I guess that's the trouble then, it can take a few hours or a month but you just won't know until they decide to ship it.  And asking when or what the delay is brings no definite information, might come then or it might come later ... who knows.  If a lead time is indicated, delivery should be around that time, not 3 times as long.  And if it is late, there should be proactive communication with what the holdup is.  The explanation I was given was they were checking filament and that was causing delays. 

Conclusion:  If you are looking for an expected result both on product and delivery, go with the replicator.  If you can accept a more unknown product with potential more versatility, and are willing to wait, go with the Ultimaker.

[fluxline]

And yes, still waiting for an ultimaker to be delivered making that a total of 28 days. Lead time on the UM page changed today to say 7 days.  If you are still between an ultimaker vs replicator, I’d go with the replicator as UM is not to be believed.

On Monday, July 16, 2012 12:06:59 AM UTC+2, Blizzard wrote:

Hey guys,

I'm thinking about buying a 3d printer. I've read a lot about different printers and now my choice is down to these two printers. It's really hard to decide so maybe you could help me out, especially it would be helpful if anyone has worked with both of those systems.

I want to print prototypes of product ideas I have. These are all mostly mechanical, so I'd need a printer which is as accurate as possible. Eg. if I have a part in my CAD which is 5.00mm long it should be 5.00mm long as exact as possible. I know it's not possible to get 100% accuracy, but I want to get as much as I can, but I'm not sure which of those printers is more accurate. I don't really care about speed. What I find interesting is that the Ultimaker is able to get incredible resolutions, as where the Replicator is still experimental at lower resolutions, so does anyone know if the Replicator is able to achieve a resolution of 0.1mm or smaller? I've heard of people who have been able to do it, even down to 0.04mm, which is what I've heard from Ultimaker users too, but more often and it seems to be more likely possible. The big plus of the Replicator would be the dual extrusion, so I could print in 2 colors or with different materials or even support structure in PVA, also that it's prebuilt. Not that it would be a problem for me to actually build the Ultimaker, but it's still a time-saver and I can be sure the machine is assembled properly and I have full guarantee in case something happens. I've seen a lot of people with the Ultimaker getting problems with stringing - is that still an issue? I'd like to have as minor finishing of the models as possible, I don't want to spend much time on the models itself once they're printed, so they have to come out great right out of the printer. I don't know which of those printers can achieve that better. Is it possible to print ABS with the Ultimaker? AFAIK the Replicator can do both, while PLA is still experimental. Also, I'd like to know how the maintenance is with both printers. From the Replicator I know you have to grease the rods every now and then and also level the build platform, but I haven't found anything for the Ultimaker. Do you also have to do some kind of maintenance frequently like the leveling of the build platform on the Replicator? I heard that you have to do it quite often which would be a disadvantage, as I want a machine which just works.

I hope that's enough information for now, and I also hope that someone could help me on my decision.

Thanks in Advance,

Blizzard

[starno]

Hey Dave,

It's not often I look through the forums, but understanding your confusion I felt I should say something.  The majority of people you have known about or interacted with at MakerBot in the past, including myself, have actually left the company.  I can also personally vouch for Aljosa's work as I pushed hard to get him hired.  In the last year MakerBot acquired a lot of talent and experience, going from about 30 people to around 120 now, and it's no mistake that all that man power is making the product more reliable, better quality, and more user friendly then ever before.

Nick

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to makerbot+u...@googlegroups.com.

[ddurant]

Heya Nick,

 

Wow. I didn't know you'd left MBI - hope you're doing something insanely cool now..

 

I wasn't really doubting the quality of his work or anything like that. Just curious about how long he'd been employed by them.