I purchased the MK4 because Prusa has been more than willing to help me solve every problem that I have run into on my MK2 and my MK3. Even sending out replacement free of charge if it was determined to be a faulty part. Prusa is the only printer company that I know of that offers upgrade kits throughout the life of the product as technology improves. That is why I choose to buy Prusa printers.
But the kits are getting extremely expensive. Like the 4.0 kit is only 250€ less than a full new mk4 kit... Unless you really only have space for 1 printer and for some reason dont want to sell the mk3 it's much more sensible to get a full mk4 and either have 2 printers or sell.mk3 (certainly for more than 250€)
I was referring to the small mid generation upgrades that are in the $50-$200 range. I agree it's not worth upgrading your current printer to the next gen.
@@Daepilin Josef has said this himself repeatedly, but people keep demanding that he sell kits, so he does it. But there’s usually partial upgrade options which make a lot more sense. For example the MK2.5 or MK3.5. You improve your current printer, not to full spec but still an upgrade, and for a fraction of the cost of a new one.
@@Daepilin and aside from upgrades they deserve some credit for providing support as well. I‘m certain I could reach out with an issue on my 6-year old several times slowly upgraded MK2.5S and they’d help me instead of saying “sorry that was EOL in 2018.”
I wouldn't buy any MORE Prusa Minis at current price point, but I have two that have been my core machines for my business and I will run them forever as long as I can still get parts and they still keep putting out quality prints. I think we will see Prusa stick around as a company for a long time to come just because they have built the rep that others have to claw their way towards, and I am sure they have more innovations in the pipe.
The printer (& software) being open source, utterly reliable & easy to maintain is far more important to me than print speed or a fancy UI. There's a line in the MK3 product passport that reads "We want your printer to last as long as possible." That speaks volumes.
And so are most FLSUN, Creality, etc printers, a LOT printers run on marlin and use parts that are (except for some printed parts) for sale on the open market. If I wanted to pay 1000€ for a printer, I would get a pre built voron. That's actually open source AND has upgrade options for the latest technoligy - updates that don't cost as much as a new printer
I don't get it. Why would a Prusa last any longer than anything else? They all run on the same open source firmware. If anything, the Prusa stuff is MORE liable to break because they've cooked up their own version. On other stuff, you can just install your own marlin and so whatever you want. I really never understood this argument with Prusa.
@@geometerfpv2804 Because a Prusa machine is built almost entirely from standard components and 3D-printed parts. There's essentially nothing on my MK3 that I can't replace for years to come. I'm not saying Prusa is the only option which offers that. But it is an advantage they have over Bambu Lab, for example.
@@andybrice2711 while thats true, I can buy a whole new another bambulab p1p if the first one completely breaks and I will be only little over the price I would pay for the MK4. why would I even care about the mk4 then
@@davidpodeszwa7010yeah I think most people understand that at the end of the day. It speaks to the sustainability comment Tom referenced in the video. Sadly most folks are in your camp and could give a lick if their product is repairable or sustainable. People will happily toss the old one in a landfill and buy something new. Is what it is I guess.
Yeah... they were forced to because the Chinese had too big of an advantage this way. They basicaly just stole what they wanted. So i think this reaction is understandable@@jumadhaheri
@@chihwahli3677That, and “made in Europe”. Bambu makes impressive gear, but the business seems a little predatory. Bambu printers are attractively priced, but part of the bill is footed by the open source community. I’m very happy with my MK4. And happy that I put it together myself, so I can fix it myself if need be.
Prusa deserves credit for their open source DNA. So many startups are standing on the shoulders of giants (like Prusa) and closing off their gardens. This is a bleak future for the reprap movement. Prusa is still a very high quality printer and a great choice.
I will continue to support Prusa due to their open-source commitment, even if it means making the "wrong" product choice for a while. A Bambu X1 looks mighty tasty, but I value the principle and innovation that open-source has given us thus far over the short term gains of buying a closed garden product.
@@jakubmastalir3557 Open source is a great thing , important in many ways .. from trouble shooting or someone who likes to modify their code. But I do think open source should be available only to non commercial use (end users).
I find it somewhat disheartening that Prusa's open-source approach is continuously being criticized as a drawback in your latest reviews. Not everyone is inclined towards an Apple-esque 'walled garden' experience. Yes, companies like Bamboo labs are undeniably driving impressive progress in the field, but that hardly renders open-source 3D printing obsolete. We can't simply overlook the likes of Voron, VZbot, and many other thriving open-source projects. They offer significant value and choices to a diverse range of users, and deserve fair acknowledgment.
Also the closed nature of a bambulabs printer is exactly the reason I'll never own one. We know what happens when printers are locked down (look at 2D printers, they suck). We need to keep the industry open or the consumer will pay the price.
How many people are using them compared to other machines? If 3D printing is your hobby, sure. They are fantastic to build, upgrade and tinker. If you use 3D printing as a tool they are not what you should get. I want a machine that just works, that just prints parts I need. I want to spend as little time as possible on the machine. And this is the market 3D printing is developing into. So for that, open source 3D printing is not important and as a company detrimental.
@@nukularpictures It's not about the present, rather the future. Consider HP, Canon, and Expo for example. They make 2D printers and they are a nightmare to use. Those.companies border on exploitative/scam practices (disabling scanning if ink is empty). When companies like Bambu Lab kill competiton, they will almost inevitabley change into the three companies above.
@@nukularpicturesAlso Obligatory *All of BambuLab’s Stuff is essentially a Voron or 247B2Zero etc Printer Reskinned in an Injection Molded Shell* Those other machines can be bought in a kit (so you actually know how to maintain it) or i *think* premade (if you really NEED premade you can also just get a Prusa) People talk about them like they *developed* what they made, when short of the albeit difficult production engineering/mold design etc *they didn’t engineer shit*. The Open Source options can be Cheaper and/or Faster and one can actually *support developers* by backing them! 😤
Duet3D has SOLID documentation, western design, completely open source, and they are a main contributor and driver of the reprapfirmware project, which is excellent. How profitable they are is not open source
Prusa might seem to now be behind other companies. But what they did for the whole community and what they provide still lets them be the industry gold standard for printers. Service and longevity are way more important for industry users than the machine's price! As company we only own high price printers because of their reliability. And that's also one of Prusa's main selling points all the other companies yet have to show their worth at.
This is true? And also part of the reason I bought a Mk4? But... To be commercially viable, you need more than goodwill: you need a market competitive product. The mk4 is? But just as Tom has done in this review, Prusa shouldn't receive a free pass, just cause of all their good will in the community.
Hopefully the Toyota strategy works for them. Always behind on features and prices seeming high for what you get, but reliable and just nailing the details.
@@francistaylor1822aren’t we all profiting from the work that came before us? We are constantly building on previous discoveries & standing on the shoulders of others.
@@KanielDYes. Patent Laws and the myth of “I alone the GENIUS invented this” cripple development due to denying this fact. Not to say that people shouldn’t be able to make a living and so on, but to support closed ecosystems and conventional patents in this day and age is either due to being ill informed, or being someone benefiting from the status quo. (decent critiques like Tom’s excluded, nuance and all that etc)
I got the MK4 as a very expensive upgrade to my unmodded Ender 3 Pro. For me 3D printing is not a hobby as much as my 3D printer is a tool. I want the thing to work every time, always have access to parts and service, and have a seamless experience from slicer to print. The competition may have surpassed Prusa in terms of speed and tech, but its the intangibles that made me choose the Mk4.
My thoughts exactly. I need a reliable tool, with solid support, long term spares and dependable connectivity. For then next printer we’re looking at a Mk4 or a Bamboo.
Great review. One thing though: while I'm a tinkerer, I explicitly do NOT want to work on my 3d printer. In fact, I loathe it. Ideally, it just prints, so I can work on iterations of my own products for weeks, or their MCU innards. That's why I'm sticking with Prusa printers. They seem to hit a sweet spot for me when it comes to reliability and price.
Yes you nailed it. "Reviews" such as this YT video are bizarre, like when he claims he'd just buy a cheap machine and then spend for ever tweaking it. Maybe he got stuck in the 2010s ? I just want to make stuff with my 3D printer, not make a 3D printer.
Had nothing but trouble out of the couple Prusas I worked with. For the price, I expected your experience, but realized that is almost ALWAYS a fan boy perspective...
I got this printer as a kit, and finished building it yesterday. I can say, the building experience was worth the money. High quality parts and the improved building process over the MK3S+ was excellent.
This tool isn't necessary but will make everything look better and avoid sharp edges let behind from cutting the tails on zip-ties : FLUSH CUT pliers@@claytonjohnston4006
I chose my first 3D printer as a prusa mk4 because I want something solid for the next 15 years minimum. I support an european busness, the open source slicer, the internet connection with all the stats I can monitorize from my phone... I bought it in kit, it was incredibly fun to build, and it works on the very first try I was completely bamboozlied. I made a Benchy on PLA and then on PETG. Incredible emotion when you come from the wood industry like me.
I am not such prusa fan, but the fact you yourself said it is going to become your main workhorse speaks volumes. Bamboo is cool for many things, but if I am printing something overnight I just want to have it in the morning.
I purchased the MK4 because I have a MK2 upgraded to an upgradded 2.5S ans I was waiting for a bigger upgrade than the MK3 to upgrade. Also, although their software and hardware are open source, I am gladly buying prusa to encourage their business and their contribution to the makers community. Enjoy :)
I think you and I might secretly be the same person, LMAO. Same exact story... Mk4 has been solidly "send file and forget" since the day I got it, and I have zero regrets.
@@NathanBuildsRobots I am not sure if you are joking or serious. If you are serious...isn't saying bambu stole from prusa the same as saying prusa stole from Slic3r?
After owning my Sovol SV-06 for half a year now, I still want a Prusa. As you said, you have to tinker with the Chinese machines until they run reliably or even work for longer prints at all (yes, I'm looking at you, heatcreep). But at this point I have three printers that need tinkering and I'm just tired. I just want a printer that prints for hours, days, weeks, months, years without tinkering. And that's what Prusas do best and seemingly nobody else achieves. My friend has a Prusa Mk2 and it still runs just perfect after all these years.
You had heat creep on the SV06? I have pumped a good 15-20 KG of filament through mine and not a single clog. That includes some 48hr+ prints. My only mods were a couple of parts to manage the bed cable and I upgraded to a 5015 single fan dual duct config. My only issue is the VFA, which the MK3/s/+ also suffer from. Oh, almost forgot I packed the bearings on the SV06 as soon as I got it, they were almost completely dry and sounded horrible, after greasing them it is pretty quiet apart from the PSU fan which I will most likely replace with an 80mm at some stage.
@@Smokinjoewhite with some PLA brands I had heatcreep issues (filament stuck, failed print), especially now in the summer it appears the temperature within my enclosure was too high. There are really good models for 5015 fans on Printables and since then I didn't have any issues again. And the printer became quieter because the bearings in the fan made weird noises on movements.
Agree on all that but i simply dont have the time to tinker. When i got the mk3, half hour after assembling it i had my 1st printed part. Ordered a mk4 in kit
Its funny you mention this while choosing a machine you have to assemble when machines with similar capabilities are printing before you get the first bolt in. Its an interesting choice to me. I suppose there is no reason not just to blurt out the elephant in the room, but in terms of not tinkering, why a kit mk4, when a P1P has _more_ capability for _less_ money and and is even more user friendly? Not wanting to tinker used to be Prusa's speciality but I have to say Bambulab in a way the cheap clones like the K1 havent really managed to yet, really disrupted that, and In my opinion changed what it meant to be an easy to use, no fuss, no tinkering printer.
@@BeefIngot point is as follows: assembling a prusa is relatively easy thanks to the really good documentation (something that is becoming out of fashion a bit everywhere and lets not start with "documentation" when it comes to some chinese products) and is a one off: 4 or 5 hours work. Regarding "tinkering", i hear stories from those who went for cheaper options, where it took them ages to set up the dozens of parameters to get the printer to work reliably; with my mk3, as i said, took literally half hour to get printing. It then worked reliably for all the time i had it (i think around3 years now) which basically means when i need something i design it, slice it and print it, with just the very occasional adjustment of first layer. The reason im getting the mk4 is that even this hassle will be eliminated. Time is money and in my business people bills 100 to 200 dollars per hour. So no, no time for tinkering when i need to print.
After nearly 2 full years of using my Mini+ with all the additions from Prusa (PINDA and filament sensor) I can confidently say it’s been overwhelmingly good. Often when I thought something was wrong it was I who didn’t understand some nuances like large flat pieces tend to warp. After I added an RPi4B 4GB with OctoPrint + OctoPi it’s been very useful too.
So, I got a MK2 when your review on that posted back in… late 2016? I have upgraded it since and it’s now a MK2.5S, which is only a couple steps short of the MK3. I converted my XL pre-order to a MK4 kit, and I have to say, on paper, there’s not a *huge* difference between even the MK2.5 and the MK4, but in practice, it’s vastly different to me. It’s way less fiddly to assemble, way more consistent in use, the interface is better, the load cell bed leveling thing is much much better than the PINDA, and it’s significantly faster (it’s not lightning, but it’s immediately noticeable. I have a way easier time getting good prints, especially large prints that cover a lot of the plate and struggle with adhesion in some spots if bed leveling isn’t spot on. So yes, same formula, and looks the same at first glance, but it’s not the same. I saved money by building the kit, which I enjoy doing anyway. But still, yeah I could get a P1P. But that’s a whole new system with new issues to learn and solve. After 6+ years of printing on my Prusa, I’m comfortable with their philosophy and how they go about things, so I know where to start when I have a problem. Expensive? Yeah a bit. Perfect? No. Bragging rights? Probably not (but I don’t really care about speed benchies etc.). But do I regret my purchase? I do not.
Honestly that load cell and prusa link are what got me to purchase the Mk4 (on top of the good experience I've had with my mk3) I never really liked using octoprint so i really like the fact that i can load my gcode onto the printer's storage without having to physically plug in the storage device into my computer. I can operate everything from PrusaSlicer and/or the web interface. Also, to me its an $800 printer since i like the fun weekend i get assembling the printer. It may not be significantly better than all the competition out there but I don't have anything to complain about with this machine.
I know my MK4 is going to get support and options for upgrades in the future on top of sustaining their commitment to the community. That’s on top of a heck of fun assembly experience that only gave me a few scares (&Haribos)
To be fair, Klipper and RRF had direct to print capabilities over WiFi - both as host and as another device on the network - since before Mk.4 was released. It's really not a unique feature and Octoprint wasn't the only way to do it as of at least 2020-ish. The load cell isn't unique either but they did make a better way to mount it that reduces oscillations from a non-rigid mount inherent in a load cell system, but without the considerable weight budget of a Tap-like 4th linear axis probing system.
I don't believe that by opening its source code Prusa is killing itself. Say they took the Slic3r and built a closed source product around it. There is still Cura in open source that other printer manufacturers could use. Without Prusa slicer it's possible that Slic3r, or a fork of it, may have gotten more attention from open source developers. I believe that people buy a Prusa when they want something that works and expect it to keep working. They also want to have someplace to contact if there are any problems with their product. It is similar to businesses paying for support licenses for Linux when one may just download the operating system for free. ( Perhaps having Prusa throw its resources into Prusa slicer and keep it open source we lost out on a lot of people contributing to the various open source slicer projects. They may have thought that things were going to get done by Prusa so they would live with any annoyances in the current version. A lot of people start on a project when there is something that is bugging them or they really want a feature but there isn't the resources to implement the fix or upgrade. )
Granted I’m no lawyer, but also with many of the Slicer features, unless you start from scratch (although this brings up the potential for issues akin to the Power Supply/Regulation circuits in Laptops etc that @Louis Rossman mentioned of there only being a few ways to do something), you would be using components that require you to open source the code. Granted Tom touched on that with the “start with open source bits and gradually remove them all until it is locked off” bit, but I don’t *think* that is what has been done (citation needed).
Most of new PrusaSlicer features are ported from Cura! Btw. I do not understand a reason for PrusaSlicer's existence ...They just took Slic3r then started rewriting it with Cura's code.
@@WizardUli PrusaSlicer exists so that Prusa that the company may guarantee that there exists an application they feel takes advantage of the hardwares strengths while dealing with any areas the printers may be weak in. They know the printers better than anyone else and are able to customize the software to them. They could have used third party software and created really good profiles but there are some things that can't be dealt with in a profile. It's true that PrusaSlicer does get a lot of inspiration for new ideas from Cura. However, new ideas travel in all directions from the slicer apps. Cura, PrusaSlicer, SuperSlicer, and more all have talented people contributing to them. Because those projects are open source the ideas may be implemented, and possibly improved, on the other apps. What may be possible on one app might not be possible, or require a tremendous effort, because of how things are implemented on another. Or it might be easier. We are all better off because there are multiple open source slicers with active development.
@@ericlotze7724 Slicers are software. How one group builds a slicer will be different from another. Even though a task may be the same for the two groups (for example, how automatically to add supports), how each group goes about implementing it in their source code could be vastly different. It depends on such things as how they store the data internally (data structures), goals (is speed more important than minimizing memory use), the computer language used, the pressure to release (if it needs to be released very soon the first idea might be implemented rather than coming up with the best idea), whom is working on the project as people have different ideas, and so on.
I sold my Prusa mini and Mk3s and got an MK4 on the release day, it has been working nonstop since then, never a failed print, no first layer calibration, nothing, it just works flawlessly. I love most things about this printer, but it has some downsides, yes it's expensive but if I wanted quality for "cheap" I would have kept my mini, and Prusa link is a bit buggy and slow and some features like input shaping are not in the machine yet. But I know that these things will be tended to and fixed along with new features and functions. The thing about this machine is that it just works, no gluestick, no messing with calibrations, I just throw any crappy filament I have and it gives me great prints every time. Also lastly, the support is amazing and as it's being produced in Europe I can get parts within a few days, which is a huge upside when working with Prusa machines.
Honestly, Prusa is still number one in my book. They have enough goodwill I trust input shaping will come and their end user experience is still the best and the most intuitive.
Open hardware and software is the future. This was a huge factor in my decision to go with Prusa over many "cheaper" alternatives. While assembling the mk3 + mmu I damaged a part for the mmu. No worries, I just downloaded and printed off the replacement. Cheaper and faster than ordering a replacement from the other side of the globe. This was my first 3D printer. It has been a fantastic experience so far. It was a deliberate decision to support an open company helping to build an open ecosystem and I have no regrets.
I think part of what your money buys you when you get one of these is also the promise that replacement parts and even upgrades for it will be available for a lot of years directly from the manufacturer. No hoping that some other company will make a compatible part 4 years from now when you accidentaly break something. You just know you can go to Prusa and have the exact spare part in a few days. Based on how they have supported previous iterations of this printer I can belive this a lot more than with any competition I can think of.
Which parts are you talking about? 3d printed parts are available as to download Whole motion system is an of the shelve solution (bearings, rods, belts, motors, etc) Frame is partly aluminum extrusions and some custom sheet metal and that big square Electronics is custom and if recent years thought us anything - BMW shipping cars with missing features, raspberry pi at crazy prices and even Prusa having problems sourcing parts - you can't trust that it will be easy to source anything that doesn't have drop in replacement. And seeing how Prusa invests in unified platform you might be in for a surprise. I think the more popular product is the bigger the chances that, even if the original part is unavailable, there will be a 3rd party replacement.
Totally agree with all those points, they're the reasons why five years ago when I got the chance to get a 3D printer I went for a Mk3. It's still going strong today.
@@furmek What you say is absolutely correct but also meaningless for many users. I know personally someone who bought a Mk3 almost 4 years ago. He uses it daily, he understands quite a bit in the principles of how FDM printing works and can go deep into many lesser known settings in the slicer. But in the end he just wants a printer that works and does not care or have time to learn that the hotend is off the shelf V6 E3D, he just wants to get a new one when a badly tightened nozzle causes a blob of death or when heatbreak breaks because of repeated crashes into a warped part. No searching, no learning, just order the part and get it in two days, with certainty it will fit. I know he changed some parts of hotends and whole hotends over the years, bed thermistors too. The short PTFE between hotend and extruder as well. I dont remember any other failures. You and I know we could invest some time searching what exact bed thermistor Prusa uses and buy it elswhere, same for the tape holding it on, and we might get it cheaper, saving a euro or two. But the convenience of never having to do that has a price many people are willing to pay and they get it with a Prusa printer. Not everyone buys these things to become an expert in what parts exactly are in it and where to get them. Some people just want to print and have easy access to spares. Prusa has shown they will support your pretty old printer that way. Other manufacturers to my knowledge have not (or some possibly not yet as they have not existed for long yet). This is not valuable to all of us but some people like it a lot. BTW I have sold my prusa some time ago because I use RatRigs now, I am also not a customer for the MK4, I just know personally someone for whom it would be an exact fit. Although he will just upgrade his current printer to Mk3.9.
I got a MK3s kit a few years ago. After assembly (which was a lot of fun and educational) it worked immediately an flawlessly. Print quality is excellent ever since. It just prints and is so reliable. I never had to tinker with it.. It cost more than twice an Ender 3, but I never regretted to pay the premium. A main point also was, that I am fairly confident and feel safe to let the printer work unattended for large overnight prints - something I would never dare with a chinese knock off. I agree, that the MK4 is a bit pricier these days, but given the experience I had so far with the MK3, I would still be willing to pay the higher price.
The lack of a sensor for input shaping is a massive problem in my book as mechanical harmonics can be massive affect by the surface the printer is placed on or any mods applied.
Indeed. Its why its pretty annoying to me how many printers are coming out with klipper right now as a main feature, then tell their users to spend an hour faffing around with input shaping manual tests to get a rough idea of whats going on every time they move their printer. Its ridiculous. Its even more ridiculous to ship the printer with pre built input shaper settings because that means that users literally have to just hope their circumstances match the manufacturers closely enough. IIRC I believe the V400 shipped this way, with no method of changing it outside of installing klipper from scratch, which I find pretty absurd.
I apologise for my absolute ignorance regarding this. But am I totally mistaken in believing that the size, weight and shape (and possibly even "position on the print-bed") of the print that is being printed also influences the "resonance harmonics" of the "machine". And if this is the case does machines that have accelerometers use them to "recalibrate continuously"? Best regards
Despite the competition, I will be getting a Mk4. I have a Mini+ at home but have some projects that will require the bigger bed. I like that its made in the EU with good support, I like a machine that will have tech support and parts availability for years to come, and I am happy to support with my wallet organizations that support the open source environment like Prusa and E3D
I bought a pre-assembled Mk4 after having an older I3 and an original mini. My reasons: * I want a printer that "just works" without tweaking. The MK4 was/is that. Complete and calibrated right out of the box, and has had zero issues. My 3d printer supports my other hobbies, but tweaking 3d printers is not part of my hobby. * I want to support a company that gives as much as it gets. The open source approach is a *huge* plus to me. Given your audience, it would be good for you to emphasize this as a positive at least *some* times. :) There are lots of companies out there who are just "takers" and build down to the lowest price possible, using another person or company's R&D, without adding anything real of their own, and without contributing back. * I want to support a company that pays a fair wage to their employees. * I want to support a company that has sustainability in mind and acts on it I know not everyone will agree, or find those important, or necessarily have the money for a Prusa even if they did. Oh, but shame on Prusa for that horrid WiFi implementation. I couldn't get it to join my network, and when I looked it up, it turns out it's not worth it because the WiFi is so incredibly slow anyway. That was a really dumb miss on their part.
Just built my MK4 and love it. I’m coming from an Ender 3 V2 that never produced anything good and I was constantly fixing, even with $200 of upgrades. I spent about 80% of the time fixing it and 20% printing. I even designed a custom mount for a dial indicator so I level my bed with precision because ABL did practically nothing. So yes, the MK4 has a place because it just works. I didn’t need it to go fast or anything like that, I just needed it to work. Maybe I will go to another printer once I’ve recovered from repair burnout, but for now, I’m happy.
I love my Prusa printers. However, Prusa Connect PrusaLink Mini Wi-Fi MMU2 Were all things I expected to be supported/improved earlier. They announced selling features & then it felt like they didn’t even update us. It makes trusting them on upcoming features more difficult. I think the MK4 kit is still a solid value depending on what someone’s time is worth. I obviously don’t know their decisions behind many choices, but it feels that they didn’t simplify the assembly process to allow for upgrading the MK3. However, it hardly seems worth the upgrade cost over selling the MK3 & buying an MK4…
The Ethernet file upload on MINI+ after a previous print is just silly. I 'get' that it's probably there to make sure that the user has cleaned up the bed before the next print, but if I fail to exit the print menu, it lets me upload a file and start a print, but then fail at the end, and then I need to exit the menu on the printer (which is fair) and find the freshly uploaded file in a jungle of other files on the SD card. If I'm reuploading a new version of the same file, it just fails (at the end, I think) instead of asking for confirmation for overwrite. Not the best arrangement UX-wise. Not the end of the world either, but feels clunky for no good reason.
In defense of Prusa, I'd trust them to offer better quality parts than the cheaper alternatives. The PSU on my Sovol SV06+ is regrettably bad (high electrical noise jamming FM radios + awfully loud fan) and I had to replace it. Next, the power switch melted on the machine (also on other machines that are still with the stock PSU afaik), which was clearly not happy with a 500 W PSU. I wouldn't expect something like this to happen with a Prusa and am still considering the MK4 as a replacement for my SV06+.
One of the reasons why prusa printers cost more than their CCP clones is partly because they use high quality, OEM components in their BOM. And the smooth brains cant seem to understand that. I have almost 25k print hours on my MK3S with zero replaced components other than a nozzle. Meanwhile, my P1P died after just 10hrs because they use the exact same cheap, low quality stepper motors as a $150 ender 3. Prusa stepper motors are still made in china, but they're name brand LDO at least. CCP printers are all built in shenzhen and use the same parts from the same factories next door to each other, that's why parts on them fail so easily.
@@LilApe This is such a bizarre mish mash of nonsense especially since Ive seen you specifically say you would never buy a Bambulab machine and see you constantly posting anti Bambulab things. The real fact of the matter is that every product has its lemons. It wasnt too long ago that Prusa had a bug in their thermal runaway protection that had some hotends melting down. Did people call them horribly unreliable and make up some xenophobic mental gymnastics to justify why that proves their products are bad? No. Prusa gets free passes for days.
I strongly believe that Prusa is moving super correctly in the principles, but they are at a very big risk of getting crunched by the uncaring market. The mk4 looks like this so you can theoretically start from the mk1 or mk2 and upgrade up to the mk4. But nowadays this is not a big selling point anymore. Printer are becoming appliances, and there's not a lot of room in the market for people who like to build their own fridge. On top of that i agree with you regarding the open source part. Yes in principle prusa are the good guys, while who exploit their work are the bad guys. But still the market does not care, so some choices here, even though asbolutely super fair in principles, are now a risky commercial disadvantage. Prusa had an edge on technology that granted them an advantage for years, because if you wanted a workhorse reliable machine you had to buy from them. Now it is not true anymore, the new products are not only cheaper because they produce in china and on par with the tech because they exploit the open source, but they are also more advanced so even that advantage is gone. If they want to keep their position they'll have to adapt, even if it looks ugly now for the good guys, business does not care.
If your strategy does not require unlimited growth for shareholders you can survive very well in this market. Makerbot, Ultimaker, and you name it all went the growth route, that's fine but makers don't want expensive proprietary products so you need to switch to the B2B market (which they did). I have contributed to quite a few products and the early days and seen many companies fail. The market is a thin one, there is not much margin. Either you build something cheap or you find some other niche. Prusa perfectly fits the niche of the original Makers, no other 3d printer manufacturer does anymore, competition is smaller than ever.
Meh, I think the criticism is pretty minor, nothing I've heard really wants me to avoid buying a Mk4. I'm a bit tired of the problems I'm getting with my Ender 3, I want a solid workhorse, I don't care for the extra proprietary stuff the competition is doing. I just don't see any of the criticisms being relevant to my purchasing decision. I'm not buying the printer for the bells and whistles, I'm not trying to impress my friends, I'm not trying to stoke my ego, I'm not trying to stay ahead of any curve. I just want a solid machine that will always work, with excellent support, and supports open ideas like open source and right to repair.
I can’t agree more. I bought an Ender thinking it would be cheaper and I would get it to be reliable. But after many upgrades I still find myself continuously having to tweak it. I am holding out with buying a mk4 for a bit to see Prusa’s response. I would like them to take this kind of feedback seriously. They really should add the accelerometers and drop the price a bit.
Years ago I started with a SeeMeCNC printer. It was a good printer, but I spent more time tweeking and upgrading than printing with it. When I started to use the MK3, I couldn't believe how much more enjoyable using a 3D printer was, it just worked! These days my time is much more valuable and I just want a reliable tool that works day in and day out with good support. Seldom do I print trinkets and when I do it is usually for family and friends. Mostly I use the printer for my own hobby projects. I have had the Prusa MK3 for several years and it has worked flawlessly. I am responsible for at least 4 other people for purchasing a MK3 just because of my recommendation. My new MK4 (kit cause I like to build things) is on order and should arrive next week. My old reliable MK3 will become my daughters first 3D printer. She will be using it for props for a local theater. Thomas, I totally understand where you are coming from and respect your comments about not recommending the MK4. That said, I will still recommend both the MK3 and MK4 for the quality and to support a company that does their best to support the Maker community! Keep those review coming Thomas.
None of the other printers on the market today check all the boxes that Prusa does : - Quiet enough to run two in my study while I work - Excellent print quality, no excuses - Excellent build quality, no excuses - Always works, no excuses - No mysterious Chinese cloud sees my work - Makes the world a better place by paying a living wage and open sourcing their work.
Here's the problem though - only a tiny portion of people buying a printer care about most of those things, especially in the current economy. The higher cost for those things is Prusas problem, not the customers. As much as I admire them and have massive respect for what they do they can't compete with the competitors right now. Neither you nor me are the average customer.
and many printers check boxes that prusa dont offer -its quiet because its slow compared to a Bambu X1C -1200€ for an open pre build printer(you can get 2x P1P for one MK4) -Only PETG, PLA for large prints without any Mods or expensive enclosure -Worst mechanical setup ( bedslinger) for fast printing +Good costumer service... -still a bad user interface +Made in the EU -Bad build material choise (PETG) if you want it to use for high temp prints -Beta status ( things that are advertised are not in the final product +better security ( but you dont have to use the cloud on the Bambu...you can use the LAN Mode)
I don't need a bunch of 1-off features, I need a machine that works reliably for years. I got that in the MK3S. Going on 4 years now with no major problems. And if anything does go wrong, Prusa Inc is there as a sustainable company to provide support and parts if needed. Compare that to the Ender printer. At least a couple times a week on the 3dprinting subreddit, it seems like people are finding them on the side of the road in various states of disrepair.
I appreciate someone pointing out how horribly clunky wifi inherently has to be while Ethernet always really "Just Works™" despite the assumption by so many people that cables are an absolute deal breaker.
Wifi can be fine but combining that with ethernet to the wifi points is the best. No one seems to do that though so wifi experiences are still very similar to years ago. With wifi6 being even more tricky to get through the house, I completely switched to Ethernet. Soooooo much better. It's that ppl want their homes to be like Ikea design displays that makes that a no go apparently.
I traded in my XL reservation for the right to purchase a MK4 and I don't regret it at all. Most of my prints are mechanical objects, not art pieces, so all of the hullabaloo about ringing means nothing to me. What matters to me is reliability, serviceability, long-term support, and speed. Input shaping on the MK4 means that it can print the type of things I print in a third the time as they would print on my MK3, and because of the other features of the MK4, they print more reliably. WiFi doesn't matter for me, because I've got Ethernet wired to my workbench -- it's plug and play. As it happens, I prefer OctoPrint to PrusaLink, so I applied two upgrades to my MK4 (hard-wired OctoPi + Logitech C270 camera) and I'm set. I hand-assembled my MK2 (and all of its upgrades to MK2.5S) and my MK3 (and all of its upgrades to MK3S+ and MMU2S). I've assembled 5 other MK3s for other people. While I thought about getting the MK4 kit, the extra cash to get a fully-assembled printer sooner than the kit was really a no-brainer for me. As with all 3D printers, Your Mileage May Vary.
I really like that the nozzle can still use e3d v6 nozzles and the open source nature of their printers. It's a missed opportunity not using a faster wifi module and including a simple camera. Adding an accelerometer and a few strain gauges would have been very low cost. But it bridges many of the main problems between the prusa mini and mk3s+ that I feel more comfortable recommending the mk4 now for reliability for beginners. There is tough competition from bambu labs p1s but I am worried about having to buy into their proprietary ecosystem to do their qc for them and keep the printer running
A harsh but honest review. Prusa won't like it being said but should pay attention. The honest truth is exactly that. I have a few Creality machines one ultimaker and actually built dolly with you a few years ago. I love what prusa does and I'd love to justify buying one. But as you say there's not enough to make me part with that kind of money for the perceived value. Manufacturing a new best thing like apple it rubbish and not their way of doing things and I appreciate that. But just doing their thing won't keep them going forever. I fear they might be swallowed up by a larger Corp. And their ip licenced to the likes of creality. But they're giving it away anyway and perhaps that's where what you said rings true. I'd rather have prusa around doing what they do for everyone's benefit with their sw and hw closed source than the possibility of them not pushing forward for the cheaper Manufacturers to pursue.
I bought a Mk4 kit, and I'm glad I did. For $800 plus a long day assembling it, this printer is excellent. I've been astonished how little configuration was required (zero). I just assembled it and hit print, and it cranks out perfect prints every time. My Prusa machines (this is my 3rd, plus some upgrade kits) have always been very reliable work-horses, and that long-term durability and reliability is valuable to me. I hope the MMU3 ends up being as good as the Mk4. It's not flashy and headline-grabbing like the Bambu, but it's excellent in its own ways that I appreciate.
When I buy a product I care about the company that sells it. Even if it’s 3x the price I will always buy from them. I will also recommend doing so to all who ask me.
Prusa could probably make a mint selling the nextruder on its own if it's compatible with other boards and firmware. I won't lie if I could stick one on my ratrig I would in a heartbeat. Auto leveling with the nozzle would be a huge sell in of itself.
@TheJustinist the tap is still different enough that you do need to z adjust. Not nearly as much a lot of the time and after you do ot once it generally keeps but still need to do it
Nextruder seems also interesting for multi material unit applications as the filament path is basically on the side of the stepper 🤔. But I won't pay a 300€ kit update just to have my hands on it ^^'
@@KevinLemarchand yeah, plus they wouldn't have to include a mount since most other printers don't use linear rods. They are using it for multimaterial but it's the tool changer style. Still waiting on my xl.
@@redkingrauri3769 true, true. I'm still waiting for the next video of MirageC on the nextruder. Very interesting design. Multi tool(head) is not a MMU :P I was more thinking about something like the Tradrack (annex) or the ERCF (Voron). ;)
Good job Tom, fair and honest review. I've had a MK3s for longest time, and I got at least 5 of my friends to buy one too. But after finally taking the plunge to get a X1C with AMS, I've honestly not looked back. I thought I'd still keep the MK3s to print in parallel if I was needing the extra output speed, but unless I'm multiplexing many projects at the same time, there just isn't even any reason to have the MK3s do one part, since the Bambu will probably finish the first part, and then finish the 2nd part all in less time (and fuss) than my quite upgraded (Revo) MK3s. In half a year of printing, there has only been one part, a 1" wide threaded screw, that for whatever reason, prints better on the MK3s than on the X1C (even slowed down). I did preorder the 5 head XL, and now many years later, I'm honestly not sure what to do with my preorder amount. I suppose my hope is they come out with some magical high speed XL improvements (cause what I've seen so far on Tada doesn't make me want one at all), and the 5 heads are faster at multimaterial printing than the AMS, which although easy to use, is hugely wasteful and massively slow. But then again, at $3500 USD... that's enough for like, 3 more X1Cs, or a whole farm of P1Ps, or whatever new printer Bambu comes out with next. It is just hard to justify, even if I very much like Prusa's contributions to open source community.
I bought MK3, upgraded to MK3S+ and soon I'll upgrade to MK4. That's what I like on Prusa printers. And I'm curios what they can do with 32 bit platform. I trust Prusa. 😀
I've been asking this for nearly 3 years. I was almost convinced they forgot to remove the feature from their website, but then they updated the firmware to support the XL and MK4 and literally has a a field listing which build supports power loss recovery, and they wrote in XL and MK4 and IXL (the print wall model), but left out Mini. So someone knows...
I have a Prusa MK3s+ with MMU2. I have been printings on and off for ~18 months without a fail caused by machine failure. I don't count when I forgot to turn on supports when I sliced a model, started the print and fell asleep. It built up a big glob and melted the fan shroud or should I say the PETG melted into the fan shroud. Other than that my Prusa prints trouble free.
That input shaping and lack of accelerometer and header on board is reason why I am still waiting to buy it, because maybe they will have it in later revisions, and I don't want to pay extra for it.
I don't personally own a Prusa, but as far as I can tell their reputation for accuracy, reliability, and after-market support still applies to the new Mark 4. Assuming that's true, I think the Mk4 is a good machine to recommend to someone who is brand new to the hobby but interested in building their own machine. Assembling the kit will give them experience with setting up a printer (unike, say, an Ultimaker or Bambu), but because it's a Prusa they can feel confident that it will actually *work* without a whole lot of screwing around. And the Prusa support team will help a lot with solving problems that come up. All of this will help keep the neophyte interested and engaged and much more likely to keep using their printer and pushing their skills forward. Starting out with a Creality machine, on the other hand, is a great way to make the neophyte extremely frustrated and push them into just giving up, resulting in yet another printer gathering dust in a closet. Should the hobbyist buy a *second* Mark 4? Should the user with a reliable existing setup invest in a Mark 4? Possibly not. But for a beginner, it still seems like a good option.
I think what really annoyed me with the MK4 is it shows lessons weren't learnt from the Mini launch. I bought the mini under the pretense that it had, or would have power loss recovery. It was a feature proudly splashed all over the marketing material and website. We're now several years on, it's had the plus iteration and it's still non existant, with just a github issue people regularly bump which gets an occasional reply brushing it off from Prusa. Input shaping was shown off in the promo materials for the MK4 and once again was not available on launch, and doesn't look like its likely to ever be in a reliable state without having to make an additional purchase to upgrade the machine to add an accelerometer or two. If Prusa had done this in the UK they'd have been fined by the ASA for false advertising by now. I can only assume the EU has a similar setup too so it's pretty reckless for them to continue this path of misleading customers, and very much tarnishes their previously great reputation.
Yes, agreed that that is not a good decision for sure. They were pressured to release due to the competition (which is good) but this and the way they deal with immediately writing off money without a clear way to know when it is shipped is bad (yes they have a shipping table, but no one will find that when you just look at the order page).
it's like when they came out with the PEI beds and it took almost a year for most people to actually receive them (but every youtuber still had one to review). I don't know why people pretend it's such an amazing company tbh, they treat the customers terribly
We have a couple of printers in the office. First one was a Zortrax M200, then there came some Prusas (Mk2 and Mk3), then a Zortrax M300 and now the XL. And to be honest, I prefer the Prusas. They are our workhorses, reliable, easy to fix (if ever something gets worn or damaged). And got all the upgrades over the years to make them more reliable. The 2 Zortrax are retired because firstly they are unreliable divas (grease it after every second print, relevel, etc) and you waste an incredible amount of time and filament for the raft. Also the proprietary and unflexible slicer and the "walled Garden" with filament. When printing a plate full of parts 1/3 of the time is wasted with the raft. I will not buy a MK4 because we already have enough printers for our demand, but when the time comes then it will be probably another Prusa.
I don't think having an open source slicer / studio is really a big downside. It's good for the community. Besides, Bambu Studio is fantastic. I've been using Orca Slicer for a few weeks now with my Ender 3 and X1C and it's been excellent.
Input shaping is not as complicated as you are describing, it's just a filter put over the motion data. When you remove the most resonant part of the motion, it vibrates less. You're making it sound like it adds signal 180 degrees out of phase, this is not the case. That's how noise cancelling works, though.
Fair enough. But how can the printer understand its motion without something like an accelerometer?
Рік тому+4
My theory is that the MK4S a year later will iron out the input shaping issues, as well it will include the accelerometer in the upgrade package. They probably wanted to ship it in the MK4 but didn't managed to implement it in time, so decided to postpone it. I'm not in the hurry anyway; my MK3S is still plenty usable. In the meantime I can watch how the market landscape changes. I'm also curious if the MMU3 will be any good.
As much as I want a Prusa machine, I can’t justify the money for it, especially when a Bambu X1 with the Ams can do multiple colors and filaments out of the box. I really want to support them and their research, but at the end of the day, I only have so much cash and need the most features I can get for my money.
Coming from an mk3s+ I am still on the fence about the mk4. Out of the box its a slight upgrade over the mk3 and its full functionality is still a ways off. (Alpha firmware, touch screen you cant touch) I'm going to sit this round out until it matures. I think Prusa is in the same place as Apple. If you make a great "older" product its hard to convince your consumers to repurchase. You aren't just competing with others you are competing with yourself. Any major change should feel revolutionary not evolutionary especially when its a whole model # different.
I absolutely agree that they should have included accelerometers on the X and Y. It would eliminate unlucky users like you and it would allow easy modifications of the X carriage without ruining the preset. It works perfectly for me but... Why? Overall I'm extremely happy with mine though, I expected to like it less honestly. I love the "gets you exactly what you need" interface, and I loooove that it still is extremely intuitive to use without touch. I've always been a tinkerer but damn, it just works. There's nothing to tinker with! I like it. Last paragraph I promise, I bought it _exactly_ for the open source aspect (paired with the reliability prusas are famous for). I hate when something breaks and I don't have options because the system is completely closed and the product is at end-of-support... Because the moment stuff breaks is when it's old, and when it's old companies leave it there. So it's good that I can do it myself.
12:10 I would say, even if every printer and my own are using prusaSlicer, and im looking forward to the day I can afford a PrusaPrinter, so I can be done with the endless setting fidling
I do not want a closed source printer. That's not the only reason I buy Prusa's either but it's definitely why I don't buy Bambu Labs. I think Prusa strikes a nice balance between open source printer with support. When my Vorons break while I have forums and things, ultimately it's on me. If I have something break on my Prusa, it's a pretty easy thing to get a replacement both in and out of warranty. I just can't get on board the closed source hype train knowing it was ultimately the reason we didn't have home desktop 3D printers 20 years ago. Fool me once...
I think the more accurate statement is our ridiculously awful and completely biased in favour of large corporations patent system is why much of the world is the way it is, in purely a bad way. So much innovation purposefully slowed down so massive companies can milk everything for as long as they can. People have died because of this occurring within pharmaceuticals and yet we as a society just leave this terrifyingly awful system in place because its largely invisible. Your average person has no idea what implications this system has. Sure its possible for companies to choose moral licensing options, but the flat out truth is that vast majority will not.
@@BeefIngot It's definitely bad. It gets worse because not all countries honor patents in other countries (one in particular...). That means folks that follow the rules are punished for doing so while folks that break them have no consequences. That's a hard solve but one way to solve it is with open source. If competition from said company is going to happen anyway, making it open source levels the playing field. Or at least means we're playing a different game (rather than trading baseball card patents). One of the better sections in my computer ethics course way back in the day was a guest lecture about how broken patents were. The lecturer was a former patent lawyer who just couldn't do it anymore and switched over to working on his PhD in computer science instead. That says a lot.
I value Prusa’s open source philosophy. I will always prefer them over the competition. They are a guarantee both in quality, durability and support. They add to the community in the selfless open source way that makes them worthy of my respect and, ultimately, my money.
I think it's really interesting how many Prusa printers you'll find in universities, engineering and design studios. Ultimaker is a joke at this point. It just keeps on running. Sort TPU is a big part of why I'm looking into maybe purchasing the upgrade kit at some point.
I can't afford the prusa printers, so got myself Chinesium printer, but I'm buying prusament from time to time, to atleast support the effort they are doing for the community and the region they are based at.
The issue is not that Prusa is in the open source space and supplying their competitors with free R&D. The Problem is that they are in the 4th iteration of a Bed slinger. The improvements that are possible on the i3 platform are minuscule. They need to switch up their main workhorse to something that actually can profit from all the brain power Prusa has assembled. The Mk4 is an incredibly nice Bed slinger. The PrusaXL looks like a great starting point for such a switch to CoreXY. If Prusa Can bring down the Price on that machine that would be huge.
Mk4 should have been launched two years ago and as a core xy to stay relevant. If just Josef could drop FDM printing all parts in large scale production and just go for injection molding they could also drop the price, increase performance and aesthetics. FDM printing is for prototyping or low volume production.
Yes it's expensive. However, I think you underestimate the plus value of having a open-hardware. Prusa offer upgrade pack and replacement part but if you want, you have access to a big third party market for replacement part or upgrade. Or you could just print your own! I've used closed sources printer like Makerbot and Zortrax and the experience was pretty poor. You need to purchase from their store were everything is stupidly overpriced. In the case of the Zortrax, they stopped supporting their printer only 5 years after. Which means that when it breaks, it's over. The other things, they just work and require almost no fidgering. This is a big plus for a small enterprise where time is money. Not all compagnies can afford Ultimaker/Makerbot. If I have the choice between fives MK4 or one Ultimaker, it's an easy choice...
Many years ago, I got a Wanhao i3 Plus. If I had spent only a couple hundred more, I could have had a MK2S. With all the issues I've had with my wanhao over the years, all the upgrades, time, effort; I have serious buyers remorse. Hindsight is 20/20, and the Prusa would have been a much better choice at the time. I'm not sure any of these Chinese manufacturers produce something I would call a "workhorse" printer. Many seem prone to failure, and require tinkering. A hobbyist machine, not a reliable go-to.
Did the same thing, Tevo Tarantula. I spent more time over 2/3 years trying to make it work reliably than actually having fun printing stuff with it. In some ways it was good as it was a valuable learning experience. I've modified it so much that I think only one extrusion and maybe a stepper remains , and it now actually resembles a bear framed Mk3 lol. Probably ended up spending the same amount over that time in replacement / parts and modifications, some times I guess you get what you pay for...
Hello Tom, long time viewer here. It's clear that you increased your production value a lot lately. You always treated every single video as something that you must be proud of, and it shows. I thank you for that. I'm sure you have expanded your skill set and you feel obligated to use to its maximum potential. I wouldn't like to point out that, unfortunately, there are diminishing returns. Honestly I wouldn't have minded a 15min monologue in front of the printer, where you're just openly talking about it. I like this new style, I really do, but it feels like you're going through a lot to push out a single video. If you're enjoying it and having fun, by all means please continue, but if you feel like you're doing too much, it's probably because you are and don't be afraid to take a step back. I will enjoy your content no matter what, because what makes your channel great is much bigger than looks.
Thomas, there is a lot of misdirector caused by all the advertising on the Input Shaping. Input Shaping is not the panacea of the 3D printing, and does not produce fast good print at all. Input Shaping it is able to remove artifacts cased by vibrations, BUT AT A PRICE: you loose all the sharp corners and sharp edges. No way, it is by design. This effect can be increased or decreased by the settings, but it is always there. When I looked at the print you did I saw that they were exactly how an object printed by with input shaping should be. This means that if you need the absolute quality, you need to print slowly and without any input shaping. If you print fast, then you will introduce quality degradation, it does not matter what printer you are using (Voron, X1C, P1P, V400). The input shaping will remove some vibration artifacts but will round the edges. If you are in peace with the degradation level caused by the speed (where having the print in 3hrs instead of 6h is more important for you) that is up to you. This resemble me the diffusion of the MP3 format on the music. 😉 An MP3 audio file has lost lots of its details, and for people that wanted to listen to it in Audiophile quality, that is crap. Nevertheless time revealed that the majority of people was more interested in storing the music in few space and loosing the quality than store cristalline audio masters in lots of megabytes. So the MP3 had an enormous diffusion and usage, and then people was acquainted to listen music to crappy earphones and not on studio quality professional Audio Earphone. The bad quality of sound with compression noise and artifacts was widely accepted as normality. So, may be we are in the same situation in the world of 3D printers. How many people are just printing objects at 0.3 or 0.4 layers level that should not be perfect and should be just printed quickly ? I can think at helmets, props, and figures that need to be printed and then primed and painted later. Market is full of people that are using the printer for this. I have also a V400, and I am the first to say that a lot of things I print are really mechanical parts that do not require extreme good quality or small details. 😉 I have an assembled MK3S+MMU2S and (when I will receive it) also an MK4. I will probably use the MK3S for small fine detailed print that should not be printed fast (e.g. 0.2 nozzle and swappable E3D nozzles) , the MK4 for general good print, and the V400 for fast objects or very long print that are halved in time. I don't see the MK4 as a speed race printer at all, but a printer that can do very good normal slow quality print, and reasonable fast print but at cost of quality, as it happen for ALL THE FAST PRINTERS (not just Prusa). But if the market will move for fast printers and mediocre quality, and the "fast mediocre quality" will be the new standard, then Prusa will be in troubles, because less and less people will be interested in their products.
For me the deciding factor for getting a Prusa (Mini+) was that they just work out of the box, even if you go for the kit version. I've had a clone printer (replicator) before and that put me off of 3D printing for years. I like tinkering with stuff as much as anyone, but at the end of the day, if pressing the print button gives me a less than 90% chance of actually getting an object out of it that looks and functions as intended, I'm just wasting my time.
Still waiting on my MK4 kit, ordered it first day available. It didn't ship the first week when the shipping table said it would, and then it didn't ship the second week either, nor the 3rd, I chatted with one of the reps and she told me it would ship in week 4. (ok, kind of weird when the shipping table said it was suppose to ship 3 weeks prior) Well guess what? It didn't ship, so now I'm waiting in week 5 to see if my $1000 I gave them actually bought me anything? I'm generally a patient person, but I don't like it when companies give me the run around. I guess I'll wait out week 5 and try chatting with them again in week 6 if it doesn't ship. Prusa is normally pretty upfront about delays, but I haven't been given any explanation as to why mines still not here.
I have the MK4 kit. Added it to my MK3. All your points were valid, but short of building a Voron or Ratrig, not sure I like the other options out there. Sure, I can get "fast and cheap", but what am I trading off to jump to those makers? Do I trust them? One of them, I don't. They continue to demonstrate what I don't like about some companies and how they treat open source, or communities. I have some hope for the others. Others may not care. They just want the cheapest/fastest because its about their business. For me, its a hobby (maybe a business some day), but I still choose to support the company i think is doing it right. Off topic, I was in a traditional bookstore this weekend in a small town. I could have found all the books cheaper on Amazon, but Between myself, my wife and my daughter, we bought 10 books at the store. I like to support the companies that I believe in with my dollars. Just my two cents.
I'm thrilled with my MK4. It prints well right out of the box. I have very little interest in tinkering with a printer. I just want it to work great and it does.
Thomas. We are a small start-up, making AI-powered pest detectors for Agriculture to help reduce the amount of pesticides contaminating our environment. Our detector is selling in early production form, and essentially all parts are 3D-printed. Currently about 740 grams per detector. We have run our first MK4 through 2 weeks of non-stop production and it's never missed a beat. It's just chugging along, flanked by our MK3's that have almost one full year of printing time on each of them. Which other printers operate at that level at that cost ?
I for myself also considered buying a MK4, but since I'm still owning a MK3s and a Mini I saw no good reason why. As you already stated I put some love rencently on my MK3s and now it prints like a gem again. Added the Revo kit to it as well, so one of the main selling points of the Nextruder is also not an issue any more. If time plays no big role and I, as a hobbyist, run jobs often during the day or night the print time doesn't kill me. I don't know if, as a newbie to 3d printing, I would choose a Prusa again today. I really like their mindset and what they providing to the community, but a friend of mine bought recently, do to budget reasons, a cheap Anycubic bed slinger and well I have to admit, it does a very pleasant job for under 200 euros. I hope Prusa will raise the bar with their future developments, but the market is now more expecting than two or three years ago. Large deficits between promises and delivery with e.g. on the Mini with the print farm will not be working out in the future anymore.
@10:51 "that distinct Eastern European brutalist paddilac style" I mean I have no idea what that means, even as an EE... ...but there is a virtue in not always complicating things to handhold and cradle... it's _a_ design choice.
I understood what Tom meant. Prusa go for a more...functional UI with very little focus on the user experience side of things. The interface on the mini and mk4 feels very dated and convoluted out of the box, but still maintains all the features you'd expect, just without that polish we see from things like the X1C UI.
How can you tune a bed which is constantly changing mass as it deposits more and more material. The geometry of the model would also play a part... Very tricky, coreXY machines have it easy on this regard.
usually the mass of plastic is much smaller than the bed (my 230x230 is ~1.2kg with a glass plate), and you could also in theory tweak for it. though the print actually moving may also be an issue.
Great Video, there are definetely some points speaking against Prusa at the moment. But seeing as most other brands are only able to be where they are due to Prusa and Prusa being an established company that supports their printers for years to come im still leaning towards the Mk4 compared to for example the Bambulabs X1. Its just a gut feeling that i know ill be in good hands and will have a reliable printer bought from a company that values high quality and long living products and pays their employees fairly. Not sure if thats the best choice, but its the one that feels right for me.
So, in summary, the review goes like this: "The input shaping does not work (I don't know why you have to be so peculiar about alpha input shaping); being open source sucks because you don't have an advantage; manufacturing products in Europe does not matter because we can simply bow to China; the printer works well, but that's nothing new; oh, as I have it already I will use it as my main printer." It's ok, there are valid points, it's surprising indeed that Prusa didn't use accelerometers for input shaping, etc.. I disagree with Tom's values. It's similar to the previous video about open-source software. It does not work. It's a fact: Chinese companies use open-source software and don't follow the licenses. I would say that we have to do something with those companies. Tom is saying that we shouldn't do open-source software. That's where we part ways
You absolutely didn't get it. Prusas approach to input shaping shows how rushed and ill-managed this printer is. 3d printing industry moved so much in the last few years and prusha just isn't keeping up. Just making an ok printer isn't enough anymore and certainly not for 1200 €. I think that the part about open source wasn't about it being bad, it was about it not being appropriate for big companies. The only reason prusha is still open source is it being based on open source projects. There is no reason they couldn't divert from that approach in the last fifteen years. If you think that prusha is some warrior for open source, makers, modifying their printers etc. They definitely aren't.
@@jakubmastalir3557 maybe for you input shaping is showing an ill-managed printer. For me, it's an interesting feature that may be useful in the future. At the moment, I'm happy with my MK4 as it is. It's a great machine, it's a great update. It's annoying that the default profiles in the slicer are using a grid infill instead of a gyroid (probably because of the speed craze). Prusa is definitely an open-source warrior if you compare them with the Chinese crap that overflows the markets, and US companies that patent every sneeze that they do. Of course, Voron is waaaaay better on that side, and I'd happily build a Voron0, but a printer without at least a minimal bed-leveling automation is a no-no for me
@@YuriyTymchuk Mk4 is in no way competetive without it though, we are literally in the future. There is nothing opensource about prusa other than their slicer which is a fork so it has to be. Nobody cares about their printers being opensource and thats the only reason they keep it that way. The firmware is not theirs and even and ape can design a bedslinger.
I have my MK4 now for a bit over a month. I‘m now at my 3th breaking issue with it while none of my MK3S(+) ever let me down. There is still a lot todo for Prusa here..
Anycubic taking Prusa's work even removing their name in code is nasty but also nobody cares about their fork or should I say skin either. Bambulab didn't straight up copy and paste, they added to it in and we even got Orcaslicer as the fork of their fork. Plus Prusaslicer itself is a fork of Slic3r... I don't even own a Prusa but even I can appreciate they aren't just selling 3D printers, they are selling a service and an ecosystem that many love and appreciate.
People were annoyed with Bambu but a number of the features they've developed for Bambulab have made their way back into Prusa Slicer, just without them being credited and code being lifted and committed under a Prusa employees name - the silly games of pinching bits of code have been happening on both sides.
Bambu lab just took a bunch of features from orca slicer in their latest update and didn't even give credit to the author like they're supposed to. Bambu lab loves taking from the open source but never wants to give back or give credit.
Great review. I have used and built an Anet A8, assembled an Creality Ender 3 and just got an Elegoo Neptune 3 Pro. I have watched the Prussia company grow and become a remarkable success. I have supported the open source community since GNU. I would not buy a 3D printer exclusively because it is open source.
An Accelerometer Upgrade would be neat, and *probably* quite cheap/easy to roll out (Development notwithstanding, although it will be difficult either way, and more existing work is there for accelerometer based systems)
I think the challenge they face as a marlin and microcontroller based board, is that they start to get to the extremes of what their micro controller is capable of doing in terms of both outputting clean stepper timings and recording clean accelerometer data. Then, you have to imagine processing that data is a pain. I could imagine some sort of a hybrid system that utilized a desktops computational power to have for instance the user log into to their browser doohicky and have the more expensive code ran on webworkers in the browser. It would be light work for a pc, but might be very difficult to both squeeze in performantly into the limited space they have for firmware. That is of course all assuming that they can even get both recording of data and movement perfectly at the same time.
my mk2 is still printing perfectly with almost zero maintenance, same for my mk3. the mk4's launch page has some interesting stuff about why it doesn't have input shaping, which seemed to come down to, "we picked parts that made the use of input shaping a diminishing return for the complexity"
I'm disappointed that Thomas seems to treat Prusa open sourcing their work as a negative point for this printer. We need to fight for open source, and that means we need our content creators to fight for it too.
I really hope the mk5 or whatever’s next printer they come out with is finally a proper Bambu X1C competitor. For someone who actually runs a business where I have to do multicolor prints, large scale prints, and prints all in ASA…. The prusa’s just are not good enough. I’ve been eyeing a Prusa XL but at almost $4K…. It’s just not worth it over a $1500 X1C that can do everything I need quickly, at high quality. And reliably
Coming from an Ender 3 V2 that I only had problems with I had to choose between a bambu or a mk4 and the only reason I went for the MK4 is the noise level. My printer is less than a meter from my home office where is sit and i was not going to deal with bambu’s loudness. It is a very pricey printer for what you are getting but being able to just hit print on about anything makes it worth it.
Thanks for the great review. I personally own 1 MK3s and 1 Mini, then I bought the Bambu X1C about 3 months ago. Since then, I have used the MK3s 1 time and the Mini 0 times. If you just want to print (even ABS, ASA, Paht etc), the X1C is really a great deal and just works. I was hoping for the XL, but to be honest, it's too expensive for me as a hobby user. BTW: I adore your Wifi and Password :)
I love my Mk3 S. At the time, I thought it was a lot of money for a kit. However, they have given quite a bit to the community and my Mk3 is 'fire and forget'.
I'm glad to see so many people are still getting the Prusa. Personally I don't have the extra cash to pay for things they do/have done for the community, but it's good others can.
I have a Bamboo Labs X1 Carbon and P1P. I have used both enough to see excellent prints time after time with only one failure which was my fault. I have only printed one item off the USB stick on the MK4 which was hours long, but printed very well. I hear that Prusa is working hard to catch up, but there’s a long road to get there.
I have a Mk4 and 2 Vorons (V0.1 and V2.4). The Vorons are faster, and have way better web interfaces - in my case fluidd. things like setting a temperature, getting a live preview of the gcode being printed are notably absent on prusa link. The Vorons however do need extensive tuning up front and good technical knowledge, which is something im kinda learning by doing right now, at least my V0.1 regularly has some issues with its printhead (yes, im planning on upgrading to a V0.2, but that is also a lot of work). the V2.4 is dead in the water, because i had problems with my inductive probe and it broke part of my hotend, so im taking the time to upgrade to a kinetic bed mount and Voron Tap for bed probing, compared to the "stock" option of having a Z endstop bolt that is probed via nozzle, and an inductive probe for leveling the gantry. Meanwhile the Mk4 has been a workhorse, like many people say: churning out ABS parts (printed in a makeshift enclosure made out of the box it came in) for the Vorons with surprising consistency. even with the Mk3S+ i had some oddities regarding my bed mesh and first layers moving around, not with the mk4 though, they did make a great bed probing system (which i hope to somewhat capture with Tap on the V2.4). as of right now, i dont think ill try the input shaping before its "done", simply to just keep one printer that 100% works. As I said earlier though: the "smart" features are hit or miss: one one hand its nice that there IS a webinterface now, but the wifi keeps dropping out on me, which it never did on my V0.1 so far, ethernet works flawlessly though. However the webinterface (im only referring to prusa link, since i cant be bothered to set up prusa connect for things in wont use it for) is just SO bare bones. I cant even drop a firmware image to the USB remotely, since the UI only accepts gcode. It cant set temperatures. sometimes gives cryptic error messages that dont mean anything (eg. uploading a file via prusa slicer to then immediately start, which sometimes errors out, but starts the print anyways). Not being able to freely change the username and password is also kinda janky. the temperature graphs only have very limited use, since they only show extruder and bed temp (heatbreak temp would be great to have here too), and even then there is only a rudimentary legend shown, so you cant actually read the chart.
I think it's funny that the good things that Prusa does right they get criticized it. THEY SHOULD BE PROPRIETARY! PLEASE LOCK DOWN YOUR FIRMWARE AND POTENTIALLY PUSH THE COSTS OF LICENSING TO US CONSUMERS SO YOU'RE AROUND FOREVER! PRETTY PLEASE!!. Prusa Wouldn't exist without being open source and contributing towards it. Yes companies are abusing it, but I think refining and actually holding the violators accountable is better than outright turning your back on open source when it's what gave you your start in the first place.
There are companies and products that are open source and paid at the same time, some support the right to download and modify the code to bypass the pay wall, something like this would probably be good.
I'm seriously considering a MK4 for one simple reason, consistent functionality and reliability over time. I've had it with stuff that is great, for a while....................... flsun v400 is great, if every t is crossed and i is dotted during assembly, if the trained chimp doing the assembly has a 'moment' it will shake something lose and 'great' inexplicably and without warning becomes something that you will have to not just take apart to the point where you took it out f the box but further than that to locktite in place a stepper-motor pulley that is now 99.95% attached rather than the 100% that is needed for it's speeds and accelerations(and yes, it does make a difference given that it's a delta, lines not being attached to it's neighbor but only in some spots and on some sides....) So I've pretty much come to the conclusion that 'works, and keeps working, consistently and for duration', is worth the price............
Like you said, you don't need an accelerometer to calibrate input shaper properly. All you need is a single calibration print, and then setting the variables accordingly. It can calibrate the printer just as well as an accelerometer. Given how rarely you have to calibrate (basically once, unless you change something) I wouldn't consider this a big issue but it is certainly much less "sexy" way of calibrating and has an aftertaste of lagging behind the competition.
And accuracy is limited by subjective judgement of the prints (and also the resolution of the parameter steps in the test). Especially for a Company that wants to sell a great out of the box experience without need to be an expert that just sucks.
@@Daepilin Still yielding comparable results to acclerometric means, which have their own source of artifacts, from the difference between resonance at the nozzle vs at the sensor, and calculations afterwards which can also lead to some fluctuations in calibration quality. With the calibration print the control on the outcome is actually tighter and more directly centred on the results. I am not saying it is sexy or will convince many customers but at the end of the day, it is just as good if it is the results that matter to you. Yes, it is more work, once at setting up the printer. That goes to some extend against the ethos of Prusa indeed. Realistically speaking however, you probably won't have to bother with it afterwards until you make some major changes to the printer or relocate it.
Input shaping values can change over time even without changing anything on the printer. Mostly due to the belt tension or loose screws. So yes an accelerometer is not required to do the calibration but it helps a lot if you want to do it once a month for example. This operation can be added in a routine check easily. And if you have enough data as Prusa could do, you could even diagnose common defaults in the assembly based on the results. So yes, I think it's a shame, that the MK4 doesn't have 2 accelerometers (one on the toolhead pcd and one on the bed). It's a missed opportunity to make this printer even more reliable. And if it was well integrated in the diagnostic checks this could justify the price of the MK4 in 2023 in my opinion.
@@KevinLemarchand Yes they can but the impact is really minor. I haven't recalibrated my V0.1 for at least a year and even made some repairs in between yet don't see much effect on the input shaping performance. An accelormeter of course helps but like I said, isn't crucial. For a bed slinger you'd need of course two, rather than one accelerometer. Not that this would add much cost or anything, just saying. That's why I not fully understand why the board is only prepared for a single accelerometer. Did they really think only about the XL there? I do agree that it is a missed opportunity but my point is that it would be for me not a major argument not to get the Mk4.
@@sagichnicht6748 yep maybe for the mk4s then ;) On my Trident I have some variations from time to time. But the belt paths are longer and as I like to mod it doesn't help XD
I purchased the MK4 because Prusa has been more than willing to help me solve every problem that I have run into on my MK2 and my MK3. Even sending out replacement free of charge if it was determined to be a faulty part.
Prusa is the only printer company that I know of that offers upgrade kits throughout the life of the product as technology improves. That is why I choose to buy Prusa printers.
But the kits are getting extremely expensive. Like the 4.0 kit is only 250€ less than a full new mk4 kit...
Unless you really only have space for 1 printer and for some reason dont want to sell the mk3 it's much more sensible to get a full mk4 and either have 2 printers or sell.mk3 (certainly for more than 250€)
I was referring to the small mid generation upgrades that are in the $50-$200 range. I agree it's not worth upgrading your current printer to the next gen.
@@Daepilin Josef has said this himself repeatedly, but people keep demanding that he sell kits, so he does it. But there’s usually partial upgrade options which make a lot more sense. For example the MK2.5 or MK3.5. You improve your current printer, not to full spec but still an upgrade, and for a fraction of the cost of a new one.
@@Daepilin and aside from upgrades they deserve some credit for providing support as well. I‘m certain I could reach out with an issue on my 6-year old several times slowly upgraded MK2.5S and they’d help me instead of saying “sorry that was EOL in 2018.”
I wouldn't buy any MORE Prusa Minis at current price point, but I have two that have been my core machines for my business and I will run them forever as long as I can still get parts and they still keep putting out quality prints. I think we will see Prusa stick around as a company for a long time to come just because they have built the rep that others have to claw their way towards, and I am sure they have more innovations in the pipe.
The printer (& software) being open source, utterly reliable & easy to maintain is far more important to me than print speed or a fancy UI. There's a line in the MK3 product passport that reads "We want your printer to last as long as possible." That speaks volumes.
And so are most FLSUN, Creality, etc printers, a LOT printers run on marlin and use parts that are (except for some printed parts) for sale on the open market.
If I wanted to pay 1000€ for a printer, I would get a pre built voron. That's actually open source AND has upgrade options for the latest technoligy - updates that don't cost as much as a new printer
I don't get it. Why would a Prusa last any longer than anything else? They all run on the same open source firmware. If anything, the Prusa stuff is MORE liable to break because they've cooked up their own version. On other stuff, you can just install your own marlin and so whatever you want. I really never understood this argument with Prusa.
@@geometerfpv2804 Because a Prusa machine is built almost entirely from standard components and 3D-printed parts. There's essentially nothing on my MK3 that I can't replace for years to come.
I'm not saying Prusa is the only option which offers that. But it is an advantage they have over Bambu Lab, for example.
@@andybrice2711 while thats true, I can buy a whole new another bambulab p1p if the first one completely breaks and I will be only little over the price I would pay for the MK4. why would I even care about the mk4 then
@@davidpodeszwa7010yeah I think most people understand that at the end of the day. It speaks to the sustainability comment Tom referenced in the video. Sadly most folks are in your camp and could give a lick if their product is repairable or sustainable. People will happily toss the old one in a landfill and buy something new.
Is what it is I guess.
The fact that they still publish under open source is reason enough for me to continue to support them.
BTW prusa removed the open source logo from the latest MK4 buddy board batch
@@jumadhaheri dark times coming
Yeah... they were forced to because the Chinese had too big of an advantage this way. They basicaly just stole what they wanted.
So i think this reaction is understandable@@jumadhaheri
I support Prusa also . Bought my first printer MK4. Open source and honest business is the way to go.
@@chihwahli3677That, and “made in Europe”. Bambu makes impressive gear, but the business seems a little predatory. Bambu printers are attractively priced, but part of the bill is footed by the open source community.
I’m very happy with my MK4. And happy that I put it together myself, so I can fix it myself if need be.
Prusa deserves credit for their open source DNA. So many startups are standing on the shoulders of giants (like Prusa) and closing off their gardens. This is a bleak future for the reprap movement.
Prusa is still a very high quality printer and a great choice.
The only real cure is for Companies reaping benefits from Prusa's front-line work (R&D) should pay dividends on Open Source
I will continue to support Prusa due to their open-source commitment, even if it means making the "wrong" product choice for a while. A Bambu X1 looks mighty tasty, but I value the principle and innovation that open-source has given us thus far over the short term gains of buying a closed garden product.
Why exactly is prusa being opensource so important to you?
@@jakubmastalir3557 Open source is a great thing , important in many ways .. from trouble shooting or someone who likes to modify their code. But I do think open source should be available only to non commercial use (end users).
@@dansteffee9759such cope
I find it somewhat disheartening that Prusa's open-source approach is continuously being criticized as a drawback in your latest reviews. Not everyone is inclined towards an Apple-esque 'walled garden' experience. Yes, companies like Bamboo labs are undeniably driving impressive progress in the field, but that hardly renders open-source 3D printing obsolete. We can't simply overlook the likes of Voron, VZbot, and many other thriving open-source projects. They offer significant value and choices to a diverse range of users, and deserve fair acknowledgment.
Also the closed nature of a bambulabs printer is exactly the reason I'll never own one. We know what happens when printers are locked down (look at 2D printers, they suck). We need to keep the industry open or the consumer will pay the price.
How many people are using them compared to other machines? If 3D printing is your hobby, sure. They are fantastic to build, upgrade and tinker. If you use 3D printing as a tool they are not what you should get. I want a machine that just works, that just prints parts I need. I want to spend as little time as possible on the machine.
And this is the market 3D printing is developing into. So for that, open source 3D printing is not important and as a company detrimental.
@@nukularpictures
It's not about the present, rather the future.
Consider HP, Canon, and Expo for example. They make 2D printers and they are a nightmare to use. Those.companies border on exploitative/scam practices (disabling scanning if ink is empty). When companies like Bambu Lab kill competiton, they will almost inevitabley change into the three companies above.
@@nukularpicturesAlso Obligatory *All of BambuLab’s Stuff is essentially a Voron or 247B2Zero etc Printer Reskinned in an Injection Molded Shell*
Those other machines can be bought in a kit (so you actually know how to maintain it) or i *think* premade (if you really NEED premade you can also just get a Prusa)
People talk about them like they *developed* what they made, when short of the albeit difficult production engineering/mold design etc *they didn’t engineer shit*.
The Open Source options can be Cheaper and/or Faster and one can actually *support developers* by backing them! 😤
Duet3D has SOLID documentation, western design, completely open source, and they are a main contributor and driver of the reprapfirmware project, which is excellent. How profitable they are is not open source
Prusa might seem to now be behind other companies. But what they did for the whole community and what they provide still lets them be the industry gold standard for printers. Service and longevity are way more important for industry users than the machine's price!
As company we only own high price printers because of their reliability. And that's also one of Prusa's main selling points all the other companies yet have to show their worth at.
This is true? And also part of the reason I bought a Mk4? But... To be commercially viable, you need more than goodwill: you need a market competitive product. The mk4 is? But just as Tom has done in this review, Prusa shouldn't receive a free pass, just cause of all their good will in the community.
It's a damn shame especially as others profit from their work
Hopefully the Toyota strategy works for them. Always behind on features and prices seeming high for what you get, but reliable and just nailing the details.
@@francistaylor1822aren’t we all profiting from the work that came before us? We are constantly building on previous discoveries & standing on the shoulders of others.
@@KanielDYes. Patent Laws and the myth of “I alone the GENIUS invented this” cripple development due to denying this fact.
Not to say that people shouldn’t be able to make a living and so on, but to support closed ecosystems and conventional patents in this day and age is either due to being ill informed, or being someone benefiting from the status quo.
(decent critiques like Tom’s excluded, nuance and all that etc)
I got the MK4 as a very expensive upgrade to my unmodded Ender 3 Pro. For me 3D printing is not a hobby as much as my 3D printer is a tool. I want the thing to work every time, always have access to parts and service, and have a seamless experience from slicer to print. The competition may have surpassed Prusa in terms of speed and tech, but its the intangibles that made me choose the Mk4.
That's exactly why I have a MK4 on order.
My thoughts exactly. I need a reliable tool, with solid support, long term spares and dependable connectivity.
For then next printer we’re looking at a Mk4 or a Bamboo.
I have a mk3 it's not gone wrong once in 2 years. I'm impressed with it every time I print.
@@dts7824Four years for my Mk3S+ but same: utterly reliable, no need to tinker with it. Just what I wanted.
Great review. One thing though: while I'm a tinkerer, I explicitly do NOT want to work on my 3d printer. In fact, I loathe it. Ideally, it just prints, so I can work on iterations of my own products for weeks, or their MCU innards. That's why I'm sticking with Prusa printers. They seem to hit a sweet spot for me when it comes to reliability and price.
Yes you nailed it. "Reviews" such as this YT video are bizarre, like when he claims he'd just buy a cheap machine and then spend for ever tweaking it. Maybe he got stuck in the 2010s ?
I just want to make stuff with my 3D printer, not make a 3D printer.
Mk3+ is a great machine which needs almost no maintenance if you use it properly
Had nothing but trouble out of the couple Prusas I worked with. For the price, I expected your experience, but realized that is almost ALWAYS a fan boy perspective...
I got this printer as a kit, and finished building it yesterday. I can say, the building experience was worth the money. High quality parts and the improved building process over the MK3S+ was excellent.
Does one need a set of tools to assemble? Or are they included in the kit?
This tool isn't necessary but will make everything look better and avoid sharp edges let behind from cutting the tails on zip-ties : FLUSH CUT pliers@@claytonjohnston4006
@@claytonjohnston4006 Tools included!
@@claytonjohnston4006 tools are included, if you have some tools they might be better, not the best but definately usable.
I chose my first 3D printer as a prusa mk4 because I want something solid for the next 15 years minimum. I support an european busness, the open source slicer, the internet connection with all the stats I can monitorize from my phone... I bought it in kit, it was incredibly fun to build, and it works on the very first try I was completely bamboozlied. I made a Benchy on PLA and then on PETG. Incredible emotion when you come from the wood industry like me.
I am not such prusa fan, but the fact you yourself said it is going to become your main workhorse speaks volumes. Bamboo is cool for many things, but if I am printing something overnight I just want to have it in the morning.
I purchased the MK4 because I have a MK2 upgraded to an upgradded 2.5S ans I was waiting for a bigger upgrade than the MK3 to upgrade. Also, although their software and hardware are open source, I am gladly buying prusa to encourage their business and their contribution to the makers community. Enjoy :)
I think you and I might secretly be the same person, LMAO. Same exact story... Mk4 has been solidly "send file and forget" since the day I got it, and I have zero regrets.
Same exact here also
Despicable me Parody was hysterical.
He stole the idea for well acted intro parodies from me, just like Bambu Lab stole PRUSASlicer from PRUSA.
@@NathanBuildsRobots 😂
@@NathanBuildsRobots I am not sure if you are joking or serious. If you are serious...isn't saying bambu stole from prusa the same as saying prusa stole from Slic3r?
After owning my Sovol SV-06 for half a year now, I still want a Prusa. As you said, you have to tinker with the Chinese machines until they run reliably or even work for longer prints at all (yes, I'm looking at you, heatcreep).
But at this point I have three printers that need tinkering and I'm just tired. I just want a printer that prints for hours, days, weeks, months, years without tinkering. And that's what Prusas do best and seemingly nobody else achieves. My friend has a Prusa Mk2 and it still runs just perfect after all these years.
You had heat creep on the SV06? I have pumped a good 15-20 KG of filament through mine and not a single clog. That includes some 48hr+ prints.
My only mods were a couple of parts to manage the bed cable and I upgraded to a 5015 single fan dual duct config. My only issue is the VFA, which the MK3/s/+ also suffer from.
Oh, almost forgot I packed the bearings on the SV06 as soon as I got it, they were almost completely dry and sounded horrible, after greasing them it is pretty quiet apart from the PSU fan which I will most likely replace with an 80mm at some stage.
@@Smokinjoewhite with some PLA brands I had heatcreep issues (filament stuck, failed print), especially now in the summer it appears the temperature within my enclosure was too high. There are really good models for 5015 fans on Printables and since then I didn't have any issues again. And the printer became quieter because the bearings in the fan made weird noises on movements.
Agree on all that but i simply dont have the time to tinker. When i got the mk3, half hour after assembling it i had my 1st printed part.
Ordered a mk4 in kit
Its funny you mention this while choosing a machine you have to assemble when machines with similar capabilities are printing before you get the first bolt in. Its an interesting choice to me. I suppose there is no reason not just to blurt out the elephant in the room, but in terms of not tinkering, why a kit mk4, when a P1P has _more_ capability for _less_ money and and is even more user friendly?
Not wanting to tinker used to be Prusa's speciality but I have to say Bambulab in a way the cheap clones like the K1 havent really managed to yet, really disrupted that, and In my opinion changed what it meant to be an easy to use, no fuss, no tinkering printer.
@@BeefIngot point is as follows: assembling a prusa is relatively easy thanks to the really good documentation (something that is becoming out of fashion a bit everywhere and lets not start with "documentation" when it comes to some chinese products) and is a one off: 4 or 5 hours work.
Regarding "tinkering", i hear stories from those who went for cheaper options, where it took them ages to set up the dozens of parameters to get the printer to work reliably; with my mk3, as i said, took literally half hour to get printing.
It then worked reliably for all the time i had it (i think around3 years now) which basically means when i need something i design it, slice it and print it, with just the very occasional adjustment of first layer. The reason im getting the mk4 is that even this hassle will be eliminated.
Time is money and in my business people bills 100 to 200 dollars per hour. So no, no time for tinkering when i need to print.
@@crono331 interesting, I ordered my mk4. What is your business about?
After nearly 2 full years of using my Mini+ with all the additions from Prusa (PINDA and filament sensor) I can confidently say it’s been overwhelmingly good.
Often when I thought something was wrong it was I who didn’t understand some nuances like large flat pieces tend to warp.
After I added an RPi4B 4GB with OctoPrint + OctoPi it’s been very useful too.
So, I got a MK2 when your review on that posted back in… late 2016? I have upgraded it since and it’s now a MK2.5S, which is only a couple steps short of the MK3. I converted my XL pre-order to a MK4 kit, and I have to say, on paper, there’s not a *huge* difference between even the MK2.5 and the MK4, but in practice, it’s vastly different to me. It’s way less fiddly to assemble, way more consistent in use, the interface is better, the load cell bed leveling thing is much much better than the PINDA, and it’s significantly faster (it’s not lightning, but it’s immediately noticeable. I have a way easier time getting good prints, especially large prints that cover a lot of the plate and struggle with adhesion in some spots if bed leveling isn’t spot on. So yes, same formula, and looks the same at first glance, but it’s not the same.
I saved money by building the kit, which I enjoy doing anyway. But still, yeah I could get a P1P. But that’s a whole new system with new issues to learn and solve. After 6+ years of printing on my Prusa, I’m comfortable with their philosophy and how they go about things, so I know where to start when I have a problem.
Expensive? Yeah a bit. Perfect? No. Bragging rights? Probably not (but I don’t really care about speed benchies etc.). But do I regret my purchase? I do not.
Honestly that load cell and prusa link are what got me to purchase the Mk4 (on top of the good experience I've had with my mk3)
I never really liked using octoprint so i really like the fact that i can load my gcode onto the printer's storage without having to physically plug in the storage device into my computer. I can operate everything from PrusaSlicer and/or the web interface.
Also, to me its an $800 printer since i like the fun weekend i get assembling the printer.
It may not be significantly better than all the competition out there but I don't have anything to complain about with this machine.
I know my MK4 is going to get support and options for upgrades in the future on top of sustaining their commitment to the community. That’s on top of a heck of fun assembly experience that only gave me a few scares (&Haribos)
I had a load cell printer YEARS AGO. The Creality CR-6 SE. Look it up. I still use it today. Works great.
To be fair, Klipper and RRF had direct to print capabilities over WiFi - both as host and as another device on the network - since before Mk.4 was released. It's really not a unique feature and Octoprint wasn't the only way to do it as of at least 2020-ish.
The load cell isn't unique either but they did make a better way to mount it that reduces oscillations from a non-rigid mount inherent in a load cell system, but without the considerable weight budget of a Tap-like 4th linear axis probing system.
I don't believe that by opening its source code Prusa is killing itself. Say they took the Slic3r and built a closed source product around it. There is still Cura in open source that other printer manufacturers could use. Without Prusa slicer it's possible that Slic3r, or a fork of it, may have gotten more attention from open source developers.
I believe that people buy a Prusa when they want something that works and expect it to keep working. They also want to have someplace to contact if there are any problems with their product. It is similar to businesses paying for support licenses for Linux when one may just download the operating system for free.
( Perhaps having Prusa throw its resources into Prusa slicer and keep it open source we lost out on a lot of people contributing to the various open source slicer projects. They may have thought that things were going to get done by Prusa so they would live with any annoyances in the current version. A lot of people start on a project when there is something that is bugging them or they really want a feature but there isn't the resources to implement the fix or upgrade. )
Granted I’m no lawyer, but also with many of the Slicer features, unless you start from scratch (although this brings up the potential for issues akin to the Power Supply/Regulation circuits in Laptops etc that @Louis Rossman mentioned of there only being a few ways to do something), you would be using components that require you to open source the code.
Granted Tom touched on that with the “start with open source bits and gradually remove them all until it is locked off” bit, but I don’t *think* that is what has been done (citation needed).
Most of new PrusaSlicer features are ported from Cura!
Btw. I do not understand a reason for PrusaSlicer's existence ...They just took Slic3r then started rewriting it with Cura's code.
@@WizardUli
PrusaSlicer exists so that Prusa that the company may guarantee that there exists an application they feel takes advantage of the hardwares strengths while dealing with any areas the printers may be weak in. They know the printers better than anyone else and are able to customize the software to them. They could have used third party software and created really good profiles but there are some things that can't be dealt with in a profile.
It's true that PrusaSlicer does get a lot of inspiration for new ideas from Cura. However, new ideas travel in all directions from the slicer apps. Cura, PrusaSlicer, SuperSlicer, and more all have talented people contributing to them. Because those projects are open source the ideas may be implemented, and possibly improved, on the other apps. What may be possible on one app might not be possible, or require a tremendous effort, because of how things are implemented on another. Or it might be easier. We are all better off because there are multiple open source slicers with active development.
@@ericlotze7724
Slicers are software. How one group builds a slicer will be different from another. Even though a task may be the same for the two groups (for example, how automatically to add supports), how each group goes about implementing it in their source code could be vastly different. It depends on such things as how they store the data internally (data structures), goals (is speed more important than minimizing memory use), the computer language used, the pressure to release (if it needs to be released very soon the first idea might be implemented rather than coming up with the best idea), whom is working on the project as people have different ideas, and so on.
I sold my Prusa mini and Mk3s and got an MK4 on the release day, it has been working nonstop since then, never a failed print, no first layer calibration, nothing, it just works flawlessly.
I love most things about this printer, but it has some downsides, yes it's expensive but if I wanted quality for "cheap" I would have kept my mini, and Prusa link is a bit buggy and slow and some features like input shaping are not in the machine yet. But I know that these things will be tended to and fixed along with new features and functions.
The thing about this machine is that it just works, no gluestick, no messing with calibrations, I just throw any crappy filament I have and it gives me great prints every time.
Also lastly, the support is amazing and as it's being produced in Europe I can get parts within a few days, which is a huge upside when working with Prusa machines.
Honestly, Prusa is still number one in my book. They have enough goodwill I trust input shaping will come and their end user experience is still the best and the most intuitive.
Open hardware and software is the future. This was a huge factor in my decision to go with Prusa over many "cheaper" alternatives.
While assembling the mk3 + mmu I damaged a part for the mmu. No worries, I just downloaded and printed off the replacement. Cheaper and faster than ordering a replacement from the other side of the globe.
This was my first 3D printer. It has been a fantastic experience so far. It was a deliberate decision to support an open company helping to build an open ecosystem and I have no regrets.
I think part of what your money buys you when you get one of these is also the promise that replacement parts and even upgrades for it will be available for a lot of years directly from the manufacturer. No hoping that some other company will make a compatible part 4 years from now when you accidentaly break something. You just know you can go to Prusa and have the exact spare part in a few days. Based on how they have supported previous iterations of this printer I can belive this a lot more than with any competition I can think of.
Which parts are you talking about?
3d printed parts are available as to download
Whole motion system is an of the shelve solution (bearings, rods, belts, motors, etc)
Frame is partly aluminum extrusions and some custom sheet metal and that big square
Electronics is custom and if recent years thought us anything - BMW shipping cars with missing features, raspberry pi at crazy prices and even Prusa having problems sourcing parts - you can't trust that it will be easy to source anything that doesn't have drop in replacement. And seeing how Prusa invests in unified platform you might be in for a surprise.
I think the more popular product is the bigger the chances that, even if the original part is unavailable, there will be a 3rd party replacement.
Totally agree with all those points, they're the reasons why five years ago when I got the chance to get a 3D printer I went for a Mk3.
It's still going strong today.
@@furmek What you say is absolutely correct but also meaningless for many users. I know personally someone who bought a Mk3 almost 4 years ago. He uses it daily, he understands quite a bit in the principles of how FDM printing works and can go deep into many lesser known settings in the slicer. But in the end he just wants a printer that works and does not care or have time to learn that the hotend is off the shelf V6 E3D, he just wants to get a new one when a badly tightened nozzle causes a blob of death or when heatbreak breaks because of repeated crashes into a warped part. No searching, no learning, just order the part and get it in two days, with certainty it will fit. I know he changed some parts of hotends and whole hotends over the years, bed thermistors too. The short PTFE between hotend and extruder as well. I dont remember any other failures.
You and I know we could invest some time searching what exact bed thermistor Prusa uses and buy it elswhere, same for the tape holding it on, and we might get it cheaper, saving a euro or two. But the convenience of never having to do that has a price many people are willing to pay and they get it with a Prusa printer. Not everyone buys these things to become an expert in what parts exactly are in it and where to get them. Some people just want to print and have easy access to spares. Prusa has shown they will support your pretty old printer that way. Other manufacturers to my knowledge have not (or some possibly not yet as they have not existed for long yet). This is not valuable to all of us but some people like it a lot.
BTW I have sold my prusa some time ago because I use RatRigs now, I am also not a customer for the MK4, I just know personally someone for whom it would be an exact fit. Although he will just upgrade his current printer to Mk3.9.
I got a MK3s kit a few years ago. After assembly (which was a lot of fun and educational) it worked immediately an flawlessly. Print quality is excellent ever since. It just prints and is so reliable. I never had to tinker with it.. It cost more than twice an Ender 3, but I never regretted to pay the premium. A main point also was, that I am fairly confident and feel safe to let the printer work unattended for large overnight prints - something I would never dare with a chinese knock off.
I agree, that the MK4 is a bit pricier these days, but given the experience I had so far with the MK3, I would still be willing to pay the higher price.
My Mark 2 is still running FINE. Thats sustainable. It was expensive back then but obviously worth it.
The lack of a sensor for input shaping is a massive problem in my book as mechanical harmonics can be massive affect by the surface the printer is placed on or any mods applied.
Indeed. Its why its pretty annoying to me how many printers are coming out with klipper right now as a main feature, then tell their users to spend an hour faffing around with input shaping manual tests to get a rough idea of whats going on every time they move their printer. Its ridiculous.
Its even more ridiculous to ship the printer with pre built input shaper settings because that means that users literally have to just hope their circumstances match the manufacturers closely enough. IIRC I believe the V400 shipped this way, with no method of changing it outside of installing klipper from scratch, which I find pretty absurd.
Not to mention the BELTS!! Belt tension is a big factor and they will loosen overtime, especially when they are new.
@@xsvforce3335 belt tensioners come on Prusia printers.
I apologise for my absolute ignorance regarding this. But am I totally mistaken in believing that the size, weight and shape (and possibly even "position on the print-bed") of the print that is being printed also influences the "resonance harmonics" of the "machine". And if this is the case does machines that have accelerometers use them to "recalibrate continuously"?
Best regards
@@onlyeyeno you only need to calibrate the model once for the head on all access and all ranges of motion
Despite the competition, I will be getting a Mk4. I have a Mini+ at home but have some projects that will require the bigger bed. I like that its made in the EU with good support, I like a machine that will have tech support and parts availability for years to come, and I am happy to support with my wallet organizations that support the open source environment like Prusa and E3D
I bought a pre-assembled Mk4 after having an older I3 and an original mini. My reasons:
* I want a printer that "just works" without tweaking. The MK4 was/is that. Complete and calibrated right out of the box, and has had zero issues. My 3d printer supports my other hobbies, but tweaking 3d printers is not part of my hobby.
* I want to support a company that gives as much as it gets. The open source approach is a *huge* plus to me. Given your audience, it would be good for you to emphasize this as a positive at least *some* times. :) There are lots of companies out there who are just "takers" and build down to the lowest price possible, using another person or company's R&D, without adding anything real of their own, and without contributing back.
* I want to support a company that pays a fair wage to their employees.
* I want to support a company that has sustainability in mind and acts on it
I know not everyone will agree, or find those important, or necessarily have the money for a Prusa even if they did.
Oh, but shame on Prusa for that horrid WiFi implementation. I couldn't get it to join my network, and when I looked it up, it turns out it's not worth it because the WiFi is so incredibly slow anyway. That was a really dumb miss on their part.
Just built my MK4 and love it. I’m coming from an Ender 3 V2 that never produced anything good and I was constantly fixing, even with $200 of upgrades. I spent about 80% of the time fixing it and 20% printing. I even designed a custom mount for a dial indicator so I level my bed with precision because ABL did practically nothing.
So yes, the MK4 has a place because it just works. I didn’t need it to go fast or anything like that, I just needed it to work. Maybe I will go to another printer once I’ve recovered from repair burnout, but for now, I’m happy.
Having the exact same issues with my ender 3v2. Is your mom still holding up I'm debating getting the Mk4 soon
I love my Prusa printers.
However,
Prusa Connect
PrusaLink
Mini Wi-Fi
MMU2
Were all things I expected to be supported/improved earlier. They announced selling features & then it felt like they didn’t even update us. It makes trusting them on upcoming features more difficult.
I think the MK4 kit is still a solid value depending on what someone’s time is worth. I obviously don’t know their decisions behind many choices, but it feels that they didn’t simplify the assembly process to allow for upgrading the MK3. However, it hardly seems worth the upgrade cost over selling the MK3 & buying an MK4…
The Ethernet file upload on MINI+ after a previous print is just silly. I 'get' that it's probably there to make sure that the user has cleaned up the bed before the next print, but if I fail to exit the print menu, it lets me upload a file and start a print, but then fail at the end, and then I need to exit the menu on the printer (which is fair) and find the freshly uploaded file in a jungle of other files on the SD card.
If I'm reuploading a new version of the same file, it just fails (at the end, I think) instead of asking for confirmation for overwrite. Not the best arrangement UX-wise. Not the end of the world either, but feels clunky for no good reason.
In defense of Prusa, I'd trust them to offer better quality parts than the cheaper alternatives. The PSU on my Sovol SV06+ is regrettably bad (high electrical noise jamming FM radios + awfully loud fan) and I had to replace it. Next, the power switch melted on the machine (also on other machines that are still with the stock PSU afaik), which was clearly not happy with a 500 W PSU.
I wouldn't expect something like this to happen with a Prusa and am still considering the MK4 as a replacement for my SV06+.
One of the reasons why prusa printers cost more than their CCP clones is partly because they use high quality, OEM components in their BOM. And the smooth brains cant seem to understand that. I have almost 25k print hours on my MK3S with zero replaced components other than a nozzle. Meanwhile, my P1P died after just 10hrs because they use the exact same cheap, low quality stepper motors as a $150 ender 3. Prusa stepper motors are still made in china, but they're name brand LDO at least.
CCP printers are all built in shenzhen and use the same parts from the same factories next door to each other, that's why parts on them fail so easily.
@@LilApe This is such a bizarre mish mash of nonsense especially since Ive seen you specifically say you would never buy a Bambulab machine and see you constantly posting anti Bambulab things.
The real fact of the matter is that every product has its lemons. It wasnt too long ago that Prusa had a bug in their thermal runaway protection that had some hotends melting down.
Did people call them horribly unreliable and make up some xenophobic mental gymnastics to justify why that proves their products are bad? No.
Prusa gets free passes for days.
I strongly believe that Prusa is moving super correctly in the principles, but they are at a very big risk of getting crunched by the uncaring market. The mk4 looks like this so you can theoretically start from the mk1 or mk2 and upgrade up to the mk4. But nowadays this is not a big selling point anymore. Printer are becoming appliances, and there's not a lot of room in the market for people who like to build their own fridge. On top of that i agree with you regarding the open source part. Yes in principle prusa are the good guys, while who exploit their work are the bad guys. But still the market does not care, so some choices here, even though asbolutely super fair in principles, are now a risky commercial disadvantage. Prusa had an edge on technology that granted them an advantage for years, because if you wanted a workhorse reliable machine you had to buy from them. Now it is not true anymore, the new products are not only cheaper because they produce in china and on par with the tech because they exploit the open source, but they are also more advanced so even that advantage is gone. If they want to keep their position they'll have to adapt, even if it looks ugly now for the good guys, business does not care.
If your strategy does not require unlimited growth for shareholders you can survive very well in this market. Makerbot, Ultimaker, and you name it all went the growth route, that's fine but makers don't want expensive proprietary products so you need to switch to the B2B market (which they did). I have contributed to quite a few products and the early days and seen many companies fail. The market is a thin one, there is not much margin. Either you build something cheap or you find some other niche. Prusa perfectly fits the niche of the original Makers, no other 3d printer manufacturer does anymore, competition is smaller than ever.
Meh, I think the criticism is pretty minor, nothing I've heard really wants me to avoid buying a Mk4. I'm a bit tired of the problems I'm getting with my Ender 3, I want a solid workhorse, I don't care for the extra proprietary stuff the competition is doing. I just don't see any of the criticisms being relevant to my purchasing decision. I'm not buying the printer for the bells and whistles, I'm not trying to impress my friends, I'm not trying to stoke my ego, I'm not trying to stay ahead of any curve. I just want a solid machine that will always work, with excellent support, and supports open ideas like open source and right to repair.
I can’t agree more. I bought an Ender thinking it would be cheaper and I would get it to be reliable. But after many upgrades I still find myself continuously having to tweak it.
I am holding out with buying a mk4 for a bit to see Prusa’s response. I would like them to take this kind of feedback seriously.
They really should add the accelerometers and drop the price a bit.
Years ago I started with a SeeMeCNC printer. It was a good printer, but I spent more time tweeking and upgrading than printing with it. When I started to use the MK3, I couldn't believe how much more enjoyable using a 3D printer was, it just worked! These days my time is much more valuable and I just want a reliable tool that works day in and day out with good support. Seldom do I print trinkets and when I do it is usually for family and friends. Mostly I use the printer for my own hobby projects. I have had the Prusa MK3 for several years and it has worked flawlessly. I am responsible for at least 4 other people for purchasing a MK3 just because of my recommendation. My new MK4 (kit cause I like to build things) is on order and should arrive next week. My old reliable MK3 will become my daughters first 3D printer. She will be using it for props for a local theater. Thomas, I totally understand where you are coming from and respect your comments about not recommending the MK4. That said, I will still recommend both the MK3 and MK4 for the quality and to support a company that does their best to support the Maker community! Keep those review coming Thomas.
None of the other printers on the market today check all the boxes that Prusa does :
- Quiet enough to run two in my study while I work
- Excellent print quality, no excuses
- Excellent build quality, no excuses
- Always works, no excuses
- No mysterious Chinese cloud sees my work
- Makes the world a better place by paying a living wage and open sourcing their work.
Here's the problem though - only a tiny portion of people buying a printer care about most of those things, especially in the current economy. The higher cost for those things is Prusas problem, not the customers. As much as I admire them and have massive respect for what they do they can't compete with the competitors right now. Neither you nor me are the average customer.
and many printers check boxes that prusa dont offer
-its quiet because its slow compared to a Bambu X1C
-1200€ for an open pre build printer(you can get 2x P1P for one MK4)
-Only PETG, PLA for large prints without any Mods or expensive enclosure
-Worst mechanical setup ( bedslinger) for fast printing
+Good costumer service...
-still a bad user interface
+Made in the EU
-Bad build material choise (PETG) if you want it to use for high temp prints
-Beta status ( things that are advertised are not in the final product
+better security ( but you dont have to use the cloud on the Bambu...you can use the LAN Mode)
@@Jabbawock1972 Those are tinkerer issues, I'm an artist/designer. Not everyone wants printer go BRRRR.
I don't need a bunch of 1-off features, I need a machine that works reliably for years. I got that in the MK3S. Going on 4 years now with no major problems. And if anything does go wrong, Prusa Inc is there as a sustainable company to provide support and parts if needed. Compare that to the Ender printer. At least a couple times a week on the 3dprinting subreddit, it seems like people are finding them on the side of the road in various states of disrepair.
I appreciate someone pointing out how horribly clunky wifi inherently has to be while Ethernet always really "Just Works™" despite the assumption by so many people that cables are an absolute deal breaker.
I also prefer cables. It's lonely sometimes. GO TEAM CABLES!!!
Team cables!
There's a reason I got ethernet runs into every single room of my house. including the loft, before I moved in.
Wifi can be fine but combining that with ethernet to the wifi points is the best. No one seems to do that though so wifi experiences are still very similar to years ago. With wifi6 being even more tricky to get through the house, I completely switched to Ethernet. Soooooo much better. It's that ppl want their homes to be like Ikea design displays that makes that a no go apparently.
I traded in my XL reservation for the right to purchase a MK4 and I don't regret it at all. Most of my prints are mechanical objects, not art pieces, so all of the hullabaloo about ringing means nothing to me. What matters to me is reliability, serviceability, long-term support, and speed. Input shaping on the MK4 means that it can print the type of things I print in a third the time as they would print on my MK3, and because of the other features of the MK4, they print more reliably. WiFi doesn't matter for me, because I've got Ethernet wired to my workbench -- it's plug and play.
As it happens, I prefer OctoPrint to PrusaLink, so I applied two upgrades to my MK4 (hard-wired OctoPi + Logitech C270 camera) and I'm set.
I hand-assembled my MK2 (and all of its upgrades to MK2.5S) and my MK3 (and all of its upgrades to MK3S+ and MMU2S). I've assembled 5 other MK3s for other people. While I thought about getting the MK4 kit, the extra cash to get a fully-assembled printer sooner than the kit was really a no-brainer for me. As with all 3D printers, Your Mileage May Vary.
I really like that the nozzle can still use e3d v6 nozzles and the open source nature of their printers. It's a missed opportunity not using a faster wifi module and including a simple camera. Adding an accelerometer and a few strain gauges would have been very low cost. But it bridges many of the main problems between the prusa mini and mk3s+ that I feel more comfortable recommending the mk4 now for reliability for beginners. There is tough competition from bambu labs p1s but I am worried about having to buy into their proprietary ecosystem to do their qc for them and keep the printer running
A harsh but honest review. Prusa won't like it being said but should pay attention. The honest truth is exactly that. I have a few Creality machines one ultimaker and actually built dolly with you a few years ago. I love what prusa does and I'd love to justify buying one. But as you say there's not enough to make me part with that kind of money for the perceived value.
Manufacturing a new best thing like apple it rubbish and not their way of doing things and I appreciate that. But just doing their thing won't keep them going forever.
I fear they might be swallowed up by a larger Corp. And their ip licenced to the likes of creality. But they're giving it away anyway and perhaps that's where what you said rings true. I'd rather have prusa around doing what they do for everyone's benefit with their sw and hw closed source than the possibility of them not pushing forward for the cheaper Manufacturers to pursue.
I bought a Mk4 kit, and I'm glad I did. For $800 plus a long day assembling it, this printer is excellent. I've been astonished how little configuration was required (zero). I just assembled it and hit print, and it cranks out perfect prints every time. My Prusa machines (this is my 3rd, plus some upgrade kits) have always been very reliable work-horses, and that long-term durability and reliability is valuable to me. I hope the MMU3 ends up being as good as the Mk4. It's not flashy and headline-grabbing like the Bambu, but it's excellent in its own ways that I appreciate.
When I buy a product I care about the company that sells it. Even if it’s 3x the price I will always buy from them. I will also recommend doing so to all who ask me.
Prusa could probably make a mint selling the nextruder on its own if it's compatible with other boards and firmware. I won't lie if I could stick one on my ratrig I would in a heartbeat. Auto leveling with the nozzle would be a huge sell in of itself.
something something voron tap
But I also agree, I would also throw it into my Trident
@TheJustinist the tap is still different enough that you do need to z adjust. Not nearly as much a lot of the time and after you do ot once it generally keeps but still need to do it
Nextruder seems also interesting for multi material unit applications as the filament path is basically on the side of the stepper 🤔. But I won't pay a 300€ kit update just to have my hands on it ^^'
@@KevinLemarchand yeah, plus they wouldn't have to include a mount since most other printers don't use linear rods.
They are using it for multimaterial but it's the tool changer style. Still waiting on my xl.
@@redkingrauri3769 true, true. I'm still waiting for the next video of MirageC on the nextruder. Very interesting design.
Multi tool(head) is not a MMU :P I was more thinking about something like the Tradrack (annex) or the ERCF (Voron). ;)
that WiFi setup has the Stink of a Linux User all over it.
Good job Tom, fair and honest review. I've had a MK3s for longest time, and I got at least 5 of my friends to buy one too. But after finally taking the plunge to get a X1C with AMS, I've honestly not looked back. I thought I'd still keep the MK3s to print in parallel if I was needing the extra output speed, but unless I'm multiplexing many projects at the same time, there just isn't even any reason to have the MK3s do one part, since the Bambu will probably finish the first part, and then finish the 2nd part all in less time (and fuss) than my quite upgraded (Revo) MK3s. In half a year of printing, there has only been one part, a 1" wide threaded screw, that for whatever reason, prints better on the MK3s than on the X1C (even slowed down).
I did preorder the 5 head XL, and now many years later, I'm honestly not sure what to do with my preorder amount. I suppose my hope is they come out with some magical high speed XL improvements (cause what I've seen so far on Tada doesn't make me want one at all), and the 5 heads are faster at multimaterial printing than the AMS, which although easy to use, is hugely wasteful and massively slow. But then again, at $3500 USD... that's enough for like, 3 more X1Cs, or a whole farm of P1Ps, or whatever new printer Bambu comes out with next. It is just hard to justify, even if I very much like Prusa's contributions to open source community.
I bought MK3, upgraded to MK3S+ and soon I'll upgrade to MK4. That's what I like on Prusa printers. And I'm curios what they can do with 32 bit platform. I trust Prusa. 😀
I wonder when they will implement power loss recovery into Prusa Mini as they promised.
Sadly never - more false advertising.
I've been asking this for nearly 3 years. I was almost convinced they forgot to remove the feature from their website, but then they updated the firmware to support the XL and MK4 and literally has a a field listing which build supports power loss recovery, and they wrote in XL and MK4 and IXL (the print wall model), but left out Mini. So someone knows...
I have a Prusa MK3s+ with MMU2. I have been printings on and off for ~18 months without a fail caused by machine failure. I don't count when I forgot to turn on supports when I sliced a model, started the print and fell asleep. It built up a big glob and melted the fan shroud or should I say the PETG melted into the fan shroud. Other than that my Prusa prints trouble free.
Your MMU2 is never had a failure? Yeah, I believe that. That is why they designed the MMU3.
That input shaping and lack of accelerometer and header on board is reason why I am still waiting to buy it, because maybe they will have it in later revisions, and I don't want to pay extra for it.
I don't personally own a Prusa, but as far as I can tell their reputation for accuracy, reliability, and after-market support still applies to the new Mark 4.
Assuming that's true, I think the Mk4 is a good machine to recommend to someone who is brand new to the hobby but interested in building their own machine. Assembling the kit will give them experience with setting up a printer (unike, say, an Ultimaker or Bambu), but because it's a Prusa they can feel confident that it will actually *work* without a whole lot of screwing around. And the Prusa support team will help a lot with solving problems that come up. All of this will help keep the neophyte interested and engaged and much more likely to keep using their printer and pushing their skills forward.
Starting out with a Creality machine, on the other hand, is a great way to make the neophyte extremely frustrated and push them into just giving up, resulting in yet another printer gathering dust in a closet.
Should the hobbyist buy a *second* Mark 4? Should the user with a reliable existing setup invest in a Mark 4? Possibly not. But for a beginner, it still seems like a good option.
I think what really annoyed me with the MK4 is it shows lessons weren't learnt from the Mini launch. I bought the mini under the pretense that it had, or would have power loss recovery. It was a feature proudly splashed all over the marketing material and website. We're now several years on, it's had the plus iteration and it's still non existant, with just a github issue people regularly bump which gets an occasional reply brushing it off from Prusa. Input shaping was shown off in the promo materials for the MK4 and once again was not available on launch, and doesn't look like its likely to ever be in a reliable state without having to make an additional purchase to upgrade the machine to add an accelerometer or two.
If Prusa had done this in the UK they'd have been fined by the ASA for false advertising by now. I can only assume the EU has a similar setup too so it's pretty reckless for them to continue this path of misleading customers, and very much tarnishes their previously great reputation.
Yes, agreed that that is not a good decision for sure. They were pressured to release due to the competition (which is good) but this and the way they deal with immediately writing off money without a clear way to know when it is shipped is bad (yes they have a shipping table, but no one will find that when you just look at the order page).
it's like when they came out with the PEI beds and it took almost a year for most people to actually receive them (but every youtuber still had one to review). I don't know why people pretend it's such an amazing company tbh, they treat the customers terribly
We have a couple of printers in the office. First one was a Zortrax M200, then there came some Prusas (Mk2 and Mk3), then a Zortrax M300 and now the XL. And to be honest, I prefer the Prusas. They are our workhorses, reliable, easy to fix (if ever something gets worn or damaged). And got all the upgrades over the years to make them more reliable. The 2 Zortrax are retired because firstly they are unreliable divas (grease it after every second print, relevel, etc) and you waste an incredible amount of time and filament for the raft. Also the proprietary and unflexible slicer and the "walled Garden" with filament. When printing a plate full of parts 1/3 of the time is wasted with the raft. I will not buy a MK4 because we already have enough printers for our demand, but when the time comes then it will be probably another Prusa.
I don't think having an open source slicer / studio is really a big downside. It's good for the community. Besides, Bambu Studio is fantastic. I've been using Orca Slicer for a few weeks now with my Ender 3 and X1C and it's been excellent.
Yah, Orca is great, I use it for my X1C's and my Vorons.
Input shaping is not as complicated as you are describing, it's just a filter put over the motion data. When you remove the most resonant part of the motion, it vibrates less. You're making it sound like it adds signal 180 degrees out of phase, this is not the case. That's how noise cancelling works, though.
Fair enough. But how can the printer understand its motion without something like an accelerometer?
My theory is that the MK4S a year later will iron out the input shaping issues, as well it will include the accelerometer in the upgrade package. They probably wanted to ship it in the MK4 but didn't managed to implement it in time, so decided to postpone it. I'm not in the hurry anyway; my MK3S is still plenty usable. In the meantime I can watch how the market landscape changes. I'm also curious if the MMU3 will be any good.
As much as I want a Prusa machine, I can’t justify the money for it, especially when a Bambu X1 with the Ams can do multiple colors and filaments out of the box. I really want to support them and their research, but at the end of the day, I only have so much cash and need the most features I can get for my money.
Coming from an mk3s+ I am still on the fence about the mk4. Out of the box its a slight upgrade over the mk3 and its full functionality is still a ways off. (Alpha firmware, touch screen you cant touch) I'm going to sit this round out until it matures.
I think Prusa is in the same place as Apple. If you make a great "older" product its hard to convince your consumers to repurchase. You aren't just competing with others you are competing with yourself. Any major change should feel revolutionary not evolutionary especially when its a whole model # different.
Got a Sovol Sv06. Was $209 delivered. Can't argue with that.
I absolutely agree that they should have included accelerometers on the X and Y. It would eliminate unlucky users like you and it would allow easy modifications of the X carriage without ruining the preset. It works perfectly for me but... Why?
Overall I'm extremely happy with mine though, I expected to like it less honestly. I love the "gets you exactly what you need" interface, and I loooove that it still is extremely intuitive to use without touch.
I've always been a tinkerer but damn, it just works. There's nothing to tinker with! I like it.
Last paragraph I promise, I bought it _exactly_ for the open source aspect (paired with the reliability prusas are famous for). I hate when something breaks and I don't have options because the system is completely closed and the product is at end-of-support... Because the moment stuff breaks is when it's old, and when it's old companies leave it there. So it's good that I can do it myself.
12:10 I would say, even if every printer and my own are using prusaSlicer, and im looking forward to the day I can afford a PrusaPrinter, so I can be done with the endless setting fidling
I do not want a closed source printer. That's not the only reason I buy Prusa's either but it's definitely why I don't buy Bambu Labs. I think Prusa strikes a nice balance between open source printer with support. When my Vorons break while I have forums and things, ultimately it's on me. If I have something break on my Prusa, it's a pretty easy thing to get a replacement both in and out of warranty. I just can't get on board the closed source hype train knowing it was ultimately the reason we didn't have home desktop 3D printers 20 years ago. Fool me once...
I think the more accurate statement is our ridiculously awful and completely biased in favour of large corporations patent system is why much of the world is the way it is, in purely a bad way.
So much innovation purposefully slowed down so massive companies can milk everything for as long as they can. People have died because of this occurring within pharmaceuticals and yet we as a society just leave this terrifyingly awful system in place because its largely invisible. Your average person has no idea what implications this system has.
Sure its possible for companies to choose moral licensing options, but the flat out truth is that vast majority will not.
@@BeefIngot It's definitely bad. It gets worse because not all countries honor patents in other countries (one in particular...). That means folks that follow the rules are punished for doing so while folks that break them have no consequences. That's a hard solve but one way to solve it is with open source. If competition from said company is going to happen anyway, making it open source levels the playing field. Or at least means we're playing a different game (rather than trading baseball card patents). One of the better sections in my computer ethics course way back in the day was a guest lecture about how broken patents were. The lecturer was a former patent lawyer who just couldn't do it anymore and switched over to working on his PhD in computer science instead. That says a lot.
I value Prusa’s open source philosophy. I will always prefer them over the competition. They are a guarantee both in quality, durability and support. They add to the community in the selfless open source way that makes them worthy of my respect and, ultimately, my money.
I think it's really interesting how many Prusa printers you'll find in universities, engineering and design studios. Ultimaker is a joke at this point. It just keeps on running. Sort TPU is a big part of why I'm looking into maybe purchasing the upgrade kit at some point.
I can't afford the prusa printers, so got myself Chinesium printer, but I'm buying prusament from time to time, to atleast support the effort they are doing for the community and the region they are based at.
The issue is not that Prusa is in the open source space and supplying their competitors with free R&D. The Problem is that they are in the 4th iteration of a Bed slinger. The improvements that are possible on the i3 platform are minuscule. They need to switch up their main workhorse to something that actually can profit from all the brain power Prusa has assembled. The Mk4 is an incredibly nice Bed slinger. The PrusaXL looks like a great starting point for such a switch to CoreXY. If Prusa Can bring down the Price on that machine that would be huge.
Mk4 should have been launched two years ago and as a core xy to stay relevant. If just Josef could drop FDM printing all parts in large scale production and just go for injection molding they could also drop the price, increase performance and aesthetics. FDM printing is for prototyping or low volume production.
Yes it's expensive. However, I think you underestimate the plus value of having a open-hardware. Prusa offer upgrade pack and replacement part but if you want, you have access to a big third party market for replacement part or upgrade. Or you could just print your own! I've used closed sources printer like Makerbot and Zortrax and the experience was pretty poor. You need to purchase from their store were everything is stupidly overpriced. In the case of the Zortrax, they stopped supporting their printer only 5 years after. Which means that when it breaks, it's over. The other things, they just work and require almost no fidgering. This is a big plus for a small enterprise where time is money. Not all compagnies can afford Ultimaker/Makerbot. If I have the choice between fives MK4 or one Ultimaker, it's an easy choice...
Many years ago, I got a Wanhao i3 Plus. If I had spent only a couple hundred more, I could have had a MK2S.
With all the issues I've had with my wanhao over the years, all the upgrades, time, effort; I have serious buyers remorse. Hindsight is 20/20, and the Prusa would have been a much better choice at the time.
I'm not sure any of these Chinese manufacturers produce something I would call a "workhorse" printer. Many seem prone to failure, and require tinkering. A hobbyist machine, not a reliable go-to.
Did the same thing, Tevo Tarantula. I spent more time over 2/3 years trying to make it work reliably than actually having fun printing stuff with it. In some ways it was good as it was a valuable learning experience. I've modified it so much that I think only one extrusion and maybe a stepper remains , and it now actually resembles a bear framed Mk3 lol. Probably ended up spending the same amount over that time in replacement / parts and modifications, some times I guess you get what you pay for...
Hello Tom, long time viewer here.
It's clear that you increased your production value a lot lately. You always treated every single video as something that you must be proud of, and it shows. I thank you for that.
I'm sure you have expanded your skill set and you feel obligated to use to its maximum potential.
I wouldn't like to point out that, unfortunately, there are diminishing returns.
Honestly I wouldn't have minded a 15min monologue in front of the printer, where you're just openly talking about it.
I like this new style, I really do, but it feels like you're going through a lot to push out a single video.
If you're enjoying it and having fun, by all means please continue, but if you feel like you're doing too much, it's probably because you are and don't be afraid to take a step back.
I will enjoy your content no matter what, because what makes your channel great is much bigger than looks.
"increased production value" - so those cringeworthy thumbnails, overly dramatic intros and clickbaity titles are production values nowadays ?
Thomas, there is a lot of misdirector caused by all the advertising on the Input Shaping.
Input Shaping is not the panacea of the 3D printing, and does not produce fast good print at all.
Input Shaping it is able to remove artifacts cased by vibrations, BUT AT A PRICE: you loose all the sharp corners and sharp edges. No way, it is by design. This effect can be increased or decreased by the settings, but it is always there.
When I looked at the print you did I saw that they were exactly how an object printed by with input shaping should be.
This means that if you need the absolute quality, you need to print slowly and without any input shaping.
If you print fast, then you will introduce quality degradation, it does not matter what printer you are using (Voron, X1C, P1P, V400).
The input shaping will remove some vibration artifacts but will round the edges.
If you are in peace with the degradation level caused by the speed (where having the print in 3hrs instead of 6h is more important for you) that is up to you.
This resemble me the diffusion of the MP3 format on the music. 😉
An MP3 audio file has lost lots of its details, and for people that wanted to listen to it in Audiophile quality, that is crap.
Nevertheless time revealed that the majority of people was more interested in storing the music in few space and loosing the quality than store cristalline audio masters in lots of megabytes. So the MP3 had an enormous diffusion and usage, and then people was acquainted to listen music to crappy earphones and not on studio quality professional Audio Earphone. The bad quality of sound with compression noise and artifacts was widely accepted as normality.
So, may be we are in the same situation in the world of 3D printers.
How many people are just printing objects at 0.3 or 0.4 layers level that should not be perfect and should be just printed quickly ?
I can think at helmets, props, and figures that need to be printed and then primed and painted later. Market is full of people that are using the printer for this.
I have also a V400, and I am the first to say that a lot of things I print are really mechanical parts that do not require extreme good quality or small details. 😉
I have an assembled MK3S+MMU2S and (when I will receive it) also an MK4. I will probably use the MK3S for small fine detailed print that should not be printed fast (e.g. 0.2 nozzle and swappable E3D nozzles) , the MK4 for general good print, and the V400 for fast objects or very long print that are halved in time.
I don't see the MK4 as a speed race printer at all, but a printer that can do very good normal slow quality print, and reasonable fast print but at cost of quality, as it happen for ALL THE FAST PRINTERS (not just Prusa).
But if the market will move for fast printers and mediocre quality, and the "fast mediocre quality" will be the new standard, then Prusa will be in troubles, because less and less people will be interested in their products.
For me the deciding factor for getting a Prusa (Mini+) was that they just work out of the box, even if you go for the kit version. I've had a clone printer (replicator) before and that put me off of 3D printing for years. I like tinkering with stuff as much as anyone, but at the end of the day, if pressing the print button gives me a less than 90% chance of actually getting an object out of it that looks and functions as intended, I'm just wasting my time.
I love my mini more than all my printers.
Still waiting on my MK4 kit, ordered it first day available. It didn't ship the first week when the shipping table said it would, and then it didn't ship the second week either, nor the 3rd, I chatted with one of the reps and she told me it would ship in week 4. (ok, kind of weird when the shipping table said it was suppose to ship 3 weeks prior) Well guess what? It didn't ship, so now I'm waiting in week 5 to see if my $1000 I gave them actually bought me anything? I'm generally a patient person, but I don't like it when companies give me the run around. I guess I'll wait out week 5 and try chatting with them again in week 6 if it doesn't ship. Prusa is normally pretty upfront about delays, but I haven't been given any explanation as to why mines still not here.
Suited, but still in Birkenstocks!
Love it! 😘
I have the MK4 kit. Added it to my MK3. All your points were valid, but short of building a Voron or Ratrig, not sure I like the other options out there. Sure, I can get "fast and cheap", but what am I trading off to jump to those makers? Do I trust them? One of them, I don't. They continue to demonstrate what I don't like about some companies and how they treat open source, or communities. I have some hope for the others. Others may not care. They just want the cheapest/fastest because its about their business. For me, its a hobby (maybe a business some day), but I still choose to support the company i think is doing it right. Off topic, I was in a traditional bookstore this weekend in a small town. I could have found all the books cheaper on Amazon, but Between myself, my wife and my daughter, we bought 10 books at the store. I like to support the companies that I believe in with my dollars. Just my two cents.
I'm thrilled with my MK4. It prints well right out of the box. I have very little interest in tinkering with a printer. I just want it to work great and it does.
Thomas. We are a small start-up, making AI-powered pest detectors for Agriculture to help reduce the amount of pesticides contaminating our environment. Our detector is selling in early production form, and essentially all parts are 3D-printed. Currently about 740 grams per detector. We have run our first MK4 through 2 weeks of non-stop production and it's never missed a beat. It's just chugging along, flanked by our MK3's that have almost one full year of printing time on each of them. Which other printers operate at that level at that cost ?
I for myself also considered buying a MK4, but since I'm still owning a MK3s and a Mini I saw no good reason why. As you already stated I put some love rencently on my MK3s and now it prints like a gem again. Added the Revo kit to it as well, so one of the main selling points of the Nextruder is also not an issue any more. If time plays no big role and I, as a hobbyist, run jobs often during the day or night the print time doesn't kill me. I don't know if, as a newbie to 3d printing, I would choose a Prusa again today. I really like their mindset and what they providing to the community, but a friend of mine bought recently, do to budget reasons, a cheap Anycubic bed slinger and well I have to admit, it does a very pleasant job for under 200 euros. I hope Prusa will raise the bar with their future developments, but the market is now more expecting than two or three years ago. Large deficits between promises and delivery with e.g. on the Mini with the print farm will not be working out in the future anymore.
I love Prusa's policy, and it was the reason why I bought Prusa MK4 while having other alternatives.
Still waiting for my prusa mini to get power failure recovery that they promised to add later -_-
@10:51 "that distinct Eastern European brutalist paddilac style"
I mean I have no idea what that means, even as an EE... ...but there is a virtue in not always complicating things to handhold and cradle... it's _a_ design choice.
I understood what Tom meant. Prusa go for a more...functional UI with very little focus on the user experience side of things. The interface on the mini and mk4 feels very dated and convoluted out of the box, but still maintains all the features you'd expect, just without that polish we see from things like the X1C UI.
How can you tune a bed which is constantly changing mass as it deposits more and more material. The geometry of the model would also play a part... Very tricky, coreXY machines have it easy on this regard.
usually the mass of plastic is much smaller than the bed (my 230x230 is ~1.2kg with a glass plate), and you could also in theory tweak for it.
though the print actually moving may also be an issue.
Great Video, there are definetely some points speaking against Prusa at the moment. But seeing as most other brands are only able to be where they are due to Prusa and Prusa being an established company that supports their printers for years to come im still leaning towards the Mk4 compared to for example the Bambulabs X1. Its just a gut feeling that i know ill be in good hands and will have a reliable printer bought from a company that values high quality and long living products and pays their employees fairly. Not sure if thats the best choice, but its the one that feels right for me.
So, in summary, the review goes like this: "The input shaping does not work (I don't know why you have to be so peculiar about alpha input shaping); being open source sucks because you don't have an advantage; manufacturing products in Europe does not matter because we can simply bow to China; the printer works well, but that's nothing new; oh, as I have it already I will use it as my main printer." It's ok, there are valid points, it's surprising indeed that Prusa didn't use accelerometers for input shaping, etc..
I disagree with Tom's values. It's similar to the previous video about open-source software. It does not work. It's a fact: Chinese companies use open-source software and don't follow the licenses. I would say that we have to do something with those companies. Tom is saying that we shouldn't do open-source software. That's where we part ways
You absolutely didn't get it. Prusas approach to input shaping shows how rushed and ill-managed this printer is. 3d printing industry moved so much in the last few years and prusha just isn't keeping up. Just making an ok printer isn't enough anymore and certainly not for 1200 €.
I think that the part about open source wasn't about it being bad, it was about it not being appropriate for big companies. The only reason prusha is still open source is it being based on open source projects. There is no reason they couldn't divert from that approach in the last fifteen years.
If you think that prusha is some warrior for open source, makers, modifying their printers etc. They definitely aren't.
@@jakubmastalir3557 maybe for you input shaping is showing an ill-managed printer. For me, it's an interesting feature that may be useful in the future. At the moment, I'm happy with my MK4 as it is. It's a great machine, it's a great update. It's annoying that the default profiles in the slicer are using a grid infill instead of a gyroid (probably because of the speed craze). Prusa is definitely an open-source warrior if you compare them with the Chinese crap that overflows the markets, and US companies that patent every sneeze that they do. Of course, Voron is waaaaay better on that side, and I'd happily build a Voron0, but a printer without at least a minimal bed-leveling automation is a no-no for me
@@YuriyTymchuk Mk4 is in no way competetive without it though, we are literally in the future.
There is nothing opensource about prusa other than their slicer which is a fork so it has to be.
Nobody cares about their printers being opensource and thats the only reason they keep it that way. The firmware is not theirs and even and ape can design a bedslinger.
I have my MK4 now for a bit over a month. I‘m now at my 3th breaking issue with it while none of my MK3S(+) ever let me down. There is still a lot todo for Prusa here..
Anycubic taking Prusa's work even removing their name in code is nasty but also nobody cares about their fork or should I say skin either. Bambulab didn't straight up copy and paste, they added to it in and we even got Orcaslicer as the fork of their fork. Plus Prusaslicer itself is a fork of Slic3r... I don't even own a Prusa but even I can appreciate they aren't just selling 3D printers, they are selling a service and an ecosystem that many love and appreciate.
People were annoyed with Bambu but a number of the features they've developed for Bambulab have made their way back into Prusa Slicer, just without them being credited and code being lifted and committed under a Prusa employees name - the silly games of pinching bits of code have been happening on both sides.
Bambu lab just took a bunch of features from orca slicer in their latest update and didn't even give credit to the author like they're supposed to. Bambu lab loves taking from the open source but never wants to give back or give credit.
Great review. I have used and built an Anet A8, assembled an Creality Ender 3 and just got an Elegoo Neptune 3 Pro. I have watched the Prussia company grow and become a remarkable success. I have supported the open source community since GNU. I would not buy a 3D printer exclusively because it is open source.
An Accelerometer Upgrade would be neat, and *probably* quite cheap/easy to roll out (Development notwithstanding, although it will be difficult either way, and more existing work is there for accelerometer based systems)
yeah the most expensive accelerometers are like 20 bucks, and you can get some for like 3-4 bucks if you cable it yourself instead of using usb.
I think the challenge they face as a marlin and microcontroller based board, is that they start to get to the extremes of what their micro controller is capable of doing in terms of both outputting clean stepper timings and recording clean accelerometer data. Then, you have to imagine processing that data is a pain. I could imagine some sort of a hybrid system that utilized a desktops computational power to have for instance the user log into to their browser doohicky and have the more expensive code ran on webworkers in the browser.
It would be light work for a pc, but might be very difficult to both squeeze in performantly into the limited space they have for firmware.
That is of course all assuming that they can even get both recording of data and movement perfectly at the same time.
The only issue is that it would need to be something that is attachable to both hotend and extruder or built into the bed and hotend
my mk2 is still printing perfectly with almost zero maintenance, same for my mk3. the mk4's launch page has some interesting stuff about why it doesn't have input shaping, which seemed to come down to, "we picked parts that made the use of input shaping a diminishing return for the complexity"
I'm disappointed that Thomas seems to treat Prusa open sourcing their work as a negative point for this printer. We need to fight for open source, and that means we need our content creators to fight for it too.
You prefer to live in lies? Are you offended with the truth? Thas why the world is upside-down!
Hi great Video, pls make it again because all that MK4 lacks at the time of this recording is now available
I really hope the mk5 or whatever’s next printer they come out with is finally a proper Bambu X1C competitor. For someone who actually runs a business where I have to do multicolor prints, large scale prints, and prints all in ASA…. The prusa’s just are not good enough. I’ve been eyeing a Prusa XL but at almost $4K…. It’s just not worth it over a $1500 X1C that can do everything I need quickly, at high quality. And reliably
Coming from an Ender 3 V2 that I only had problems with I had to choose between a bambu or a mk4 and the only reason I went for the MK4 is the noise level. My printer is less than a meter from my home office where is sit and i was not going to deal with bambu’s loudness. It is a very pricey printer for what you are getting but being able to just hit print on about anything makes it worth it.
Thanks for the great review.
I personally own 1 MK3s and 1 Mini, then I bought the Bambu X1C about 3 months ago. Since then, I have used the MK3s 1 time and the Mini 0 times. If you just want to print (even ABS, ASA, Paht etc), the X1C is really a great deal and just works. I was hoping for the XL, but to be honest, it's too expensive for me as a hobby user.
BTW: I adore your Wifi and Password :)
Try on the x1c abs with ultra fine setting, thank me later
I love my Mk3 S. At the time, I thought it was a lot of money for a kit. However, they have given quite a bit to the community and my Mk3 is 'fire and forget'.
I'm glad to see so many people are still getting the Prusa. Personally I don't have the extra cash to pay for things they do/have done for the community, but it's good others can.
I have a Bamboo Labs X1 Carbon and P1P. I have used both enough to see excellent prints time after time with only one failure which was my fault. I have only printed one item off the USB stick on the MK4 which was hours long, but printed very well. I hear that Prusa is working hard to catch up, but there’s a long road to get there.
I have a Mk4 and 2 Vorons (V0.1 and V2.4).
The Vorons are faster, and have way better web interfaces - in my case fluidd. things like setting a temperature, getting a live preview of the gcode being printed are notably absent on prusa link.
The Vorons however do need extensive tuning up front and good technical knowledge, which is something im kinda learning by doing right now, at least my V0.1 regularly has some issues with its printhead (yes, im planning on upgrading to a V0.2, but that is also a lot of work). the V2.4 is dead in the water, because i had problems with my inductive probe and it broke part of my hotend, so im taking the time to upgrade to a kinetic bed mount and Voron Tap for bed probing, compared to the "stock" option of having a Z endstop bolt that is probed via nozzle, and an inductive probe for leveling the gantry.
Meanwhile the Mk4 has been a workhorse, like many people say: churning out ABS parts (printed in a makeshift enclosure made out of the box it came in) for the Vorons with surprising consistency. even with the Mk3S+ i had some oddities regarding my bed mesh and first layers moving around, not with the mk4 though, they did make a great bed probing system (which i hope to somewhat capture with Tap on the V2.4). as of right now, i dont think ill try the input shaping before its "done", simply to just keep one printer that 100% works.
As I said earlier though: the "smart" features are hit or miss: one one hand its nice that there IS a webinterface now, but the wifi keeps dropping out on me, which it never did on my V0.1 so far, ethernet works flawlessly though. However the webinterface (im only referring to prusa link, since i cant be bothered to set up prusa connect for things in wont use it for) is just SO bare bones. I cant even drop a firmware image to the USB remotely, since the UI only accepts gcode. It cant set temperatures. sometimes gives cryptic error messages that dont mean anything (eg. uploading a file via prusa slicer to then immediately start, which sometimes errors out, but starts the print anyways). Not being able to freely change the username and password is also kinda janky. the temperature graphs only have very limited use, since they only show extruder and bed temp (heatbreak temp would be great to have here too), and even then there is only a rudimentary legend shown, so you cant actually read the chart.
I think it's funny that the good things that Prusa does right they get criticized it. THEY SHOULD BE PROPRIETARY! PLEASE LOCK DOWN YOUR FIRMWARE AND POTENTIALLY PUSH THE COSTS OF LICENSING TO US CONSUMERS SO YOU'RE AROUND FOREVER! PRETTY PLEASE!!. Prusa Wouldn't exist without being open source and contributing towards it. Yes companies are abusing it, but I think refining and actually holding the violators accountable is better than outright turning your back on open source when it's what gave you your start in the first place.
There are companies and products that are open source and paid at the same time, some support the right to download and modify the code to bypass the pay wall, something like this would probably be good.
I'm seriously considering a MK4 for one simple reason, consistent functionality and reliability over time.
I've had it with stuff that is great, for a while.......................
flsun v400 is great, if every t is crossed and i is dotted during assembly, if the trained chimp doing the assembly has a 'moment' it will shake something lose and 'great' inexplicably and without warning becomes something that you will have to not just take apart to the point where you took it out f the box but further than that to locktite in place a stepper-motor pulley that is now 99.95% attached rather than the 100% that is needed for it's speeds and accelerations(and yes, it does make a difference given that it's a delta, lines not being attached to it's neighbor but only in some spots and on some sides....)
So I've pretty much come to the conclusion that 'works, and keeps working, consistently and for duration', is worth the price............
Like you said, you don't need an accelerometer to calibrate input shaper properly. All you need is a single calibration print, and then setting the variables accordingly. It can calibrate the printer just as well as an accelerometer. Given how rarely you have to calibrate (basically once, unless you change something) I wouldn't consider this a big issue but it is certainly much less "sexy" way of calibrating and has an aftertaste of lagging behind the competition.
And accuracy is limited by subjective judgement of the prints (and also the resolution of the parameter steps in the test).
Especially for a Company that wants to sell a great out of the box experience without need to be an expert that just sucks.
@@Daepilin Still yielding comparable results to acclerometric means, which have their own source of artifacts, from the difference between resonance at the nozzle vs at the sensor, and calculations afterwards which can also lead to some fluctuations in calibration quality. With the calibration print the control on the outcome is actually tighter and more directly centred on the results.
I am not saying it is sexy or will convince many customers but at the end of the day, it is just as good if it is the results that matter to you. Yes, it is more work, once at setting up the printer. That goes to some extend against the ethos of Prusa indeed. Realistically speaking however, you probably won't have to bother with it afterwards until you make some major changes to the printer or relocate it.
Input shaping values can change over time even without changing anything on the printer. Mostly due to the belt tension or loose screws. So yes an accelerometer is not required to do the calibration but it helps a lot if you want to do it once a month for example. This operation can be added in a routine check easily. And if you have enough data as Prusa could do, you could even diagnose common defaults in the assembly based on the results.
So yes, I think it's a shame, that the MK4 doesn't have 2 accelerometers (one on the toolhead pcd and one on the bed).
It's a missed opportunity to make this printer even more reliable. And if it was well integrated in the diagnostic checks this could justify the price of the MK4 in 2023 in my opinion.
@@KevinLemarchand Yes they can but the impact is really minor. I haven't recalibrated my V0.1 for at least a year and even made some repairs in between yet don't see much effect on the input shaping performance.
An accelormeter of course helps but like I said, isn't crucial. For a bed slinger you'd need of course two, rather than one accelerometer. Not that this would add much cost or anything, just saying. That's why I not fully understand why the board is only prepared for a single accelerometer. Did they really think only about the XL there?
I do agree that it is a missed opportunity but my point is that it would be for me not a major argument not to get the Mk4.
@@sagichnicht6748 yep maybe for the mk4s then ;)
On my Trident I have some variations from time to time. But the belt paths are longer and as I like to mod it doesn't help XD