Choosing a new corexy or markforged printer

I think so but honestly I had so many failures they all bled together. I think I tried prusa-slicer 2.3.3, 2.4.0-beta4, 2.4.0-rc, and cura 4.11.0…


A few days before Christmas, a replacement constant-force spring arrived, and with my digital hang scale I measured its force as within spec.

Today I received a set of redesigned bed brackets that implement the changes I suggested to maximize build volume within the frame constraints. I can get rid of the workaround I used for the back bracket. I can also adjust the X position of the bed a bit easier with the new design of the front brackets.

1 Like

I tore the magnetic sheet off and probed the bare aluminum bed. 0.681500 mm variation across the bed. I have provided that data and asked one more time for a complete new set.

Update: SecKit has agreed to replace the bed with one that is more flat and is covering shipping.

If I were starting this journey today, I would have added the Jubilee to my list of possibilities. Given that I complained about not getting quite all 350x350 mm on the SK-Tank, though, I probably wouldn’t personally have chosen a 300x300 kit. Others might have different size considerations, and Filastruder producing the kit makes me optimistic about quality.

1 Like

The replacement bed came almost twice as flat as the old one, 0.35mm variance measured across the bed. It had been CNC surfaced and rough sanded on both sides. This time I probed the bare bed before installing heater or magnetic sheet, and I’m not going to put anything on it until I decide whether to try to flatten the aluminum.

I’d still like flatter than 0.35mm variance. I’m wondering how much work it would be to bring it down to 0.1mm or less variance. Judiciously marking the bed contours and sanding down higher spots? I definitely learned that Sanding (or planing or scraping?) magnetic sheet for flatter bed? doesn’t work well, but aluminum should be better-behaved.


5 posts were split to a new topic: First attempt at making a fly cutter from scratch

I’m definitely going down a rabbit hole here, but I found a relatively affordable surface plate that will be big enough, I think. It has at least one dimension larger than the bed… My 8x12 surface plate doesn’t have a lot of working room anyway.

I sincerely doubt at that price it’s actually A grade, but it should meet my needs.


Tonight I re-measured the bed in the printer. Not just probing it with the non-contact induction probe. I ran a dial indicator across it, attached to the print head, showing that it wasn’t flat. I even took a video of the dial indicator as it tracked back and forth across the bed. But then I took the bed off the printer, set it on my mill table, attached the dial indicator to the mill spindle, and ran it across the same track that read almost .01" of variance when I read it on the printer, and it read much flatter on the mill, .002" at most.

This must mean that the printer gantry is out of square in a complicated way.

The original bed definitely wasn’t flat. I could use a straightedge and it rocked on the bed in some ways, and I could slip a shim under the middle other ways. This bed has a few places that can pass a .001" shim under a straightedge, but not nearly as bad as the original. It might be good enough.

I have been looking at the bed mesh and I can’t figure out what combination of unsquareness of the machine could result in the mesh I see. I tried relaxing all possible screws through the linear rail and that didn’t help. Still trying to work out what could be wrong. :frowning:

1 Like

Hi, Thank you for sharing, Michael! Is there any decent but cheaper alternative? $1700 atm hits the pocket.
All the best!

@DimitaXO, I don’t know why you added to what I wrote a link to the tronxy x5s. I did not write that nor would I link to it as a suggestion. My current other printer started out as a tronxy x5s, and it was such hot garbage that I threw away most of it and used the frame, motors, and a few other components to make a new printer that was mostly my own design. I have edited your post to make the quote be what I actually said. The site you linked to looks like a SEO site to me.

If you really want ideas, read the whole thread, not just one later comment linking to an interesting new printer. I started with a fairly wide price range.

My experience trying to get to a flat bed has been frustrating, and I walked away from this for a while.

I finally realized that the Y frame members to which the Y linear rails are attached is itself not flat.

It would be a lot of disassembly to take them off and square the top surface on the mill, so instead I’m just shimming the rails above the frame members to make the rails true as installed.

The X rail clearly droops because it’s not attached to anything to straighten it, but for now I’m not going to worry about that. I’m finally going to put the new bed together with the heater and magnetic surface and get back to printing.

1 Like

Ultimately I didn’t get the rails perfectly flat; I just accepted some unflatness. I want a working printer, and perfect has become the enemy of better. This is the printer that I want my kids to be able to use, and I haven’t been giving them that opportunity while I’ve been puzzling this over.

1 Like

When I ordered it, it said it was in stock. A few days later, they notified me that it was not actually in stock, oops. A few days shy of half a year later, it has shipped to me and I have a UPS tracking number.

This is long after I realized that I don’t need it for this purpose, but on the other hand I do actually want a bigger surface plate in my basement machine shop. So, OK I guess?

1 Like

It came with a report claiming 1.2 microns unilateral variance. I’m guessing from laser interferometry; not sure how else you would get it this cheap.

If that’s an accurate and representation of the surface, then it would be within the definition of a Grade A surface plate. But 25 samples on a 12x18 surface plate doesn’t sound like much to me, so while it’s good enough for my purposes, I don’t think that (e.g.) Starett has anything to be afraid of. :relaxed:

What’s really fascinating to me is that it looks like they could have claimed better. It’s not relative to the bottom. Unilateral flatness is just the minimum distance between two parallel planes such that all the surface points lie between them. If their test points were representative, it seems clear that they didn’t optimize the planes for minimum reported unilateral flatness.

Anyway, good enough for this hobbyist! :relaxed:


Update: If I were buying today I’d probably get the Sovol SV08.

1 Like

I know you don’t like Bambu printers, but for people that don’t want to make the printer the project I have to say that the X1C is awesome. I’ve had mine for a year now and I’m just printing and printing. Mostly functional parts, mostly ASA, some PETG, some of those with CF. I’ve had one little spaghetti last week 'cause the slicer didn’t put a proper brim and the print came loose, but the printer stopped early on its own before it became a total mess.
In general it just does its thing. I love to take stuff apart and tinker but in this case it’s kind’a new experience for me to have a complex machine that “just works”…

The only thing I particularly dislike about Bambu printers are the ones that have carbon-fiber rods that are wear items that I understand can’t be replaced, which makes the printer itself an explicitly and intentionally wear-limited item, as I understand it. Other than that, it sounds like they are well engineered, and I appreciate the “just works” nature. I don’t try to talk people out of buying them.

Personally I retain some dislike and distrust for Bambu the company primarily because they initially refused to follow the license terms for the slicer, and secondarily for their historical cavalier handling of data. The “we might at some later date, and when we feel like it, honor the license terms” approach they initially took showed absolutely no respect for intellectual property law and was frankly immoral. As a result of their dishonoring intellectual property law regarding their slicer fork, and some of the data-handling mistakes that have come to light, I have absolutely zero trust in their cloud model. So I personally wouldn’t put their devices inside a firewall I control, nor would I print any model where I cared about intellectual property of the model itself. This is not an accusation that they are stealing models or that their printer firmware is insecure; I merely do not trust them to have effective controls around model data or to keep their printer firmware secure. This is about me and my level of trust, not a statement that everyone should agree with me.

My dislike does not extend to the individual engineers who have clearly done a good job overall (even if I disagree with one of their design decisions). Nor does it extend to anyone who has purchased and appreciated a Bambu printer. :slight_smile:


Sounds like you’ve read an EULA or two in your day. BTW, 100% agree with what you said.
They don’t even allow for direct USB serial control.


I am a huge fan of my P1P. It has been a beast. I have over 600 hrs of printing and only 3 print failures. And they were 100% user generated due to bad models. It is still printing as pretty as it did in the beginning.

And now a days everyone is stealing your data. Microsoft, Adobe, Google, Youtube, …name a corporation, is using your data to train their flavor of AI.

I’ve had a cnc pattern store for 12 years now and I’ve come to the acceptance that as soon as I post a pattern it will end up on ebay or some other commerce site. One of the reasons I don’t share STL files anymore. Though to be fair I haven’t posted anything new in the last few years so don’t know the current cnc pattern market environment.

On the 3d print side, any amazing model posted, will within days have a Chinese site selling the same for a fraction of the price. Sadly, some folks don’t care and see it as a great discount opportunity to purchase the model. I am in a model building hobby forum site and see that frequently.

I have not seen Bambu do anything illegal. Underhanded and slimy, maybe a little and needed to be “gently” pushed to follow their slicer license terms. Their printers are marvels.

Again, I personally don’t recommend the P1P. There are better options our there now but mine has and continues to perform.

1 Like

I am just randomly jumping in here… My co workers are all 3d printing greenhorns. One of the new guys has actual experience with industrial CNC machines, but not 3D printer tech based desktop CNC. All of them have decided they are now experts. At least they took advice and subscribed to Lychee. Our old cad guy who ran the CNC got himself a Prusia and suddenly he’s an expert, though it took him several months to rebuild an otherwise new Anycubic Photon… I am not sure the 3D printer they got I have never looked close they all look the same these days. Got a couple of massive Elegoo Resin printers. Apparently they have also now ordered a bambu printer because they have integrated the filament data with a customized slicer, and they managed to convince my know it all co workers that this is the best. uggg.

I am like, so their solution to everything is to keep wasting cash on every company that advertises they know everything and have all the solutions? Meanwhile this very process makes it abundantly clear, how little they really know. I feel like I need to teach a class on 3D printers. 101: Learning the parts, their functions, why they matter, what we are trying to to do and where the industry is headed.

That Bambu might be a IP risk is a concerned I will need to pass on to the CEO who signed off on this mess. They wont work with me, they just think if they keep throwing money at some one else… Maybe, I wont bother to warn them of the IP risk, or support issues.

Once upon a time I also worked with another company that integrated their filament data with their slicers. M3D. It kinda worked and by the end I was only using their slicer as a controller. But I never had issues ordering or in getting support.

1 Like