I decided to try Cura because I wanted to play with Joris mode, but it’s giving me about 5x too much plastic. I’ve been on Slic3r for a while, but I think I have a pretty good understanding of what the settings mean and what I needed to change from the defaults. It’s almost as if it’s using old-style 5D instead of volumetric, but that’s crazy, right? Anyone know what might be going on?
Happy New Year dude!
That’s quite strange! Cura is definitely using volumetric.
I would suggest doing the following:
- Reset the profiles to default (File --> Reset profiles to default)
- Go into preferences and enter your e-Step number (I guess this is also used in Slic3r?! Or is it just defined in the firmware from what I’m seeing in my installed version? Doesn’t matter anyways…)
- Use the simple mode and just go for a small test print (without changing any other settings)
That should really work. Ah btw: Grab the very latest version from http://software.ultimaker.com/
If it doesn’t @Daid_Braam can probably chime in.
@Florian_Horsch_flouS Wtf is a slicer doing with a step per whatever value. Slicers shouldn’t even be aware that steps exist!
Cura puts an M92 near the top of the gcode to set the esteps…
I tried hard (maybe not hard enough) to get Cura to “behave” with my setup and gave up in the end. I’d either get too little extrusion on the infills (gaps) or blobby corners and uneven layers, no matter what i did. Might be me, or might just be Cura.
Switched to KISSlicer now, getting really nice results from it. Extremely simple to use, but still plenty configurable, makes smooth walls and actually usable PLA support! The only downside are the very visible “seams” at the layer starts (it always extrudes a blob at the start, no matter what i do with retract).
@Rob_Giseburt , it’s just a usability feature for people who are not aware how to modify their e-step number within the firmware. Nothing to get crazy about.
Try Cura and see how simple it is… it’s definitely the right way to go when looking at usability.
@Florian_Horsch_flouS @Dave_Durant Phew! I was afraid that the slicers had started to go crazy when I wasn’t looking! 
All good then Happy New Year Rob btw!
Ah, I’m sure that M92 was the problem. I’ll give it another try in a bit, but that totally explains it. I was looking through the code for an M221 or something like that that might be causing it, but I mistook the M92 for a G92, which (while confusing) didn’t look like it would affect anything because there were several G92 E0 commands before it actually started to extrude.
I don’t think I noticed be e_steps setting when I was searching through the settings, and if I did I ignored it because I know that it’s something that the firmware is supposed to control, not the slicer. Slicers should not be putting in an M92 in the code unless the user manually types it into start.gcode or some such. Is there any way to turn that off?
It’s funny to plug in my numbers from slic3r and see Cura complain that a well-tuned Ultimaker probably isn’t capable of achieving them 
I think the M92 is common because there have some different drive bolt diameters out there. The setting is under File\Preferences or you can remove it from the gcode or hack the cura code to not add it.
Cura’s a big advance in some ways but sorta rubs the wrong way in others. In particular, not being able to have different infill and perimeter feed rates is nearly a deal breaker for me. I suspect if that was in there, it wouldn’t be as conservative about the “won’t print well” messages… I just ignore those messages - I know what my machine can do.
I have to second @Dave_Durant : @Whosa_whatsis , it’s funny how people are not willing to accept that Cura is probably the easiest slicer for newbies and miss all the advanced features of other slicers instead Just ignore the warnings, they just try to get a newbie focused to a set of “that will work for sure” parameters. Nothing to do with the maximum capabilities of the Ultimaker itself.
Or put differently: How do you like the simple mode?
I’d like to have a few more knobs to fiddle with, but I’m starting to really like the interface. Doing wall and top/bottom thickness in mm instead of layers seems to work nicely, and the 3d view on the right has some really nice features that I’ve wished for in the past. There are a lot of slic3r features I’m not willing to give up, but it is going to be my go-to slicer for single-wall vases now that I have the flow rate issue resolved.