I have saw it, but do you have anything I can buy.

1 Like

Great to hear! Let us know how it goes, would love to see the finished product. Good luck!

-–

Eezitec.com

eCommerce Platform for 3D Printers

thanks @EEZITEC I would like to contact you

Your website looks good

1 Like

@EEZITEC, I have a question which airwolf is dual nozzle and WiFi compatible

1 Like

thanks @EEZITEC I would like to contact you

Your website looks good

1 Like

Also i found the solidoodle is great

1 Like

Thank you! You can email me at Mitchel@Eezitec.com

It would be the Airwolf HDR: http://eezitec.com/collections/3dprinters/products/airwolf-3d-hdr

Let me know if you have any more questions!

Hey @EEZITEC do you have contact so I can contact you

1 Like

How is the printing speed and how noisy in real life

1 Like

I’ve done a lot of research into 3D printers, mainly in the sub $4000 (USD) range to help support the engineering department I work in. I designed a test cube part and sent it out to many different 3D printer makers to print it in ABS, so I could compare it to a Dimension (12.4hrs, 0.17 layer). It’s a 2" cube with differing features on the outside, with cylindrical cuts thru it and a ball suspended in the middle by small support arms. It has a mix of male and female features that can be mated directly to any second part like puzzle pieces. It has a large flat bottom, equally tall vertical walls, small text features and a mix of conical/spherical/cylindrical/square features. Many refused to try it once they saw the difficulty, even though at first glance it looks very simple. A few companies wanted very high costs for samples, while some companies were nice enough to send the results for free. In the end, I got samples back from several companies.

Please keep in mind that some of the less-than-desirable results could have been due to the difficulty of the part, printing the part for free and not having enough time to troubleshoot problem areas. The list is of course not complete since some samples have not arrived or been ordered. Here are the results of samples and photos received up to this point:

Zortrax M200 - GREAT looking part. It looks better than the Dimension and probably almost as good as my Objet sample. Printed in 0.18 layers using 100% infill and took about 8hrs to build. If materials were open source, this would be an even more amazing printer.

Cyrus - Very nice looking sample…second only to the Zortrax. Print took about 6hrs, printing 0.15 layers and 50% infill.

PolyPrinter 229 - Samples were approximately the same quality as the Dimension but prints were done FAAAST! Print times varied between only 1.2 - 3.5hrs (20%-100% infill, 0.20mm - 0.15mm layer). This is the fastest machine I’ve gotten sample parts from. Only issues I found was some of the support was difficult to remove, but that was fixed by using Cura software instead of KISSlicer. These guys even printed me some extra parts in Taulman 618/645/Bridge/PCTPE just to prove how good their machine is. What this company lacks in advertising and machine beauty/finesse, they make up for in performance, features and support.

MakerGear M2 - Preliminary print photos looked very promising, but final results are still pending further testing. I expect this to be somewhere around the Cyrus level in terms of print quality. Print time and layer thickness TBD.

SeeMeCNC Rostock MAX V2 - Most of this cube looked good other than the bottom of the ball in the center of the part which looks non-spherical. Some issues with over-hangs. Some issues with the support arms too, where they didn’t look correct. Also had some issues with support removal. Prints took about 4.5hrs running 0.20 layeranwith 25% infill.

ZMorph - Looked ok from photos with support still in place, but never received parts in the mail. Could see some delamination and areas of concern. No idea on build time or layer thickness.

GiMax 3D S2 - Same issues as the Rostock MAX V2. Small amount of delamination. Unsure of print time and layer thickness.

Robo3D R1 - The bottom of the cube has a odd layer fill and some difficulty with support removal. The bottom of the ball is missing and hollow. Over-hangs are a bit messy. Small amount of warp. Some layer drifting where it’s rough feeling between layers. Unsure of print time or layer thickness.

gCreate 1.5 XT - Delamination, vertical wall drifting, very bad part warping, poor top and bottom layer fills (can see into the part), the ball looks bad, the over-hang features are distorted and messy. Not a good looking part. Print time was 2.75hrs @ 0.15mm layer with no(?) infill.

PIRX One - Same issues as the 1.5 XT.

Cel Robox - Warping, difficulties with areas requiring supports, over-hangs are messy. Delamination was a big issue. Was told this would be fixed in a software update. For areas where it didn’t delaminate, it had nice layer quality @ 0.15mm and top/bottom layer fills look really good. Parts took about 8hrs with 20% infill.

Amazing, this is very helpful, thank you!

Hi there! Would you mind publishing the .stl file so that I could do some test prints of this on my leapfrog creatr HS? So far a really good test, pictures would be perfect for me visual comparison from our (our = community) own perspective. -Marius

Here are a few pictures. These are from my Dimension sample.

Wow these are detailed prints, thanks for sharing!

Is there a way to send private messages on here?

Maybe you can contact me when you request a quote from my hub: 3dhubs.com/siegen/hubs/marius Otherwise you could send me the file via email: marius.breuer@cad-breuer.de

E-mail sent. Please share your results!

Any luck yet on trying that file I sent you?

Not yet, I am busy with other orders and my exams. Will get to print it soon. -Marius