@COPE413 and lars here is your chance with MC

  • And I really mean it - convince me - You said I should not suggest some alternate slicers and I will definitely stop if you can show me the superiority of MC. And I am serious

    Here are some complaints with PS and you can read that and at least look at it as I do not want to resize and edit all the pics so they fit here Here is the pic of the print produced with MC

    You can see 2 of the 4 outside walls did not print at all the one that printed was .94mm thick its supposed to be .8 read the details here
    So I dont have to repeat them. Now your stats and its the same printer same roll of filament same temperature

    Outside wall supposed to be .8mm 2 walls missing 1 a mess the kinda printed one almost 20% oversized and that after I lowered the extrusion multiplier to .93 from .96 of the PS one
    2nd wall 1.5 mm designed 1.66 to 1.70 thick on the slicer it shows 2 .8mm walls.
    3rd wall 2mm nominal shows 2.05 and is solid I call that good
    4mm square post - is 3.2mm square and I call that bad
    pirnt nominal height 15mm and actual 14.7 but that could be due to squish of the first layer

    Again hotend is a Volcano with a .8 nozzle.

    So what I am looking for. is a slicer that easily reliably prints accurately has variably perimeter widths and variable layer heights that always work as expected (PS works most of the time as expected) Now I used to like 1.75 which is now totally outdated in features and everything but IMO still gave you more options than the current version and yeah before I gave it a try I upgraded to todays current version.

    So please tell me why I should suggest MC over other slicers.

Log in to reply

Looks like your connection to MatterHackers Community was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.