Difference in output MendelMax 1.5 vs. 2.0

What is the output quality difference between a MendelMax 1.5 and 2.0?

I know the 2.0 is more rigid and faster printing, but I'm more interested in the output quality.

If the 1.5 is still high quality, what are some reputable sources to purchase a full kit with good support?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/03/2014 07:57PM by WhiskeyMike.

Same quality. It all depends on the person building the machine in the end.

I have done a rework of the MendelMax 1.5 where I put things in the build that are not in the official build and in the end if a machine is well built, they all perform well. A Prusa i3 can also perform really well. A Mendel90 too.

There is no 'better' machine, however, the MendelMax 1.5 and 2.0 both have better rigidity in the frames, which also means that if you make an assembly mistake, the machine will be less forgiving. Everything has to be exactly straight, every bar, corner, every angle, it all has to be square and straight.

The 2.0 has a slightly larger build volume and it's more open design makes it easier to do things IMO.

---

WWW.ZATOPA.COM - Your Place for high quality 3D Printing Filament and accessories

One of the evolutionary goals Maxbots has stated was to make it easier to build, designed for manufacturing (most Reprap designs are for DIY), fewer different parts meaning more of a standardization of fasteners and threading parts where possible instead of using nuts.

Thanks for the responses folks. If they are basically the same components but a different frame, why is there commonly an $800 difference in a kit? I assumed that the extrusions would be more accurate or of higher quality because of better hot ends or similar.

For me the MendelMax 2.0 parts were harder to get. The price difference is ridiculous, I guess it's only because it is 'newer'. There is a difference, that is that the 2.0 uses an extrusion as X-axis, however, if you use nicely chromed rods, those rods should be more expensive than two aluminum extrusions. I don't know why it's more expensive.

Doesn't the 2 use linear rails and the 1.5 uses rods?

---

greghoge.com

HUGE 3D PRINTER PARTS SALE!!!

Quote
gmh39
Doesn't the 2 use linear rails and the 1.5 uses rods?

I think thats what I said

"There is a difference, that is that the 2.0 uses an extrusion as X-axis" extrusion with linear rails on it yeah.

Quote
Ohmarinus

Quote
gmh39
Doesn't the 2 use linear rails and the 1.5 uses rods?

I think thats what I said

"There is a difference, that is that the 2.0 uses an extrusion as X-axis" extrusion with linear rails on it yeah.

I was thinking just an aluminum extrusion with a printed part riding on it, not an actual linear rail.

---

greghoge.com

HUGE 3D PRINTER PARTS SALE!!!

The motion components of an MM2 are easy to source. Misumi and Igus have what you need for a combined retail of a couple hundred dollars plus some low cost Z lead screws from MTW. For the kits I've made the wholesale cost of the 27 or so cut AL parts are more than the frame or motion components though I'm only getting 5 sets at a time. Add tapping and powdercoat and it's a couple hundred or better retail for just the cut parts. Many of the MM1.5 users are upgrading tothe Y axis W rail and pillow blocks used on the MM2 with good results. It's a nice machine, robust and accurate. Blazingly fast as well. It does come with a cost, though.

Given the frame of the mendelmax 2 I think it will be an easier platform to work future upgrades on, and the supported X rails seem to be more accurate than the typical rod sections. That being said, I do think that either platform can be upgraded to greater accuracy than stock, and more importantly, eventually the same level of accuracy and since I have essentially a mendelmax 1.5+ (sort of), that tends to be the platform I work with. . For example, my Linear Z rail project (below if anyone is curous) probably would have been easier to engineer on a mendelmax 2. Adding X rails to the Mendelmax 1.5 without offsetting the nozzle is going to be a challenge, but I think the stability advantages will be worth not dealing with the end of carriage forces on rapid movement. The trick in the end is going to be dialing in the entire Z axis motion system. The Y rail works ideally in either solution

[www.thingiverse.com]

pierct I have been trying to get people to understand how important the stiffness of the z-axis is nice to see some people are finally realizing it nice job

I guess you could say I am taking Z axis stiffness to a whole new level

---

WWW.ZATOPA.COM - Your Place for high quality 3D Printing Filament and accessories

Quote
jzatopa


I guess you could say I am taking Z axis stiffness to a whole new level

looks fantastic but I would have used linear ball rail supported here is mine

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2014 03:33PM by cnc dick.

I have a Mendel max 2 and I really love it. I only have experience with a prusa version 1 and I can definitively say that it is significantly more stable and less prone to mechanical failure during prints ( such as x axis sliding out of the motors on the top.). I visually like the look of v2 over 1.5 but if you build 1.5 check out richraps build of it because I like it more than the standard.