phantom

Its a modded version of Cura. I haven't experienced any issues with the firmware and everything works as normal, just with a lot more options. You can find it here for several um2 printers https://github.com/TinkerGnome/Ultimaker2Marlin/releases Tinkergnome made it and is still active here. There's enough info on this forum to get you going.

I personally installed firmware called Cura Master on my UM2, it has so much extra functionality including the entering of e-steps with the dial. Also testing the extrusion by marking 10cm of filament and use the move function that can move the filament and display how many milimeter it should have moved.

Bondtech extruder might need different E step settings. Don't know about this model but website should tell you more. And your line width states 0.6mm , why is that, you have a custom nozzle?

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2974405 Exactly what you're thinking of

Did you ever find out what the problem is?

@smartavionics Sorry for the late reply, thanks for looking into this, much appreciated !! 🙂

Here you go @smartavionics cube 2.3mf cube 1.3mf

Hi @smartavionics, Please find them attached 1 = + 2 = - cube 1.3mf cube 2.3mf

Hi guys, I've come upon a bug in "Initial Layer Horizontal Expansion" Printed a couple of calibration cubes with setting going from 0.52mm to -0.52mm and there was absolutely no change in measurement in the cubes elephant foot, whilst this isn't a small difference ? @smartavionics Attached gcode, Cube 1 = + value of 0.52mm Cube 2 = - value of 0.52mm Cube 1.gcode Cube 2.gcode

I've come upon a bug in "Initial Layer Horizontal Expansion" Printed a couple of calibration cubes with setting going from -0.52mm to 0.52mm and there was absolutely no change in measurement in the cubes elephant foot, whilst this isn't a small difference ?

Hi all, Just wondering when the final be ready? Greetz Barry

hope your not asking me :-P

Hi @smartavionics, Thanks for checking! The top surface layer is equal in both version right, as is maximum resolution ? Changing these settings would make a difference as would changing a layer height to a higher value, it's obvious that the slicing time would drop considerably, but that is a choice that you know will take more time to process(and print) So the question is what changed that the slicing times are this much higher then before 3.5. Slicing on my computer is very consistent, i have a gaming laptop with i7 desktop cpu and high end gpu and all on ssd drive, so I am not used to long slicing times and staring at the progress bar. I can do it several times on files bigger then this, and it will be consistent with a stopwatch to within 2-3 seconds. So if this print is 15 hours, you can imagine what the difference in slicing time is between 3.4 and 3.6 when I slice a model that prints more then a day, I'm talking 3-4 times longer, and in minutes that's a huge increase, so there must be either a bug or a setting so different that wasn't there before. Let's hope we can get the speed as it was previously (same settings offcours) and hopefully @ghostkeeper has a fix in 4.0 Guys I appreciate the help and looking in too it! Greetz Phantom

Hi @smartavionics, I also got a response on the 3.5 beta topic and it seems to be an update in version 4 according to @ghostkeeper If this is non related, here the 2 files i made: 3.4.1 1.23 minutes to slice 3.6 took 2 minutes Thanks for the help ! 3_6 version testfile.3mf 3_4_1 version testfile.3mf

Great, thanks so much, i'll be looking forward to it !