Standard Ultimaker 2 vs Extended

[purps 9]

Hello all, long time lurker, first time poster here.

Apart from the larger print volume, is there any real difference between the Extended and the standard Ultimaker 2 in terms of reliability, print quality, etc?

I really don't think I need the extra build volume; however for reasons I won't bore you with, the Extended will end up costing me pretty much the same as the standard Ultimaker 2.

If there are any concerns about the Extended whatsoever, I would just go with the standard Ultimaker 2.

Cheers,

Matt.

[Dim3nsioneer 557]

Everybody I've seen so far with an UM2 Extended was happy with that printer. The build height is the only difference; everything else is the same.

btw: Those reasons would not bore me at all...

edit: I think to remember a recent post about print quality comparison of the three UM2 models. Iirc the GO had the best quality in order to its smaller build size.

Edited December 7, 2015 by Guest

[purps 9]

That's great, thank you for the insight. I would be very interested in seeing that thread for the comparison of the three UM2 models if anybody knows where it is off hand?

I'm willing to believe the quality is the same between the UM2 standard and Extended, however I just wanted to be sure because bigger machine usually means more slop! There is no way I would want to compromise quality/reliability for the extra build volume.

Cheers,

Matt.

P.S. Reason they are the same price (or nearly the same price) to me is because I would be buying them for my business, and the price of the Extended is high enough such that I go over a magic number and I get more of a tax break, effectively making it cost the same as a standard UM2. You see I told you it was boring! :-)

[Dim3nsioneer 557]

P.S. Reason they are the same price (or nearly the same price) to me is because I would be buying them for my business, and the price of the Extended is high enough such that I go over a magic number and I get more of a tax break, effectively making it cost the same as a standard UM2. You see I told you it was boring! :-)

 

Not that boring... you know, Swiss tend to listen when they hear or read the word 'tax'...

[frederiekpascal 193]

That's great, thank you for the insight. I would be very interested in seeing that thread for the comparison of the three UM2 models if anybody knows where it is off hand?

I'm willing to believe the quality is the same between the UM2 standard and Extended, however I just wanted to be sure because bigger machine usually means more slop! There is no way I would want to compromise quality/reliability for the extra build volume.

Cheers,

Matt.

P.S. Reason they are the same price (or nearly the same price) to me is because I would be buying them for my business, and the price of the Extended is high enough such that I go over a magic number and I get more of a tax break, effectively making it cost the same as a standard UM2. You see I told you it was boring! :-)

 

Then I would buy an UM2 extended. Once you master your machine, you'll miss the bigger build volume pretty soon.

[DidierKlein 729]

If cost is not a problem, the go for the extended.

It prints as good as the UM2, it's basically the same machine with 10cm more.

For having the 3 models, i must say i found that the Go was slightly better in terms of quality but it's more of a gut feeling. And not a big difference

[Labern 774]

As the top axis are the same in length as the UM2, belts are same etc. The slop is no differnt there and only thing is the height. The bed is on longer rods but linear bearings are the same so the slop is no different. I have both and to me the quality is the same.

I would get the extended as there maybe that one job that you may need the extra height. You may think you don't need it till you start using it and might find it comes in handy.

[MarcusWolschon 7]

I had the UM2 and have the UM2 extended now.

It's just the height. Same reliability and same quality.

[purps 9]

Thank you all very much for your comments; they answer my question perfectly.

Cheers,

Matt.