Original Vs. 2.0?

Snapmaker Original
1

What are some of the main differences between the Original and the 2.0? I know the Original is relatively small, but what else should I take into consideration when considering the two

Thank You

2

I noticed on facebook and this forum a lot of technical problems with 2.0. Most are probably solved now. There is more active support for 2.0 then for the original: no more firmware updates and software improvements for the original since a long time. Technically 2.0 is more advanced. I am happy with the original because I never need to print large parts.

3

Thank you for you feed back

4

The main reason to go with the 2.0 is the modular design and the future toolheads/addons.
Support of the original is running out, even the community is not that strong like at 2.0.

5

The Snapmaker Original and the Snapmaker2 A150 are of similar size and general construction (the A150 is a bit bigger, I believe). The A250 and A350 have larger build volumes, but suffer from occasional problems with paired linear modules getting misaligned that canā€™t exist for the smaller machines.

The Original ships with a weaker laser head than the 2 (although you can purchase an additional stronger laser module).

I donā€™t think the Original does wireless.

Plus what the others have already said.

If youā€™re looking to buy, Iā€™d say go for one of the Snapmaker2 models unless you get an extremely good price on the Original and it comes with the additional laser head.

6

You guys can read the specs sheet via these links:
https://snapmaker.com/product/snapmaker-2/specs
https://snapmaker.com/product/snapmaker-original/specs

7

Iā€™m going to second the recommendation of a 2.0, and likely the A150. The Original is NOT being supported anymore (which is disappointing me greatly, since thereā€™s still a bug in the firmware for Original that I run into sometimes), and the CNC heads are very far apart, features-wise.
(in particular, the 2.0 CNC head has an ER11 collet, which allows you to use a wide range of tool sizes, while the Original only allows 3mm diameter bits)

1 Like
8

As a v1 owner, I do like the bed. After the first (manual) calibration, it just prints. I havenā€™t had to mess with manually creating a 7x7 calibration grid, nor excel spreadsheets. It did take me a little while to dial in the proper Z height offset for the first layer, but I think thatā€™s universal to FDM.

The lack of firmware updates (and open source firmware) is a bit annoying. I would like to get the G2/G3 and pause features as well. Pause in particular since the v1 doesnā€™t have filament runout detection.

Loading the filament in the v1 is harder. Itā€™s a manual process, and takes some forearm strength and practice. Iā€™ve gotten a lot of practice, because my current spool of filament seems to get brittle very quickly.

I think the original wins in the ā€œjust worksā€ category. But it is small, and Iā€™ve had to either scale down models or break them up into multiple prints more than once.

Iā€™ve been happy with v1 since I got it mid-2018. Iā€™m just an enthusiast though. I donā€™t print regularly or often. I think Iā€™m on my fifth 500g spool of filament. I love the precision of the prints, even if it does make for a slow/long print.

1 Like
9

I agree: I miss the G2/G3 and pause feature. I also miss the rotational speed control of the CNC spindle as specified at the moment I bought. (During shipment this spec changed). Snapmaker please update firmware.