Which ONE is the BEST NOZZLE SIZE?? (for Cura 5+ & PrusaSlicer 2.5+)

[@PrintingPerspective]

PRINT TIMES (Cali-Dragon): 0.4mm LW - 38 minutes 0.5mm LW - 33minutes 0.6mm LW - 30minutes 0.8mm LW - 27minutes PRINT TIMES (GJB Test Cube): 0.4mm LW - 27 minutes 0.5mm LW - 22minutes 0.6mm LW - 20minutes 0.8mm LW - 18minutes (All other settings are exactly the same)

[@changjunzhang]

Are they the same settings? How a bigger nozzle can print faster that the toolpath is the same?

[@Dirt33breaks]

​@@changjunzhangthe tool path won't be the same if for example it can make a wall with less passes.

[@802Garage]

I think this is where the larger nozzles shine. Extrapolate to a very large print. 0.4mm at 380 minutes vs 0.6mm at 300 minutes for example. That's 1h20m time saved! Now what if it was 3,800 vs 3,000 on a huge prints? That's over 13 hours saved. Over 18 hours if you jump to the 0.8mm nozzle. Can be cut even more if you step up the layer height, which I believe works better as a function of larger nozzles since you won't have as much "tubing" of the laid filament. Less gaps left. I could be off base though.

[@Jim_One-wl4ke]

@@802Garagegood point for bigger prints , mostly functional parts that do not require much details still better to use bigger nozzles. Thanks for sharing ❤

[@Jim_One-wl4ke]

Thanks for making this video.. allow the choice of speed & quality. ❤thanks for sharing

[@beauregardslim1914]

Yeah, it seems that Thomas is mostly concerned with large functional prints. .6 is kind of mandatory for wood filament but I tried a couple ordinary prints with the new Cura and wasn't impressed. I suspect it has something to do with viscosity or surface tension in relation to the size of the hole but .6 is just sloppy.

[@PrintingPerspective]

IMHO a lot of functional prits should be printed at least from PETG for longevity and durability, but that is just me. For the wood filament you should try 0.5mm nozzle. The only problem is that those are not that common as 0.6mm ones.

[@TheRobojay]

I really wish I could use 0.6 for the speed benefits but my printer is too fast and 0.6 is usually slower for me bc of the melt limit lol

[@PrintingPerspective]

"My printer is too fast" it is a nice "problem" to have, haha!

[@perrinsilveira6759]

It is very important to make videos on this so thank you. It seems like every couple of days over on r/fixmyprint that someone comes away with the idea that .6 or .8mm nozzles are their key to faster parts and they ruin their prints and often overrun their volumetric flowrate, or even more often overrun their part cooling capabilities resulting in weird hard to diagnose at a glance print artifacts. Every time I tell one of those people that most nozzles will print at least 1.2mm width lines without sacrificing print quality it always feels like the supprised Pikachu meme. Hopefully this helps undo some of the damage Thomas Sanladerer did with his Arachne video.

[@PrintingPerspective]

Trust me, I feel you. It is hard to see other people not taking seriously the information you have when you know it is the right one. :)

[@esoterical4350]

Thank you for testing this. Even with other people going with the "0.6mm and arachne" combination being the best I always suspected that as long as you weren't hitting volumetric flow limitations, you are better using a 0.4mm and thicker width than a 0.6mm nozzle and trying to get arachne to print less than nozzle widths. Your tests seem to confirm this (though I didn't think about the overhangs, makes sense though). I'll keep going with my 0.4mm nozzle and 0.6-0.8mm line widths as I am still not maxing out the flow rate of my extruders quite yet.

[@PrintingPerspective]

Yeah, I am only sad because of the minimum line width cap with wider lines. I would love to test and dial in settings for 0.6 lw and 0.2 min lw, but as far as I know that is not possible to get now.

[@polycrystallinecandy]

"as long as you weren't hitting volumetric flow limitations, you are better using a 0.4mm" Surely you mean the opposite? Because if you start hitting your flow limit, a larger nozzle isn't going to help you anyway. You mean to say that as long as you CAN hit the flow limit with a 0.4 nozzle, no point in going with 0.6. The point is to keep using 0.4 as long as possible since it produces better details. The only time you'd want to go bigger is when you CAN'T utilize you extruder's entire flow capacity (because line width/height becomes too ridiculous for 0.4 to handle).

[@sierraecho884]

You can even revert to 0,3mm nozzle ( I wouldn´t go lower than that for a FDM machine) and print waay finer but also simply use thicker layer lines if need. I too have 2 profiles, 1. course and 2. fine.

[@sierraecho884]

@@PrintingPerspective I would say the .3mm is the best overall size. You can still print 0,6mm layer lines but also 0.3mm if needed without swapping the nozzle which is usually a hassle in my opinion

[@PrintingPerspective]

Not wrong, if I had to choose the one I would probably go for 0.35mm for PLA and 0.3mm for PETG as oozing is almost non existent with small nozzles compared to 0.6mm one. I wouldn't say nozzle change is a big deal, but it's definitely thing that most of us don't want to do often, especially for PETG dedicated printers as it can be too messy.

[@802Garage]

The results are pretty similar overall. For fine details, obviously a finer nozzle is the winner. For functional prints and the larger they get, a wider nozzle is going to get you faster print times with little sacrifice. Good video!

[@TechieSewing]

Huh, I was sort of expecting bigger nozzles performing better with their 'native' line widths. Thank you for this analysis! I routinely print small detailed prints with 0.5mm line width (and 0.4mm nozzle), it's pleasantly faster and looks good. I guess my bigger nozzle will stay in the box waiting for more cloggy filament like marble/glitter.

[@PrintingPerspective]

Yeah... it is kinda not what you would expect. Hopefully, I will find out more things like this :)

[@shackeemtash7589]

Should i use a 0.5 nozzle to get instead of a 0.6? To get benefits from both worlds? not to big like the 0.6 and not to small like 0.4

[@onewa712]

I'm sorry but I can't see anything that might be a deal breaker for a 0.6 vs the classic 0.4. Where are those details you say that are so visible, and where exactly does the 0.4 "destroys" the 0.6 nozzle? :/ my screen is just an HD one, so maybe I need more resolution to appreciate when does the 0.6 fails? .-.

[@PrintingPerspective]

You don't have to be sorry. Everybody interprets the difference differently, that is why I provide high-quality shots. Ideally, you should watch in 4K. In my opinion, 0.4mm destroys 0.6mm one because it performed better in almost every tested aspect. The 0.6 one doesn't fail anywhere, I don't understand why you say that.

[@umbratherios5614]

tried nozzles from 0.2 up to 0.8. I will never go above 0.4mm again. the print quality is imprecise, ugly and just low quality (I am more sensitive to small details), even with e steps calibrated and all the other calibrations. 0.2 tho? it's slow, but holy hell, the prints are BEAUTIFUL, I will, and do, HAPPILY choose quality over speed. I don't print large prints anyways, but this large nozzle obsession is slowly killing the hobby for me by the day. 0.2 does requite it's own custom profile and tuning though. and a higher temperature.

[@R3d_8]

Great video, I'll be sticking with my 0.4mm nozzle and 0.5mm line widths

[@chuck2501]

I have a CHT clone 0.6 and use it with .4 and .48 layer heights for the practical prints, for mega speed. my 0.4 cannot do this. :)

[@Iisakki3000]

I use my 0.6 mm nozzle to print at 0.48mm layer height and 1mm line width all the time! Yet I can still get great details in my prints at a smaller layer heights and line widths. All with the same nozzle.

[@StumblingBumblingIdiot]

Nice video. I would like to see the difference in printing times though. With a large nozzle you can get significantly reduced print times IF you have the upgraded hotend and extruder! Of course those are not detail oriented prints but just basic large items like vases, your battery box you showed, etc. If you dont have the upgraded hotend and nozzle it is like you said, you run into limitations and you have to reduce the speed to a point where it is not worth it for certain prints. Really hope you do .3 and .2 nozzles :)

[@PrintingPerspective]

EDIT: I woke up with a fresh brain and I get what you see by the different print times, haha. I will make a pinned comment with them. The reason I stopped at 0.32mm is just because of the 0.4mm nozzle limit. To test higher layers I would need to compare 0.6 vs 0.8 vs 1.0mm nozzles. But for different layer heights, it is very easy to know the print times. If the print takes 60 minutes with a 0.3mm height, it will take 40 minutes with a 0.4mm layer height. The only question is the quality, but I doubt that it would be a priority with that high layer. But honestly, I am way more down to test 0.3 vs 0.35 vs 0.4mm nozzles. However, what I learned from these testing results, is that you should just use the smallest nozzle you can for your application needs. So I don't know if that kinda video will be soon. :D

[@StumblingBumblingIdiot]

@@PrintingPerspective Smaller is better in this case :) I would love to use a .2 for everything but man do those times get long! Looking forward to more videos!

[@daliasprints9798]

@@StumblingBumblingIdiot What about using 0.2 nozzle but only 0.2 line width on the outer perimeter, 0.4+ everywhere else?

[@StumblingBumblingIdiot]

@@daliasprints9798 Would be interesting to try but I think the print speed would still have to be really slow due to the .2 nozzle can only get so much filament through it.

[@daliasprints9798]

@@StumblingBumblingIdiot Now I want to try a flow test with 0.2 mm nozzle. 😂

[@sierraecho884]

Increase volumetric flow by using a volcano nozzzle and 2 nuts thats it. The heater catride can keep up, the heatsink can keep up, you simply just need a longer nozzle.

[@PrintingPerspective]

Yeah, basically you just need a longer melt zone. I ordered the adapter from Mellow to increase it with the possibility to use my shorter nozzles i.imgur.com/3leKU5P.jpg That + Bondtech CHT V6 nozzle probably would do wonders even with stock V6 hotend :)

[@sierraecho884]

@@PrintingPerspective Hmm i would prefer the longer nozze as it is just one piece so one possibility of leakage less. But sure this is one option. And yes the CHT Nozzle would do wonders. However just the volcano nozzle beats every possible solution in price/value.

[@PrintingPerspective]

I would prefer that too, but if you already have high-quality V6 nozzles buying a single extension that allows using them all it's a pretty neat thing.

[@sierraecho884]

@@PrintingPerspective Ah I see, yes I agree. I never bought into expensive nozzles so I don´t have that "problem" =) The only thing that sucks with my volcano nozzle solution is I don´t have a fitting silicone sock. And I am too lazy to make one myself.

[@WKfpv]

I've been testing 0.6 for a month or so, and went back to 0.4 because quality was just not there

[@me-vo3di]

This one I sorta figured myself few years back but what about heatbreak? I buy $5 bimetal heatbreak, the other guys buys $30, nether of us gets the heat creep

[@PrintingPerspective]

If the hotend heatsink cooling is good you will never have any problems even with a basic steel heatbreak and printing PLA. The only time I got clogged hotend on any of my printers was because after tinkering I forgot to plug the hotend cooling fan back lol.

[@lucerocj]

You are missing the point of larger nozzle sizes... it's not for printing action figures but functional parts that are larger than an action figure. Such a silly video to post.

[@PrintingPerspective]

The funny part is that you don't understand the point of the video and blame me not understanding the point of the larger nozzles lol. It is crazy how some people gets so sensitive and offended, instead of trying to understand the bigger picture that this video is saying.

[@lucerocj]

@@PrintingPerspective you made a video then blame me for not understanding it.

[@forkerion]

The discussion was not the quality, obviously .4mm nozzle is better there. The point is that the quality loss is minimum at normal settings while time is reduced

[@PrintingPerspective]

Did you only watched the intro? :D Everyone interprets quality differently. For me the quality loss in not minimal and print times are literally the same as you can print wider and thicker lines with 0.4mm nozzle too. I honestly don't get your point.

[@forkerion]

@@PrintingPerspective I watched the whole video

[@skaltura]

It's amazing 0.4mm turned out to be the perfect size, time and time again for all this time. I have a lot of larger nozzles, i keep buying them, but ... i never use them :O

[@amogusenjoyer]

Yep even Prusa has shifted back to 0.4mm nozzles for their XL printers after the disaster that was the launch in big part due to the 0.6mm nozzle. Im sure they could've made it work on the 0.6mm but it seems like just using a 0.4mm fixed it

[@noahjones1121]

so then the way to fine details and speed is just going like 0.2-0.4mm and crankin that volumetric flow + cooling?

[@m_IDEX]

Highly informative. You make a good case for IDEX printers. Use 0.4 for outermost perimeter and large nozzle for everything else.

[@madvelila]

Have you forgotten to make the video about 0.3mm nozzle that you mentioned?

[@ameliabuns4058]

I'm curious about a 0.3mm now.

[@WTF_BBQ]

Interesting. I've always thought that the bigger nozzle was the most obvious thing for faster prints. I usually print functional parts rather than aesthetic models. But from what you are saying, the 0.4mm nozzle can print just as fast as the 0.6mm for as long as you don't hit the volumetric limit. Is this correct ?

[@PrintingPerspective]

If you use the same line widths and layer heights, the print times are literally identical. What I am saying is that you should use the smallest nozzle possible with taking into account the max line widths and layer heights you will be able to print. If you print 0.5mm widths and 0.2mm heights it is way better to use like a 0.3mm nozzle for regular PLA or PETG. Volumetric flow rate is just a value how much plastic your hotend is capable to properly melt.

[@marcus3d]

Oh, wow, I just found your channel and it's amazing! Awesome information! Thanks!

[@PrintingPerspective]

Welcome!

[@Gromic2k]

It would have been nice to see a few smaller nozzles than the 0.4

[@PrintingPerspective]

Yeah, but all the same principles apply to them too. If you want the best quality at a 0.4mm line width and 0.2mm layer height, go for a 0.3mm nozzle. The smaller the nozzle the better quality will be. The biggest downsides of going small will be the max line width and max layer height you can print.

[@ButlerOfTheC]

Amazing vid!

[@j.justin1511]

I'd like to see the smallest nozzle tested.

[@PrintingPerspective]

Me too, but I doubt we would see a different trend. However, I think I will make it one day just to visually see the difference.

[@InklanUtterfield]

Have you tested a 0.3mm nozzle yet? These findings were very interesting and not what I would have expected at all.

[@PrintingPerspective]

I have been using a 0.25mm nozzle for a while mostly for PETG functional prints that need to be more accurate and in my latest TC Lead Screw video. The details on those prints look amazing. I would say the most universal nozzle is still 0.4mm, but if you want more details go for 0.3 or 0.35mm. The main downsides of going smaller are the max line width and max layer height that you will be able to print. But don't cheap out on smaller nozzles, buy at least from Mellow or Trianglelab, they have very good quality and reasonable prices.

[@InklanUtterfield]

@@PrintingPerspective I see thanks. And what would you say is the widest line and layer height your 0.25mm nozzle manages?

[@PrintingPerspective]

Property machined V6 nozzles with correct dimensions can print 2x of the nozzle size line widths and 80% of the nozzle size heights. So, 0.5 LW and 0.2mm LH. However other nozzles can have smaller diameter nozzle tip (the surface around the hole) so in that case you can't squeeze that much and the max line width will be 80% of the tip diameter.

[@InklanUtterfield]

@@PrintingPerspective thanks :)

[@Kotaztrafee]

I'm trying to get an 0.6 to speed up my process with ASA. I have achieved the strength and speed I'm looking for but there is one (4mm dia.) area that is is curved upwards at a mere 70 degrees and I get curling at the edge which leads to a clump of plastic along the edge but is fine elsewhere. I've tried many settings but what the 0.4 nozzle has no trouble with the 0.6 insists on curling in this area. Even at 0.15 Layer Height on the 0.6 nozzle I am getting curling. As I understand it the theory is that the ASA is shrinking and I've adjusted accordingly with all the popular settings. Preliminary results of my tests so far show I can take my 8 hour print down to 3, if only I can fix this problem. I've run the normal gambit of Temperature, Speed, Layer Height ect. so I am wondering if wall overlap and skin penetration and whatever else anyone can think of that might help.

[@PrintingPerspective]

At what layer height and line width you are printing with 0.6 nozzle? The higher the overhang the slower you want to print. Prusa Slicer has dynamic overhang speed in their alpha version, you could try it.

[@Kotaztrafee]

@@PrintingPerspective I was hoping to get the 0.6 to work at .2LH to achieve some detail with speed. I haven't tried prusa slicer as I don't know if it will work on my QIDI. I wish Cura had the ability to change layer height at a designated height(s) but even so I have tried all temperatures, speeds and layer heights and the ASA insists on curling. As stated, I had no problem with the 0.4 nozzle at many settings but the 0.6 will not lay flat in the problem area. I see minor curling in other small areas but it doesn't effect the final outcome. I've even changed the orientation of the model to see if there is a draft in the chamber but it didn't make a difference. My model is quite curvy but it is just the one area that is troublesome. I am coming to the conclusion that 0.6 just will not allow ASA to lay flat in certain areas. It is definitely stronger with the 0.6 but, as all things in life, there are compromises. I can share in more detail what I am working with and what I've tried if you don't mind PM/DM sometime. I'd love for you to prove me wrong. Please prove me wrong 🙂

[@PrintingPerspective]

The only reason I see to use bigger nozzles is when you need bigger layer heights. If you printing at 0.2LH, just use 0.4mm nozzle and print at 0.6 line width, at least try it. Look, I always down to give some suggestions but, don't take this the wrong way, I am not your support print optimization questions. I don't have time for that, I am sorry.

[@Kotaztrafee]

@@PrintingPerspective I will give that a try. I don 't think the 0.6 is going to work out so the 0.8 is probably impossible. I understand about time to offer support and was surprised you even replied. But, I thought it might be something you would like to address in a video.

[@Kotaztrafee]

@@PrintingPerspective I know I said I'm trying to print at 0.2 LH but I am actually trying to print at 0.3LH. I said 0.2 because I have all but given up on 0.3. Thanks for your time. BTW, I wouldn't ask someone to do something for nothing and would compensate someone for solving my problem. But, I think at this point the solution is not using a 0.6 nozzle.

[@daliasprints9798]

I definitely still prefer 0.4 mm nozzle, even if printing 0.5-0.7 mm line width. In my experience, top layers and overhangs suffer a lot when layer height is less than 50% of nozzle orifice width. I also print a lot of tiny details requiring dimensional accuracy, like small gears. But I do like my 0.5 mm Bozzle a lot too.

[@VolkanTaninmis]

This is layer height /nozzle orifice ratio is also working for me like wonders.

[@TableTopBiker]

I like the format of your video but you may as well have told us that water is wet. I'm glad your figuring this out for yourself though. Keep up the good work.

[@PrintingPerspective]

At least if you making the criticism make it constructive. This comment brings nothing but trying to insult. If you really think that everything in the video is like "water is wet" then I suggest not watching my videos, because clearly you are not my target audience.

[@TableTopBiker]

@@PrintingPerspective It's a figure of speech, not an insult. No need to be so sensitive.

[@Mikehatespigs]

I like .5