They’ve certainly made headlines, but having a high profile doesn’t necessarily translate into real-world success…
The DIY ethic inherent in 3D printing has had a notable effect on the industry sector in many ways, but perhaps the most surprising is in the number of 3D printers that have been brought to life using platforms like Kickstarter.
Part of the reason is that for many people, assembling a 3D printer is a hurdle they can’t quite clear. They want to make 3D objects, but assembling a piece of computer hardware essentially from scratch is slightly out of their capabilities and price range. Even more enthusiastic 3D printing users get excited about the prospect of a unit built by and for enthusiasts, with features most consumer models cut corners on.
But crowdfunding projects are notoriously ambitious and optimistic, especially when it comes to computer hardware. They’re often run by people who have unrealistic expectations about material costs, supply chain delays and production quality. Delivery delays are common. So if the dream is a cheap, high-quality 3D printer that can be enjoyed by beginners and enthusiasts, how does the reality hold up? We looked at three high-profile 3D printing projects launched before 2014 to find out whether or not you’re likely to get the 3D printer you asked for through Kickstarter.
Deltaprintr
kck.st/1nL6UVG
The Deltaprintr’s campaign launched in December 2013 and planned to deliver its assembled units in July 2014. Pledging to be “simple, efficient and affordable” it used polar rather than traditional Cartesian movement, intended to keep the unit compact and uncomplicated. The cheapest amount backers could pay to receive a unit was $425 (£280) plus shipping, though it came unassembled. To receive a completed one, you had to pay at least $625 (£409) plus shipping. 691 backers pledged $236,451, giving the company 121% of its $195,000 goal.
The printer itself, it was claimed, would offer faster speeds than more conventional printers, a 100 micron resolution, automatic calibration and a compact power supply. Although many of its updates are backer-only, making it hard to find out the specifics of its production delays, it’s clear that the project missed its target. In October, several backers were asking for refunds due to lack of information, but Deltaprintr was still actively responding to concerns with updates.
The units eventually began to ship in January, though there was minor controversy about the company shipping website orders before Kickstarter orders (though this is standard practice to prevent Paypal freezing accounts for non-delivery). As of 1st May, the company claims that all units should have been shipped that week – though missing parts in the self-assembly kits are a problem according to many commenters.
Unfortunately, there don’t appear to be any reviews of the printer itself, but its Facebook page does show images of items printed by backers, so it seems that it at least works. All things considered, a sixmonth delay isn’t bad for Kickstarter, and at this price it’s hard to complain too much.
Verdict: Success
The Buccaneer 3D Printer
kck.st/N7ezA6
Launched in May 2013, the Buccaneer 3D Printer was designed to bring 3D printing into everyone’s home, promising a highquality and affordable unit that anyone could use. It blew past its original target of $100,000, and when it ended in June 2013 it had received $1.4 million from 3,520 backers, who could get units for as little as $297 (£195) plus shipping, with a projected delivery date of February 2014 – though some batches were projected to arrive as late as April 2014.
In the campaign, the Buccaneer compared its technical capabilities to the popular Makerbot Replicator 2 printer (which cost the equivalent of £1,400) to highlight its capabilities. The Buccaneer added cloud printing and mobile compatibility, and although it produced smaller items overall, it was made of metal rather than plastic.
Again, updates were restricted to backers but an initial batch of printers was with users by March 2014, although apparently only those who chose to receive the untested prototype version. In July 2014, it issued a public update revealing that it had been forced to alter the product to contain a cold rather than heated print bed (the original producing better quality printing) but that backers could either take a cold bed device, wait until April 2015 for a hot bed device, or receive a refund, which would be issued by December 2014.
By March 2015, it was apologising for delays issuing the refunds and reassuring users that bugs in the controlling software had been fixed. While some people have received their printers, it’s clear from the project’s comments that many haven’t, and even those that have are reporting problems, from software bugs to cracked casing. All things considered, it seems it’s fallen short of its promises.
Verdict: Failure
FORM 1
kck.st/1g7TTCz
The FORM 1 project began in September 2012, offering (what else?) a high-resolution, affordable 3D printer. It hit its $100,000 target in literally a matter of hours. When the project closed a month later, 2,068 backers had pledged almost $3 million to the project. The FORM 1 was certainly in a different price league to the other projects we’ve looked at, and the cheapest way to get a unit was to pay $2,229 (£1,460) for a first-line production unit. Deliveries were scheduled to begin in February 2013, and the latest units – those for international backers – were due to arrive in April 2013.
The project’s aim was to deliver a professional-quality printer at a cost that home users could afford, at a time when those printers cost tens of thousands of dollars and consumer models were considerably more simplistic. It promised 300 micron accuracy, which it’s worth noting is 200 microns worse than the other two projects in this list (which both started in 2013).
The project’s updates are mostly public, so it’s easy to follow the progress of the design and shipping. The project received a setback in November 2012 when Formlabs, which ran the project, received a patent infringement lawsuit from 3D Systems, though it continued to make units throughout the duration. The first units began to ship in May 2013, though it did not complete USA and Canada production until September 2013, and the project was not announced as complete until December 2013.
But again, the delay wasn’t too bad, and the units seem to have been largely well received by backers, and reviews were good. The company followed up with a conventionally funded upgrade, the Form1+, and a documentary covering its startup period, entitled ‘Print the Legend’, is available on streaming services.
Verdict: Success
While it’s clear that all projects suffered delays, this is fairly standard for crowdfunded projects in general. Of greater concern is the quality of the product you actually receive, and in that case it’s more or less worked out. Of the three high-profile projects that have had adequate time to run their course, only one has combined huge delays with inconsistent product.
While neither of the other projects were perfect, they did at least deliver what they promised in a reasonable amount of time. The odds aren’t ideal, but if you want to save money, then it seems like Kickstarter is a good place to go for 3D printers – as long as you don’t mind waiting a little.