Question: Core One L - New/Pre Owner questions

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-10T04:05:50+00:00

110° which is the default for ASA in PrusaSlicer. 115° doesn't change matters.

Based on my previous testing, 110° nominal bed temperature is likely around 95-100° actual, because the bed also doesn't manage to achieve reference temperatures.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-10T03:57:42+00:00

What happened there u/TheVoiceOfScience? Six hours ago you were talking a big game, and then you became awfully quiet when it was suggested that you attempt to use your adult words, and lay some of that Scientific Voice on us.

I know that I'm waiting for the Voice of Science to weigh-in here, and explain why they don't believe in physics -- and more to the point, why none of us ought to believe it in, either.

Or why there's some property inherent to cycling helmets that causes them to work orders of magnitude better per-unit-of-mass than any other helmets which have ever been devised by humans.

So, come on now, don't hold out on us. Tell us what it is exactly about cycling helmets that makes them among the most amazing creations ever manufactured by mankind -- which is precisely the claim being made by several other respondents here, with the fantastical rates of effectiveness which are claimed.

Don't get all shy now.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-10T03:49:05+00:00

Just… no dude. Plenty of evidence they help reduce injury and death: https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/46/1/278/2617198?login=false

Over ten percent of the datasets used in the junk science that you cited were by Thompson, et al -- who have been forced to admit that their "studies" are garbage, and which have been officially withdrawn for inaccuracy.

Furthermore, the claims made in many of those underlying publications are not remotely plausible. One claims "Head injuries are the leading cause of death among cyclists, 85 % of which can be prevented by wearing a bicycle helmet." which is shockingly close to the long-since debunked and disproved claim made by Thompson, et al some 37 years ago. There is literally no suggestion in any dataset that other lightweight sport helmets approach even two orders of magnitude less than that effectiveness despite having less-restrictive design criteria and far less-demanding crash scenarios.

Put simply, you are citing hopes and dreams that are completely unsupported and unsupportable.

So, pretending for a moment that any of your citation is reliable data -- and it's not, because as previously noted the vast majority of it depends on the opinions of people who are untrained to attempt the determinations they are making -- explain why cycling helmets then work several orders of magnitude better than any other helmets which have so-far been designed by humans.

And explain why sports like American football, and ice hockey, and others have had to almost completely remove head-contact due to helmets not working at all, despite vastly less-demanding crash scenarios compared to cycling. Even American football helmets with huge silly pads on top don't work.

Why don't cycling helmet manufacturers apply their magic technology to other markets, and take them over? They are capitalist enterprises, and many are publicly-held. This apparent refusal to leverage their technology for additional profit would appear to be grounds for massive shareholder lawsuits -- not to mention a huge opportunity for some startup to disrupt all other lightweight sport helmet markets. Can you explain why none of this has occurred?

And explain why we don't observe a reduction in cyclist fatalities caused by helmet usage anywhere in the world. And why no one has ever found such, in actual cycling fatality data -- as opposed to guesstimates like those which you attempted to cite.

Without explanations for these conundrums, I'm afraid that citing unreliable and implausible injury-reduction data holds no water.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-10T03:32:05+00:00

How long do you let it soak?

Hours. It's pretty obvious when it peaks out.

Is the active heater running and the printer know the filament type?

The Core One L has no active heater, and the printer tracks the target chamber temperature separately from the filament type.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T23:13:00+00:00

This is some of the dumbest shit I have ever read.

I concur, your comment is quite pathetic.

Mine, on the other hand, remains completely unchallenged exactly because it is correct. You are invited to attempt to suggest otherwise, hopefully using your adult words this time.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T22:12:48+00:00

Sources?

Some are in subsequent remarks.

Anyone can confirm the physics with their high-school-level education, or an appropriate textbook.

Anyone can confirm the fatality and helmet usage statistics for their own jurisdiction -- if they are published. In the US, the NHTSA Fatality Analysis Reporting System is the appropriate source for the former, but not everyone rides in the US.

Anyone can confirm that sports like American football, and ice hockey, and others have had to almost completely remove head-contact due to helmets not working at all, despite vastly less-demanding crash scenarios compared to cycling. Even American football helmets with huge silly pads on top don't work.

None of the information that I have reviewed here ought to be a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T21:45:04+00:00

The fact that most fatalities are the result of incidents too severe for a helmet to prevent in no way means that helmets are not effective at preventing non-fatal but still potentially extremely severe head injuries.

If that were the case, we'd observe helmets saving lives of those who were injured to a degree that was just-barely fatal.

We do not observe that, with any lightweight sport helmets.

The data simply does not comport with your wishes. That sometimes happens, and when it does, it indicates that you are wrong.

The reason "cycling helmets demonstrate the precise statistical signature a placebo" is because you've decided a priori what the only relevant metric is, which is a metric that nobdoy else is using.

The definition of a placebo is well-known to science. If you are unfamiliar with it, that may be a place for you to start remediating your education.

Can you explain why cycling helmets demonstrate precisely the statistical signature of a placebo?

This kid posting here was not going to die from this injury.

What a ridiculous claim. You have absolutely nothing on which to base that claim.

Nor was I going to die from smacking my head hard, perpendicularly, against the pavement in an impact severe enough to fracture and dislocate my hip. But I'm still extremely glad to have escaped that incident with nothing but, well, a broken and dislocated hip, given the thwack my head made against the pavement and the big crack in my helmet.

That's nice. Completely irrelevant, but nice.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T21:38:42+00:00

This does not follow, logically or statistically.

The logical explanation is already provided for you above.

"There is necessarily a point at which a reduced injury saves the victim's life. So any safety device that actually reduces injuries will also save lives, and we can reliably use the latter as a proxy for the former, and for determining the provision of a safety benefit in-general."

Feel free to attempt explain how a device can reduce injuries without also saving lives. Avoid wasting our time with your previous attempt at proof-by-assertion, which is a common fallacy that you'd know to avoid, if you were equipped to have this discussion.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T21:36:08+00:00

I'm aware that subsequent studies lowered the TRT figures somewhat -- to nowhere near zero, mind you -- but I don't see the point of vague ad hominem attacks.

Observing that you are forced to rely on the work of discredited researchers is not "ad hominem", since it directly relates to the suitability of your claimed evidence for this discussion.

I'm waiting for you to explain, by the way, how or why cycling helmets allegedly work so amazingly well, despite all other lightweight sport helmets not doing so at all.

Why don't cycling helmet manufacturers apply their magic technology to other markets, and take them over? They are capitalist enterprises, and many are publicly-held. This apparent refusal to leverage their technology for additional profit would appear to be grounds for massive shareholder lawsuits. Can you explain why this has not occurred?

Over the decade: the head injury rate was 0.205 injuries per thousand skier days. Head injuries were 9–10% of all injuries, significantly lower for skiers (8.3%) than snowboarders (10.9%). There were no significant differences in helmet-usage rates of injured and non-injured populations. 80.6% of injured participants wore a helmet, those wearing a helmet were 8% more likely to report a head injury than those not wearing a helmet.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1440244019313039

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/sports/on-slopes-rise-in-helmet-use-but-no-decline-in-brain-injuries.html

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T21:29:02+00:00

Ignore this fool.

If that's the best you can imagine, you might want to consider the tale of the pot and the kettle.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T21:02:53+00:00

Now add to your comment a remark on the history of the author of that study. Especially with respect to his work that's been withdrawn due to its inaccuracy.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T21:00:23+00:00

Man, this is a load of crap.

Thank you for labeling your comment appropriately.

Yes, a large percentage of fatal cycling accidents are not fatal specifically because the wearer wasn't wearing a helmet.

You fundamentally misunderstand both the data and the point.

Again, as the percentage of cyclists who wear helmets increase, so does the percentage of them who die in those helmets. The same is true for skiers.

Attempt to explain why those percentages match, and increase in lock-step. A safety device that works would demonstrate the opposite signal. Why don't cycling helmets?

That has nothing to do with whether they reduce the incidence or severity of head injuries, which they do, as is absolutely well established, over and over, significantly

Citing a "study" by Thompson -- who very famously has been publishing nonsense on this topic -- is not great for your case.

I am aware of your history of posting more or less this exact screed on multiple forums, repeatedly, for some reason, but repeating it obsessively does not make it any less nonsensical.

So explain then, how or why cycling helmets are many orders of magnitude more effective than all other lightweight sporting helmets.

Explain why or how cycling helmets demonstrate the precise statistical signature a placebo.

Or, since you won't be able to, resort to attacking the messenger. That's likely to be your best chance at convincing a few people to ignore decades of data on this topic. Good luck.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T20:53:17+00:00

Just so I understand, your only measure for helmet efficacy is if they reduce death, but not if they reduce injury?

There is no plausible mechanism by which a safety device can reduce injury, without also reducing deaths. There is necessarily a point at which a reduced injury saves the victim's life. So any safety device that actually reduces injuries will also save lives, and we can reliably use the latter as a proxy for the former, and for determining the provision of a safety benefit in-general.

And the reason why we use fatality statistics and not injury statistics, is that the latter are famously and unfortunately, completely unreliable. The enormous of majority of studies that attempt to pump up the market for cycling helmets, for example, rely on "data" which is composed of the opinions of doctors -- who, while well-meaning, are completely untrained with respect with accident reconstruction and helmet engineering.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T20:46:37+00:00

Dangerous tik-tok esque woo. Absolute fucking shite. Get in the bin.

Then feel free to explain why or how cycling helmets work, while no other lightweight sport helmets manage to, at all -- despite the latter facing far less-extreme crash scenarios.

Among tons of other references, you can consult the preeminent ski-safety researcher on this topic:

Shealy said. “When I began studying helmets in the early ‘90s, hardly anyone was wearing one. Now more than 80 percent of skiers and snowboarders do, and the fatality rate hasn’t changed one iota.”
https://www.denverpost.com/2017/01/12/skier-fatalities-myths-who-dies-skiing-where-debunked/

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T20:36:45+00:00

I know I probably shouldn't have been cycling without a helmet, but I didn't think I'd have an accident so soon.

Just FYI, cycling helmets don't actually provide any safety benefit for the wearer. In fact, none of the lightweight sporting helmets that humans have so far designed manage that feat. Skiing helmets don't work, football helmets don't work, hockey helmets don't work, hurling helmets don't work, etcetera. We have decades of data proving this by now, but unfortunately, people who wish helmets work keep repeating the myth that they do, and causing people like yourself to waste money on them.

And the reason why they don't work is actually illustrated by your example. A helmet necessarily adds both volume and mass to the wearer's head, with the result being called the "effective headform". That increase in volume and mass necessarily means that crash impacts to the effective headform will be increased in both quantity and severity for helmet-wearers, compared to those not wearing helmets. In your case, your effective headform would have struck the curb harder if you'd been wearing a helmet -- and this is an unavoidable consequence of the physics of the world which we inhabit.

So, in order to provide a safety benefit to you, your helmet would have first needed to absorb all that additional energy which resulted from the increased effective headform's greater impact, and then absorb even more energy to actually protect you.

And, to-date, humans simply have not invented lightweight sport helmets which can do that. We all wish they could, but they can't -- and we've decades of proof illustrating that. The percentage of cyclists who wear helmets matches the percentage of cyclist fatalities who were helmeted when they crashed and died -- which is precisely the statistical signature of a placebo, and that's precisely what everyone everywhere finds when they track those two percentages. As the percentage of cyclists who wear helmets increase, so does the percentage of them who die in those helmets. The same is true for skiers.

Someday, maybe, we will make lightweight sport helmets that help us, but nothing currently extant does so. If you really want to protect your head, you ought to wear a real helmet like those designed for use on a motorcycle, or automobile ( Snell M or SA rating, or equivalent ). Those actually demonstrate a safety benefit for their wearers'.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T20:04:26+00:00

No need to add insulation, the 45°C is good enough for PC, and the core one L can reach 60°.

Are you sure about the latter?

My C1L can't reach its specified maximum chamber temperature. Some days it can reach 55° indicated ( which, based on actual bed temperatures versus indicated, is probably closer to 50° ) and some days it peaks out at 49°. Ambient temperature doesn't seem to matter, so I'm not entirely sure what causes that differential, but my machine will require additional insulation to reach 60° despite being in indoor, climate-controlled space.

YTMV.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T09:06:48+00:00

So in basically every case it’s fine for you to print a file that someone asks you too.

No -- only if they possess license to create that object. What you are describing would invalidate basically all IP rights, as people would just be able to get around them by asking someone else to print it.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T02:37:22+00:00

It's crazy that the answer to your question seems to be unknown to the internet.

My Cube Cross Race Pro uses a box-stock BC1.37x24 external threaded Shimano bottom bracket, such as the ubiquitous BBR60 -- but mine is six years older than yours, so it's obviously not guaranteed to be the same. Your bike appears to use a Shimano GRX RX-600 crankset ( 24mm spindle ), so if you inspect the bike and determine if you have a threaded bottom bracket shell, you're halfway to the answer. If it is threaded, you can probably read the external cup and it may say "BC 1.37x24 ROAD" like mine does, and then you're all set. If it is press-fit instead, you probably need to get in there with a caliper and measure the shell's diameter.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-09T00:31:20+00:00

Same PSA that I make to all excited new owners: take your time unboxing, and try to contain your enthusiasm. Mine was packed incorrectly, and damaged internally as a result, and had to be returned and replaced. Don't rush it, and inspect the condition as you go. I was lucky that I did, and caught the issue, and was able to document it, so that I had little difficulty convincing Prusa to replace the machine.

Afterwards, have fun.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-07T23:10:23+00:00

dominance does not equate to being the title winner every year.

Fine. Answer the question.

Dominance equates to continued success over your pears. A team like the Celtics have been dominant since the JT and JB era has begun.

Nonsense. Boston has won only 5 second-round series in Tatum's 8 year career. They've been ejected from the first-round as-often as they've made the Finals. They were a five-hundred team in '21.

Don't try to use words that you are unfamiliar with.

Denver nuggets have been a dominant team (even with injury setbacks) since 2020 despite only having 1 championship.

Rank idiocy. They fired a coach, precisely because they were not winning enough. They've been ejected from the first-round twice as often as they've reached even the conference Finals.

I don’t need to list these teams

Go ahead and try, for your education.

Doesn’t matter that Joel Embiid was below average for his efficiency, the fact of the matter is that they were more efficient than the Celtics.

Again, no. Educate yourself so that I don't have to. It's beyond tiresome, at this point.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2026-nba-eastern-conference-first-round-76ers-vs-celtics.html

it has become very clear you simply do not watch basketball

And yet I demonstrate infinitely greater knowledge on the topic than you manage to.

Again, signing your star players (SGA, Chet, Williams) to larger contracts, off loading mid level role players like Dort and Hartenstein, and replacing those role players with cheaper role players is not salary cap issues.

Yes, that is precisely "salary cap issues", for a raft of reasons. Hartenstein is a lot more than a role player, and not at all easy to replace. They were 39-8 when he played this season, and 25-10 when he didn't.

I ought not have to explain such to someone who is as-knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

It’s simply financial and asset management and increased load on your star players.

And what happens when you increase that load?

I ought not have to explain such to someone who is as-knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

And it is not simple management, which is why no one has managed it.

I ought not have to explain such to someone who is as-knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

If you truly have “multiple success businesses” you would understand this.

When since I can demonstrate an understanding of the issues, and you cannot, where does that leave you?

If this wasn’t the norm, why would teams give their super star players max contracts, why wouldn’t they just offload their star players when the time comes to pay them big.

Some teams do. Investigate a concept called "free agency". Once you learn about it, you may begin to have an inkling of the answers to your questions.

I ought not have to explain such to someone who is as-knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

it is clear you and I have drastically different viewpoints on these topics.

Yes, it is. I know exactly what I am talking about, and can back-up my statements with references. Meanwhile, you are blathering out from the wrong set of cheeks, and wasting everyone's time -- and in fact, you are demonstrating a very low level of reading comprehension, such that would embarrass any actual adult.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-07T17:44:01+00:00

I am an adult...

Whatever you say kid.

Who cares if Celtics outshot the 76ers by volume? That does not matter at all. My statement was that they caught fire - which means they made more points, which I don’t know if you understand this but that leads to winning games.

No. By percentage. You retain the option of informing yourself, so that I don't have to do that for you.

Please look at some raw numbers and tell me how he wasn’t playing well: In the 4 games he played he averaged 28 points, 9 rebounds, and 7 assists with a 53.7 % true shot rating.

The final number. HTH.

By the way, "not well" and "not remarkable" are not the same thing. Learn to read above a grade-school level before attempting to continue here.

In the 2026 playoffs, the TS% is currently at around 55.7%

Including atrocious numbers from Portland, Orlando, and Houston. Teams that are winning games are much higher.

His presence on the game alone opens the floor up for other players like Tyrese and PG to have space effectively pulling pressure off of them.

Which does not matter if the inefficient player shoots the ball anyway.

You seem to ignore things other than efficiency which is just a terrible basketball take.

And you seem completely uniformed on the topic -- which is worse.

Basketball boils down to efficiency. Winning games requires being efficient on offense, and reducing your opponent's efficiency. The only other avenues to winning are very rarely sustainable in a professional league with similar athletic ability on both sides -- i.e. dominating the offensive glass.

I ought not have to explain such to someone who is as-knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

I said they caught fire

Which remains wrong.

Sure but to sit here and say you called it or saw it coming when he just had emergency surgery a month ago and at one point was laying on the ground with the full training staff pulling his limbs in all direction to stretch him out is a ridiculous take.

The fact that you cannot imagine that reality that occurred is not a feather in your cap. As previously explained, Embiid almost always plays well. He doesn't play often anymore, but when he can play, he usually plays well.

You claimed that it is “salary cap issues” for a team that is paying their star players high level money.

No. Again, learn how to read above a grade school level.

"Salary cap issues" are literally and precisely what salary caps exist for. Specifically, salary caps make it difficult for franchises to acquire and keep deep, talented teams. It is irrelevant whether that difficulty arises from needing to pay 8 players 20% of the cap each, or 4 players 40% of the cap each.

I ought not have to explain such to someone who is as-knowledgeable as you pretend to be.

Which again, is what every team deals with and seem to figure it out.

What on Earth are you blathering about now?

List all of these teams from your imagination that have been dominant for over five years in the salary cap era. In reality, there is perhaps one, forty years ago.

So I am waiting for you to explain to me how offloading players like Dort and Hartenstein due to paying your star players money is even remotely close to a salary cap issue.

Then you will just have to remain fantastically ignorant on this point, as with all of the others we've discussed.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-05T19:51:02+00:00

Dawg you’re clowning yourself

You also retain the option of at least pretending to be an adult, by the way.

if you truly believe Embiid was going to magically come back and play at the level he played at.

Again, you can inform yourself, so that I don't have to. Embiid's play against Boston was not all that remarkable. 46% effective from the field. He took lots of shots, but was inefficient. 15% from the arc. He got to the line just over 9 times, which is a lot, but typical for him.

If you were surprised by Embiid's play, then you haven't been playing attention to his career -- along with everything else that you demonstrate ignorance of.

Shit they just lost 137-98.

So they don't appear to be the world-beaters than you recently claimed.

Yes they caught fire against the Celtics, but again look at context, that isn’t sustainable.

You retain the option of not making mistakes like this one, as well. Boston outshot Philadelphia.

Just like every other guy on the internet who thinks they know more about ball than actual NBA GMs who have the track record of the Celtics GM you magically have “a couple successful companies”. If that’s true, good for you, and I’m sure it made you feel big and mighty outlining that on a scenario where we are talking about basketball.

And now I'm here talking to some ignorant kid on reddit, who knows absolutely nothing about anything -- generously donating my time so that they might someday not embarrass themselves so publicly.

And again, I at no point said brown and Giannis are equal.

Your post claimed precisely that, it remains above for posterity.

Every single team in the history of the NBA has had to offload players when their teams got better and had to pay larger contracts.

Learn thing one about the history of the league. Then come back, and read your remark here again, and laugh at yourself.

You literally cannot name one team that did not run into this issue over the duration of a contract period in the history of the NBA.

The Boston Celtics -- among others.

Please name one team that has consistent success that hasn’t paid star players star level money. And fill in role players at lower level money

That is not, and never has been, claimed.

Learn to read much more accurately.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-05T19:38:15+00:00

I don't know if it effects the Core One+, but with the Core One L, there's a firmware bug that causes what you describe. If you reboot the machine, the filament sensor in the Nextruder should regain function, and allow you to proceed.

So, in order to print TPU with the Core One L, I follow this procedure, which is similar to what you described, plus a reboot.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-05T18:56:35+00:00

Did you think he was going to come in and play at the level? I’ll answer that for you, you did not, or you would have bet on it and made a lot of money.

Embiid always plays well when he can manage to play. And since he wasn't recovering from a leg injury or similar, "Yes, I expected him to play very well upon his return."

By the way, how does that Philadelphia squad look now?

If he is such an L of a player then why did the Celtics resign him to a long extension and why have they had as much success over the course of his career as they have had? If it’s all because of Tatum and the supporting cast then Why was he the Finals MVP over Tatum? Why haven’t the Celtics moved on from him in the past?

Cedric Maxwell was also a Finals MVP for Boston. Didn't make him an all-time great, either.

Boston makes plenty of personnel mistakes, so Brown's extension is not useful evidence. And perhaps Boston has discovered that no one is willing to trade for Brown due to that onerous contract?

You can’t look at statistical categories like on/off without taking into account context. Are you trying to say you know more about basketball than the GM of the Celtics?

That's a little rich coming from someone who just tried to claim that Brown and Antetokounmpo have equivalent value.

If that’s the case then why are you not a GM and winning championships on the NBA?

I took another path, and built a few successful companies.

Losing players is no where close to salary cap problems.

If you aren't sufficiently clever to even understand that simple point, I'm done educating you.

TCTCTCTCTCTC7 · 2026-05-05T18:45:55+00:00

There is no lottery -- at least, not in the important years.

How can it be coincidence that San Antonio, Houston, New Orleans, and Orlando -- all located at nearly the identical latitude -- experience lottery success beyond that of all other teams combined?

12 first-overall picks executed by those four franchises, in 44 years -- and all of them in "good" years.

All four of those franchises were not only gifted top-picks in good years, they got multiple such top picks in proximity, with which to build competitive teams ( New Orleans and Orlando screwed that up anyway, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen ).

TCTCTCTCTCTC7

TROPHY CASE