To be clear, I never expected the RMAX V2, or even an Ultimaker 2 to be as simple as a refrigerator or an inkjet printer. But I did expect the RMAX V2 to be an unassembled Ultimaker 2. On that count I was wrong, and I was ignorant. Though nowhere in the literature does it say that the current SeeMeCNC deltas are “experimental”, as has been implied. And here’s the thing though: It is possible to create experimental products in experimental industries, while publishing truthful stats. Therein lies my rub.
***I took another glance at the RMAX V2 Spec Sheet.***
And you know what? They ARE scammers.
Abso-lute-ly.
They gained an unfair market advantage by publishing a false spec sheet. Here, take a look below:
Those are off-the-charts specs for a consumer 3D printer. That sheet is what many industry outsiders like myself use to make purchasing decisions. That spec sheet at a $999 price point makes the RMAX 2V the no-brainer choice among the barrage of 3D printers out there. Only it is less than truthful. Until I’m convinced most users can print reliably to the 11” line, I say SeeMeeCNC was deliberately deceitful. And why is the 11” spec absolved from needing to be met by the manufacturer in your minds anyway? I designed a part that needs to nearly touch the 11” edge. I can’t print it, and from the looks of it, maybe no one who has posted on this thread can either. What if only a small fraction of the users could get their nozzles up to 245 ºC? Would that be alright too? What if only a small fraction of the users could get the bed to 120 ºC? Oh wait… I think that one may also be a lie. I’ll try to check tonight to confirm. Who knows, I may get the pleasant surprise that my printer bed can reach 120 ºC… after 6 hours, without the build glass on it, and me not even breathing near it. Yes yes, very practical. Hmm… let’s see, a .0125 layer height... Quite possibly the only FFF printer in the world that can achieve this awesome feat. Only it is not reliably verifiable. Who here has ever printed to a layer height of .0125 on their RMAX V2? Raise your hand please. Do we see a certain pattern here? I see a pattern of intentional deceit.
No doubt about it. I’d be too scared about class actions to try to pull this Spec Sheet stunt. It was deliberately and unnecessarily deceitful. No excuses. They could have competed honestly and fairly with the other up-and coming "experimental" 3D printing companies. They simply chose not to.radicaldev wrote:It takes balls to do what they did