Buying an SLS printer can be cheaper when recurring demand spreads fixed ownership costs across enough accepted parts and the complete internal workflow costs less than equivalent outsourcing. A service bureau may cost less for low, intermittent or uncertain demand, especially when internal finishing, quality control or capacity would add expense.
Figure 1. Raise3D RMS220 SLS printer
For US engineering and manufacturing teams, compare the cost of obtaining the same acceptable parts by the required date. A low reported print cost is useful evidence, but it does not by itself establish that buying equipment is cheaper.
What must match before comparing ownership and outsourcing?
Use the same CAD revision, material grade, tolerances, finish, inspection, accepted quantity and delivery address. Establish remedies for rejected or late parts. For the example below, an outsourced orthotic insole shell must meet the same requirements as the internally produced shell; a different nylon grade or finish is not an equivalent offer. Application-specific qualification requirements must be included where relevant.
Ask service suppliers for written quantity-tier quotations that identify setup, finishing, shipping, taxes, lead time and quote validity. A public quotation portal does not establish a price for the target part.
What can a reference build tell us about in-house cost?
A reference cost analysis covers 90 PA NEXT Black orthotic insole shells, with 2.59 kg of sintered parts, approximately 28.8 g per shell, and a 20% powder refresh assumption. Its six cost items total USD 275.46 per build, or approximately USD 3.06 per shell. This is a case-specific costing result, not a quotation for every part or configuration.
| Reference-build item | Cost per build | Reference basis |
|---|---|---|
| Powder | USD 185.25 | 2.85 kg fresh powder at USD 65/kg |
| Printer depreciation | USD 48.69 | Machine-cycle allocation on the reference equipment budget |
| Nitrogen-generator depreciation | USD 6.24 | Reference PSA supply arrangement; electricity separate |
| Filters | USD 4.72 | Reference nitrogen-mode filter allowance |
| Electricity | USD 2.56 | 29.3 kWh at USD 0.0875/kWh |
| Hands-on labor | USD 28.00 | 1 hour at USD 28/hour |
| Reference total | USD 275.46 | Six listed items; generator electricity excluded |
The reference printer allocation uses a USD 34,999 printer-with-build-unit budget; the monthly example below instead uses the USD 44,998 package including the cleaning station. The reference also identifies approximately USD 2 of additional generator electricity per build outside its total. Separate service, installation, workflow accessories, inspection coverage and other site costs still need review. The configuration and process behind the reference build must be matched to the equipment quotation before using its result in a purchase decision.
The cycle data distinguish 25.7 hours of printing from approximately 29.2 hours of printer occupancy. External cooling and hands-on finishing extend the part-ready interval to roughly two days. Parallel cooling requires an appropriate build-unit and downstream schedule; print time alone cannot establish delivery or monthly capacity.
Why should USD 3.06 not become the variable-cost input?
The USD 3.06 figure already contains printer and nitrogen-generator depreciation. Adding a separate monthly equipment charge on top of the entire figure would count those capital costs twice.
For a monthly model, separate the reference’s USD 48.69 printer allocation and USD 6.24 generator allocation from its total. The remaining powder, filters, electricity and labor are USD 220.53 per full 90-shell build. Adding the reference’s approximate USD 2 generator-electricity allowance gives a modeled running subtotal of USD 222.53 per full build, approximately USD 2.47 per shell before monthly fixed costs.
This running subtotal is not a validated marginal cost for an arbitrary partial build. Packing, startup, staffing, inspection and purchase timing can change when the workload changes.
What hardware and monthly assumptions are used?
The US RMS220 Standard Package listing displays USD 44,998 excluding tax, including the printer, one Build Unit 220 and C220-P Cleaning Station, checked November 6, 2026. Freight, installation, extra build units, finishing equipment and site preparation require an itemized quote.
Figure 2. The RMS220, Build Unit 220 and C220-P
Comparison assumptions. The monthly example repeats full 90-shell reference builds and assumes all 90 shells in each repeated build meet acceptance requirements and are needed. Reproducing that workload with the quoted package has not yet been established; the illustration is conditional on confirming the build configuration. It uses the reference’s separately budgeted PSA generator, not a claim that every RMS220 installation requires an additional generator. Other fixed costs, the outsourced price and order allowance remain hypothetical. Costs below are an identified-cost planning subtotal, not a complete installed-system budget, local supplier quote or payback forecast.
| Monthly input | Amount | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Package capital allocation | USD 749.97/month | USD 44,998 over 60 months; calculated before rounding |
| Reference PSA capital allocation | USD 83.33/month | USD 10,000 over 120 months; supply configuration must be matched |
| Other fixed operating allowance | USD 500.00/month | Scenario allowance for service, incremental space, software and administration; not a quotation |
| Monthly fixed subtotal | USD 1,333.30 | Does not establish all applicable fixed costs |
| Running subtotal per full reference build | USD 222.53 | Reference operating lines plus an approximate USD 2 generator-power allowance |
| Planned accepted shells per full build | 90 | Repeat-build acceptance assumption, not a general yield claim |
| Outsourced delivered-shell price | USD 12.00 | Assumed matched production, finishing and delivery; actual quote required |
| Buyer order/receiving allowance | USD 50.00 per active month | One order; zero when no external order is placed |
Use a consistent tax and financing basis. Add applicable unpriced equipment, service, utilities, inspection and site costs to the selected route. No resale credit is modeled. The additional USD 500 fixed allowance is retained only as an explicit scenario input, not as verified cost data from the reference article.
Where does monthly cost cross over for full 90-shell orders?
For a month requiring 180 accepted shells, the illustration runs two full reference builds:
- In-house: USD 1,333.30 + 2 × USD 222.53 = USD 1,778.36.
- Outsourced: 180 × USD 12 + USD 50 = USD 2,210.00.
- Modeled difference: in-house is USD 431.64 lower for the included cost scope.
| Full reference builds per month | Planned accepted shells | In-house subtotal | Outsourced subtotal | Lower modeled subtotal |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 90 | USD 1,555.83 | USD 1,130.00 | Outsourcing by USD 425.83 |
| 2 | 180 | USD 1,778.36 | USD 2,210.00 | In-house by USD 431.64 |
| 3 | 270 | USD 2,000.89 | USD 3,290.00 | In-house by USD 1,289.11 |
| 4 | 360 | USD 2,223.42 | USD 4,370.00 | In-house by USD 2,146.58 |
| 5 | 450 | USD 2,445.95 | USD 5,450.00 | In-house by USD 3,004.05 |
For full-build demand, the calculation is (1,333.30 − 50) ÷ (90 × 12 − 222.53) = 1.4966 builds. Rounding up gives two complete builds, or 180 shells per month, as the first modeled full-build workload where the included in-house subtotal is lower. It is not a universal part threshold or a machine-capacity claim.
Figure 3. Discrete full-build comparisons using reference running costs and disclosed monthly assumption
For an order that is not a multiple of 90, compare actual partial-build costs or the number of complete builds required. If complete builds are used and surplus shells have no assigned value, 100 demanded shells require two full-build charges, not 100 times an averaged running unit cost. Do not count unsold output as cost-saving demand.
How do the external quote and fixed costs change the result?
The following table shows the first whole number of full reference builds at which the included in-house subtotal is no higher. It retains USD 222.53 per build, 90 accepted shells per build and USD 50 per active external order. All outsourced prices and extra fixed allowances are hypothetical.
| Extra fixed allowance above USD 833.30 capital/month | Outsource USD 6/shell | Outsource USD 8/shell | Outsource USD 12/shell |
|---|---|---|---|
| USD 0/month | 3 builds / 270 shells | 2 builds / 180 shells | 1 build / 90 shells |
| USD 250/month | 4 builds / 360 shells | 3 builds / 270 shells | 2 builds / 180 shells |
| USD 500/month | 5 builds / 450 shells | 3 builds / 270 shells | 2 builds / 180 shells |
Figure 4. Scenario sensitivity for complete reference builds
The running allowance also changes per accepted shell if yield changes. USD 222.53 spread across 90 accepted shells is approximately USD 2.47 each; at a hypothetical 90% acceptance rate, the expected output is 81 accepted shells and the allowance becomes approximately USD 2.75 each. These are yield scenarios, not additional measured builds. Rejects and rework should be counted once.
Can outsourcing still win with this lower running cost?
Yes. In a hypothetical year with six months at 180 shells and six idle months, fixed ownership costs continue in every month. The in-house subtotal is USD 18,669.96, while six external orders cost USD 13,260.00. Outsourcing is USD 5,409.96 lower for this seasonal demand pattern, despite the modeled advantage in each busy month.
A hybrid route can cover peaks, downtime or specialized finishing. Its external prices, acceptance terms and delivery commitments need a real quote; a smaller overflow order may not retain the original unit price.
Does a reference cycle establish capacity or payback?
No. At two full builds, the reference printer-occupancy figure totals approximately 58.4 hours before other scheduling allowances. Build-unit availability, cooling, depowdering, finishing, inspection, staffing and downtime must also fit the required delivery dates. No monthly capacity limit is inferred from the reference.
Monthly economic-cost equality includes capital allocation. Equipment payback instead asks when cumulative net cash benefits recover the actual installed purchase. Use a separate cash-flow analysis for financing, inventory, taxes, maintenance, downtime and recovery, without charging the same capital twice.
Before deciding, obtain an itemized US workflow quote and an external offer for the same insole shell, at the same quantities, finish and delivery terms. Validate repeat-build acceptance and confirm the reference configuration. Then replace the remaining assumptions and compare complete costs and lead times.
Discuss your shell geometry and production plan with Raise3D and request an RMS220 workflow quote.
Frequently asked questions
Does the USD 3.06 reference cost mean ownership beats an external quote above that price?
No. The reported figure includes a particular depreciation allocation and excludes some workflow costs. A monthly comparison must reflect actual workload, fixed commitments and matched external scope.
Can USD 3.06 be added to a monthly equipment charge?
Not in full. It already includes printer and generator depreciation. Separate capital allocations before adding monthly ownership charges.
Is 180 shells a verified universal purchase threshold?
No. It is the first full-90-shell workload that wins in the disclosed scenario. The external price and extra fixed fees remain assumptions, and the reference configuration must be confirmed.
Can a smaller order use the same average per-shell cost?
Only if its packing, cycle and processing costs support that estimate. Price partial builds explicitly or charge the necessary whole builds; do not assume unsold shells create savings.
Why keep an outsourcing option after buying equipment?
It can cover demand variation, downtime or specialized processing. Compare matched quality, quantity-tier prices and delivery responsibility before allocating the work.
