Best fit
PETG
General functional parts where plain PETG already provides the needed behavior without an abrasive additive.
- • Keeps nozzle preparation simpler.
- • Offers higher toughness than the PETG-CF reference route used here.
Hardware readiness
PETG vs PETG-CF for a stiff functional part
Hold the PETG base polymer constant, then compare the plain route with a carbon-fiber-reinforced route that changes both part properties and nozzle preparation.
Best fit
PETG-CF
Stiffness-oriented parts where higher modulus and dimensional stability are meaningful requirements.
- • Requires a hardened nozzle.
- • Offers lower toughness than plain PETG in the referenced manufacturer comparison.
Decision rule
Choose plain PETG when it already meets the part requirement. Choose PETG-CF when higher stiffness and dimensional stability justify the lower-toughness tradeoff and the hardened-nozzle route is ready.
Editorial record
Maintained by Make Your Own Tools to turn “Plan a print” into a defined material fit, spool inventory, hardware preparation, and print cost. The references below provide the technical context for this planning path. Its calculation rules and planning assumptions are documented in the methodology, and affected calculations pass regression checks before the review date advances.
- Last reviewed
- Evidence set
- 3 primary references
Prusament PETG technical data sheetManufacturer reference density and temperature range for the PETG route.Open source ↗Prusament PETG Carbon Fiber material guideIdentifies PETG as the base polymer, carbon fiber as the reinforcing additive, the hardened-nozzle requirement, and the stiffness-versus-toughness tradeoff.Open source ↗Prusa nozzle guidance for abrasive filamentsHardened-nozzle guidance for filaments that use abrasive carbon-fiber additives.Open source ↗