How to Reduce 3D Printing Costs: Practical Tips for Every Stage

3D printing is a game-changer for prototyping and small-batch production—but high costs can hold back projects. From material waste to unnecessary post-processing, there are hidden expenses at every step. The good news? You don’t have to sacrifice quality to save money. This guide breaks down how to reduce 3D printing costs across design, manufacturing, and post-processing, with real data, case studies, and actionable tips that work for startups, hobbyists, and large manufacturers alike.

Stage 1: Cut Costs During the Design Phase (The Most Impactful Step)

Your 3D model’s design is the biggest driver of cost—small tweaks here can slash expenses by 30% or more. Focus on these four strategies to design for affordability.

1. Use Hollow Designs (Not Solid) for Powder-Based Technologies

If you’re using SLS (Laser Sintering) or MJF (HP Nylon Multi-Jetting Fusion), hollowing your model is one of the easiest ways to save. Hollow parts use less powder, lower material costs, and even make parts lighter (a bonus for applications like drones or wearable devices).

Why it works: Powder-based technologies use loose powder as support—so you don’t have to worry about the hollow interior collapsing. A solid part wastes material on the inside; a hollow part only uses powder for the outer shell.

Cost Comparison (from Xometry’s Instant Quote Engine):

Example: A startup designing a custom drone frame used MJF with a hollow design. They cut material use by 60% and reduced the part cost from \(25 to \)9—saving \(16 per frame. For a batch of 50 frames, that’s \)800 in total savings.

2. Scale Down Unnecessary Large Models

3D printing costs are directly tied to the volume of material your part uses (and the space it takes on the printer bed). If your part is a visual prototype (not functional), scaling it down can drastically lower costs.

Data Example: Compare costs for a standard model (a) and a scaled-down version (b) using two common technologies:

Key Takeaway: Scaling down cuts FDM unit costs by 43% and MJF per-100-piece costs by 53%. Just make sure scaling doesn’t affect your prototype’s purpose—if you need to test fit with other parts, keep critical dimensions accurate.

3. Optimize Design to Avoid Waste and Rework

Poorly designed parts lead to reprints (wasting material and time) or expensive post-processing. Follow these simple design rules to avoid extra costs:

• Use progressive transitions: Connect adjacent surfaces with smooth slopes (not sharp edges). Sharp edges create stress points that can break parts, forcing reprints.
• Limit unsupported thin walls: Thin walls (under 1mm for FDM, 0.5mm for MJF) bend or deform during printing. Redesign walls to be thicker—this avoids reprints and extra material use.
• Avoid shallow angles: Angles under 45° (for FDM) create “steps” on the surface. These steps need sanding or polishing to fix—adding post-processing costs. Use steeper angles or add small supports (only if necessary).

Case Study: A stationery brand redesigned a pen holder for MJF. By adding small holes in the bottom (to reduce material) and using smooth transitions between the base and sides, they cut the part cost by 7%—from \(14 to \)13 per holder. For a batch of 200 holders, that’s $200 in savings.

Stage 2: Save Money by Choosing the Right Manufacturing Options

The technology, material, and production volume you pick have a huge impact on cost. Here’s how to make smart choices.

1. Pick the Cheapest Material That Meets Your Needs

You don’t need expensive materials for every project. Match the material to your part’s purpose to avoid overspending:

Example: A student making a visual prototype of a phone case used PLA (FDM) for \(5 per part—instead of ULTEM (which would cost \)35 per part). They saved 86% and still got a prototype that looked like the final product.

2. Choose the Most Cost-Effective 3D Printing Process

Not all technologies are equal in cost. For most projects, FDM or MJF are cheaper than high-end options like SLA (resin) or SLM (metal). Here’s a breakdown of when to use each:

Cost Comparison: A small gear (PA12 material) costs \(8 with MJF, \)10 with SLS, and $15 with SLA (resin, if modified for strength). MJF is the cheapest option for functional nylon parts.

3. Match Production Volume to the Right Method

3D printing is cheap for small batches—but not for large-scale production. Use this rule of thumb to choose:

Example: A consumer brand needed 5,000 plastic clips. 3D printing (MJF) would cost \(10 per clip (\)50,000 total). Injection molding cost \(2,000 for tooling plus \)1 per clip (\(7,000 total)—saving \)43,000. They only used 3D printing for the first 50 prototypes (cost $400) before switching to injection molding.

Stage 3: Reduce Costs in Post-Processing

Post-processing (like removing supports or polishing) can add 20–30% to your total cost. Use these tips to cut expenses here.

1. Use Support-Free Technologies (MJF/SLS)

Technologies like MJF and SLS don’t need support structures—they use loose powder to hold parts in place. This eliminates the time and labor needed to remove plastic supports (common in FDM).

Cost Impact: Removing supports from 100 FDM parts takes 2 hours (at \(25/hour = \)50) and wastes 5–10% of material (extra \(20–\)40). Using MJF for the same parts avoids this \(70–\)90 in extra costs.

2. Choose Low-Cost Post-Processing Methods

Not all post-processing is equal—pick the cheapest option that meets your needs:

Example: A toy company dyed 200 MJF-printed figurines for \(0.50 per part (\)100 total). Painting the same figurines would cost \(2 per part (\)400 total)—saving $300.

3. Skip Unnecessary Post-Processing

Ask yourself: Does this step add value? For example:

• If your part is hidden (e.g., an internal bracket), you don’t need a smooth surface—skip sanding.
• If your part is functional but not visible, you don’t need dye or paint—use the material’s natural color.

Case Study: An automotive supplier made internal sensor brackets with MJF. They skipped polishing (saving \(1 per part) and used natural nylon color (saving \)0.30 per part). For 500 brackets, that’s $650 in savings—with no impact on performance.

Yigu Technology’s Perspective on Reducing 3D Printing Costs

At Yigu Technology, we help clients cut 3D printing costs without losing quality by focusing on design optimization and process matching. For prototypes, we recommend FDM (PLA) for visuals or MJF (PA12) for function—avoiding overpriced materials. For small batches, we prioritize powder reuse (MJF/SLS) to lower material waste by 50%+. For large volumes, we guide clients to switch to CNC or injection molding after prototyping. We also skip unnecessary post-processing—only polishing parts that need a cosmetic finish. Our goal is simple: get you the parts you need at the lowest possible cost.

FAQ About Reducing 3D Printing Costs

1. Can I reuse 3D printing material to save money?

Yes—especially with powder-based technologies like MJF and SLS. Over 50% of unmelted powder can be reused, cutting material costs by 25–30%. For FDM, you can’t reuse filament scraps easily, but you can buy recycled filament (cheaper than new) for non-functional parts.

2. Is it cheaper to 3D print at home or use a service?

It depends on volume. For 1–10 parts, a service (like Xometry) is cheaper—you avoid buying a printer (\(200–\)10,000) and materials. For 100+ parts, home printing (FDM) is cheaper—you pay for filament once and no service fees. For example, 50 PLA parts cost \(50 at home vs. \)100 from a service.

3. Will reducing 3D printing costs lower the quality of my part?

No—if you make smart choices. Hollowing a part (MJF/SLS) doesn’t reduce strength if the shell is thick enough (2–3mm). Scaling down a visual prototype keeps it looking like the final product. Choosing FDM over SLA for functional parts (with PA12) still gives you a durable part. The key is to cut waste, not quality.