September 9, 2026
Creality CFS Nano: Multicolor Printing on a $300 Budget
Watch the video on YouTube. Opens in a new tab.
Disclosure: Creality sent me the CFS Nano kit free of charge for this review. They did not pay me for the video, give me a script, or get to approve it before it went public. The links below are affiliate links, so I may earn a small commission if you buy through them, at no extra cost to you.
The CFS Nano exists for a pretty simple reason: getting people into multicolor printing for less money. It is not meant to be an upgrade over the CFS Lite. It is the cheaper way in, and looking at it that way makes a lot more sense.
My kit arrived late, so I did not have a huge amount of testing time before the launch video. I had already spent a lot more time with the SparkX i7 itself, which is doing most of the work here. This article is about my first experience with the Nano: what you give up, what actually works better than I expected, and how the prints turned out.
What did it cost at launch?
These are the prices I discussed in the video, not a live price list. The discounted figures are rounded, and the launch bundles, stock, and code eligibility can change. Watch the pricing discussion at 1:19.
| Setup | Price in the video | With the 5% code, approximately |
|---|---|---|
| CFS Nano upgrade kit | $69 | $66 |
| SparkX i7 with CFS Lite | $359 | $341 |
| SparkX i7 with CFS Nano | $299 | $284 |
The Nano combo launch offer also included four spools of Hyper PLA RFID filament. A multicolor-capable printer and four kilograms of filament for around $284 with the code was a very good deal in my opinion. If you already had the SparkX i7 without a CFS, the $69 Nano kit was the cheaper way to add that capability.
If you are checking it out now, use the links below to see what is currently included. You have two code options for the SparkX i7 Nano combo: NANO20 for $20 off, or MIKEQL for 5% off. For the standalone CFS Nano and other Creality purchases, use MIKEQL.
Installation was easy, but my instructions missed a step
The kit included the CFS Nano, spool holders, mounting brackets, PTFE tubing, a data cable, and the hardware needed to install it. Most of the assembly was straightforward. The instructions that came with my kit did have a couple of problems, though. Watch the installation at 2:38.
The back brackets went in the lower set of holes as shown. Assembling the bridge was also clear. But when I mounted everything to the frame, it did not feel stable, and something was obviously off.
After looking through the parts, I realized there was a step missing from my guide: replacing the two lower screws on each side of the frame with the modified screws included in the kit. Once I used the right hardware, the mounting made sense.
That was my early kit. Production instructions may already have been revised, so compare yours with the included hardware and the current official guide. The filament layout shown in my instructions was also behind a printer update that had changed the on-screen layout to match the physical setup.
Yes, it wobbles
There is no point pretending otherwise. The spool-holder assembly is wobbly, especially higher up. It did not feel flimsy to me, but you can definitely move it around. See the assembled setup at 4:16.
Loading the spools helped. The added weight pushed the brackets down onto the little rubber feet at the back, which made the assembly more stable. I was expecting it to shake around and make a load of extra noise while printing. Luckily, that did not happen. I did not notice it being louder than my CFS Lite setup.
The Nano itself is a small unit, which also leaves room to change the arrangement with your own mounts. I would not be surprised to see people come up with all kinds of ways to make it fit their space. That is a possibility I liked, not something you need to do before it works.
The odd PTFE gap is there for a reason
This was the part where I thought I knew better than the instructions. There are short bits of PTFE sticking out of the connectors on the back of the Nano. At first, I could not see why I should leave a gap instead of running the longer tube straight into it. So I connected it directly. Watch the PTFE demonstration at 5:32.
It loaded fine. The reason for the gap became obvious when the filament retracted. With the tube connected directly, that extra filament went back toward the spool, leaving slack. It was the same annoyance I had mentioned with the CFS Lite. It had not caused tangles in my testing, but I did not like tidying the loose spools when changing filament.
When I put the short PTFE pieces back and followed the intended arrangement, the gap acted as a buffer. The filament could move in and out there instead of pushing all that slack back onto the roll.
It looks a little strange, but it worked. That is a fairly clever way of dealing with the slack without adding another mechanism to a budget unit.
Running filament from a dryer is easier
One thing I liked about the open setup was how easy it was to feed filament from a dryer. In the video I used my Creality Space Pi X4. The CFS Lite has space for desiccant, but that is not the same thing as actively drying the filament. Watch the dryer setup at 7:56.
With the Nano, I could route the dryer’s PTFE tubes toward the inputs and keep the dryer running while printing. You can keep the buffer gap or connect the tube directly, but remember the tradeoff from the previous section: the direct connection gives up that open buffer for retracted filament.
If you want to look up the dryer or other Creality gear, here is my Creality store affiliate link. Try MIKEQL for 5% off eligible purchases and check the offer at checkout.
You still feed the filament in by hand
There are no powered feeders out at the spool holders. When changing a spool, you manually feed the filament through the PTFE until the Nano grabs it. From that point, it takes over. That is one of the compromises of the simpler design. See filament loading at 9:01.
For me, it was a reasonable tradeoff. You get a small unit, easy access to the filament paths, and more freedom to arrange the spools or use a dryer.
How did it actually print?
This is the part that matters most to me, and my first prints went smoothly. I did not need to change extra slicer settings just because I was using the Nano. Watch the print results at 9:34.
The first print was a flexi beaver for my nephew. The color changes worked, loading and retraction worked, and I came back to a finished print. No messing around to get it through the job.
Then I printed a Street Fighter diorama in separate parts. That involved more color changes and swapping filament colors between parts, but again I did not run into feeding or retraction problems. The parts came out clean with the 0.4 mm nozzle and assembled into a really cool print.
That is a good start, but it is still a first look. My testing time with the Nano was limited when I made the video. I like running machines for longer and sharing updates through the channel, so I would not turn two successful projects into a claim that nothing can ever go wrong.
Would I choose it over the CFS Lite?
If you already have a CFS Lite that works for you, I do not see the Nano as an upgrade you need to buy. If you are trying to get into multicolor printing on a smaller budget, that is where it makes sense.
The frame wobbles. You feed the filament in manually. My early instructions needed a revision. But the Nano did the job I wanted it to do: changing filament and finishing prints without me standing over it.
I also liked the PTFE buffer idea and being able to use a dryer so easily. Those are useful things, even if the setup does not look as tidy as a more enclosed system.
Not everybody needs the most expensive or advanced printer. If your budget is around $300, the SparkX i7 Nano combo is worth looking at alongside the other options available when you buy. Check the current bundle and price first, because the launch offer in the video may not be the offer you see today.
