Aim: This study analyses the tolerance and accuracy of 3D printed casts created by two printing techniques and cast geometry deformations after six months. MISC. Methodology. An A 28-year-old volunteer with full dentition was scanned using 3shape's TRIOS3. 3Shape's Dental System converted the scan to STL. NextDent 5100 DLP and Forms Lab Form 2 SLA printers received the STL file. Each printer made 10 casts. Every cast was scanned using a 3Shape E3 Scanner (E3 Scanner from 3Shape). A cloud comparison tool compared each scan to the volunteer's original scan. The two printers' accuracy was measured at the time of the scan and six months afterward using IBM's SPSS 28 for a one-way ANOVA. Shapiro Wilk statistics were not significant P> 0.05, proving normality. ANOVA was used to compare printers' accuracy. Results. Table 1 shows the means and SDs. Wilk's Lambda of p.05 (F = 95.533 and partial eta squared = 0.841) reveals an initial and six-month accuracy difference. A P 0.05 within-subject’s tolerance effect was found. P=.503 demonstrates printer type doesn't affect participation. The study's mean was.995, with a standard error of.066 and CI of.856 to 1.134. Conclusion. The accuracy measurement decreased significantly between the initial and six-month measurements. There was no difference in accuracy between the two measurements for either printer. There was a statistically significant difference between each cast and each printer's first STL file information. However, the distinction was within the accepted tolerance of -/+ 42 µm (Envision TEC reported an accepted tolerance level).