So summarising and extending the posts above.

It is currently:
* 91% self replicating by cost (£2400 out of £2700)
* 20% self replicating by weight (3lb out of 15lb)
* 0.01% self replicating by complexity (plastic blocks made out of plastic, circuits, motors, extruders, frame)
* 0% self assembling
* A good step forwards.

I personally am very disappointed. I've been following this project even to the point of downloading and gearing up to look at the code. It seems to be more active than Fab@Home but to see a news article in the morning paper about self-replicating machines when they're not seems to be blatantly dishonest.

I was thinking of going to the Science Festival that's exhibiting the RepRap this weekend but now my only question would be a very negative, 'What were you thinking to make such a press release'.

Hopeful for the future but disappointed by the present.

Two points:

The company that Bussard set up to continue his work ( http://www.emc2fusion.org/ ) recieved funding from the Navy to continue his work. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_W._Bussard )

Also Bussard only estimated requiring a few million to build a scale model not US$200 million. $200M was his estimate for how much the first complete power generating fusion reactor would cost once the physics had been tested with the cheaper, smaller device.

So a few million to test out the physics seems like a no brainer to me. And I guess some peoplein the US Navy science funding system agreed.