Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Articles
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Zirconium
New super trans zirconia
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ken Knapp" data-source="post: 144969" data-attributes="member: 8413"><p>Certainly, an emax esthetic version of zirconia would take more of the emax market share.</p><p></p><p>However, the new translucent zirconias are not proven in the market yet so I would hedge your bets.</p><p></p><p>The issues are: Unproven reliability of these new materials which most likely have a higher yttria content and less tetragonal/cubic phase ratio. The esthetics are definitely improved but less than emax, quantification of this in a couple of months.</p><p></p><p>These new zirconia materials could take a couple of years or more to sort out before acceptance of the dental community.</p><p></p><p>A clear winner would be esthetics equal to or better than emax using high strength zirconia material. Same composition, same flexural strength greater than 900 MPA and same proven and documented reliability.</p><p></p><p>This zirconia material would be a clear winner and would have immediate acceptance of the dentists.</p><p></p><p>Why is this so difficult to achieve?</p><p></p><p>Ken</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ken Knapp, post: 144969, member: 8413"] Certainly, an emax esthetic version of zirconia would take more of the emax market share. However, the new translucent zirconias are not proven in the market yet so I would hedge your bets. The issues are: Unproven reliability of these new materials which most likely have a higher yttria content and less tetragonal/cubic phase ratio. The esthetics are definitely improved but less than emax, quantification of this in a couple of months. These new zirconia materials could take a couple of years or more to sort out before acceptance of the dental community. A clear winner would be esthetics equal to or better than emax using high strength zirconia material. Same composition, same flexural strength greater than 900 MPA and same proven and documented reliability. This zirconia material would be a clear winner and would have immediate acceptance of the dentists. Why is this so difficult to achieve? Ken [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who do we work for?
Post reply
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Zirconium
New super trans zirconia
Top
Bottom