0.3mm bur vs. 0.5mm

millennium

millennium

Active Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
878
Reaction score
78
Good morning all,
Is there a significant difference between 0.3mm and 0.5mm finish as far as fit and occlusal anatomy, and overall look of a crown?
Intaglio surface(that ti base fits into) of a zr abutment or screw retained crown?
Some mills have an 0.5mm as the smallest bur.
 
A

adl

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
454
Reaction score
66
Good morning all,
Is there a significant difference between 0.3mm and 0.5mm finish as far as fit and occlusal anatomy, and overall look of a crown?
Intaglio surface(that ti base fits into) of a zr abutment or screw retained crown?
Some mills have an 0.5mm as the smallest bur.
I love my .3 mm bur .I see a difference on the occlusal anatomy in general, interproximal and embrasures on bridges. The fit is the same for me ., I have a versamill 5 by 400.
 
Sevan P

Sevan P

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
3,413
Reaction score
641
I would say yes. Wieland .7 vs .3 you see it in both greenstate and sintered. But you must have it designed right. I know in 3shape we can turn tool radius on and see the the set radius tool will and will not remove material.
 
Accutech

Accutech

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
113
Reaction score
20
I see a significant amount of difference in marginal adaptation and integrity. I get good margins and overall fit with 0.6 mm burs but with 0.3 mm burs milling in HD on my Ceramill 5X, the margins are superb (under 1.5 X magnification) and the intaglio fit near 1 mm marginal finish line is snug, but not too tight.
As far as surface anatomy and texture, the sprue / support pin placement ruins all that and surrounding surface areas anyways so I don’t spend too much time worrying about it. I just go over everything by hand so no, I don’t benefit in terms of facial/ surface anatomy,
805BBF86-0CE5-44BE-9EF8-90D0FF7AC509.jpeg
 
JohnWilson

JohnWilson

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
5,487
Reaction score
1,575
Happy New Year

The bur diameter has less to do with fit than you may think. Understanding your CAD design and the parameters you set for drill comp and DESIGINING for the bur radius will give you the best results. as Sevan stated.

The fissure bur AKA .3 is used so sparingly in my lab and we still get exceptional detail off the mill
 
millennium

millennium

Active Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
878
Reaction score
78
Thank you all for sharing your knowledge and experience. I am getting really close to pulling the trigger on a mill.
The mill I was leaning towards is one of the two of my choices has 0.5mm as the smallest bur and I don't want to make a mistake and wish my mill had an 0.3mm bur.
 
Tayebdental

Tayebdental

Tayeb S. CDT
Donator
Full Member
Messages
3,238
Reaction score
470
Thank you all for sharing your knowledge and experience. I am getting really close to pulling the trigger on a mill.
The mill I was leaning towards is one of the two of my choices has 0.5mm as the smallest bur and I don't want to make a mistake and wish my mill had an 0.3mm bur.
Mine is a small vhf mill, the smallest bur is 0.6mm, the occlusal details are great when space is sufficient and fit is great as well, I am thinking about another mill to be 5axis in the future
 
CoolHandLuke

CoolHandLuke

Idiot
Full Member
Messages
10,078
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,411
depends on the CAM; your plan of attack on milling your parts is how you get detail. work in tandem with your CAM provider to acheive your desired results. don't just leave it to out-of-the-box defaults.
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom