3shape 700vs. Dental wings 3series?

[rkm rdt]

My frames are designed from a full contour cutback.

 

[CoolHandLuke]

while that works and i won't knock it, its not necessary for every single frame. unless you need full contour lingual, or are making metal contacts, or some strange thing, full anatomical cutback isnt that necessary.

but Luke, you ask, how do you gauge distance and cusp heights?

is very simple. use the morphing tool. the circle is a diameter of 3 mm. pull the edges of the coping to where you have just over 1 radius of the circle in clearance.

no mucking about with pointy cusps, no messing around with runny opaquer. best of all no need to retrim. create easy mushroomoid shapes in 50 fewer clicks.

 

[Dali k]

As much as I prefer 3Shape I have to disagree. If your main workflow is single units (frameworks not full contour),then DW is so much better in this area.

For us we are doing less and less copings... full contour or full contour with backup... are the big majority of our work... We tried to work it that way with the multi plate i mean when we use to make more copings but the thing is that it has to be simple copings with no need for support for the ceramic... also when we had tight occluion in anteriors we had to put a high lingual zirconia band we had no choice but to scan the whole situation... that doesnt leave you alot of cases that you can do this way..
From our point of view the way things are going forward its not a thing that would be used alot..
on the other hand the advantages that 3shape offer are stuff that would be needed.
We work with dental wings for a long time and we liked it at some point but it seems that its not folowing the evolution that is happening in the way laboratories are working...

 

[Torquadon]

Would you mind describing more specifically how you see DW as preferable for this application. I (we) can design a great framework in 3Shape in about 2-3 minutes a unit.
thanks

Sure I wouldn't mind. First reason: DW multi die plate is simply better design then on 3Shape, calibration and cleaning is much easier with DW than with 3Shape because DW doesnt have multi die arm, just a plate. Second and more important reason: in DW you can start designing your first coping as soon as first die scan is finished, no need to wait for rest of the units on the plate to scan, where in 3Shape you have to wait for all 6 units to scan. Also if I remember correctly you can now use 12 unit plate with DW3, so you can scan double the amount in one go. 3Shape is superior to DW in many ways but not in multi die scanning.

 

[Torquadon]

For us we are doing less and less copings... full contour or full contour with backup... are the big majority of our work... We tried to work it that way with the multi plate i mean when we use to make more copings but the thing is that it has to be simple copings with no need for support for the ceramic... also when we had tight occluion in anteriors we had to put a high lingual zirconia band we had no choice but to scan the whole situation... that doesnt leave you alot of cases that you can do this way..
From our point of view the way things are going forward its not a thing that would be used alot..
on the other hand the advantages that 3shape offer are stuff that would be needed.
We work with dental wings for a long time and we liked it at some point but it seems that its not folowing the evolution that is happening in the way laboratories are working...

I agree 100%, as I mentioned before it is only multi die scanning where DW3 shines. Designing multi unit, full contour and implant cases is much better and easier on 3Shape. We are comparing 2 scanners here and it is only fair to mention all advantages and disadvantages of both, regardless personal preference.

 

[rkm rdt]

while that works and i won't knock it, its not necessary for every single frame. unless you need full contour lingual, or are making metal contacts, or some strange thing, full anatomical cutback isnt that necessary.

but Luke, you ask, how do you gauge distance and cusp heights?

is very simple. use the morphing tool. the circle is a diameter of 3 mm. pull the edges of the coping to where you have just over 1 radius of the circle in clearance.

no mucking about with pointy cusps, no messing around with runny opaquer. best of all no need to retrim. create easy mushroomoid shapes in 50 fewer clicks.

The thing is that designing a zir coping as you would a metal coping defeats the advantages of using the software. The ability to design a frame in reverse from the final contour is a huge improvement over the analog approach. This is cad for the ceramist and not the " metal tech".

This is the whole premise behind the implant studio software as well. Design and position the final restoration first and then position the implant site accordingly.

 

[Baobabtree]

Good luck with the free trial- let us know if you find one.
I have a version of DW ($traumann). Buggy as compost pile. Swapping files from a DW scan to Exo crossed my mind as well, but remember you will have to work out parameter bugs when they crop up. Truly the best thing they have going is the multi die scan. Anyone know if the 3shape 900 series does it?

Hi Gru
We have the CS2, but never upgraded to DW, looking at our options at the moment whether to upgrade to DW or junk it and start over with a medit. Not a lot of love for DW it seems(certainly here on DLN and from talking to people here in the UK as well). Our rep asked why we hadn't upgraded, I mentioned that the fan base is pretty small to say the least, he had no response, I guess that says it all. Just burns me as we have the equipment but it is looking like it is a startover.

 

[rkm rdt]

 

[Gru]

Baobabtree, cool tree!

Make no mistake, there are a few things I do like about the CS2 /DWOS, but only a few.
The scanner is surprisingly accurate, the auto margin marking is not bad and the included anatomy catalogs are useful. The import function is improved in 9.0.
I found that each "upgrade" in the software seems to make it slower and have more bugs. @$2k/yr. for the license I would expect outstanding upgrades that don't seem to only favor the re-seller. The latest update does not seem to have fixed most of the bugs I've run into, the new GUI is annoying (but pretty) with it's reflectivity, language-less icons (mostly) and repositioning of buttons. The best reason to use this scanner was to do their custom abutments- but since they threw us under the bus and now anyone can do them, that's a moot point. I can't comment on the non-CS2 DWOS, so take it for what it's worth. Our next scanner will not be DWOS based. If you can justify the expenditure, replace it and use next year's license fee as the first payment. My 2cents.

 

[kotharyabbas]

Hello Friends,
Has anyone used the Dental Wings Version 3.8 software to design angled screw retained restorations? Can we design it in DW 3.8 ? I have heard that moving the screw axis hole is possible in the DW version 5 is that right??? Anyone who has experience on this topic please guide. thanks