Emax Ingot Choice Poll.

  • Thread starter Marcusthegladiator CDT
  • Start date

HT or LT?


  • Total voters
    54
sidesh0wb0b

sidesh0wb0b

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
5,649
Reaction score
649
So making a plunger is less labour than cleaning an alox.....Really? Did you do a time study?
maybe I am having bad luck with the alox plungers but its usually not 10 seconds to clean them. (yes I used alox sep too)
its a few seconds after investing to pour into the disposable plunger form with investment that would have otherwise gone in the trash. and then put them in the oven when you put the invested rings in the oven. again, no time really. no plungers to clean. no purchasing plunger separator. no worries during divesting. and pressings come out with less reaction layer.

that's my experience, and I know there are others here doing the exact same thing.
 
sidesh0wb0b

sidesh0wb0b

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
5,649
Reaction score
649
I dunno.. I've been using the same two alox plungers for over 5 years now.. Cleaned them only a couple times (which by the way takes about 10 seconds each). I would think there is more labor over the years of making molds and pouring your own but still probably not a ton of time lost there. It's cool to do things your own way, but for me it seems the more I stray from the intended way of doing things the more problems I have... And then when a problem arises it's harder to track down the source. But that's just me.
I started out with a pro press 100 and had nothing but problems for 2 years, tried all kinds of different temps, investments and could never get it right. That's when I bought the ep5000 and never looked back.
I got "gifted" the form for making disposable plungers. so I never made one. and I have HUNDREDS of plungers poured and ready for use. every investing I make 2 plungers.
the real reason I switched was reaction layer, the cost and labor involved was a bonus.
 
Gru

Gru

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
1,707
Reaction score
305
I acknowledge this is a digression from the thread topic. My apologies.
As some here know, I made my own- and some "gifted" plunger formers. Since the disposable plungers are made from investment "waste" at the end of the ring pour, there's no added cost. The time used can be measured in seconds since the investment is rapidly approaching set up. They have the exact same strength and density as the invested ring. The decision to pursue disposable plungers came after ivo started selling disposable plungers for their 300g ring, in my mind a default acknowledgement they work. Not all of the formers have served well. For some reason- probably ratio used for the silicone- the expansion isn't correct on a few, making them useless. As to the cleaning of the alox plungers, using their separator makes it less of a hassle to be sure, but disposable are no hassle at all- not to mention some days I needed more plungers than I had in the alox and no time to divest & clean them. My 2cents.
 
Patrick Coon

Patrick Coon

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
1,174
Reaction score
565
I acknowledge this is a digression from the thread topic. My apologies.
As some here know, I made my own- and some "gifted" plunger formers. Since the disposable plungers are made from investment "waste" at the end of the ring pour, there's no added cost. The time used can be measured in seconds since the investment is rapidly approaching set up. They have the exact same strength and density as the invested ring. The decision to pursue disposable plungers came after ivo started selling disposable plungers for their 300g ring, in my mind a default acknowledgement they work. Not all of the formers have served well. For some reason- probably ratio used for the silicone- the expansion isn't correct on a few, making them useless. As to the cleaning of the alox plungers, using their separator makes it less of a hassle to be sure, but disposable are no hassle at all- not to mention some days I needed more plungers than I had in the alox and no time to divest & clean them. My 2cents.

Just a note on the use of a disposable plunger for the 300g ring. Because of its bulk if AlOx were used it would add a considerable amount of time to the heat soak time in the press furnace. BTW they are also not recommended for lithium disilicate, only for the press-to materials (POM and ZirPress).

Since we are so far off the original topic now, I promise this is the last post I will make on this subject. Sorry for the digression. Shakehands
 
sidesh0wb0b

sidesh0wb0b

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
5,649
Reaction score
649
my apologies for the digression as well! thanks for everyones input as always
 
Gru

Gru

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
1,707
Reaction score
305
Ok, fair enough. They are called "IPS e.max one-way-plungers". I realize zp is in the same labeling family, but habitually only think of ld as e.max. Not to be a jerk, but shouldn't they re-name the plungers then?


Edit: In fairness to Patrick sent me a PM to stay off this thread as he promised. AND I acknowledge disposable plungers are not recommended. I for one am glad he takes the time here at DLN.

Can't wait for the full line of MT ingots!
 
Last edited:
desertfox384

desertfox384

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
684
Reaction score
74
What press oven do you use sideshowbob?
 
L

LamPlusLab

New Member
Full Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I use LT for upper crowns and MT for lower crowns. The occlusal is more translucent and looks prettier while LT looks better on the upper without greying out too much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
McTeeth

McTeeth

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
335
Reaction score
37
Bump

I am curious if more are trying MT and those who have, how do they like them?

Sean
 
JohnWilson

JohnWilson

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
5,487
Reaction score
1,575
We use the impulse or MT as they are called now for the vast majority of our non layered restorations. Anything the needs a cutback I like to use the LT to control chroma/value
 
McTeeth

McTeeth

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
335
Reaction score
37
We use the impulse or MT as they are called now for the vast majority of our non layered restorations. Anything the needs a cutback I like to use the LT to control chroma/value

Do you have a "system" using them? (As in using 1 ingot for a variety of shades?) We are currently using a Brad Jones conversion chart where he achieves the 16 shades off of just 3 HT ingots
 
user name

user name

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
6,960
Reaction score
1,633
Do you have a "system" using them? (As in using 1 ingot for a variety of shades?) We are currently using a Brad Jones conversion chart where he achieves the 16 shades off of just 3 HT ingots
Care to share a link?
 
A

adl

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
454
Reaction score
66
Multi ingots are my go to ingots .
 
K

karleames

Member
Full Member
Messages
13
Reaction score
8
I use the multi ingots for almost everything also
 
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
7,971
Reaction score
1,122
I use LT for upper crowns and MT for lower crowns. The occlusal is more translucent and looks prettier while LT looks better on the upper without greying out too much.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We use the impulse or MT as they are called now for the vast majority of our non layered restorations. Anything the needs a cutback I like to use the LT to control chroma/value

Have you all, or anyone else found a need to go down 1 shade step for the MT's? As a rule of thumb, if you want a A1, do you use the A1 ingot, or a MTBL4? I'm just wondering since they are in-between the LTs and the HTs in translucency/opacity are they a little lower value than the LTs but not as bad as the HTs? I have a case I need to press a A2 monolithic, and was wondering if I should use that shade, or a A1?

Thanks :)
 
Last edited:
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
7,971
Reaction score
1,122
So using them shade for shade in the MTs, you haven't found them to be to low value at all, and we can pretty much trust them as is? Or are they shade tab Inc 1/3 low value, so they can be used shade for shade and look good? I'm so used to using HTs 1 step lighter for my FC that I just need a little direction. Thanks, John.

I'll press my A2 in a A2, and probably answer most of my questions by just going for it ;)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

T
Replies
13
Views
755
DigiSculpt Design Center
DigiSculpt Design Center
JonnyLathe
Replies
21
Views
2K
JKraver
JKraver
T
Replies
5
Views
946
JKraver
JKraver
filippos
Replies
20
Views
2K
filippos
filippos
Top Bottom