Ivoclar Prime Esthethic!

DreN4do

DreN4do

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
161
Reaction score
0
Hello folks. long time no post!

So i just found out that Ivoclar has a new ZirCAD block called Prime Esthetic. Has anyone used this and does anyone
know what the difference is between that and the regular Prime?

please advise.
thank u
 
kimba

kimba

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
375
Reaction score
58
even more fine print in the advertising?
 
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,122
I'm sintering one as we speak.
It's a 4y gingival to 5y incisal without being overly translucent (no Prime line). It's rated at 850mpa so I figure the incisal is about 750? It's more of a esthetic update to the MT Multi. It also comes in 14mm disc's. edit: it's 650mpa, as per the info I found shown in my next post.

If I can find the info that showed the MT Multi being the 850mpa ging and 750? Incisal, I'll post it as the Esthetic is along the same line. It is very pretty stuff. 3 unit bridges being the max. span.
 
Last edited:
DreN4do

DreN4do

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
161
Reaction score
0
I'm sintering one as we speak.
It's a 4y gingival to 5y incisal without being overly translucent (no Prime line). It's rated at 850mpa so I figure the incisal is about 750? It's more of a esthetic update to the MT Multi. It also comes in 14mm disc's.

If I can find the info that showed the MT Multi being the 850 ging and 750? Incisal, I'll post it as the Estheic is along the same line. It is very pretty stuff. 3 unit bridges being the max. span.
how do you feel about the esthetic (BL3 preferred) vs. the regular BL3?

also, can you post a pic of the units being sintered so I can get a look at how it looks?

thank u
 
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,122
how do you feel about the esthetic (BL3 preferred) vs. the regular BL3?

also, can you post a pic of the units being sintered so I can get a look at how it looks?

thank u

It's a test B1 for an anterior case I'll be doing this weekend, I'll post a photo tomorrow.

The 1st disc I purchased was an A2, photos below untouched, just InSync glaze. I put it higher up in the 16mm disc so the chroma is light, but it is the correct, nice hue. I only have 2 shades in the Esthetic. Esthetic also comes in all the shades, including the bleach shades. I did find the information, it's 650mpa on the incisal area.

magnifier_20211216_181731.jpg

magnifier_20211216_181830.jpg

Screenshot_2021-12-16_182534.jpg
 
Last edited:
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,122
Here is the B1 I sintered last night. I'm missing the 2nd B1 tab, but you get the idea. Maybe it's just a little low value lacking some chroma, brightness, but as with the others, I put it higher up the disc, about 1/2mm from the top of a 16mm disc, just to get more of an idea of the translucency and what I'd be dealing with in that regard.

magnifier_20211217_090117 2.jpg
 
Affinity

Affinity

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
6,325
Reaction score
1,062
I still have a half a puck of this stuff that I havent used. It is really chalky or opaque compared to the nexxzr+. Or am I missing that the esthetic is more translucent? There are two different prime materials? Id be willing to give it another go, but the nexxzr+ multi is much cheaper.

The incisal on that central looks darker (orange) than the body? is that stained or thats just how it looks?
 
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,122
The incisal in hand looks good. It could just be a photo thing as the incisal is thinner than the tab, and it is also resting on the counter, light reflecting back? while the tab is sitting up, due to the button on the back.

To me, the MT Multi and the Prime Estheic seem to look closer to emax monolithic maybe in the MT range? My account noticed the difference when I sent them the MT Multi, and Prime Estheic seems to be a bit "new and improved". Ivoclar went with the European pricing across the board at least for the Ivoclar zirconia, so I agree, it is expensive. But saying if we get on average 24 - 30 fcz in a disc, how much extra is that per unit, and is it worth it?
 
Last edited:
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,122
I still have a half a puck of this stuff that I havent used. It is really chalky or opaque compared to the nexxzr+. Or am I missing that the esthetic is more translucent? There are two different prime materials?

I missed answering that one. Yes, they are 2 different Prime's. One being the stronger gingival at 1200mpa 3y (more opaque) to 650 5y incisal, good for longer span bridges. The other being a 850mpa 4y gingival (more translucent) with the 5y incisal at 650 good for singles and 3 unit bridges.
 
Affinity

Affinity

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
6,325
Reaction score
1,062
Im not saying the higher price is a problem, if it looks better than the nexxzr+ multi, but I really didnt think it does. It was immediately noticeable, and I cant see if this puck is the esthetic but I think it is. I thought it was so chalky I havent dared use it again, like I said, I think too much trans can cause problems, sometimes you need more opacity. I was willing to spend the extra money for a better product, but I was disappointed with it. Have you tried the nexxzr+ multi? Better product IMO, lower price, same company. Ive been using it since it came out and honestly I havent had a single bridge break, only a couple thin posterior singles fractured, so they got redone in nexxzr T.
 
Contraluz

Contraluz

Well-Known Member
Full Member
Messages
1,571
Reaction score
275
Have you tried the nexxzr+ multi? Better product IMO,
My understanding is that Ivoclar's 'Multi MT' and Sagemax's 'nexxzr+ Multi' are pretty much the same, aren't they? I use Multi MT for pretty much all my single units. But, depending on the shade or opacity, I add Argen or others into the mix.

I have yet to try the new Prime disc. I have a couple of them unused laying around...

My beef with the 'original' Prime zr is well documented, here...
 
Car 54

Car 54

Well-Known Member
Donator
Full Member
Messages
6,894
Reaction score
1,122
Im not saying the higher price is a problem, if it looks better than the nexxzr+ multi, but I really didnt think it does. It was immediately noticeable, and I cant see if this puck is the esthetic but I think it is. I thought it was so chalky I havent dared use it again, like I said, I think too much trans can cause problems, sometimes you need more opacity. I was willing to spend the extra money for a better product, but I was disappointed with it. Have you tried the nexxzr+ multi? Better product IMO, lower price, same company. Ive been using it since it came out and honestly I havent had a single bridge break, only a couple thin posterior singles fractured, so they got redone in nexxzr T.

I agree, we can end up low value with too much 5y on the Inc, especially if the anterior Inc is thin.
Haven't tried nexxzr+ multi but am usually willing to try out a disc with a good recommendation, especially since you've been using Sagemax since the Sagemax Brent Harvey contest. Didn't you enter a bridge?
 
F

FASTFNGR

Active Member
Full Member
Messages
375
Reaction score
5
Hello folks. long time no post!

So i just found out that Ivoclar has a new ZirCAD block called Prime Esthetic. Has anyone used this and does anyone
know what the difference is between that and the regular Prime?

please advise.
thank u
I have been using a couple of shade to see the end results. One was C2 and it was right on the money but not a lot of translucency in my opinion.
 

Similar threads

H
Replies
3
Views
1K
Highland
H
user name
Replies
10
Views
1K
Patrick Coon
Patrick Coon
P
Replies
1
Views
193
Bonita5
B
Getoothachopper
Replies
14
Views
731
Affinity
Affinity
Top Bottom