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
Metal
SLM Frameworks
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="charles007" data-source="post: 294722" data-attributes="member: 9"><p>Update to this thread I started Nov. 2014...…..</p><p></p><p>1. Someone asked if Argens SLM has improved.. Yes Argen improved SLM for those unhappy with past results.</p><p>2. I was never totally happy with marginal fits with their DPM as compared to their Milled gold alloys or my inhouse casting and reasoning for asking about SLM for PFM frames.</p><p>3. Received a call from Argen recently to learn they will soon start Milling Ceramic alloys ! Still have the extra cost of milling which is a little higher than DPM, but we will have a wide selection of nice Argen Alloys...</p><p>4. Personally I hate making pfms anymore, and miss stacking porcelain, but love CAD metal designed frameworks and know cad designed is far superior if you must.</p><p>5. Lastly, I see little reason making pfms anymore knowing patients will eventually see a black line around the margins and knowing porcelain will/can eventually chip, break, or that rare porcelain shearing off. Throw in the opaque/high value color thats impossible to hide makes above average made pfms inferior to an average made full contour/ micro cutbacks using Zirconia or LD.</p><p></p><p>fyi........when dental assistants from several offices tell you 3 years or more ago FCZ looks better than average pfms. its past time to bury the casting machine...<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p>Just saying !</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="charles007, post: 294722, member: 9"] Update to this thread I started Nov. 2014...….. 1. Someone asked if Argens SLM has improved.. Yes Argen improved SLM for those unhappy with past results. 2. I was never totally happy with marginal fits with their DPM as compared to their Milled gold alloys or my inhouse casting and reasoning for asking about SLM for PFM frames. 3. Received a call from Argen recently to learn they will soon start Milling Ceramic alloys ! Still have the extra cost of milling which is a little higher than DPM, but we will have a wide selection of nice Argen Alloys... 4. Personally I hate making pfms anymore, and miss stacking porcelain, but love CAD metal designed frameworks and know cad designed is far superior if you must. 5. Lastly, I see little reason making pfms anymore knowing patients will eventually see a black line around the margins and knowing porcelain will/can eventually chip, break, or that rare porcelain shearing off. Throw in the opaque/high value color thats impossible to hide makes above average made pfms inferior to an average made full contour/ micro cutbacks using Zirconia or LD. fyi........when dental assistants from several offices tell you 3 years or more ago FCZ looks better than average pfms. its past time to bury the casting machine...:) Just saying ! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who do we work for?
Post reply
Forums
Lab talk, the good, the bad, and the ugly
Metal
SLM Frameworks
Top
Bottom