What is Lava crown and how is it different from regular zirconia?

Lava is 3M's branded zirconia system. Standard monolithic zirconia is milled from a solid block — strong but opaque. Lava uses a zirconia core with a layered porcelain surface (similar to a PFM structure but far stronger than PFM metal). The result is zirconia-level core strength with porcelain-level aesthetics. Lava Plus uses a translucent zirconia formulation that is more aesthetic than monolithic and still stronger than pure Emax. The 3M branding also provides a 10-year manufacturer's limited warranty.

Is Lava worth the higher price?

For anterior (front) teeth where a standard zirconia would look too opaque, and where Emax might be at higher fracture risk (e.g., bruxer with front teeth damage), Lava is a reasonable premium. At Picasso, Lava is AUD 962 vs Emax at AUD 566 — AUD 396 more per tooth. For a full arch of 8 front crowns, that difference is AUD 3,168. Whether it is worth it depends on your specific bite load and aesthetic requirements.

Which material does Picasso recommend most often?

Emax for front teeth and premolars; zirconia for molars. This is the standard clinical recommendation globally — not Vietnam-specific. Lava is recommended for patients who want premium aesthetics but have higher bite load or existing bruxism that makes Emax slightly less suitable.

What about PFM (porcelain fused to metal) crowns?

PFM crowns are an older technology — a metal substructure with porcelain baked on top. They are strong and long-lasting, but the metal margin can show as a dark line at the gum if the gum recedes over time. PFMs are AUD 283 at Picasso — the most affordable option. They remain clinically appropriate for back teeth in cost-sensitive cases. Most patients now choose full ceramic (Emax, zirconia, or Lava) for superior aesthetics and no metal margin risk.

Blog

Emax vs zirconia vs Lava crowns: which material should you choose?

Emax, zirconia, and Lava crowns compared for Australian patients. Aesthetics, strength, and prices at Picasso Dental Clinic Vietnam in AUD as of May 2026.

Emax (lithium disilicate ceramic) gives the best aesthetics for front teeth and premolars. Standard monolithic zirconia gives the greatest strength for molars and patients who grind. Lava (3M zirconia with layered porcelain) bridges the gap — near-Emax aesthetics with near-zirconia durability — and carries a 10-year 3M warranty at Picasso. The right choice depends on where the tooth sits and what load it carries.

Three-material comparison

Property	Emax	Monolithic zirconia	Lava (3M)
Aesthetics	Excellent — most translucent	Good — more opaque	Very good — translucent zirconia or layered
Strength (flexural)	400–500 MPa	900–1,200 MPa	500–700 MPa (core)
Best position	Front teeth, premolars	Molars, bruxers	Anterior to premolar with higher bite load
Chipping risk	Low (higher under very heavy load)	Very low	Low (layered version: check surface porcelain)
Manufacturer warranty	Ivoclar Vivadent (material)	Varies by brand	3M 10-year limited warranty
Lab processing	Pressed ceramic	CAD/CAM milled	CAD/CAM milled core + layered porcelain

AUD price comparison — Picasso vs Australian private

Crown material	Picasso Vietnam (AUD)	Australian private (AUD)
PFM	AUD 283	AUD 1,500 – AUD 2,000
Emax (lithium disilicate)	AUD 566	AUD 1,800 – AUD 2,500
Zirconia (monolithic)	AUD 679	AUD 1,800 – AUD 2,800
Lava / Lava Plus (3M)	AUD 962	AUD 2,200 – AUD 3,200

When to choose each material

Front incisors and canines → Emax

The central role of front teeth is aesthetic. Emax’s translucency mimics natural enamel better than any other crown material. For young patients with good enamel and normal bite load, Emax is the gold standard for teeth 11–23.

Molars → zirconia

First and second molars carry the highest bite force. A monolithic zirconia crown at AUD 679 at Picasso handles this load reliably. Aesthetics at the molar position are not a primary concern — the teeth are barely visible.

Premolars in bruxers → Lava or zirconia

The first premolar (tooth 4) is visible in smiling but also takes meaningful bite load, especially in patients with clenching or grinding habits. Standard Emax is acceptable but may chip under heavy lateral load from bruxism. Lava provides improved core strength without sacrificing the aesthetics needed for this position.

Implant crowns → zirconia (posterior) or Emax (anterior)

Implants do not flex like natural teeth — they transfer full bite load directly to the crown. Zirconia is preferred for implant crowns in posterior positions. For implant crowns on front teeth, Emax remains the aesthetic choice.

Lava in detail — why 3M matters

Lava is manufactured by 3M (USA) — a global material science company. Two Lava variants:

Lava (Classic): zirconia core + hand-layered feldspathic porcelain. Aesthetically closest to Emax among zirconia systems. The layered surface can chip under extreme load — lower risk than PFM, but present.
Lava Plus: fully monolithic with a more translucent zirconia formulation — no layering, no chip risk on the surface layer. Slightly less aesthetic than Lava Classic; stronger.

The 3M 10-year limited warranty covers manufacturing defects — it does not cover damage from trauma or abuse. Picasso registers Lava crowns under the 3M warranty programme on the patient’s behalf.

Decision framework for Australian patients

Where is the tooth? Front = aesthetics priority → Emax or Lava. Back = strength priority → zirconia.
Do you grind? Yes → add strength: zirconia or Lava instead of Emax for premolars; nightguard recommended regardless.
What is on an implant? Posterior implant → zirconia. Anterior implant → Emax.
What is your budget? PFM is appropriate for back teeth in cost-sensitive cases. It is not inferior for molars where aesthetics are not the priority.

Your written Picasso treatment plan will specify the recommended material per tooth with the clinical rationale.