Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of different bracket arch-wire interface using conventional elastomeric ligation on frictional resistance during simulated canine retraction on typodont model. Materials and Methods: The sample consists of three types of brackets: 1- Stainless steel brackets (3M UnitekTM) 2- Ceramic brackets (3M UnitekTM Clarity), and 3- Ceramic brackets with metal slot (3M UnitekTM). Two conventional uncoated archwires were used: 1- Stainless steel archwires (SS) (ortho organizer), 2- Nickel titanium archwires (NiTi) (ortho organizer) and regular clear elastomeric module were used for ligation. The sample was divided into three main groups according to type of bracket. Majority of investigators used straight length arch-wire and fixed the bracket over models and draw the straight length arch-wire through the but this does not fully simulate the clinical reality, because clinically moving teeth during sliding mechanics do not occur in a straight line. The method used in the present study was designed to closely replicate the clinical situation. All tests were carried out in a dry state on an Instron universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 0.5 mm/min). Results: Metal slot ceramic brackets generated significantly lower frictional forces than ceramic brackets, but higher significantly values than stainless steel brackets. The highest frictional resistance was observed between Ceramic bracket and NiTi arch-wire combination ligated by elastomeric module. Conclusion: Ceramic brackets with metal slot seem to be a good substitute to conventional stainless-steel brackets and ceramic brackets in space closure with sliding mechanics in patients with esthetic demands.