Introduction: The aim of this in vitro study was two part. The first being to assess and compare the amount of dentin removed by an instrument with a taper of 0.04 versus an instrument with a taper of 0.06 using the Edge Evolve® file system at different increments within the canal system. Secondly, this study evaluated whether instrumentation with either taper resulted in a remaining dentin thickness (RDT) of less than 0.3mm. If this RDT was imposed upon, fracture resistance was compromised. Both pre and post instrumentation measurements were taken of samples instrumented with the 0.04 and 0.06 tapered files. Methods: Ten maxillary premolars exhibiting Weine class III canal systems and minimal to no root canal curvature were mounted in an acrylic resin filled K-cube. Each acrylic resin cube was sectioned horizontally at 3, 6, 9, and 12mm increments from the apex. The K-cube is a device which allows the investigator to disassemble and then reassemble root slices in their original orientation. Dentin thickness was measured at three positions on each canal using the Zeiss Discovery V20 stereomicroscope. The sections were then reassembled into the K-cube. The ten premolar roots were separated into two groups. In half of the teeth the buccal canals were instrumented with 0.04 tapered files and the lingual canals instrumented with 0.06 tapered files. In the other half of the teeth, instrumentation was reversed: the buccal canals were instrumented with 0.06 tapered files and the lingual canals were instrumented with 0.04 tapered files. Root sections were again separated, and the remaining dentin thickness was measured. A repeated-measures mixed-model ANCOVA was performed to analyze the effect of taper on RDT. Results: The amount of dentin removed was statistically different between the two tapers (P=0.02). Across all of the slices and positions, the 0.04 tapered instruments had an average pre-post difference of 0.1313mm. The 0.06 tapered instruments had an average pre-post difference of 0.1672mm. None of the instruments imposed upon the recommended 0.3mm RDT. Conclusion: The 0.04 tapered files instrument with greater conservancy than the 0.06 tapered files. The 0.06 tapered files had their greatest effect on the canal in the 9mm and 12mm sections. However, neither taper imposed upon the recommended RDT for optimal fracture resistance within the apical 12mm root portion observed in this study. Keywords: Instrumentation, Edge Evolve, Root canal preparation, Taper