This study aimed to investigate the efficiency of different cements for luting implant restorations. Standard restorations were bonded with different cements, including a zincoxide-based temporary cement (ZOE), a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (GIC) and a resin-based, eugenol-free cement (RBEFC). The restorations were stored under moist conditions and were subsequently subjected to thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML). Retention forces were determined with an axial tensile test and removabilty of the restorations was analyzed with a pneumatic crown remover. GIC provided significantly higher retention forces than RBEFC, which provided significantly higher values than ZOE. After storage, retention forces were significantly higher than after TCML. With regard to removability, no significant differences were identified between ZOE and RBEFC, but a significantly higher number of applications was required to remove restorations luted with RBEFC. All cements provided sufficient retention forces, yet removal of restoration might be more demanding if luted with RBEFC.