The purpose of this study was to compare the shaping abilities of LightSpeed, ProTaper-Universal, and hybrid technique using S-series of ProTaper-Universal and LigthSpeed. The 72 simulated root canals of J-shape were used and classified as flowing 3 groups according to the instrumentation methods; Group P of 24 canal blocks were prepared with ProTaper-Universal, Group L was prepared with LightSpeed, and Group H was prepared with hybrid technique (initial shaping with ProTaper-Universal SI and S2 and apical shaping with LightSpeed from #25 to #50). A second-year resident of Endodontic department prepared the resin block canals to apical size #50 (F5 in Group P). The time lapses for instrumentation and the reduction of root canal curvature after shaping were measured. The pre- and post-instrumented root canals were scanned and superimposed to evaluate and calculate the increased canal width and apical centering ratio. The results were as followings: Group Land H showed significant less instrumentation time than Group P (p < 0.05). The ProTaper system showed greater reduction of root canal curvature and working length diminishment than other methods (p < 0.05). LightSpeed system showed best canal curvature preserving characteristics. The Group P had greater instrumented widths at all levels examined (p < 0.05). Group L and Group H showed lower centering ratio (ability to preserve the canal center; the lower ratio means the better canal center preservation) than Group P (p < 0.05). Group H had the lowest centering ratio at the 1 mm level.