The objectives of the present study were to measure and compare the bond strength and failure sites of a currently available ceramic bracket (Transcend 3M-Unitek) with the new metal reinforced ceramic bracket (Clarity 3M-Unitek) and to evaluate the amount of composite left on the tooth using the Adhesive Remnant Index in the teeth that were debonded with pliers recommended for this purpose. In addition, the presence or absence of enamel damage after debonding was also assessed. One hundred and twenty extracted premolar teeth were divided into 4 groups of 30 each. Two groups of 30 teeth had Transcend 6000 brackets bonded, and the other 2 groups had Clarity brackets bonded. Shear bond strength was carried out on 30 Transcend 6000 brackets and 30 Clarity brackets, whereas the other 2 groups of 30 teeth bonded with Transcend 6000 and Clarity brackets were debonded with debonding pliers recommended by the manufacturer of both ceramic brackets. The mean shear bond strength of the Clarity brackets was 13.27 MPa, whereas that of the Transcend 6000 was 21.19 MPa. Both brackets failed mostly at the bracket-adhesive interface (75%), indicating a possible reduction of the chances of enamel damage. Six of the premolars, bonded with Transcend 6000 brackets and debonded with the plier, showed an increase in the number or length of enamel cracks as evaluated by an optical microscope (Micro-Vu); one premolar, bonded with Clarity brackets and debonded with the pliers, showed an increased enamel crack length. Gross enamel damage, assessed by enamel dislodgment, was not evident in any specimen. Results of this study suggest that the new metal reinforced ceramic bracket (Clarity) may be recommended for clinical use because of its acceptable shear bond strength and possible reduced chances of enamel damage during bracket removal.