The aim was to compare two temporary cements to determine which resisted bacterial and dye penetration under temporary posts/cores/crowns subjected to simulated masticatory function. Forty-six single canal human tooth roots were prepared for posts/crowns. A cotton pellet and Cavit were placed in each post space. Temporary posts/cores/crowns were cemented with Intermediate Restorative Material (IRM) (n = 23) or Tempocem (n = 23). Specimens were sterilised, then immersed in a mixture of Streptococcus gordonii and India ink, and subjected to 4 weeks simulated mastication. Dye penetration was assessed by visually inspecting the cotton pellets. Bacterial penetration was determined by placing the pellets into sterile broth and by plating them onto agar plates to confirm S. gordonii growth. There was no statistically significant difference between the cements and the dependent variables of bacterial and dye penetration. Hence, both cements are good options to cement temporary posts/cores/crowns during endodontic treatment of anterior teeth.