Aim: To compare the condylar guidance angle obtained by extraoral Gothic arch tracing, protrusive interocclusal records (IORs), and orthopantomogram (OPG) in completely edentulous and dentulous subjects. Materials and methods: A total of 30 edentulous and 30 dentulous subjects were selected. Conventional steps in the fabrication of complete denture with balanced occlusion were carried out. Extraoral Gothic arch tracing records were obtained from each subject. Protrusive IORs were used to program the Hanau Wide-Vue semiadjustable articulator, to obtain the sagittal condylar guidance angle. The sagittal condylar guidance was determined in 60 subjects by protrusive IORs and facebow transfer. The sagittal outline of the articular eminence and glenoid fossa was traced in panoramic radiographs. The sagittal condylar path inclination was constructed by joining the heights of curvature in the glenoid fossa and the corresponding articular eminence. This was then related to the constructed Frankfurt horizontal plane to determine the radiographic angle of sagittal condylar guidance. Results: There was statistically significant difference between the sagittal condylar guidance values obtained using extraoral Gothic arch tracing and OPG method (p 0.0237) in edentulous subjects. Statistically significant values were obtained using protrusive records and OPG method (p 0.0237) in dentulous subjects. Conclusion: The use of OPG to set condylar guidance on the articulator should be taken into consideration for both dentulous and edentulous subjects. Clinical significance: In clinical practice, the use of IORs following Gothic arch tracing for the programming of semiadjustable articulator may be associated with manual errors. To minimize the errors and to obtain more accurate sagittal condylar guidance values, the use of OPG along with IORs should be considered for programming of the semiadjustable articulator.