This study aimed to compare the efficiency of placement technique on internal adaptation, gap formation and microshear bond strength (SBS) of bulk-fill composite resin materials.Standardized class V cavities were prepared for microcomputed tomography (mCT) test and divided into four groups (n=12) as follows: Group SDR: Smart Dentin Replacement system/bulk fill; Group SF2: Sonic-Fill system/bulk fill sonic-activated composite placement system; Group CHU: Herculite-XRV-Ultra composite resin inserted with Compothixo/sonic-vibrated composite resin placement system; Group HIT: Herculite-XRV-Ultra composite resin applied with incremental technique. Self-etch adhesive (Optibond-XTR) was used for bonding in all groups. After 10000 thermocycling, mCT scans were taken to reveal gap formation at the toothrestoration interface and universal testing machine was used to test microshear bond strength SBS values (n=10). ANOVA, post-hoc Bonferroni and Tukey HSD tests were used for evaluating the gap formation and SBS values p=0.05.SF2 and CHU showed the best adaptability compared with both SDR and HIT. The difference between groups SDR and HIT was statistically significant (p0.05).Bulk-fill composite resins placed either with sonic-activated or sonic-vibrated instrument demonstrated better adaptability, less gap formation and higher bond strength than both the bulk-fill flowable composite and conventional incremental techniques.