35  5,925,690  36  TABLE  3-continued  TABLE  4  EXAMPLES  24 to 36  Primer com12osition (%  by  weight)  Optional  com12onent  Compo- Adhesive Strength/  Com12onentA  Com12onent B  Phosphoric  Com12onent D  nent C  MPa(SD)  PM  Pheny 1-P PM2  MAC-10  MTS  HOMS  acid  EtOH  IPA  H$_{2}$ 0  Adhesive  Dentin  Enamel  Ex. 8  Comp.  10  8  27  55  M  8.5(2.4)  20.1(3.8)  Ex. 9  Comp.  62  8  15  15  M  5.1(0.8)  7.4(1.2)  Ex. 10  Comp.  10  30  60  M  13.6(1.4)  21.5(3.2)  Ex. 11  Comp.  10  10  25  55  M  12.7(2.5)  21.6(4.7)  Ex. 12  Comp.  10  8  80  2  M  10.1(4.7)  7.6(1.0)  Ex.  13  Comp.  15  27  58  N  12.0(3.7)  5.8(0.9)  Ex. 14  Comp.  10  8  27  55  N  8.4(2.0)  18.9(3.4)  Ex. 15  Comp.  62  8  15  15  N  5.5(1.4)  7.3(2.2)  Ex. 16  Comp.  10  8  80  2  N  9.8(3.9)  5.7(0.7)  Ex.  17  Primer com12osition (%  by  weight)  Adhesive strength/  Component A  Component B  Component D  Component C  MPa(SD)  Phenyl-P  MTS  IPA  H$_{2}$ 0  Adhesive  Dentin  Enamel  Ex. 24  10  8  27  55  B  21.4(2.2)  21.5(4.0)  Ex. 25  10  8  27  55  D  20.5(2.4)  23.6(2.4)  Ex. 26  10  8  27  55  G  22.2(2.9)  21.1(4.9)  Ex. 27  10  8  27  55  H  21.8(2.4)  22.3(3.0)  Ex. 28  10  8  27  55  22.9(4.9)  25.8(3.6)  Ex. 29  10  8  27  55  J  24.0(2.5)  21.3(2.2)  Ex. 30  10  8  27  55  K  20.7(2.8)  20.7(3.7)  Ex. 31  10  8  27  55  L  21.5(2.6)  19.9(2.0)  Ex. 32  10  8  27  55  0  18.8(2.4)  22.6(3.7)  Ex. 33  10  8  27  55  p  18.4(4.0)  21.5(3.5)  Ex. 34  10  8  27  55  s  17.9(2.3)  23.3(1.1)  Ex. 35  10  8  27  55  V  17.2(2.2)  21.3(2.5)  Ex. 36  10  8  27  55  w  17.0(2.4)  21.3(3.3)  polymerizable unsaturated group in place of component  (A)  and exhibited low adhesive strength to dentin. Comparative  Examples 10 and 16 show results obtained by using com› ponent  (A) in an amount above the specified range and  exhibited low adhesive strength to both enamel and dentin.  Comparative Examples  11  and 17 show results obtained  without component  (B)  and Comparative Example 12 a  result obtained by using  HOMS  having only one carboxyl  group in place of component  (B).  Both comparative  examples exhibited low adhesive strength to dentin.  Primers were prepared in the same manner as in Example  1 and evaluated using different adhesives. The compositions  of the primers, used adhesives and results are shown in Table  4.  Comparative Examples 8 and 14 show results obtained  without component  (A)  and exhibited low adhesive strength  to both enamel and dentin. Comparative Examples 9 and 15  show results obtained by using phosphoric acid having no  Examples 15 to 19 show results obtained by using adhe› sive  M  and changing kinds and amounts of components  (A),  (B)  and  (D)  and Examples 20 to 23 results obtained by using  adhesive  N and changing kinds and amounts of components  (A), (B)  and  (D).  Examples 15, 20 and 21 show results  obtained by using different components as component  (A),  Example 16 a result obtained by using a plurality of com› ponents as component  (D),  Example 17 a result obtained by  reducing the amount of component (C), Examples 15, 18  and 19 results obtained by changing components  (B)  and  (D),  and Examples 22 and 23 results obtained by using a  plurality of components as component  (A).  All the above  examples obtained sufficient adhesive strength to both  enamel and dentin. 