Any Suggestions on a Good Tren Cycle

[quote]Mike823 wrote:
Dirty Gerdy wrote:
Brook wrote:
this is not true. Shutdown isnt the harsh bit, it is the very high androgen content.

It affects appetite, sleep, mood in a very potent way (apparently).

By your reasoning Deca would be as ‘harsh’ as tren… but it is absolutely not.

I havent used tren, but i have used enough steroids to know that if i took one that had the sides that tren can give, then in my mind i would consider it harsh. As i do halo, and methyltrienolone… it is very very high androgens that are harsh on the body.

As for the kidney issues… all i know is that one guy pissed blood on this site after using a high dose tren cycle, and many more have increased urea in their stream.

JMO.

Brook

I’m not going to lie. My urine has been quite a bit darker since going ‘on’. Sometimes it has a funky smell to it too (no I’m not smelling my piss) but I can smell it when I go.

It has affected mood, appetite, and sleep as well. When I’m in the gym I love it…otherwise it can get kinda crazy. I’m glad I’m a mellow person, but still find myself getting pissed at stuff that shouldn’t bother me, I know before it wouldn’t have but now for some reason it does. Driving in Socal traffic for one. lol

DG

I’ve been on 37.5 mg of tren ace ed for the past 2 weeks stacked with 750 mg pf test e per week and I’ve noticed some uncomfortable sides. I’m definitely more irritable, my cardio is shit, amy piss is brown, and I generally feel like shit. That said, I’ve gained 10 pounds in 2 weeks and my strength has gone through the roof. I’m going to try to stay on the tren for 4 more weeks but I’m not sure I can take it.

[/quote]

Hurts so good doesn’t it. As bad as the sides are the gains are still unequalled and usually why most guys continue to stay on and grin and bear it so to speak

[quote]Mike823 wrote:
Dirty Gerdy wrote:
Brook wrote:
this is not true. Shutdown isnt the harsh bit, it is the very high androgen content.

It affects appetite, sleep, mood in a very potent way (apparently).

By your reasoning Deca would be as ‘harsh’ as tren… but it is absolutely not.

I havent used tren, but i have used enough steroids to know that if i took one that had the sides that tren can give, then in my mind i would consider it harsh. As i do halo, and methyltrienolone… it is very very high androgens that are harsh on the body.

As for the kidney issues… all i know is that one guy pissed blood on this site after using a high dose tren cycle, and many more have increased urea in their stream.

JMO.

Brook

I’m not going to lie. My urine has been quite a bit darker since going ‘on’. Sometimes it has a funky smell to it too (no I’m not smelling my piss) but I can smell it when I go.

It has affected mood, appetite, and sleep as well. When I’m in the gym I love it…otherwise it can get kinda crazy. I’m glad I’m a mellow person, but still find myself getting pissed at stuff that shouldn’t bother me, I know before it wouldn’t have but now for some reason it does. Driving in Socal traffic for one. lol

DG

I’ve been on 37.5 mg of tren ace ed for the past 2 weeks stacked with 750 mg pf test e per week and I’ve noticed some uncomfortable sides. I’m definitely more irritable, my cardio is shit, amy piss is brown, and I generally feel like shit. That said, I’ve gained 10 pounds in 2 weeks and my strength has gone through the roof. I’m going to try to stay on the tren for 4 more weeks but I’m not sure I can take it.

[/quote]

Why not drop the dose to ~25mg day? See if that helps. Or bump your test, or both.

I did a 6 week cycle of TA @ 50mg/day, and i had no negative sides.
Libido through roof - more than any other steroid.
Strength high, lean gains - increased body composition, reduced hunger and aggression isnt anywhere as bad as i expected.

This was with 700mg test a week.
Arimidex too…

I dont believe tren has any activity at the progesterone receptor, unlike deca - which then goes on to increase prolactin…

JMO

Brook

Hey I was reading this writeup on Tren acetate on another site and was hopeing to get some thoughts on the write up.

Finaplix
(trenbolone acetate)
The drug trenbolone acetate is, without a doubt, the most powerful injectable anabolic steroid used by Steriod.com members to gain muscle. However the full properties of the drug are not always fully understood. This profile will separate fact from fiction and help steroid.com members decide if trenbolone is right for them.

Trenbolone is similar to the highly popular steroid nandrolone, in that they are both 19-nor steroids, meaning that a testosterone molecule has been altered at the 19th position to give us a new compound. Unlike nandrolone however trenbolone is an excellent mass and hardening drug with the majority of gains being muscle fiber, with minimal water retention (1) It has an unbelievable anabolic (muscle building) score of 500. When you compare that to testosterone, which itself is a powerful mass builder, and has an anabolic score of 100 you can begin to fathom the muscle building potential of trenbolone. What makes trenbolone so anabolic? Numerous factors come into play. Trenbolone greatly increases the level of the extremely anabolic hormone IGF-1 within muscle tissue (2). And, it´s worth noting that not only does it increase the levels of IGF-1 in muscle over two fold, it also causes muscle satellite cells (cells that repair damaged muscle) to be more sensitive to IGF-1 and other growth factors(3). The amount of DNA per muscle cell may also be significantly increased (3).

Trenbolone also has a very strong binding affinity to the androgen receptor (A.R), binding much more strongly than testosterone (4). This is important, because the stronger a steroid binds to the androgen receptor the better that steroid works at activating A.R dependant mechanisms of muscle growth. There is also strong supporting evidence that compounds which bind very tightly to the androgen receptor also aid in fat loss. Think as the receptors as locks and androgens as different keys, with some keys (androgens) opening (binding) the locks (receptors) much better than others. This is not to say that AR-binding is the final word on a steroid´s effectiveness. Anadrol doesn´t have any measurable binding to the AR& and we all know how potent Anadrol is for mass-building.

Trenbolone increases nitrogen retention in muscle tissue (5). This is of note because nitrogen retention is a strong indicator of how anabolic a substance is. However, trenbolone´s incredible mass building effects do not end there. Trenbolone has the ability to bind with the receptors of the anti-anabolic (muscle destroying) glucocorticoid hormones (6). This may also has the effect of inhibiting the catabolic (muscle destroying) hormone cortisol (7).

Yet another amazing trait of trenbolone that must be noted is its ability to improve feed efficiency and mineral absorption in animals given the drug (8). To help you understand what this means for you, feed efficiency is a measurement of how much of an animals diet is converted into meat, and the more food it takes to produce this meat, the lower the efficiency. Conversely, the less food it takes to produce meat the, higher the efficiency& well you get the idea. Animals given trenbolone gained high quality weight without having their diet adjusted, thus improving feed efficiency. Finding new compounds which can improve feed efficiency is a billion dollar industry, and has spawned many nutritional advances in the bodybuilding world over the last few decades (CLA, Whey Protein, and HMB are compounds which spring to mind as having first been introduced by the livestock industry). What does this translate to for the hard training athlete? The food you eat will be better utilized for building lean muscle, and vitamins and minerals are also better absorbed which may keep you healthier during cycle.

Trenbolone is also a highly androgenic hormone, when compared with testosterone, which has an androgenic ratio of 100; trenbolone´s androgenic ratio is an astonishing 500. Highly androgenic steroids are appreciated for the effects they have on strength as well as changing the estrogen/androgen ratio, thus reducing water and under the skin. As if the report on trenbolone was not good enough, it gets better; Trenbolone is extraordinarily good as a fat loss agent. One reason for this is its powerful effect on nutrient partitioning (9). It is a little known fact is that androgen receptors are found in fat cells as well as muscle cells(10), androgens act directly on the A.R in fat cells to affect fat burning.(11) the stronger the androgen binds to the A.R, the higher the lipolytic (fat burning) effect on adipose tissue (fat)(11). Since some steroids even increase the numbers of A.R in muscle and fat (11, 12) this fat loss effect would be amplified with the concurrent use of other compounds, such as testosterone.

Trenbolone promotes red blood cell production and increases the rate of glycogen replenishment, significantly improving recovery (13). Like almost all steroids, trenbolones effects are dose dependant with higher dosages having the greatest effects on body composition and strength. Mental changes are a notorious side effect of trenbolone use(15), androgens increase chemicals in the brain that promote aggressive behavior(16), which can be beneficial for some athletes wanting to improve speed and power.

Trenbolones chemical structure makes it resistant to the aromatize enzyme (conversion to estrogen) thus absolutely no percentage of trenbolone will convert to estrogen. Trenbolone administration would not promote estrogenic side effects such as breast tissue growth in men (gynecomastia, bitch tits) accelerated fat gain, decline in fat break down and water retention trenbolone. Trenbolone is also resistant to the 5- alpha-reductase enzyme, this enzyme reduces some steroid hormones into a more androgenic form, in trenbolones case however this does not matter, trenbolone boasts an androgenic ratio of 500, it can easily cause adverse androgenic side effects in any steroid.com members who are prone cases of hair loss, prostate enlargement, oily skin and acne have been reported. Unfortunately trenbolones potential negative side effects do not end there. Trenbolone is also a noted progestin: it binds to the receptor of the female sex hormone progesterone (with about 60% of the actual strength progesterone) (17). In sensitive steroid.com members this can lead to bloat and breast growth worse still, trenbolones active metabolite17beta-trenbolone has a binding affinity to the progesterone receptor (PgR) that is actually greater than progesterone itself (18). No need to panic though, the anti-estrogens letrzole or fulvestrant can lower progesterone levels, and combat any progestenic sides. The use of a 19-nor compound like trenbolone also increases prolactin& . bromocriptine or cabergoline are often recommended to lower prolatin levels (20). Testicular atrophy (shrunken balls) may also occur; HCG used intermittently throughout a cycle can prevent this. (21) It is also wise for Tren users to closely monitor their cholesterol levels, as well as kidney function and liver enzymes, as Tren has the potential to negatively affect all of those functions. Trenbolone, being a powerful progestin, will also shut down natural testosterone production which even a relatively small dose and keep the testosterone level suppressed for an extended period of time, this can lower libido and cause erectile dysfunction (fina dick). It is essential that you always stack trenbolone with testosterone.

The acetate ester is a very short-chain ester attached to the trenbolone molecule. It has an active life of 2-3 days but to keep blood levels of trenbolone elevated and steady, daily injections are often recommended. The acetate ester provides a rapid and high concentration of the hormone which is beneficial to those seeking quick gains, coupled with a rapid clearing time the acetate ester can be discontinued on the onset of adverse side effects.

Now that the properties of trenbolone acetate have been explained we can better understand how to use it in order to maximize its advantages. Evidence suggests that trenbolone when stacked with estrogen promotes more weight gain that trenbolone alone(22), now I´m not telling you to go pop some birth control with your trenbolone but the addition of aromatizing orals such as dianabol and a long estered testosterone such as cypionate or enanthate would produce great gains in a bulking cycle. For a cutting cycle trenbolone is the best choice you have; trenbolones powerful effect on nutrient shuttling allows a user to restrict calories and remain in a state of positive nitrogen balance (remember what that means?). The cortisol reducing effect and binding to the glucocorticoid receptor will greatly reduce the catabolic effects of harsh dieting and excessive amounts of cardio& not to mention that trenbolone itself may burn fat (due to it´s strong AR-binding). A good choice to stack with tren in a cutting cycle is Winstrol. Winstrol has a low binding affinity to the AR and thus will act in your body in vastly different ways than the Tren (i.e. in non-receptor mediated action). In addition, Winstrol is a DHT-based drug and Tren is a 19-nor& throw in some Testosterone (prop), and you´ll have a cutting cycle which takes advantage of all 3 major families of Anabolic Steroids (Testosterone, 19-nor, and DHT), as well as vastly different AR-binding affinities and mechanisms of action.

Ironically, even though Tren is an excellent contest prep drug, it lowers your thyroid level(23), and this raises prolactin. I recommend taking T3 (25mcgs/day) along with your Tren to avoid elevating your prolactin too high via this route.

Also, this drug is a poor choice for athletes who rely on cardiovascular fitness to play a sport. Tren, anecdotally at least, reduces many athletes ability to sustain high levels of endurance. Unfortunately, this makes Tren a poor choice for many.

As of now the main source of trenbolone is from implants for cattle being converted into an injectable or transdermal compound, from powder, and of course Underground Labs. “Home brewing” powder or cattle implants seems to be the preferred method of obtaining injectable trenbolone acetate, because the user would have much more control over the potency and sterility of the drug. Trenbolone is much more expensive than other anabolic steroids ranging from 15 U.S dollars per gram of powder or 150 U.S for a single 10 ml bottle. The cost of trenbolone should not matter, it is worth every penny.

The attempted-playing-medicinal-chemist by dividing anabolic steroids into “categories” according to whether they have a 19-methyl or not, or some non-fact-based (or even fact-based) decision on whether the compound is “DHT-based,” is just baseless and should be ignored.

Sorry, the androgen receptor does not check to see whether there is a 19-methyl or not, and act differently according to whether it does or doesn’t. Nor, so far as is known, any part of the cell.

Nor is there any mechanism for the body to check to see if the compound is supposedly “DHT-based.”

There is relevance as to whether compounds aromatize or not, or 5-alpha reduce or not, but these are different questions, and the latter has nothing to do with muscle acquisition, though has some relevance with side effects.

So yes, look at whether there are metabolites of importance, but forget planning based on whether things are “19-nor” or “DHT-based.” It’s completely misguided.

Also, one or two previous posts discussed “trenbolone/testosterone ratios.”

I believe this also is misguided. I know of no way that tbe body works by measuring or detecting ratios of anabolic steroids being used, or responding according to ratio.

Instead, use the amount of testosterone you consider appropriate for yourself under the circumstances and the amount of trenbolone you likewise consider appropriate, when considering both at the same time.

By considering both at the same time, I mean that using moderate amounts of testosterone could allow you to slightly reduce the TA dose for the same amount of activity at the AR, and by virtue of using the TA you don’t have to use a very high, e.g. multigram, dose of testosterone for near-saturation of the AR.

So as an example, let’s say that in your past experience it seemed that in a TA/Dianabol cycle, 100 mg/day TA did a little better for you than 75 mg/day. In a TA/testosterone cycle with substantial testosterone, e.g. say 700 mg/week, you could drop the TA back to the 75 mg/day level without fearing less effectiveness, thanks to the testosterone also having good Class I activity, though maybe only 1/3 as potent (effective per mg) as trenbolone in that regard. But hey, yeah, 100 mg/day testosterone will definitely allow dropping TA by 25 mg/day if you wanted.

Or as another example, let’s say you are experienced with testosterone-only, are a pretty advanced user, and have found that 2 g/week does more for you than 1 g/week. This I believe is principally due to testosterone being shorter on Class I activity than Class II, which seems pretty satisfactorily covered at 1 g/week or even a bit less.

So if now you are considering TA/testosterone, you could be confident that a good dose of TA would allow you to drop the testosterone to a gram per week or even a bit less, the TA being a very effective Class I.

That is what I mean by considering them in combination.

But it’s not a ratio.

1 Like

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
The attempted-playing-medicinal-chemist by dividing anabolic steroids into “categories” according to whether they have a 19-methyl or not, or some non-fact-based (or even fact-based) decision on whether the compound is “DHT-based,” is just baseless and should be ignored.

Sorry, the androgen receptor does not check to see whether there is a 19-methyl or not, and act differently according to whether it does or doesn’t. Nor, so far as is known, any part of the cell.

Nor is there any mechanism for the body to check to see if the compound is supposedly “DHT-based.”

There is relevance as to whether compounds aromatize or not, or 5-alpha reduce or not, but these are different questions, and the latter has nothing to do with muscle acquisition, though has some relevance with side effects.

So yes, look at whether there are metabolites of importance, but forget planning based on whether things are “19-nor” or “DHT-based.” It’s completely misguided.

Also, one or two previous posts discussed “trenbolone/testosterone ratios.”

I believe this also is misguided. I know of no way that tbe body works by measuring or detecting ratios of anabolic steroids being used, or responding according to ratio.

Instead, use the amount of testosterone you consider appropriate for yourself under the circumstances and the amount of trenbolone you likewise consider appropriate, when considering both at the same time.

By considering both at the same time, I mean that using moderate amounts of testosterone could allow you to slightly reduce the TA dose for the same amount of activity at the AR, and by virtue of using the TA you don’t have to use a very high, e.g. multigram, dose of testosterone for near-saturation of the AR.

So as an example, let’s say that in your past experience it seemed that in a TA/Dianabol cycle, 100 mg/day TA did a little better for you than 75 mg/day. In a TA/testosterone cycle with substantial testosterone, e.g. say 700 mg/week, you could drop the TA back to the 75 mg/day level without fearing less effectiveness, thanks to the testosterone also having good Class I activity, though maybe only 1/3 as potent (effective per mg) as trenbolone in that regard. But hey, yeah, 100 mg/day testosterone will definitely allow dropping TA by 25 mg/day if you wanted.

Or as another example, let’s say you are experienced with testosterone-only, are a pretty advanced user, and have found that 2 g/week does more for you than 1 g/week. This I believe is principally due to testosterone being shorter on Class I activity than Class II, which seems pretty satisfactorily covered at 1 g/week or even a bit less.

So if now you are considering TA/testosterone, you could be confident that a good dose of TA would allow you to drop the testosterone to a gram per week or even a bit less, the TA being a very effective Class I.

That is what I mean by considering them in combination.

But it’s not a ratio.[/quote]

Fucking excellent post.

1 Like

Yeah three cheers for Bill.
Now I’m one who often refers to ratios. I think in a round-about kinda way Bill and I share a very similar view. I called it ratios but more appropriately its ratios within the context of overall mg dosing as well. I’m a big advocate of a what I causally call 2-1 ratio as opposed to a 5-3 ratio. Using Bill’s numbers and taking into consideration the mg’s per week the points he and I make overlap. Which is to say if you use 1G a week of test and aim for a 5-3 ratio you’d end up with 600mg of Tren a week. Versus a 2-1 ratio leaves you at 500mg a week. Further as Bill eluded to indirectly as doses increased the ratio will surely decrease.

I’ll use my cycle as a classic example of what both BR and I are saying. Im going to run 1G of TE and 400mg of TREmg. So on my ratio plan that’s 5-2 [even less than the 2-1 I purport]. Why? It gets back to Bill’s point. On a Gram of Test a week I don’t need 600 or even 500mg of Tren. 400mg is going to be plenty.

I would never dare to debate Bill on the science but in my real world experiences I do find my body is much more agreeable when my ratio of Test more than doubles the amount of Tren I’m putting in concurrently. So even on say 500mg of Test I would not recommend exceeding 250mg of Tren a week. This may be where Bill and I different. Bill might point out that a users body could accommodate 400mg of Tren so why not run 500mg of TE and 400mg of Tren? My answer again would be back to direct personal experience. I would add a slight conditional to these ratios being dosage dependent. But I have lived and experienced too much suffering when my Test didn’t greatly exceed my tren both in terms of sheer mg’s as well as ratio.

At the end of the day my underlying point behind advocating a lower ratio of tren to test gets down to this. When used in combo most guys will do better [better here defined as maximum gains and minimal sides] with a bit less tren than they think they need when paired synergisticly with the test.

But to echo JJ’s words that was a fantastically educational post from the mighty BR :slight_smile:

Well, thank you!

It’s fair to say that if a person gets useful numbers from a method, then the fact that the method doesn’t actually have a biological basis and isn’t really based on that method, has nothing to do with getting the good results.

If in practice your ratio method – within a given range of doses anyway – gives useful values then very good.

However, it being more of a method of figuring rather than a reality, if it so happens that something that would work well for a person falls outside the ratios, then a person should not worry that the calculated value is different.

E.g., let’s say that someone has liked a gram of testosterone per week, and liked trenbolone, but past a low dose such as 35 mg/day they get night sweats that are just too bothersome. And they wonder if it would be okay to take a gram of test and 35 mg/day TA. They should not worry about the ratio.

Or likewise if someone has liked 100 mg/day TA and in the past has used Dianabol with it, and for whatever reason is not going to use an antiaromatase and/or does not want to use much testosterone because of previous experiences with their skin or whatever, if they wonder if they would do OK with 100 mg/day and just some quite modest dose of testosterone such as 250-350 mg/week, again they need not worry about the ratio. They won’t get the added outcome they would from more testosterone than that, but they won’t be in the toilet either.

Also where I have a little bit of objection to the ratio method is that it has an underlying premise that more of one requires more of the other. But this is not so.

I agree Saps (good to hear from you again - you have been missed).

I remember when i first started learning about application of AAS - in books though, not the net - and it was common practice to add a drug to a Test base to lessen the doses of the drug with the most sides, yet achieve the best gains. The drug with the most sides at that time for me was Test - as i had no access (or knowledge of, in the beginning) to AI’s - with a stack of Tamoxifen and Proviron being the best i could hope for with my limited knowledge and budget.

Take Test with Deca - To get similar gains from this stack with only test, i would need well over a gram a week of the androgenic and aromatizable steroid - but with 700mg test and 400mg deca, i get the benefit of much improved gains, with less estrogen, less androgen yet a higher quality look to the physique. A basic but apt example i think.

With Tren (another excellent anabolic to supplement Test) while you can potentially get many more androgenic sides - you get much more strength than test plus the extra anabolism - with less of the estrogen, than the equivalent dose of test.

One last example of a cycle which i have done is a simple 500mg Test, 400mg Deca and 400mg Eq - here you can see that the ratio system is well out of whack, with 500mg test to 800mg of non-test AAS - but 500mg of test is more than enough to offset any on-cycle sides from the other drugs, but a much improved anabolism with less sides (sides being the main result of increases in DHT or Estrogen in the most common cases).

This is more my experience than what i have learned intellectually online - with much online advice (by no means just here) following the ratio method (i always assumed as a quick and easy way out for people to give advice on the necessity of testosterone - that is to say estrogen and DHT in a cycle).

JMO

JJ

Saps,

I remember that you never felt the need for an AI as you were not affected negatively by aromatase. Is that still the case for you for instance on your proposed cycle of 1g test E/w & 400mg tren E/w?

By the way, those believing they are not affected by high estrogen but who suffer acne during cycles may be making a mistake in thinking the estrogen is causing them no problem.

This may be even moreso the case for those using a SERM during a cycle and therefore thinking they have no use for an antiaromase, but who suffer acne.

Not so much related to the general thread, but relevant to the question DH just raised.

Interesting point Bill. It makes me wonder about the many who complain of acne NOT during cycle, but during PCT. I thankfully don’t seem to suffer from that affliction, but I have always used AIs during cycle to date (as I would assume most do). In fact I did experience nipple soreness while on a 580mg/w test e cycle combined with 3 x 10mg/d dbol and had to up my Adex dose 0.25mg EOD to about 0.5mg/d. The soreness cleared up after 4 or 5 days at the higher dosage.

It is too soon to be sure but a number of users (including myself) who chronically had some acne problems post-cycle stopped having that problem on stopping using SERMs post-cycle.

It is also too soon to be sure whether anti-aromatase alone is really sufficient. Presently I would not recommend it – but rather the traditional approach – for anything past 8 weeks, and would recommend even if only 8 weeks or less, being ready to use a SERM if recovery seems to lag.

But anyway, it is starting to look as though SERMs may be a major culprit in post-cycle acne, even perhaps the prime culprit.

(And, back on topic, estrogen as a major culprit during cycles.)

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
It is too soon to be sure but a number of users (including myself) who chronically had some acne problems post-cycle stopped having that problem on stopping using SERMs post-cycle.

It is also too soon to be sure whether anti-aromatase alone is really sufficient. Presently I would not recommend it – but rather the traditional approach – for anything past 8 weeks, and would recommend even if only 8 weeks or less, being ready to use a SERM if recovery seems to lag.

But anyway, it is starting to look as though SERMs may be a major culprit in post-cycle acne, even perhaps the prime culprit.

(And, back on topic, estrogen as a major culprit during cycles.)[/quote]

This is interesting. A couple years back I actually ran some bunk stuff, experienced little to no gains, but decided to do a PCT with Tamoxifen in the standard fashion anyway. I ended up with some pretty bad cystic type acne lumps on my back that took maybe 7 months to clear up.

What would you recommend exactly for a 6-8 week cycle if not using a SERM? Just taper off your AI?

I am currently doing 8 weeks of test and using a test taper. I may nix the SERM just to see if I don’t get acne.

What I do is switch to a dose of AI that is appropriate in the individual case for stasis use (when not using any injected steroids) immediately after the last injection. This will be a lower dose than appropriate during the cycle. Probably several times.

For example – not saying it’s a generally correct figure --when using 700 mg/week testosterone I use 3 times my stasis dose.

As the AI’s have a several day half life, and dosage is not being reduced to zero, presumably levels fall reasonably in sync with decreasing levels of aromatizable steroid from the cycle. Just roughly speaking. That is what I have done in my own case, with propionate. I haven’t suggested it let alone advised it to anyone else. I suppose that that isn’t quite an optimal formula for a longer acting ester such as enanthate.

Thanks for all the input.Alot of quality information from everyone.

The next question is on max or min or a certain steroid.I understand alot has to do with ur goals,length of cycle and what u are cycling with.Obviouslly there are other factors that will come into play as far as not enough to get gains or after a certain amount to not get any gains and the risks become to much to deal with.

The steroids I would hope to get a little on min dodes in order to maintain gain or the max dose as far as still continuing to get results.

It’s just that I would do my cycles with getting the most out of the cycles I am doing.My serms will be adex and nolvadex at the end.I understant the adex will have to change on what effects I am feeling.

Steroid guide lines as far as mazimum gains.

Tren levels.Obviulslly I am looking at getting the most gains but not overdosing on side effects.I’ll be going with 50mgs ED.How much higher should or can I go.Obviouslly it has to do with how I react but I want the most out of the tren as I have heard great gains come from it.I would like to run it for 8 weeks.With what I have I can run up to 500mgs a week but for next time I would like to know if I coould go higher.

Next is Test Enath or Cyp.

I’m running 750mgs a week for 10 weeks but have heard u can go up to 1000mgs.Also I’ve heard the more test the better the resulds.At what point does this max out?

Last I am running dbol as well.Did the first week at 50mg ED then upped it to 75mgs ED.Will be doing this for 5 weeks total.

Last is any suggestions on mast or primo and what cycles they fall into and at what levels will produce the best effects.

I’m hopeing not to get roasted to badly here but results back fro someone training his ass off with weights,cardio and BJJ classes.As well as a high protein diet.

[quote]Dynamo Hum wrote:
Interesting point Bill. It makes me wonder about the many who complain of acne NOT during cycle, but during PCT. I thankfully don’t seem to suffer from that affliction, but I have always used AIs during cycle to date (as I would assume most do). In fact I did experience nipple soreness while on a 580mg/w test e cycle combined with 3 x 10mg/d dbol and had to up my Adex dose 0.25mg EOD to about 0.5mg/d. The soreness cleared up after 4 or 5 days at the higher dosage.[/quote]

I was under the impression you had run barely 2 cycles and done just a couple of different AAS too…

You may find that your experiences change with more androgenic cycles for example - or if you change your AI for one reason or another…

Brook

[quote]deafwoody wrote:
Thanks for all the input.Alot of quality information from everyone.

[i]The next question is on max or min or a certain steroid.I understand alot has to do with ur goals,length of cycle and what u are cycling with.Obviouslly there are other factors that will come into play as far as not enough to get gains or after a certain amount to not get any gains and the risks become to much to deal with.

The steroids I would hope to get a little on min dodes in order to maintain gain or the max dose as far as still continuing to get results.[/i][/quote]

What?[quote]

It’s just that I would do my cycles with getting the most out of the cycles I am doing.My serms will be adex and nolvadex at the end.I understant the adex will have to change on what effects I am feeling.[/quote]

I am sure everyone ‘would be doing their cycles with getting the most out of the cycles they are doing’ Your Sentance construction is very poor and quite confusing, is english your second language? If so, no problem.
Also, Adex is NOT a SERM mate - it is an AI (Aromatase Inhibitor).[quote]

Steroid guide lines as far as mazimum gains.

Tren levels.Obviulslly I am looking at getting the most gains but not overdosing on side effects.I’ll be going with 50mgs ED.How much higher should or can I go.Obviouslly it has to do with how I react but I want the most out of the tren as I have heard great gains come from it.I would like to run it for 8 weeks.With what I have I can run up to 500mgs a week but for next time I would like to know if I coould go higher.[/quote]

Mate - your ‘tolerance’ to Tren is totally personal to you and not forseeable by anyone else on the planet - for example some tolerate 50mg/day very well, great gains and strength - zero negative sides. Others can only go as high as 35mg/day for suffering sides.
While one may get no side effects, another may get just sleep issues and another may get a whole range - all on 350mg/wk for example. You need to try it and see - a common tactic used with the drug is to start on a low dose (250mg/wk for example) and increase accordingly as comfort levels allow.[quote]

Next is Test Enath or Cyp.

I’m running 750mgs a week for 10 weeks but have heard u can go up to 1000mgs.Also I’ve heard the more test the better the resulds.At what point does this max out?[/quote]

I dont know if this is your first cycle, it doesn’t sound like it except for not knowing what dose of drugs to take or what type of drug Arimidex is… however if it is, i suggest that not only is 1000mg of week far too high, but 750mg may well be too… 500mg being an excellent level to gain on for quite a number of cycles (as a base).
In regards to your question, IME i would say that while results go up massively from 250mg/wk to 850mg/wk - any more than 1 gram will lead to a greater increase in sides for results given. I love ~700mg/wk and it would be the cycle dose of choice for me. The sides are easily contained, and the anabolism is good - and when stacked in the manner you are looking into (Tren and Dbol) it yeilds excellent results.[quote]

Last I am running dbol as well.Did the first week at 50mg ED then upped it to 75mgs ED.Will be doing this for 5 weeks total.[/quote]

Dianabol is liver toxic and i dont know of a single user today, online or IRL, who uses more than 50mg a day. I cant believe that this has even been recommended to you - and if you had read anything on the drug, you would see that the max dose almost exclusively recommended would be 50mg/day.
Over this is do-able, and back in the 70’s i am confident it was done regularly - and may cause no harm in some, but AFAIK for the extra results given, compared to sides (liver toxicity included) over 50mg/day is NOT worth the risk.[quote]

Last is any suggestions on mast or primo and what cycles they fall into and at what levels will produce the best effects.[/quote]

What do you mean [quote]“…and what cycles they fall into…”[/quote]? I wouldn’t add either to the cycle that is outlined above personally - with any effects the drugs may give being drowned in the effects given by drugs already in the cycle.

However the max dose regularly used with Masteron is ~350mg/wk and primobolan Enanthate is used from 400mg-2000mg/wk. Under 400mg is not going to yeild much in the way of results - i once used 200mg/wk and noticed the mildest of anabolism - no suppression that was noticeable. 1000mg/wk of primo will cost an arm and a leg too - it is an expensive drug and it is NOT necessary to use the drug on the path to a top physique IMO.[quote]

I’m hopeing not to get roasted to badly here but results back fro someone training his ass off with weights,cardio and BJJ classes.As well as a high protein diet.[/quote]

I am sure you have asked this already - your results are dependant on food and training and genetics. I dont know you - you know you better.
If you have never cycled before, as it seems quite evident at this point, then i would suggest running a simple test/dbol cycle or just test at 500mg/wk. This will allow you to answer many of your questions in the future when you want to run the next cycle.

I must say lad, i have lost a good amount of confidence in your ability to run a safe and effective cycle - that said, trust me you will be happy with the results given by Test/Tren/Dbol @ 500/350/280 all else being equal.

Look into dbol dosages, beginner Test dosages (even if this isnt the first cycle, you are a beginner it seems in relation to AAS) and Arimidex… you seemed a little confused on these.

JJ

[quote] Brook wrote:
Dynamo Hum wrote:
Interesting point Bill. It makes me wonder about the many who complain of acne NOT during cycle, but during PCT. I thankfully don’t seem to suffer from that affliction, but I have always used AIs during cycle to date (as I would assume most do). In fact I did experience nipple soreness while on a 580mg/w test e cycle combined with 3 x 10mg/d dbol and had to up my Adex dose 0.25mg EOD to about 0.5mg/d. The soreness cleared up after 4 or 5 days at the higher dosage.

I was under the impression you had run barely 2 cycles and done just a couple of different AAS too…

You may find that your experiences change with more androgenic cycles for example - or if you change your AI for one reason or another…

Brook[/quote]

You have a point. I guess I’ll find out when I run a cycle with tren or deca.

[quote]Dynamo Hum wrote:
Brook wrote:
Dynamo Hum wrote:
Interesting point Bill. It makes me wonder about the many who complain of acne NOT during cycle, but during PCT. I thankfully don’t seem to suffer from that affliction, but I have always used AIs during cycle to date (as I would assume most do). In fact I did experience nipple soreness while on a 580mg/w test e cycle combined with 3 x 10mg/d dbol and had to up my Adex dose 0.25mg EOD to about 0.5mg/d. The soreness cleared up after 4 or 5 days at the higher dosage.

I was under the impression you had run barely 2 cycles and done just a couple of different AAS too…

You may find that your experiences change with more androgenic cycles for example - or if you change your AI for one reason or another…

Brook

You have a point. I guess I’ll find out when I run a cycle with tren or deca.[/quote]

This site IS an excellent resource, and teaches us all much - but i know from experience that there is alot to be said for personal experience - this is because as i am so fond of saying, the different drugs affect different people in different ways - so for example before i tried Tren relatively recently i would say it was a harsh drug by all accounts - NOW, i realise that for me it is by no means harsh at ~350mg/wk and is actually quite preferable to Nandrolone whilst stacking with test - better libido, more strength and great quality gains with appropriate diet - excellent body composition benefits, all of these are accompanied by no negative sides - who’d have thunk it from this drug that can affect so many so negatively!

Just saying that while the reading is invaluable for our own knowledge before we try drugs, and to help us construct cycles for ourselves that include new untried drugs relevant to our personal goals… it isn’t always an accurate representation of what advice to pass on to others.

I am guilty of it myself on occassion of course, as it is easy to know a drugs effects on papaer and feel as though you know it inside out, but as i said - they affect people in different ways.

Brook