Author Topic: Thinking about running this.  (Read 1905 times)

GettNit

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 43
Thinking about running this.
« on: March 21, 2007, 10:01:08 PM »
Hi I am thinking of running this for my next cycle. its a lean bulker. here is what I decided to use would like to know if anybody has tried using masteron enanthate as part of there bulking cycle? Thought I would give it a try for bulking due to the strength you get off it plus It will keep the water retention down and keep me vascular.

12 weeker. I am dropping the masteron E after 6 maybe 8 weeks.
Test enanthate- 500mg weekly
masteron enanthate- 400mg weekly
80mg tbol daily for 6 weeks

PCT just clomid ,nolva and aromasin.

Rimbaud

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9884
  • There can be only one.
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2007, 10:37:10 AM »
I think you should go 16 weeks but if you want to do 12 here's what I would recommend:

Weeks 1-12 500mg Test EW
Weeks 3-12 400mg Masteron EW
Weeks 1-8 50mg of Tbol ED

BTW- what are your stats?


Rimbaud

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9884
  • There can be only one.
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2007, 11:10:36 AM »
I forgot to add that for your PCT there's no need to use Clomid & Nolva together - just pick one (most prefer Nolva).

whitewidow

  • Guest
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #3 on: March 22, 2007, 02:33:06 PM »
I forgot to add that for your PCT there's no need to use Clomid & Nolva together - just pick one (most prefer Nolva).
I  get better results when I use the nolva and clomid together.

Rimbaud

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9884
  • There can be only one.
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2007, 02:42:46 PM »
Im 5-5 180 under 10%.  get better results when I use the nolva and clomid together.

How are the results better? This time around I'm using Clomid for PCT & for the two weeks I was taking Nolva as well. I didn't feel any different so I dropped the Nolva.

whitewidow

  • Guest
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2007, 09:04:55 PM »
How are the results better? This time around I'm using Clomid for PCT & for the two weeks I was taking Nolva as well. I didn't feel any different so I dropped the Nolva.

nolva will get your cholesterol levels back in check.

leonp1981

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2691
  • mmmmm....
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2007, 09:09:51 PM »
Whats the general verdict on Masteron?

I've looked at it before and wondered.  Isn't it quite expensive?

strength

  • Guest
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2007, 10:02:12 PM »
if youve never used masteron before, hold on to your butt cause youll enjoy the ride.  Never been so hard in my life than when i was running oral masteron.  Its a good choice if you want to try something different.  not necessary at all but it is fun.  lots of guys carry it for rather cheap also

Rimbaud

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9884
  • There can be only one.
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2007, 02:56:44 AM »
nolva will get your cholesterol levels back in check.

Really? I'll have to keep that in mind for next time.

whitewidow

  • Guest
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2007, 01:42:33 AM »
Really? I'll have to keep that in mind for next time.

Both compounds are structurally alike, classified as triphenylethylenes. Nolvadex is clearly the stronger component of the two as it can achieve better results in decreasing overall estrogen with 20-40 mg a day, than Clomid can in doses of 100-150 mg a day. A noteworthy difference. Triphenylethylenes are very mild estrogens that do not exert a lot, if any activity at the estrogen receptor, but are still highly attracted to it. As such they will occupy the receptor and keep it from binding estrogens. This means they do not actively work to reduce estrogen in the body like Proviron, Viratase or arimidex would (by competing for the aromatase enzyme), but that it blocks the receptor so that any estrogen in the body is basically inert, because it has no receptor to bind to.

This has advantages and disadvantages. The disadvantage is that when use is discontinued, the estrogen level is still the same and new problems will develop much sooner. The advantage is that it works much faster and has results sooner than with an aromatase blocker like Proviron or arimidex. Therefor, when problems such as gynocomastia occur during a cycle of steroids one will usually start 20 mg/day of nolva or 100 mg/day of Clomid straight away, in conjunction with some Proviron or arimidex. The proviron or arimidex will actively reduce estrogen while the Clomid or Nolvadex will solve your ongoing problem straight away. This way, when use is discontinued there is no immediate rebound.

So which one should you use? Well personally, I'd have to say Nolvadex. Both as an on-cycle anti-estrogen and a post-cycle therapy. As an anti-estrogen its simply much stronger, demonstrated by the fact that better results are obtained with 20-40 mg than with 100-150 mg of Clomid. For post-cycle, this plays a key role as well. It deactivates rebound estrogen much faster and more effective. But most importantly, Nolvadex has a direct influence on bringing back natural testosterone, where as Clomid may actually have a slight negative influence. The reason being that tamoxifen (as in Nolvadex) seems to increase the responsiveness of LH (luteinizing hormone) to GnRH (gonadtropin releasing hormone), whereas Clomid seems to decrease the responsiveness a bit1.

Another noteworthy fact about Nolvadex is that it acts more potently as an estrogen in the liver. As you remember, I mentioned that clomiphene and tamoxifen are basically weak estrogens. Well, tamoxifen is apparently still quite potent in the liver. This offers us the positive benefits of this hormone in the liver, while avoiding its negative effects elsewhere in the body. As such Nolvadex can have a very positive impact on negative cholesterol levels2 in the body, and therefore too should be considered a better choice than Clomid. It will not solve the problem of bad cholesterol levels during Steroid use, but will help to contain the problem to a larger degree.

Another reason why I promote the use of Nolvadex over Clomid post-cycle (as if being 3-4 times stronger and having more of a direct effect on restoring natural test wasn't enough) is because it's a lot safer. Not just because it improves lipid profiles, but also because it simply doesn't have the intrinsic side-effects that Clomid has. Clomid causes more acne for sure, but that's mainly because you need to use a 3-4 times higher dose. But Clomid seems to also affect the eyesight. Long-term Clomid therapy causes irreversible changes in eyesight3 in users. Irreversible. For me that alone is reason enough to prefer Nolvadex.

Lastly, one should be aware that use of these compounds can reduce the gains made on steroids. Nolvadex more so than Clomid, simply because it is stronger. Estrogen is responsible for a number of anabolic factors such as increasing growth hormone output, upgrading the androgen receptor and improving glucose utilization. This is why aromatizing steroids like testosterone are still best suited for maximum muscle gain. When reducing the estrogen levels, we therefore reduce the potential gains being made. For this reason one may opt to try Clomid during a cycle instead of Nolvadex. Although I would imagine that the problem that needed solved would be of more concern, in which case nolva remains the weapon of choice. It's a plain fact that there is a high correlation between gains and side-effects. Either you go for maximum gains and tolerate the side-effects, or you reduce the side-effects, and with it the gains. That's life, nothing is free.

Luv2Hurt

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6036
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #10 on: March 25, 2007, 03:53:35 AM »
Nolva has been reported to be good for lipid profiles.  Unlike the AI's a-dex or femara.  Nolva is your friend.

Rimbaud

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9884
  • There can be only one.
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #11 on: March 25, 2007, 05:41:34 AM »
Both compounds are structurally alike, classified as triphenylethylenes. Nolvadex is clearly the stronger component of the two as it can achieve better results in decreasing overall estrogen with 20-40 mg a day, than Clomid can in doses of 100-150 mg a day. A noteworthy difference. Triphenylethylenes are very mild estrogens that do not exert a lot, if any activity at the estrogen receptor, but are still highly attracted to it. As such they will occupy the receptor and keep it from binding estrogens. This means they do not actively work to reduce estrogen in the body like Proviron, Viratase or arimidex would (by competing for the aromatase enzyme), but that it blocks the receptor so that any estrogen in the body is basically inert, because it has no receptor to bind to.

This has advantages and disadvantages. The disadvantage is that when use is discontinued, the estrogen level is still the same and new problems will develop much sooner. The advantage is that it works much faster and has results sooner than with an aromatase blocker like Proviron or arimidex. Therefor, when problems such as gynocomastia occur during a cycle of steroids one will usually start 20 mg/day of nolva or 100 mg/day of Clomid straight away, in conjunction with some Proviron or arimidex. The proviron or arimidex will actively reduce estrogen while the Clomid or Nolvadex will solve your ongoing problem straight away. This way, when use is discontinued there is no immediate rebound.

So which one should you use? Well personally, I'd have to say Nolvadex. Both as an on-cycle anti-estrogen and a post-cycle therapy. As an anti-estrogen its simply much stronger, demonstrated by the fact that better results are obtained with 20-40 mg than with 100-150 mg of Clomid. For post-cycle, this plays a key role as well. It deactivates rebound estrogen much faster and more effective. But most importantly, Nolvadex has a direct influence on bringing back natural testosterone, where as Clomid may actually have a slight negative influence. The reason being that tamoxifen (as in Nolvadex) seems to increase the responsiveness of LH (luteinizing hormone) to GnRH (gonadtropin releasing hormone), whereas Clomid seems to decrease the responsiveness a bit1.

Another noteworthy fact about Nolvadex is that it acts more potently as an estrogen in the liver. As you remember, I mentioned that clomiphene and tamoxifen are basically weak estrogens. Well, tamoxifen is apparently still quite potent in the liver. This offers us the positive benefits of this hormone in the liver, while avoiding its negative effects elsewhere in the body. As such Nolvadex can have a very positive impact on negative cholesterol levels2 in the body, and therefore too should be considered a better choice than Clomid. It will not solve the problem of bad cholesterol levels during Steroid use, but will help to contain the problem to a larger degree.

Another reason why I promote the use of Nolvadex over Clomid post-cycle (as if being 3-4 times stronger and having more of a direct effect on restoring natural test wasn't enough) is because it's a lot safer. Not just because it improves lipid profiles, but also because it simply doesn't have the intrinsic side-effects that Clomid has. Clomid causes more acne for sure, but that's mainly because you need to use a 3-4 times higher dose. But Clomid seems to also affect the eyesight. Long-term Clomid therapy causes irreversible changes in eyesight3 in users. Irreversible. For me that alone is reason enough to prefer Nolvadex.

Lastly, one should be aware that use of these compounds can reduce the gains made on steroids. Nolvadex more so than Clomid, simply because it is stronger. Estrogen is responsible for a number of anabolic factors such as increasing growth hormone output, upgrading the androgen receptor and improving glucose utilization. This is why aromatizing steroids like testosterone are still best suited for maximum muscle gain. When reducing the estrogen levels, we therefore reduce the potential gains being made. For this reason one may opt to try Clomid during a cycle instead of Nolvadex. Although I would imagine that the problem that needed solved would be of more concern, in which case nolva remains the weapon of choice. It's a plain fact that there is a high correlation between gains and side-effects. Either you go for maximum gains and tolerate the side-effects, or you reduce the side-effects, and with it the gains. That's life, nothing is free.


Thanks. Check your PM's.

GettNit

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 43
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2007, 12:00:40 AM »
I think you should go 16 weeks but if you want to do 12 here's what I would recommend:

Weeks 1-12 500mg Test EW
Weeks 3-12 400mg Masteron EW
Weeks 1-8 50mg of Tbol ED

BTW- what are your stats?



Thanks.

Rimbaud

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9884
  • There can be only one.
Re: Thinking about running this.
« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2007, 07:39:48 AM »
I've used Masteron P (not E). I didn't notice any major size gains but my strength went up. I also noticed that my muscles appeared harder.