M-Drol not as strong muscle building chemical compound as original AX Superdrol?

Page 3 of 5 First 12345 Last

  1. Well fwiw the CEL guy is fully aware of this thread. So either they are preparing a statement or just choosing not to respond...


  2. Someone reposted this at BBcom too, but no one has said anything relevant there so far.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by rpen22 View Post
    Someone reposted this at BBcom too, but no one has said anything relevant there so far.
    not surprising

    I'm wondering about the SNS question. I guess I can run upstairs and check my bottle

  4. Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00 View Post
    If people report it working, it's worth taking at $19.99. That's a good deal. But, if they're advertising it as Superdrol IMHO they should either stop advertising it or fix it. Maybe they just didn't know 5a is really differenat than 5b, who knows?
    That's true too, they might not even know.

  5. hmm thats interesting, and alot of pple seem to swear it's the same as the original... I ran the original solo about 1.5 years and worked up to 30mg, and no stack or doseage of anything i have run since comes anywhere near that stuff
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Lukass View Post
    ... I may up the dosage by 10-20 mg, so I might end up taking 40 mg or even more because I really want 6lbs out of it!
    Just remember that yes it may be a different compound than the original,but that dose will probably destroy your lipid profile.
    The LORD is my rock, my fortress, and my savior; my God is my rock, in whom I find protection. He is my shield, the power that saves me, and my place of safety.-Psalm 18:2

  7. Quote Originally Posted by TripDog View Post
    Just remember that yes it may be a different compound than the original,but that dose will probably destroy your lipid profile.
    Yea I wont go higher than 30. Im a heavy guy though... I needed about 40 AX SD (towards the end of the cycle).

    Hey have you took M-Drol?

    If so... did you gain off it? (And was it definitely the M-Drol?)

    The reason I ask is because I thought I saw a post in Dr.D's section, from you, saying you did a M-Drol pulse cycle.

    I probly confused you with some1 else though.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Lukass View Post
    Yea I wont go higher than 30. Im a heavy guy though... I needed about 40 AX superdrol (towards the end of the cycle).

    Hey have you took M-Drol?

    If so... did you gain off it? (And was it definitely the M-Drol?)

    The reason I ask is because I thought I saw a post in Dr.D's section, from you, saying you did a M-Drol pulse cycle.

    I probly confused you with some1 else though.
    No i haven't used m-drol. I pulsed the orig AX before. I doubt i will ever run a straight superdrol cycle,as it's just to toxic for my liking. I have a few bottles of the AX,and M-drol,and a methyl dx3. I will run a pulse with my next test/eq cycle rather that the 3-4 week frontload.
    The LORD is my rock, my fortress, and my savior; my God is my rock, in whom I find protection. He is my shield, the power that saves me, and my place of safety.-Psalm 18:2

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Movin_weight View Post
    hmm thats interesting, and alot of pple seem to swear it's the same as the original... I ran the original solo about 1.5 years and worked up to 30mg, and no stack or doseage of anything i have run since comes anywhere near that stuff
    If the compound is what the label claims it is, and what the results of Alston Sykes purity test confirm, then its definitely different than the original superdrol.

    Most people claim its the same because the nomenclature is almost identical, and it was advertised as an SD clone. I didn't notice until someone pointed it out to me. Now that I looked at it though, the label is stating its a different substance than the original SD.

  10. Just a heads up..the BCI powerdrol gave me ALMOST the same results on a 3 week..20mg a day cycle...i'm 215lb's so i think i dosed it low enough to where i didn't do overkill. Gained 16lb's lean on AX and 13lb's on BCI...However my next cycle will be tried and true Test-E...got my feet wet with the designer stuff now i'm waiting for my down time to be over.FWIW--buddy of mine ran AX superdrol and got delayed gyno 3 months later after a 6 week 40mg a day cycle ..getting surgery this monday...B careful with that ****..Legit post cycle therapy is a must and he wouldn't listen to me...now he regrets it.

  11. Unless I just keep seeing websites with wrong label facts, Powerdrol is missing the 17beta-hydroxy in its nomenclature.

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Wilderbeast View Post
    SNS was a very good clone of superdrol, actually you can't even call it a clone.

    The owner or AX told a vitamin store owner the truth was that the original AX superdrol and the SNS superdrol clone came from identical raw materials.

    So, as to agree with you, SNS superdrol was good yes.
    Interesting thread. I cannot speak for M-Drol, but was tempted to reply from the perspective of M-Drol being the same listed active as our old Methyl Drol product.

    When we first came out with Methyl-Drol, we had it tested for purity and also had it tested against AX Superdrol. We were told by the lab that there were actually a couple different ways that we could label the product and that the way we chose to was technically the correct way. Keep in mind, we had the product not only tested for purity, but also tested against AX Superdrol.

    To take that a step further, for those that remember when we first came out with Methyl-Drol, AX stated that they tested it themselves and then openly posted on AM (and maybe here, I cannot remember) that Methyl-Drol and their Superdrol were identical.

    Now, how does that relate to M-Drol - 2 ways - 1. Labeled the same as our Methyl Drol was and 2. on their independant testing done by RTP, it shows the compound listed on the lab report the same way.

    Keep in mind, I am no chemist so I cant offer any explanation further than what I just gave, but we had the compound itself tested for purity, we had it tested against Superdrol and the lab said it was the same, then AX acknowledged themselves that they were the same.

    Hope that helps.

  13. I find it interesting that it was always acknowledged that Methyl Drol was the same as Superdrol yet M-Drol has independant lab confirmation of testing the same as Methyl Drol did and people are saying its different.

  14. I wasn't aware that Methyl-Drol was labeled the same way.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by rpen22 View Post
    Someone reposted this at BBcom too, but no one has said anything relevant there so far.
    LOL, that could be said regarding just about every thread at bb.com.

  16. I'm not a chemist by any means, but if there is a difference between the original AX Superdrol and the newer clones, like M-Drol, is there differences between other original compounds and their cones, such as AX's Pheraplex and P-Plex?

  17. Quote Originally Posted by sns8778 View Post
    Interesting thread.
    So you had it tested against the original SD and it came back legit and you labeled it the same as MDrol?

    I had considered that this may be the case, simply a mislabeling of the product.

    Any way to confirm that you've actually got the 5a-androstane isomer and not the 5b-androstane isomer?

  18. Quote Originally Posted by stxnas View Post
    Hmm, that one slid right past me...very interesting observation. Has anybody reading this ran the original and one of the new clones? I know people loved SNS's superdrol clone, and Methyl DX3 has a great following too...CEL obviously has a following or there wouldn't be so much attention being paid to M-Drol right now...

    I'm not doubting that there are still gains with the clones or the Beta versions, but I'm really wondering how the sides differ? With DMT (PP vs Ergo) the Beta seemed to have a more apparent sides for most. I wonder if the same goes here?
    Ours is the exact same ingredient listing and also tested out the same as SNS's Methyl Drol.

  19. Are CEL and SNS connected(the same)?

  20. Quote Originally Posted by Travis View Post
    Well fwiw the CEL guy is fully aware of this thread. So either they are preparing a statement or just choosing not to respond...
    Not sure how to interpret the tone there so let me just state that I just started posting on AM so alot of people here may not know me as well as some on other forums. I work full time for the company and have alot of responisbilities in day to day operations there. I try to devote as much time as I can to the forums, but if I dont reply, its not that Im not avoiding anything, its that I dont necessarily have time everyday to do so. I am sorry for that, I do the best I can.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by sns8778 View Post
    Interesting thread. I cannot speak for M-Drol, but was tempted to reply from the perspective of M-Drol being the same listed active as our old Methyl Drol product.

    When we first came out with Methyl-Drol, we had it tested for purity and also had it tested against AX Superdrol. We were told by the lab that there were actually a couple different ways that we could label the product and that the way we chose to was technically the correct way. Keep in mind, we had the product not only tested for purity, but also tested against AX Superdrol.

    To take that a step further, for those that remember when we first came out with Methyl-Drol, AX stated that they tested it themselves and then openly posted on AM (and maybe here, I cannot remember) that Methyl-Drol and their Superdrol were identical.

    Now, how does that relate to M-Drol - 2 ways - 1. Labeled the same as our Methyl Drol was and 2. on their independant testing done by RTP, it shows the compound listed on the lab report the same way.

    Keep in mind, I am no chemist so I cant offer any explanation further than what I just gave, but we had the compound itself tested for purity, we had it tested against Superdrol and the lab said it was the same, then AX acknowledged themselves that they were the same.

    Hope that helps.
    Thank you so much for that acknowledgement.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by CompEdgeLabs View Post
    That is my line of thought. AX even acknowledged that Methyl Drol was identical to Superdrol. Ours is not labeled exactly the same as SNS's was and also it tested out identical to it.
    So, is MDrol just mislabeled? If so, any plans on fixing the labels in the coming future?

  23. well, heres another question. how differently do the a + b isomers appear in a GC ?

  24. Quote Originally Posted by Botch View Post
    Oh my bad anEVOL is one of those ridiculous double methyls. It also has Phera-Plex. But the Superdrol in it is still 5a. Here is what the label says: 2a,17a-dimethyl-17B-hydroxy-5a-etiocholan-1-ene-one 17a-methyl-17B-hydroxy-5a-etiocholan-2-ene
    Just an FYI, a double methyl isn't a big deal. Methyl groups aren't inherently bad for you, its SPECIFICALLY the methyl group that protects the C17 beta hydroxyl group that causes your liver enzymes to go crazy.

    So, if it says 17a-methyl in the chemical name of the steroid hormone THEN its the type of methyl that will cause you problems. The methyl groups elsewhere aren't necessarily an issue, although there are other factors, of which I'm not educated enough to speak of, that contribue to toxicity of hormones.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    well, heres another question. how differently do the a + b isomers appear in a GC ?
    That's a question that I don't know the answer to, but I'd guess that the 5a and 5b androstane's would have different fragmentation patterns in a mass spectroscopy because there is more steric strain on the 5b isomer, so if the GC's are matching up between the original superdrol And MDrol, etc, I'd say its likely that these are the same products and that simply the incorrect nomenclature was used to describe MDrol (and similars).
    Last edited by kwyckemynd00; 11-10-2007 at 09:06 PM.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Good strong PH for muscle building
    By EasternLEGEND in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 07-16-2015, 10:07 PM
  2. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-26-2010, 03:29 PM
  3. Just signed up for the muscle building program
    By firebird in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-15-2005, 07:45 PM
  4. IGF-1, insulin and muscle building ?
    By chi_town in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-22-2003, 04:32 PM
  5. Keto Muscle Building
    By Carl Willingham in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-26-2003, 06:03 PM
Log in
Log in