With all the new Creatines out there, is anything TRULY better then Creatine Mono?

[mdgrwl]

With all the special 'blends' and 'delivery systems', i.e Creatine Gluconate, Dicreatine Malate, Magnesium Creatine Chelate and so on... my question is, has anyone truly found these to be any better then Mono strictly in the strength/endurance results department? Yes, perhaps taste, or perhaps a less bloat, stomach issues ect... but straight up strength/endurance... ?

I personally have only tried Creatine Mono, SizeON, and Green Mag (Ragnarok/SuperPump/No-Shotgun if you count those) and so far I honestly find Mono to be the best... perhaps a little bloat, but strength/endurance was better then all of the above.

Has anyone HONESTLY had better results with anything other then Creatine Mono for strength/endurance? If so please share, because I'm just bout ready to go back to Mono and nothing else...

 

[RenegadeRows]

Yup. There's been some studies comparing the 'new forms' to mono, and the new forms show very good with strength gains. Synergestic Effects of Magnesium and Creatine on Ergogenic Performance

You also have to take into account the new forms of creatine are usually in a 'pre workout' matrix that contains other ingredients that enhance creatine or enhance your own endurance and strength as well.

Less bloat is enough reason for me to stay with em

 

[mdgrwl]

bump

 

[Distilled Water]

Right now I use No-Shotgun Preworkout (has insulin mimic properties) & SizeOn Intra-workout (has carbs & insulin mimic properties) and I won't give them up for the world!

:think:

 

[Mass_69]

shooda made this a poll.

 

[mdgrwl]

:think:

Perhaps I was a bit overzealous in writing that... I did post in another thread afterwards (I believe the "Neovar vs. SizeOn") that I'm not feeling SizeOn's effect anymore... it doesn't seem that endurance is as high as when I first took it. At first, it was great being I haven't supplemented with a creatine product for a while prior to its use, so it gave me a good 'jolt' in terms of endurance, but now, seemingly to subside. Weird... maybe I'm just expecting too much?

Anywhoo, I remember Mono being better, and having that 'endurance' feeling all the way through.
Its my honest opinion that all these special blends/delivery systems are just a new way for the supplement industry to make money. I'm not saying they aren't effective, but I'm not so sure they are AS effective as the first, good ol' Monohydrate.

I mean, if they are truly, scientifically better, wouldn't only one or two be in use industry wide? Now we have Chelate, Magnz, Gluc, Orit, Phosph, EE, Kre, and so on...
Just a theory here so don't jump down my throat.
It just seems like a whole lotta 'delivery systems' that just flooded the market with little science or studies comparing them. I mean, could you tell me which is better, Creatine Mag vs. Creatine Gluc ?

Anyway, that theory, in addition to my own experience of Mono being more effective is why I started this thread.

 

[Timmo]

I really think its individual. Some forms of creatine work better for others than they will for you. If you find a creatine product that gives you good results stick with it. But as far as me personally I have had much better results with all new forms of creatine in comparison to mono, I couldnt keep mono down no matter what I tried drinking it with.

 

[Force of Green]

Yup. There's been some studies comparing the 'new forms' to mono, and the new forms show very good with strength gains. Synergestic Effects of Magnesium and Creatine on Ergogenic Performance

You also have to take into account the new forms of creatine are usually in a 'pre workout' matrix that contains other ingredients that enhance creatine or enhance your own endurance and strength as well.

Less bloat is enough reason for me to stay with em

Bro, you guys are genius with the Green Magnitude! Force of Green uses 1 scoop Green Magnitude for killer workouts!

 

[Distilled Water]

I love mono personally. I haven't tried many other's and if I do I still add a little mono in there. The cost to gain ratio is too good for me to switch to anything else.

 

[Nightwanderer]

I love mono personally. I haven't tried many other's and if I do I still add a little mono in there. The cost to gain ratio is too good for me to switch to anything else.

X2. I don't respond at all to any other form anyway, or so it seems.
I dump 5g into my ragnarok and a bit of honey, nice pre workout.

 

[mdgrwl]

X2. I don't respond at all to any other form anyway, or so it seems.
I dump 5g into my ragnarok and a bit of honey, nice pre workout.

See, thats my point exactly. Why would you need to add creatine to Ragnarok, which already contains 4.5 grams of super duper high quality molecularly attached creatines?

I think they DO work, just not as well as Mono.

Just wish Mono didn't bloat me, but I love the way I feel in the gym from Mono. Nothing has given me that type of endurance yet.