Best form of creatine:HCL or nitrate?
- Thread starter Palash
- Start date
wsaucer
Banned
I've tried con-cret a couple of times and I've also had a bottle of creatine nitrate. IMO they both have great strength gaining properties with CN working a little faster than con-cret. However, CN was far more superior in pumps,vascularity,and fullness.
SweetLou321
Well-known member
ive used both, i like mono
nattydisaster
PESCIENCE.com
Nitrate preworkout on workout days, monohydrate off days
JudgementDay
Legend
Creatine Nitrate, no contest!
Palash
New member
Thanks all.
Now I need to define the product.
Pure Creatine Nitrate not.
Is on the market:
1. APS Creatine Nitrate (Proprietary Blend 3000mg:
Creatine nitrate, Dicreatine malate, vitamin C
but exactly how much nitrate is not specified)
2.ThermoLife: C-Bol
Creatrate ™ - U.S. Patent Pending Creatine Nitrate, Creatine Anhydrous, Creatine HCL 3,000 mg
the same thing - do not know the value of the nitrate form
3. S.A.N.: CM2 Nitrates
i-L-Arginine-L-Malate 2grams †
B-Alanine 1.6grams †
Creatine Nitrate 1gram
4. Cellucor: C4 Extreme
Creatine Nitrate 1000mg
5. Mesomorph (388 grams)
Manufacturered By: APS
but exactly how much nitrate is not specified
What options are there?
I know the forum would like to purchase wholesale party creatine nitrate.
Now I need to define the product.
Pure Creatine Nitrate not.
Is on the market:
1. APS Creatine Nitrate (Proprietary Blend 3000mg:
Creatine nitrate, Dicreatine malate, vitamin C
but exactly how much nitrate is not specified)
2.ThermoLife: C-Bol
Creatrate ™ - U.S. Patent Pending Creatine Nitrate, Creatine Anhydrous, Creatine HCL 3,000 mg
the same thing - do not know the value of the nitrate form
3. S.A.N.: CM2 Nitrates
i-L-Arginine-L-Malate 2grams †
B-Alanine 1.6grams †
Creatine Nitrate 1gram
4. Cellucor: C4 Extreme
Creatine Nitrate 1000mg
5. Mesomorph (388 grams)
Manufacturered By: APS
but exactly how much nitrate is not specified
What options are there?
I know the forum would like to purchase wholesale party creatine nitrate.
wsaucer
Banned
I'd go with either Mesomorph(which I believe is roughly 1 gram or so but somebody please confirm/correct me),cellucor( I personally haven't used but my buddy really likes the stuff), or just plain APS Bulk CN
jtterrible
Active member
cellucor's C4 uses nitrate.. but don't use it if you're sensitive to Yohimbe.. scary as hell
JudgementDay
Legend
The Creatine Nitrate for the recommended 8 cap daily serving contains 3g of Creatine Nitrate.
Mesomorph at 1 scoop is 750mg of Creatine Nitrate.
AndrewNico
Active member
this
as for which product; they all use the same source (PII) so you'll get the same creatine nitrate out of the quality products.
APS is good for simply bulk CN
TL is good for other additional stuff
SAN isn't really good for the price
C4 is a good product for a good price
EDIT: Ergopump has ~3g of CN per serving as well. Good deal there
Mesomorph is a good addition, but shouldn't be treated as the sole source for CN
Muscle feast's product is fine, but id get more citrulline malate in bulk (they sell that too for a very good price)
other one, idk
Palash
New member
Are you sure? Then I'll buy it if 3 grams of nitrate in a single dose, as this is the only product that we sell with CN.
AndrewNico
Active member
Ive heard ~3g/serving from ergogenix reps.
tinshot
New member
Are you sure? I love creatine nitrate.
ScienceGuided
Active member
at the end of the day I love MCC over them all,monohydrate a close second
southpaw23
Well-known member
Great pick. I use it and it's an awesome product, dosed correctly.
AndrewNico
Active member
Nitrates in too high of a dose can be very harmful. in these doses though, they are very safe.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
Same. Altho I do like Orotate quite a bit as well
VolcomX311
Legend
Creatine Nitrate :deal:
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
Creatine hcl is the superior form of creatine.
Most guys are raving about creatine nitrate because they are experiencing the benefits of nitrate use (very noticeable in the short term).
Solution, take creatine hcl with a nitrate source. Profit.
Or just stack the two.
Most guys are raving about creatine nitrate because they are experiencing the benefits of nitrate use (very noticeable in the short term).
Solution, take creatine hcl with a nitrate source. Profit.
Or just stack the two.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
Please explain why you think this
AndrewNico
Active member
I like the shark avi better.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
Agreed, the Shark avi is pretty beast (badum ching)
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
There are two studies (one out of Manitoba, and one out of Univ NE Lincoln) that show superior solubility compared to creatine mono (were talking very significant results). There is a ceiling when it comes to creatine saturation. The best thing you can do to make a superior form of creatine is decrease the time it takes to reach that ceiling.
The only other benefits are a form that reduces gastric issues (which a better solubility will do), and perhaps reduce the extracellular/intracellular water ratio (which as far as I know only MCC has been shown to do).
There are currently no studies on creatine nitrate solubility, only a patent. It's possible it has greater solubility but at this point the evidence lies in favor of creatine hcl. I know Ron's team was working on funding a study. Not sure whatever came of it.
To answer your question though, creatine is creatine. Creatine itself doesnt change, only the molecule you choose to bond it with. Nitrates have awesome benefits and people should use it. And right now there are not a lot of supplemental options when it comes to nitrates and last I checked it's hard to come by beet root juice at your local grocer, and I dont want to eat 6lbs of spinach pre-workout and **** my pants half way through.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
There are two studies (one out of Manitoba, and one out of Univ NE Lincoln) that show superior solubility compared to creatine mono (were talking very significant results). There is a ceiling when it comes to creatine saturation. The best thing you can do to make a superior form of creatine is decrease the time it takes to reach that ceiling.
The only other benefits are a form that reduces gastric issues (which a better solubility will do), and perhaps reduce the extracellular/intracellular water ratio (which as far as I know only MCC has been shown to do).
There are currently no studies on creatine nitrate solubility, only a patent. It's possible it has greater solubility but at this point the evidence lies in favor of creatine hcl. I know Ron's team was working on funding a study. Not sure whatever came of it.
To answer your question though, creatine is creatine. Creatine itself doesnt change, only the molecule you choose to bond it with. Nitrates have awesome benefits and people should use it. And right now there are not a lot of supplemental options when it comes to nitrates and last I checked it's hard to come by beet root juice at your local grocer, and I dont want to eat 6lbs of spinach pre-workout and **** my pants half way through.
Solubility is irrelevant in my opinion. Once at saturation it does not matter.
I honestly dont see much of a reason to go with HCl over regular mono
I agree with you with regards to creatine nitrate and solubility. I have yet to see a study showing it has greater solubility, I only hear claims. Altho given a choice between HCl and CN. I would go with CN simply for the nitrate benefits
This is why I stick with MCC when I go with a designer creatine
The new version of White Flood that was just announced today has nitrates from beet root by the way
VolcomX311
Legend
Solubility is irrelevant in my opinion. Once at saturation it does not matter.
I honestly dont see much of a reason to go with HCl over regular mono
I agree with you with regards to creatine nitrate and solubility. I have yet to see a study showing it has greater solubility, I only hear claims. Altho given a choice between HCl and CN. I would go with CN simply for the nitrate benefits
This is why I stick with MCC when I go with a designer creatine
The new version of White Flood that was just announced today has nitrates from beet root by the way
New White Flood, I wasn't aware.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
Solubility is irrelevant in my opinion. Once at saturation it does not matter.
I honestly dont see much of a reason to go with HCl over regular mono
I agree with you with regards to creatine nitrate and solubility. I have yet to see a study showing it has greater solubility, I only hear claims. Altho given a choice between HCl and CN. I would go with CN simply for the nitrate benefits
This is why I stick with MCC when I go with a designer creatine
The new version of White Flood that was just announced today has nitrates from beet root by the way
Solubility does matter though. I suppose it may not to those that are more conscious of their wallet than their appearance (referring to extra/intracellular water retention).
Powercage
Board Sponsor
You wont bloat with pretty much any creatine if you stay within 2.5g-5g daily
Appearance should be unchanged for the most part across creatine types once at saturation
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
Research shows otherwise to a significant degree. The below study compared intracellular and extracellular water with MCC and no creatine. It was interesting because they found MCC increased ICF and decreased ECF. If you add up the total fluid weight you almost net the same. What this would produce is fuller muscles with less "flat" look.
ICF = intracellular fluid
ECF = extracellular fluid
TBW = total body weight
Invalid Link Removed
Metabolism. 2003 Sep;52(9):1136-40.
Magnesium-creatine supplementation effects on body water.
Brilla LR, Giroux MS, Taylor A, Knutzen KM.
Exercise and Sport Sciences Laboratory, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225-9067, USA.
Abstract
This study evaluated magnesium-creatine (MgCre) supplementation on body water and quadriceps torque. Maltodextran (Placebo), Mg oxide plus Cre (MgO-Cre), and Mg-creatine chelate (MgC-Cre) at 800 mg Mg and 5 g Cre per day were used for 2 weeks in 35 subjects in a random assignment, blinded study. Pre-post measures were completed with bioimpedance to determine total body water (TBW), extracellular water (ECF), and intracellular water (ICF), and an isokinetic device at 180 degrees per second for knee extension peak torque (T), total work (W), and power (PWR). Body weights increased for both treatment groups, MgO-Cre Delta 0.75 kg (P <.05) and MgC-Cre Delta 0.4 kg (P =.07). Significant pre-post differences (P <.05) were noted only for MgC-Cre in ICW (26.29 v 28.01 L) and ECW (15.75 v 14.88 L). MgC-Cre had significant peak T (Nm) increase (124.5 v135.8, P <.05), while MgO-Cre (116.4 v 124.9, P =.06) and placebo (119.8 v 123.7, P =.343) did not. Both treatment groups had increased PWR (P <.05). MgC-Cre affects cellular fluid compartments. The peak torque changes were significant only in the MgC-Cre group, which had increases in ICW that may infer more muscular creatine due to its osmotic effect, and with increased cellular hydration, perhaps increased protein synthesis.
PMID: 14506619 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
VolcomX311
Legend
Oh cool, thanks.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
This study didnt compare the effect of the MCC vs regular Creatine Mono. We dont have a baseline for how it varies concerned to regular mono
Not only that. This study was only done over 2 weeks. Time to saturation has not been achieved for other forms of creatine.
Like I said. Give it time to saturation and the differences among creatines are insignificant as far as the creatine goes.
Now with MCC you get the benefit of being absorbed more in the intestine rather than being converted in the stomach...which does not particularly affect saturation. What it will benefit is that those that have GI issues from Mono may actually find that MCC works better for them as it alleviates the GI issues. Plus, as I said before, you get some electrolyte replacement with the magnesium
Not only that. This study was only done over 2 weeks. Time to saturation has not been achieved for other forms of creatine.
Like I said. Give it time to saturation and the differences among creatines are insignificant as far as the creatine goes.
Now with MCC you get the benefit of being absorbed more in the intestine rather than being converted in the stomach...which does not particularly affect saturation. What it will benefit is that those that have GI issues from Mono may actually find that MCC works better for them as it alleviates the GI issues. Plus, as I said before, you get some electrolyte replacement with the magnesium
Powercage
Board Sponsor
But again, this still gives me no reason to really want to buy HCl
This is why MCC (Green Bulge) is my goto for creatines. Nitrates I can gain from other means such as nitrate containing intras or a preworkout
I still feel CN is a valid form of creatine because you get the nitrate benefits along with the creatine benefits. I simply prefer MCC for its GI sparing properties along with electrolyte replacement
This is why MCC (Green Bulge) is my goto for creatines. Nitrates I can gain from other means such as nitrate containing intras or a preworkout
I still feel CN is a valid form of creatine because you get the nitrate benefits along with the creatine benefits. I simply prefer MCC for its GI sparing properties along with electrolyte replacement
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
This research was not trying to determine time to saturation. It was looking at water retention. Which is well documented when it comes to mono.
Someone just said CL sells creatine nitrate now? If so this is an important fact you should understand because the same issue is improved by using CN vs Mono.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
CL does not sell creatine nitrate
You arent really grasping what Im saying about the study. You cannot really tell much from this study by saying that one form shows greater water retention 2 weeks in. You would need to allow time for all of the forms of creatine to come to saturation, then compare them. MCC may have had the best extra/intra ratio due to having the quickest time to saturation of the kinds used.
The study also doesnt show the level of water retention at the time for straight creatine mono. Which should have been included as a baseline of the study imo (if you wanted to compare to mono).
Powercage
Board Sponsor
And lastly (now Im just getting my post count up so I can post links/pics), the ICF was increased and ECF was decreased even in the placebo group (altho it wasnt significant)
This isnt really telling me anything more than I would have already assumed. MCC has an impact on the osmotic balance of a cell compared to placebo
This isnt really telling me anything more than I would have already assumed. MCC has an impact on the osmotic balance of a cell compared to placebo
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
My point is that the bold portion of your statement has been studied on multiple occasions, which is why it was not included in this study. Read the mono studies. In the short term (6-8 weeks) it's always noted that an increase in bodyweight was due to water retention (not actual LBM). Now go back to where I said:
If you add up the total fluid weight you almost net the same.
Improved forms of creatine that elicit greater solubility actually reduce body weight in the short term. And it is due to the effect we saw in this referenced MCC study.
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
If you look at the study. The second form of creatine even has less water retention than the placebo in both intracellular and extracellular. Obviously there is something going on there
You want greater intracellular water retention. Less is not a sign of a superior form of creatine.
Powercage
Board Sponsor
Again, why does this matter in the short term when most people are going to be in saturation for the large majority of time? Once at creatine saturation there wont be much of a difference between the forms of creatine unless you have GI issues
There is no reason to really cycle off creatine. Many go on it for years at a time...which makes the speed of absorption irrelevant as they pretty much never have to become saturated again.
I could see merits to greater solubility if I was constantly cycling on/off. But otherwise I wouldnt consider that part of my equation into what to buy
Royd The Noyd
Board Sponsor
Post #47 explains why this is actually a benefit, and different than mono.