mikeymike85
Well-known member
I've never really had this look before, and either my next run (M-Sten), or a run come early next year... I want to incorporate a compound that will do this. Am I limited to Tren or Winny?
Next Cycle- Achieving the Grainy Look
- Thread starter mikeymike85
- Start date
Smont
Legend
I'm my opinion, that grainy look is from having mature muscle, genetics and getting extremely lean and dry. So nothing you take is gonna give you that look
Chados
Well-known member
Yes I agree with this but sure there are better compounds and these two are some of my favorites. I still like to add that tren takes a lot of experience to get most out of it. It's not a miracle drug.. Winstrol is extremely effective if you're somewhat lean. The grainy look will dissappear for 99% of the people though. When you're on tren you can look crazy with a tanktop and after getting off you will be disappointed most likely even if you kept a lot of muscle the visual effects will fade. This happens with all steroids somewhat its just that these two steroids will make some drastic changes when it comes to grainy/veiny look and it's also the two you'd be most disappointed if you lose that look.
If you have tried a test cycle and have problems keeping the look id say you're not ready for tren. Its just not worth the damage
Lionheart1776
Member
Absolutely not! Have you ever considered running 1-Test Cyp? It's not a well known compound by most due to the horrible pip it used to come with as well as it's lack of availability due to lack of consumer demand. Now that there are a few UGLs that carry a good PIP free version and due to how strong and mild and cheap the compound is, I see it taking off any day now as a new favorite.
It is Mg/Mg twice as anabolic at test, it doesn't convert to estrogen at all, and has a side effect profile very similar to Primo due to how molecularity similar the two compounds are. It's been said that it's almost like child compound of tren and primo or like a "super primo" as Mike Arnold called it.
Here is a quote I saved during my research on the compound from Mike Arnold who claims to have extensive experience using the compound. "1-testosterone is on the complete other side of the spectrum, but better compared to trenbolone than trestolone or testosterone. This is because 1-testosterone is essentially a dry steroid with exceptional muscle hardening effects."
I will never ever touch tren or winstrol myself except as pre contest drugs if I ever go that route due to how harsh each respective compound is after seeing "Winstrol + Tren: A Dangerous Steroid Combination" by doctor Thomas O'Conner on You-tube. And even then I'd try 1-Test cyp and or primo first due to how mild and safe they are in comparison. I'm a huge gear nerd, I formed this opinion by reading around in the internet and not from personal experience, so due take it with a grain of salt. Mike has more to say on the subject in an article he wrote "effective-alternatives-to-traditional-injectables" over at Iron Magazine, just found it in my bookmarked gear pages.
Chados
Well-known member
Winstrol is not as dangerous as people think. Superdrol, anadrol, halo, tren, dbol, M1T etc are more dangerous than winstrol.
I think the rumour comes by comparing it to anavar and people running it when out of shape and expect miracles and then realize they probably took a steroid that was more harmful and didn't see much.
Smont
Legend
I loved winni, I don't know why ppl say it's so bad, and I see these doses of 20-30mg. I know ppl that use 100 No issues. If I had to pick one oral and never use another again it would be winni
Chados
Well-known member
Yeah arguably my favorite too. It just changes my body so much. I think when you're in the right shape nothing beats it.
It crushes anavar and masteron as a finisher
Smont
Legend
I've used it while in not the greatest shape, like around 20%bf with test and t3 and made dramatic recomp with great strength gains. I think it's much more versatile then ppl believe
Chados
Well-known member
Oh for sure.. I bulked 28 pounds and leaned out but that comes with diet genetics and hard work. There are just too many thinking it's a fatloss pill which it isn't. Too many people cycling when they shouldn't even do steroids.
I mean at least dbol will give you a huge temporary size that makes people think they're the hulk for a little while haha
Smont
Legend
Absolutely, you can bulk or cut on anything if you eat accordingly
Lionheart1776
Member
For sure, the main health concern I had it mind was the lipids being crashed which all orals do. Someday I want to try a competition stack of 1-Test-CYP and the SARM known as S4. If that is the SARM that has been said to have a winny like effects by some. Dr. Tony Huge has a video where he does a SARM only competition stack and I believe he won. I am just fascinated by things being done in a different way. Ideally I love to discover a way to be able to get winny shredded with out orals and/or tren. More as just a fun experiment really, I doubt it really matters how much winny crushes lipids anyways as long as the lipids bounce back to a healthy level and are kept in a healthy range for most of the year.
DemntedCowboy
Well-known member
^^^Don't listen to this guy...Just read some of his post. He has no clue
Chados
Well-known member
Yeah but again winstrol isn't harder on om lipids than most other strong orals.. S4 is like winstrol but from what I've seen it doesn't compare. Winstrol will be effective even with a little higher bodyfat and S4 it seems like you pretty much have to be lean for it to work. It's not a steroid so they can't be compared.
YoungThor
Well-known member
Cgkone is the #1 S4 advocate on this board and he said S4 makes it very easy to lean out, so starting at a low body fat isn’t mandatory to see the change. Itll help you get to the bf you want. I’ll take his word for it. Maybe I’ll run an experiment on myself with it.
And of course diet is important and steroids/sarms aren’t magic fat burners but they sure as hell make it easier to drop some lbs.
Chados
Well-known member
No I see the benefits of S4 but winstrol is something that I personally can bulk on and lean out and that wouldn't happen with S4. Part of that has to do with winstrol building muscles and keeping water out of your body. S4 is a really nice compound if we can believe the studies and should be far more worth using than winstrol.
My point here is that any cycle will be more effective if you don't have to lose fat cause steroids build muscles and much more so if you can eat a lot of calories. Winstrol for me is better than anything I've tried included tren to get abs more noticible. It's a steroid vs a Sarm at the end of the day.
Smont
Legend
Tony huge is all about selling sarms. They don't replace steroids, but a high dose of s4 is similar to winni.
Old Witch
Well-known member
What I would do, and might do soon, is run 1-T C and test C for 16 weeks, Kick it off with DMZ 4 weeks and finish it with either anavar and T3 for 8 weeks or winstrol 4 weeks. Maybe I'm way off base there but with the experiences I've had and what I'm reading out in the world... That would be super solid.
I see now you plan to use MSten. You could simply stack that with epistane or triumphalis to get as close as probably anyone could without winstrol. Triumph is the less harsh of the two.
I see now you plan to use MSten. You could simply stack that with epistane or triumphalis to get as close as probably anyone could without winstrol. Triumph is the less harsh of the two.
mikeymike85
Well-known member
I've done DMZ kickstart with 8 week Var finisher- Granted is was utterly amazing, but it doesn't give you that really paper thin skin look. It makes you vascular as all out hell, don't get me wrong. IMO there is big difference between vascular and the paper thin skin look. Anyhow, Ive ran Triumphalis numerous times- its by far my favorite steriod behind Var. I might try Epistane, never ran it. Just need to buck up and get on Winny in near future it seems.
mikeymike85
Well-known member
After reading further.... I personally have never seen any real gains from Osta, so I have a dislike for sarms, if I'm going to put a foreign substance in my body, I'm a proponent of going all the way. That being said, is the S4 hype real for a non believer?
mixedup
Well-known member
Halotestin would give that look but you have to be low be.
Smont
Legend
I know, but unless you are carrying a decent amount of muscle and low bf, nothing is gonna do it. I know some things work better then others. Just trying to give a realistic opinion
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120A using Invalid Link Removed
Old Witch
Well-known member
Totally. A guy with higher body fat would be best off running a solid cut for a long run, before attempting a real finished look.
Old Witch
Well-known member
Osta is not really a mega mass gainer of a compound, it's really better for maintaining on a cut. S4 seems to be even more so, getting people leaner more than building slabs of muscle.
For the gear like gains you would want to be taking something like LGD4033 at around 20mg a day for 12 weeks or longer. In that way we see it's probably better to stack SARMS or SARMS and gear for the real results we want. Why not just use another AAS? Well, when searching for a solid stacking compound we run into some snags, you're mostly stuck with 19nors, and methylated orals for any real size results (no offense to mast and EQ). Wouldn't it be swell to have other options to cycle with? Enter SARMS, now there are more options.