Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Creatine anhydrous vs Creatine monohydrate vs Creatine HCL

ForceOfNature

Member
Hey guys. I was just wondering the differences between these and which would be most effective. I hear there is not a significant difference between anhydrous and monohydrate since anhydrous is just monohydrate with the water molecules removed. Hcl is very controversial where some people swear it's the king while others say it's just a glorified name with a hefty price tag. Which is most effective and what are the differences?

There can only be one King!
 
ForceOfNature said:
Hey guys. I was just wondering the differences between these and which would be most effective. I hear there is not a significant difference between anhydrous and monohydrate since anhydrous is just monohydrate with the water molecules removed. Hcl is very controversial where some people swear it's the king while others say it's just a glorified name with a hefty price tag. Which is most effective and what are the differences?

There can only be one King!
Click to expand...

Creatine Mono is the #1 studied creatine on the market, it has plenty of pubmed research to back its name. A major reason why it is utilized in many products on the market for its strength, endurance, and performance benefits.

Creatine hydrochloride is creatine bound with hydrochloric acid. It’s turned into a basic creatine molecule by stomach acid. Like other forms of creatine, creatine HCL may be more water soluble than monohydrate, but this has no effect on absorption.

Creatine anhydrous is creatine monohydrate with the water removed. It provides slightly more creatine than creatine monohydrate on a gram-per-gram basis, but it has never been shown to be more effective.
 
ForceOfNature said:
Hey guys. I was just wondering the differences between these and which would be most effective. I hear there is not a significant difference between anhydrous and monohydrate since anhydrous is just monohydrate with the water molecules removed. Hcl is very controversial where some people swear it's the king while others say it's just a glorified name with a hefty price tag. Which is most effective and what are the differences?

There can only be one King!
Click to expand...

Creatine mono is studied, and cheap. I see no reason to go with any other.
 
As of now creatine monohydrate is by far the tried and true. But that doesn't mean one of the others just hasn't been around long enough to compete. That just means the research is done using monohydrate.

As The Solution said there's no proven effect on absorption with either but being more water soluble may prove distinctively more benificial with time, who knows.

As for now, if buying straight creatine, I see no point in spending money on an expensive form than monohydrate, given it's from a reputable source. But in buying a creatine containing product; I wouldn't turn my nose up at a product for using an alternative form of creatine if dosed properly.

My 2cents
 
K_pem said:
As of now creatine monohydrate is by far the tried and true. But that doesn't mean one of the others just hasn't been around long enough to compete. That just means the research is done using monohydrate.

As The Solution said there's no proven effect on absorption with either but being more water soluble may prove distinctively more benificial with time, who knows.

As for now, if buying straight creatine, I see no point in spending money on an expensive form than monohydrate, given it's from a reputable source. But in buying a creatine containing product; I wouldn't turn my nose up at a product for using an alternative form of creatine if dosed properly.

My 2cents
Click to expand...

Most forms of creatine have been adequately studied for absorption and monos absorption rate is so good that the need for other forms is reduced.

I imagine athletix used it to reduce the serving scoop size, but thats just a guess
 
Jiigzz said:
Most forms of creatine have been adequately studied for absorption and monos absorption rate is so good that the need for other forms is reduced.

I imagine athletix used it to reduce the serving scoop size, but thats just a guess
Click to expand...

Adequately yes. What I was trying to get at was that nothing is proven yet to be more effective then mono; to the best of my knowledge at least!
 
Mono is by far the best if you're just buying solo creatine. You can get 1000g for 15-20$ which is about 200-250 servings.

That being said if you're going into the realm of a rounded product like e9 (which is awesome if you have the money to harness the 8 awesome additions) the most important thing is to make sure the product you use is giving you that 3-5g of creatine a day.
 
So long as you're getting the sufficient 3-5g creatine per day to maintain tissue saturation then there really is no "best". We use anhydrous in ergonine because it is more creatine per gram and this allows us to fit more into the formula without increasing scoop size as jiigzz suggested
 
Tried and true mono all the way!
 
grab some mono and call it GOOD! buy 1.2 kg from SNS.... should last a while :)

Invalid Link Removed,
 
CreMax XT worth looking into as it uses a mix of Monohydrate and Magensium Creatine Chelate as well as full dose 2.5g Betaine Anhydrous and a big dose of Amentoflavone among other things. Awesome product for strength and power output!
 
Adizzle1 said:
CreMax XT worth looking into as it uses a mix of Monohydrate and Magensium Creatine Chelate as well as full dose 2.5g Betaine Anhydrous and a big dose of Amentoflavone among other things. Awesome product for strength and power output!
Click to expand...

we've got a GREAT sale on this versatile supp at Nutriverse as well.... check supplement deals section for more info!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top