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

Unreal's Guide to Superdrol

What do you guys think of this cycle? I've done my research but would still like any opinions. 6 week cycle - superdrol - 1-3
Tren liquavade - 1-6
Epi - 3-6
You guys think this would be too harsh?
 
it's a bit much, besides the liver, also consider that the shutdown is pretty considerable between Tren and Superdrol especially. My response to Tren was particularly unlucky and from the way it destroyed my libido I would guess that it shut me down worse than I've ever been. SD + Tren has been done a lot before but I think that combination will tend to cause pretty intense suppression and loss of sex drive in many users.
 
What about if I ran on cycle ancillaries like nolvadex and arimidex? Still too much? I would run hcg as well but I don't know where to get it
 
Oh and one other thing - would rubbing 10 g anrodgel a day make any difference if I did it throughout? Is the suppression worrisome because I would have no testosterone at all or is it more worrisome because it might be too hard to jumpstart back up during PCT?
 
Unreal, as you are on of the very, very few users here who actually got quite a body with the help of chemicals, what were you stats (DL, BP, SQ - 1 RMs) the day before your very first cycle or injection, meaning when you were 100% clean?

I guess you were developed already quite a bit back then. Sorry for OT.
 
SpargelJanusz said:
Unreal, as you are on of the very, very few users here who actually got quite a body with the help of chemicals, what were you stats (DL, BP, SQ - 1 RMs) the day before your very first cycle or injection, meaning when you were 100% clean?

I guess you were developed already quite a bit back then. Sorry for OT.
Click to expand...

I am curious as well. What about your bf % and starting weight?
 
...
Something that I never got the jist of on the pulsing idea was that if one pulses 90mg/week x 6 weeks and another takes 140mg/week x 4 weeks, then the overall amount per mg taken during the cycle is close to being the same.

How does this not cause the same side effects or does it not matter about the overall intake throughout the cycle but just the single dose and how much of any impact a single dose has?.
 
SpargelJanusz said:
Unreal, as you are on of the very, very few users here who actually got quite a body with the help of chemicals, what were you stats (DL, BP, SQ - 1 RMs) the day before your very first cycle or injection, meaning when you were 100% clean?

I guess you were developed already quite a bit back then. Sorry for OT.
Click to expand...

right well i lifted somewhat in high school 2002-2003 then barely lifted at all and got pretty fat until 2006, started up again and bulked naturally, bulking was the name of the game.

in 2007 i naturally hit 6'1 and 235-240 pounds, i was probably like 18% bf though. I have never been strong for my size, my bench was only 325, my squats not much over 400. And in my last 2 years of cycling I haven't really gotten much bigger or much stronger than i was naturally; they contributed little, but the strict diet i accustomed myself to helped me retain LBM while getting my bodyfat down.

Anyway to be honest I didn't think I was that big and certainly not very strong and I think I jumped the gun on steroid use, readily admitted this to myself. So when I see people with stats that demonstrate that they don't know how to bulk, I am upset, because obviously steroids are not necessary.
 
hardknock said:
...
Something that I never got the jist of on the pulsing idea was that if one pulses 90mg/week x 6 weeks and another takes 140mg/week x 4 weeks, then the overall amount per mg taken during the cycle is close to being the same.

How does this not cause the same side effects or does it not matter about the overall intake throughout the cycle but just the single dose and how much of any impact a single dose has?.
Click to expand...

The side effects will be a function of the rate of steroid intake, not the sum total over a given period of time.

So 140mg*4 weeks has a higher rate and will provide a higher rate of suppression and higher likelihood of side effects. But being 4 weeks the sides won't last as long and the sum total of the sides over 140*4 weeks should be equal to 90*6 weeks.
 
Thanks man, but a big "LOL" @ "my bench was only 325". I totally believe you, but do you realize 90% of the running jokes around here don't even reach this on their x-th cycle.... (you know, the guys who bench 180 lbs for 5 reps and plan their first cycle)

So to bench this and squat this as a natty is damn impressive. No reason for false modesty.
 
duttvg84 said:
2a, 17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxy-5a-androstan-3-one
mdrol - 2a, 17a-dimethyl-17b-hydroxy-5b-androstan-3-one
so is there a diff between these two? and iyo, which one is better?
Click to expand...

orig. sd = 5a skeloton isomer
mdrol = 5b skeloton isomer

5a is stronger and more harsh on sides
5b is mild with less harsh on sides.

im currently (started today) running 10mg m-f of mastavol (5a).
i've ran a version of the 5b before, and didn't really notice it. could of been the company though, but i'll see.
 
UnrealMachine said:
it's a bit much, besides the liver, also consider that the shutdown is pretty considerable between Tren and Superdrol especially. My response to Tren was particularly unlucky and from the way it destroyed my libido I would guess that it shut me down worse than I've ever been. SD + Tren has been done a lot before but I think that combination will tend to cause pretty intense suppression and loss of sex drive in many users.
Click to expand...

tren actually increases my libido, and i may be one of the few that have this. tren's suppression varies (IMO) so incredibly much on an individual basis, its almost impossible to guess what happens. i have friends that were "active" 2-3 times per week and had their libido drop to once every two weeks. mine went from 5-6 times per week to 9 times.

for this reason, i think tren's suppression is highly variable, and quite possibly could be dietary related, though i really don't know the answer to this - random speculation. i'd like to hear your thoughts on this unreal if time permits.
 
SpargelJanusz said:
Thanks man, but a big "LOL" @ "my bench was only 325". I totally believe you, but do you realize 90% of the running jokes around here don't even reach this on their x-th cycle.... (you know, the guys who bench 180 lbs for 5 reps and plan their first cycle)

So to bench this and squat this as a natty is damn impressive. No reason for false modesty.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty serious though, in the high school weightroom the stronger sophomores and juniors could bench 225-300 and some of the stronger seniors could bench over 300. And this wasn't a big HS and we didn't have a great football team.
One of my close friends, who inspired me to lift weights, hit 405 on bench when he was 18 and natural. We're talking about high schoolers here... And i was right with them in high school, I hit about 250 on bench when I was 16 before I stopped.

I've got high standards because of what I've done and because of what I've seen my friends do, other friends hitting 300 on bench naturally after only a few years of training, no problem. I don't think that me and my friends are a group with great benching genetics, I just think we try harder than most people.

Yep that's my elitist way and because of my background I can't much help it. Reppin' 180 on bench... i was doing that the same year I started lifting weights when I was 15. I know for a fact that most people that lift weights don't have that inner drive deep from within to succeed, they just kind of go through the motions day after day and hope that it adds up to something. That's why I see people here that say they are like 6'1 180 pounds and been training for 6 years. I'm like DUDE at any point in your training did you think to actually TRY to eat some FOOD and build some muscle or were you just going to the gym for 6 years to pat yourself on the back and give yourself the illusion that you were really doing something?? Training for 6 years 10 years 20 years don't matter if it's lazy-ass training... There are 15-16 year old kids bigger and stronger than a lot of the people cycling here after "training" for 10 years and to me it's all just pathetic.

Sorry for the rant.

suncloud said:
tren actually increases my libido, and i may be one of the few that have this. tren's suppression varies (IMO) so incredibly much on an individual basis, its almost impossible to guess what happens. i have friends that were "active" 2-3 times per week and had their libido drop to once every two weeks. mine went from 5-6 times per week to 9 times.

for this reason, i think tren's suppression is highly variable, and quite possibly could be dietary related, though i really don't know the answer to this - random speculation. i'd like to hear your thoughts on this unreal if time permits.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's interesting how some people can get a libido boost of tren (and real trenbolone too). Consider yourself lucky I think. I still tend to think that the suppression will still be significant even if there is a rise in libido but who can know anything for certain without bloodwork.
 
Sometimes I believe that people try and eat too clean. I mean seriously, some people talk about becoming Ronnie or Jay, Dexter or similar and these guys take down an amazing amount of food.
Honestly these guys go without in their bb infancy just to spend on food.
You have to be willing to gain weight, no matter what, in order to stand on stage at a show and garner a trophy.
...
Then you have people like me who has an unorthadox high metab...i could eat donuts a month str8 and still have a 12 pack. It looks good but it sucks that I can't really gain major weight though...i may put on 10-15lbs here or there but that's it. As far as roids go, I've been there and never again will I venture back to those days. The highs were great, the lows were miserable. I just can't get back into them...just my short story.
 
Oh btw, thanks for the input on the Q I asked...that is along the lines of my logic.
 
Hey Unreal....if it makes you feel any better, i'm 6'0 230 and have been training for about 6 years and am just now getting into PH/DS/AAS
:biggthumpup:
 
Bump to this great thead cause there are too many people out there that have no idea on how to run this stuff... Can we get a sticky please!!!!
 
I think I've figured this out before but maybe I am wrong.

If a person takes 30mg at one time, does the body take longer to break it down as opposed to taking 10mg 3xday?

I know I've read that 3xday keeps you in an anabolic balanced state longer but does that mean taking heavy doses at once cause the body to try and absorb it all in a short time period? Or, does the body not care and only absorbs so much per time period?
That last statement doesn't seem correct though because at that logic, no one would ever OD on any drugs.
 
hardknock said:
I think I've figured this out before but maybe I am wrong.

If a person takes 30mg at one time, does the body take longer to break it down as opposed to taking 10mg 3xday?

I know I've read that 3xday keeps you in an anabolic balanced state longer but does that mean taking heavy doses at once cause the body to try and absorb it all in a short time period? Or, does the body not care and only absorbs so much per time period?
That last statement doesn't seem correct though because at that logic, no one would ever OD on any drugs.
Click to expand...

I seem to vaguely remember reading something from Bill Roberts over on T-Nation that if you take the entire dose at once....you'll see less gains and less sides and if you spread it out you'll see more gain and more sides or something like that.

I could also be completely wrong....i'll have to dig for that post it's barried somewhere. Unreal can you shed any light on the topic?
 
TheDarkHalf said:
I seem to vaguely remember reading something from Bill Roberts over on T-Nation that if you take the entire dose at once....you'll see less gains and less sides and if you spread it out you'll see more gain and more sides or something like that.

I could also be completely wrong....i'll have to dig for that post it's barried somewhere. Unreal can you shed any light on the topic?
Click to expand...
...
I'd have to dig up my old notes because I haven't studied absorbtion times in a few years.

I know if you stay constant over the course of the day that you are supposed to see more gains due to keeping your body in a constant anabolic state as oppsed to doing one large does.

Although my questions leans more toward absorbtion time rather than effective dosing timing, what you mentioned is still a good topic that needs to be rehashed.
 
TheDarkHalf said:
I seem to vaguely remember reading something from Bill Roberts over on T-Nation that if you take the entire dose at once....you'll see less gains and less sides and if you spread it out you'll see more gain and more sides or something like that.

I could also be completely wrong....i'll have to dig for that post it's barried somewhere. Unreal can you shed any light on the topic?
Click to expand...

You'll have less inhibition if you take the full dose as early as possible in the AM. If you take the full dose in the PM, it won't minimize suppression at all.

AM dose: less gains, less supression

Spread throughout day: more gains, more supression
 
What's the difference between the origional SD with the a isomer and the clones B isomer on gains sides and toxisity? How do they compare
 
marco wolf said:
You'll have less inhibition if you take the full dose as early as possible in the AM. If you take the full dose in the PM, it won't minimize suppression at all.

AM dose: less gains, less supression

Spread throughout day: more gains, more supression
Click to expand...
...
How about anything concerning absorption time of 10mg vs 30mg..or 10mg vs 50mg...or any mgs vs a higher mg doses.

I am talking general terms of all drugs not just steroids.
 
jbryand101b said:
orig. sd = 5a skeloton isomer
mdrol = 5b skeloton isomer

5a is stronger and more harsh on sides
5b is mild with less harsh on sides.

im currently (started today) running 10mg m-f of mastavol (5a).
i've ran a version of the 5b before, and didn't really notice it. could of been the company though, but i'll see.
Click to expand...

Wait a sec, I thought the 5a isomer was the more anabolic, less androgenic isomer (cleaner), and the 5b was less anabolic/more androgenic (dirty). In terms of non-androgenic sides such as liver stress, BP, etc, I guess what you said is true, but not for hairloss, prostate issues, etc.
 
hardknock said:
...
I'd have to dig up my old notes because I haven't studied absorbtion times in a few years.

I know if you stay constant over the course of the day that you are supposed to see more gains due to keeping your body in a constant anabolic state as oppsed to doing one large does.

Although my questions leans more toward absorbtion time rather than effective dosing timing, what you mentioned is still a good topic that needs to be rehashed.
Click to expand...

marco wolf said:
You'll have less inhibition if you take the full dose as early as possible in the AM. If you take the full dose in the PM, it won't minimize suppression at all.

AM dose: less gains, less supression

Spread throughout day: more gains, more supression
Click to expand...

hardknock said:
...
How about anything concerning absorption time of 10mg vs 30mg..or 10mg vs 50mg...or any mgs vs a higher mg doses.

I am talking general terms of all drugs not just steroids.
Click to expand...

:werd:
 
if it was m-drol, could have been one of the bunk batches. Does anyone have comparisons of the old vs new SD products. Is the 5b really less sides and less gains.
 
Bill Roberts wasn't talking about absorption rates, per se. He was specifically talking about full dosing in the AM to minimize supression vs. spacing the dosage out evenly for maximum gains.
 
Primordial Performance is coming out with SD that can be dosed to allow for even blood plasma lvls. ex 5mg doses
 
marco wolf said:
Bill Roberts wasn't talking about absorption rates, per se. He was specifically talking about full dosing in the AM to minimize supression vs. spacing the dosage out evenly for maximum gains.
Click to expand...
..
I got you.
But, I didn't know if you had any links that dicussed absorption rates of low doses vs larger doses.

I can't remember what I had in my notes from 6 or 7 years ago but I want to say that if one took, say, 500MG of codone and the body absorbed it in 1hr and same person took 2000mg of codone the body would attempt to absorb 2000 mg of it in a similar time period which would cause severe side effects/ODing or similar ... same as for steroids...10mg would be absorbed at the same rate as 40mg causing a larger spike?

Same as over eating. Your body doesn't wait to absorb food at a slower rate just because you ate to much. It should absorb 1 chicken breast at a relative rate to absorbing 8 chicken breast, hence the sick feeling on the stomach after over eating...
I might be wrong but I think that is it as I remember.
 
Dragon13 said:
Wait a sec, I thought the 5a isomer was the more anabolic, less androgenic isomer (cleaner), and the 5b was less anabolic/more androgenic (dirty). In terms of non-androgenic sides such as liver stress, BP, etc, I guess what you said is true, but not for hairloss, prostate issues, etc.
Click to expand...

I havn't read that the 5a is less androgenic. i just know it is stronger, and the sides are more pronounced. lethargy, back pumps, elevated values...

with adding the increased effect of the compoud, i would think it is more of both worlds, which is the reason it is felt more, while the other seems to be less harsh.

again, i've never seen anything stating it is less androgenic (5a) or more than the 5b. so i would just have to go off of what is logical from what i know about steroids.
 
hardknock said:
..
I got you.
But, I didn't know if you had any links that dicussed absorption rates of low doses vs larger doses.

I can't remember what I had in my notes from 6 or 7 years ago but I want to say that if one took, say, 500MG of codone and the body absorbed it in 1hr and same person took 2000mg of codone the body would attempt to absorb 2000 mg of it in a similar time period which would cause severe side effects/ODing or similar ... same as for steroids...10mg would be absorbed at the same rate as 40mg causing a larger spike?

Same as over eating. Your body doesn't wait to absorb food at a slower rate just because you ate to much. It should absorb 1 chicken breast at a relative rate to absorbing 8 chicken breast, hence the sick feeling on the stomach after over eating...
I might be wrong but I think that is it as I remember.
Click to expand...

this is right---^
if you take 40mg of sd at once, you body will use all 40.
the only reason how much you dose will effect shut down is the effect 10mg has on your hpta vs 40mg has on your hpta function.
so if your hpta is more sensitive to 40mg at once, vs 10mg at once, you still may be shut down if you take it every day, even in the am.
a larger dose will give you a larger spike in blood concentrations and would be useful if you are say a power lifter, or just looking for that big surge.
but you will get 40mg of sides for the half life of w/e drug you are taking vs 10mg. something to keep in mind.
only way for a person to be sure, if for that person to experiment, and get blood work to show if their hormone panels are effected.
 
Found this:

The half-life of Dianabol is only about 3 to 4 hours, a relatively short time. This means that a single daily dosage schedule will produce a varying blood level, with ups and downs throughout the day. The user likewise has a choice, to either split up the tablets during the day or to take them all at one time. The usual recommendation has been to divide them and try to regulate the concentration in your blood. This however, will produce a lower peak blood level than if the tablets were taken all at once, so there may be a trade off with this option. The steroid researcher Bill Roberts also points out that a single-episode dosing schedule should have a less dramatic impact on the hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis, as there is a sufficient period each day where steroid hormone levels are not extremely exaggerated. I tend to doubt hormonal stability can be maintained during such a cycle however, but do notice that anecdotal evidence often still supports single daily doses to be better for overall results. Perhaps this is the better option. Since we know the blood concentration will peak about 1.5 to 3 hours after administration, we may further wonder the best time to take our tablets. It seems logical that taking the pills earlier in the day, preferably some time before training, would be optimal. This would allow a considerable number of daytime hours for an androgen rich metabolism to heighten the uptake of nutrients, especially the critical hours following training.
Click to expand...
 
jbryand101b said:
I havn't read that the 5a is less androgenic. i just know it is stronger, and the sides are more pronounced. lethargy, back pumps, elevated values...

with adding the increased effect of the compoud, i would think it is more of both worlds, which is the reason it is felt more, while the other seems to be less harsh.

again, i've never seen anything stating it is less androgenic (5a) or more than the 5b. so i would just have to go off of what is logical from what i know about steroids.
Click to expand...

Read this thread: Invalid Link Removed. There are other on this board that reference it and have a similar discussion, notably Unreal's M-drol mini-log.

At this point, it all boils down to what you believe. Do you believe that there is a potential isomer issue or some other issue with the raws, COAs and testing notwithstanding? Or do you believe that it is merely a nomenclature labeling issue, and that all the SD clones get the same raws and all are exact replicas of DS/AX original SD?

If the former, then a isomers are inherently more anabolic, and b isomers are inherently more androgenic. That's a fact, and is true of any steroid, not just SD. This information can be found if you do some searching.

If the latter, however, then we're all just spinning our wheels, and all the clones are the samd thing.

Guess which scenario I believe.
 
Dragon13 said:
Read this thread: Invalid Link Removed. There are other on this board that reference it and have a similar discussion, notably Unreal's M-drol mini-log.

At this point, it all boils down to what you believe. Do you believe that there is a potential isomer issue or some other issue with the raws, COAs and testing notwithstanding? Or do you believe that it is merely a nomenclature labeling issue, and that all the SD clones get the same raws and all are exact replicas of DS/AX original SD?

If the former, then a isomers are inherently more anabolic, and b isomers are inherently more androgenic. That's a fact, and is true of any steroid, not just SD. This information can be found if you do some searching.

If the latter, however, then we're all just spinning our wheels, and all the clones are the samd thing.

Guess which scenario I believe.
Click to expand...

i think that link killed some of my brain cells. j/k
any how, so from what i can get from reading, I havn't been able to find a actual "difference" in the androgenic/anabolic rating on the two nomenclatures, what seems to make the difference is in how well the A isomer binds to the A.R. vs how well the B isomer (either) doesn't bind to the a.r. or if it can bind at all.

and if it can not bind, which i dont think is the case here, then that would call in the question of having accurate nomenclature info from the label of the bottle of mdrol, which, seeing how long mdrol has been in production, if it was incorrect, i think they would of fixed it by now.

so for now, until I can dig up some more info on this subject, from the nomenclature info i've been reading, the b isomer is less potent due to it binding less than what the A isomer binds, which is why the A is so much more potent.
I bumped "nomenclature for dummies" hoping for an answer.

btw, it pisses me off there is no info about this subject in anabolics 9th edition from Llewellyn. Anyone know if S.roberts talks about it in his book?
Have to get a copy of vidas androgens and anabolic agents. digital.
 
I have vida pdf but not hyper linked with all of the bells and whistles.

I have a person that I am aware of who had it recopied in pdf with search links and hyper linked toc. If I could get that then it would make using the literature much easier.
 
hardknock said:
I have vida pdf but not hyper linked with all of the bells and whistles.

I have a person that I am aware of who had it recopied in pdf with search links and hyper linked toc. If I could get that then it would make using the literature much easier.
Click to expand...

it's out there in pdf format, i just have to take the time to d.l it, which could take a few hours. so some day....
 
jbryand101b said:
it's out there in pdf format, i just have to take the time to d.l it, which could take a few hours. so some day....
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you have some form of transport, saying, yahoo or something, then you can just d/l it from me. I don't know how fast yahoo, aol, or whatever chat client around now a days is,but I have the pdf version, but not the pdf version with hyperlinks to where you can jump around the whole book by typing in a search word. A guy I know has that version.
 
hardknock said:
Yeah, if you have some form of transport, saying, yahoo or something, then you can just d/l it from me. I don't know how fast yahoo, aol, or whatever chat client around now a days is,but I have the pdf version, but not the pdf version with hyperlinks to where you can jump around the whole book by typing in a search word. A guy I know has that version.
Click to expand...

holy crap, there is a version like that? i have the plain pdf version of anabolics 9th edition and have been suffering that, thinking it was all i could have.
 
If you dose higher, it'll take a little more time to absorb and for all of it to take effect than a low dose, but it'll still function far, far faster than spreading the dose out through the day.
 
UnrealMachine said:
If you dose higher, it'll take a little more time to absorb and for all of it to take effect than a low dose, but it'll still function far, far faster than spreading the dose out through the day.
Click to expand...

yea, but a little more time, we are talking minutes more time to absorb. possibly seconds if you had nothing to eat with it.

now if you did take it with your breakfast or w/e you eat, this will most likely slow the absorbtion to a few hours.

but if you take say 30mg of sd with your proein isolate shake in the morning 1hr pre workout, you will be working out with 30mg of sd in your system.
or so i believe.
 
What ancillaries, if any, and at what doseages should I run on cycle for the following cycle: 1-6 - tren liquavade
1-3 - M-drol
3-6 - Epi

I'll be either running 10 g of androgel a day or will be doing test cyp injections, depending on my dr., so test suppression won't be an issue. Thanks ahead of time for any responses
 
wont do you mean test suppression wont be an issue? by adding in test cyp or andro your are going to be shutting yourself down even more. also y 3 compounds?
 
Ok... Well lack of testosterone won't be an issue because even though my natural test will be shut down, I'll still have testosterone. And I won't be coming off the androgel or test cyp injections. Does this mean that I don't even need to do PCT and/or ancillaries?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top