I too would like to hear more feedback on this, from people who have done both. I did a short 6 week cycle about 2 months ago and got great results from it. I did run a bit too high of a dose and ended up feeling a bit ill during the last few weeks and so I will adjust this for my next go around.
those of you that run short cycles, do you think 4 weeks on and about 4 weeks off is the optimal? I would have run my second short cycle about 4 weeks after the first but I had to go in for hernia surgery. Had 3 of those bastards patched up and was basically just laying around for over 2 weeks and then lifting ultra light for 4 more weeks. Now, 6 weeks later, I am sitting about 25 pounds lighter and weaker. Been just cruising on some GH and 350 mg test/week as I try to build back a base for the next cycle.
I like many others find that when I run a long cycle of 12-16 weeks, my gains pretty much slow down or halt at around week 8. Even adjusting things like calories, training intensity, and dosages seems to do very little. Thats why the short cycle seems like a smart way to go. That first short cycle I ran took me up about 20 pounds in bodyweight and increased my strength significantly. The gains I made were very similar to what I would make running a 12 week cycle, really not much difference. Only experience I dont have is how easy those gains would be to maintain while off, since I ended up going into surgery right after finishing the cycle and didnt train for so long.
So for those that run short cycles, how long a cycle do you run and how much time off between? Are the gains easier to maintain post cycle?