If he dies….he dies

[pickapeck]

here’s the unconventional plan….more of an experiment

Test E 175mg week
Trest ace 20mg daily
Tren ace 30mg daily
Primo E 600mg week…(help combat estrogen from trest

Aromasin/ralox/letro on hand in case of boob issues.

Fully aware running trest+tren might develop some knarly sides, but at a total of 350mg 19 nors, I think I’ll be able to handle them, and with ace, I can drop it quickly

Looked balanced in some ways.

 

[marssel]

YES ^^^

Agreed as well simple and GH up to say 10 iu a day is magic with for me all positive sides only. Cept a lil carpal tunnel

 

[juggy38]

YES ^^^

The basics work best and agree.

But I have a box of half filled vials and they are annoying me lol

I have a test base, a heavily aromatizing drug, and primo to help deal with estrogen. Test, 19-nor, DHT

It’s just a self experiment. If I had a competition or hard set goals, I’d pick less random drugs lol

 

[marssel]

The basics work best and agree.

But I have a box of half filled vials and they are annoying me lol

I have a test base, a heavily aromatizing drug, and primo to help deal with estrogen. Test, 19-nor, DHT

It’s just a self experiment. If I had a competition or hard set goals, I’d pick less random drugs lol

So don’t waste em just add a few ticks to each shot, not a lot but enough not to waste it.

 

[Mike Arnold]

Goals ehh…I’ll eat at a surplus to try and gain about a pound a week after the initial water swings, and go from there.

I really don’t know how I’ll respond to this cycle, I just remember Mike Arnold said he enjoyed a low trest+tren cycle so i
Figured id give it a go

I love it. I can use low doses, still get good results, and feel good without significant side effects. People are so accustomed to seeing massive doses of gear, that when they see someone using 10 mg daily or 20 mg EOD, they think it is a waste. That couldn't be further from the truth. Sure, you wouldn't use doses that low with something like EQ or primo, but trest and tren are different drugs completely. It doesn't take a lot to produce noticeable increases in size and strength, along with changes in hardness, vascularity and fullness.

 

[Elvia1023]

The title of the thread definitely doesn't go with the outlined cycle!

Regarding the cycle... it looks fine. You only need low doses of tren and trest to be highly effective and then you have added in the low test and moderate primo so it's going to "work".

 

[Mike Arnold]

in my opinion, definitely overcomplicated - on a simple cycle, e.g.
250 test + 200npp e2d
humalog pre and post + gh as much as you have money you would get a lot more

You're correct that many people overcomplicate their cycles, but a test, trest and tren cycle is awesome--certainly more powerful than a test and NP cycle when compared on a mg per mg basis. Test and nandrolone will always work, but trestolone is the current best mass-builder of the available non-methyls...and I don't see it being surpassed anytime soon. If muscle is the goal and we leave tren out of the picture, then test and trest is absolutely superior to test and nandrolone. I'm not saying everyone should go that route. I'm just saying trestolone is simply more powerful than nandrolone. Trestolone is a beast.

But yes, better results will be achieved with moderate steroid use in combination with proper Insulin and GH use, compared to just using a bunch of steroids alone.

Going back to cycle overcomplication, yeah, it's a problem. In my opinion, when it comes to maximizing growth with steroids, all one needs to do is pick a couple of the best steroids and stick with that. The more complicated cycles are better reserved for pre-context, as growth alone is no longer the goal.

Off-season...

2, maybe 3 steroids
Insulin
GH


Anything else is extra and only improves potential gains by a small margin. I'm not saying nothing else has value. Other things certainly do, but the bread & butter will always provide for the majority of one's gains.

 

[juggy38]

The title of the thread definitely doesn't go with the outlined cycle!

Regarding the cycle... it looks fine. You only need low doses of tren and trest to be highly effective and then you have added in the low test and moderate primo so it's going to "work".

Well I’ll slowly ramp
Up the trest/tren depending on sides

Last time I rsn trest, the response was insane. I respond well to 19-nors

Complicating…would be the primo….but it’s in there to increase anabolism and to help deal with the aromatizing trest. There is a little method to the madness lol

I thought about mast….lowers prolactin in rats, helps with estro sides….but mast+tren+trest….I’d be sooo angry. Last time I ran tren and mast
I kicked my cat.

WHO DOES THAT!?!

 

[cmryan]

I thought about mast….lowers prolactin in rats, helps with estro sides….but mast+tren+trest….I’d be sooo angry. Last time I ran tren and mast
I kicked my cat.

WHO DOES THAT!?!

Yikes. I'm fortunate with the mental sides from those drugs. I've never used them all concurrently, but never had lousy mental sides with the exception of my first test+tren cycle. It wasn't nearly as bad as some guys experience but I was definitely more irritable. Added mast and that improved drastically.

Best of luck with your experiment and please let us know how it goes. Considered starting a log for it?

 

[luki7788]

You're correct that many people overcomplicate their cycles, but a test, trest and tren cycle is awesome--certainly more powerful than a test and NP cycle when compared on a mg per mg basis. Test and nandrolone will always work, but trestolone is the current best mass-builder of the available non-methyls...and I don't see it being surpassed anytime soon. If muscle is the goal and we leave tren out of the picture, then test and trest is absolutely superior to test and nandrolone. I'm not saying everyone should go that route. I'm just saying trestolone is simply more powerful than nandrolone. Trestolone is a beast.

But yes, better results will be achieved with moderate steroid use in combination with proper Insulin and GH use, compared to just using a bunch of steroids alone.

Going back to cycle overcomplication, yeah, it's a problem. In my opinion, when it comes to maximizing growth with steroids, all one needs to do is pick a couple of the best steroids and stick with that. The more complicated cycles are better reserved for pre-context, as growth alone is no longer the goal.

Off-season...

2, maybe 3 steroids
Insulin
GH


Anything else is extra and only improves potential gains by a small margin. I'm not saying nothing else has value. Other things certainly do, but the bread & butter will always provide for the majority of one's gains.

I have tried MENT a few times and I agree that it is a great drug, but the aromatization is so strong that I am not able to comprehend it and I have no idea how to do it. Maybe my mistake was that I always used it with a high test

 

[jaxino]

You're correct that many people overcomplicate their cycles, but a test, trest and tren cycle is awesome--certainly more powerful than a test and NP cycle when compared on a mg per mg basis. Test and nandrolone will always work, but trestolone is the current best mass-builder of the available non-methyls...and I don't see it being surpassed anytime soon. If muscle is the goal and we leave tren out of the picture, then test and trest is absolutely superior to test and nandrolone. I'm not saying everyone should go that route. I'm just saying trestolone is simply more powerful than nandrolone. Trestolone is a beast.

But yes, better results will be achieved with moderate steroid use in combination with proper Insulin and GH use, compared to just using a bunch of steroids alone.

Going back to cycle overcomplication, yeah, it's a problem. In my opinion, when it comes to maximizing growth with steroids, all one needs to do is pick a couple of the best steroids and stick with that. The more complicated cycles are better reserved for pre-context, as growth alone is no longer the goal.

Off-season...

2, maybe 3 steroids
Insulin
GH


Anything else is extra and only improves potenktial gains by a small margin. I'm not saying nothing else has value. Other things certainly do, but the bread & butter will always provide for the majority of one's gains.kk kk km MMO ok,

Talking about Trestolone dosages and Test dosages.

Can you provide some "guidelines" on how to use it?

For example, 500 test 150 Trest can be compared to like a 2g of Testosterone?
Is that possible to create a sort of idea on how much Trestolone is compared to Test?

I know that it's like apple and oranges but at least to have an idea....

As my personal experience i have noticed positive reactions at 500-1g Test but i really have no idea how much Trestolone i can stack with it and avoid massive estrogenic effects

 

[cage99]

Talking about Trestolone dosages and Test dosages.

Can you provide some "guidelines" on how to use it?

For example, 500 test 150 Trest can be compared to like a 2g of Testosterone?
Is that possible to create a sort of idea on how much Trestolone is compared to Test?

I know that it's like apple and oranges but at least to have an idea....

As my personal experience i have noticed positive reactions at 500-1g Test but i really have no idea how much Trestolone i can stack with it and avoid massive estrogenic effects

Your gonna have to experiment with this yourself. Trest aromatases so much on its own and with high test it’ll just compound the issue.

If you wanna try Trest then utilize a low dose of Test with it. Something like 200mg/Test, & 50mg Trest. Keeping AI’s on hand should be a priority too! I’d run these dosages for 3 weeks then reevaluate. If sides seem low or manageable then increase the Test by 50mg and the Trest by 25mg. Re-evaluate every 2-3 weeks. Increase or decrease dosages depending on your sides.

Also, since Primo tends to lower your estrogen levels it’d be a good addition to keep things in check.

Cage

 

[Mike Arnold]

I have tried MENT a few times and I agree that it is a great drug, but the aromatization is so strong that I am not able to comprehend it and I have no idea how to do it. Maybe my mistake was that I always used it with a high test

Yeah estrogenic sides are a beast while on trest, if not properly delt with. I don't think test needs to be as high when using trestolone, but regardless of the test dose, I prefer using raloxifene for cosmetic estrogenic side effects (e.g. gyno). When it comes to growth, keeping estrogen on the higher side is preferable, but in order to combat cosmetic sides with an AI alone (especially with something like trest), the dose often needs to be so high that it will compromise growth. Therefore, I advocate using raloxifene for cosmetic sides effects....and if needed, using just enough of an AI to keep systemic estrogen in the desired range. This way, you get the growth benefits of estrogen, but don't have to deal with gyno. For some people, water retention may still be an issue, though.

 

[lynxeffect1]

Yeah estrogenic sides are a beast while on trest, if not properly delt with. I don't think test needs to be as high when using trestolone, but regardless of the test dose, I prefer using raloxifene for cosmetic estrogenic side effects (e.g. gyno). When it comes to growth, keeping estrogen on the higher side is preferable, but in order to combat cosmetic sides with an AI alone (especially with something like trest), the dose often needs to be so high that it will compromise growth. Therefore, I advocate using raloxifene for cosmetic sides effects....and if needed, using just enough of an AI to keep systemic estrogen in the desired range. This way, you get the growth benefits of estrogen, but don't have to deal with gyno. For some people, water retention may still be an issue, though.

The last time you were talking about estrogen you mentioned top level bodybuilders you knew leaving estrogen go sky high in the offseason , into the 1000's I think you said , for growth purposes, can you elaborate more on that ? I have a nightmare anytime I touch an a.i. for example on 1000g test a week even 6.25mg of aromasin twice weekly always leaves me crippled joints wise immediately come week 3.so it's either crushing me estrogen or just having it in my system is giving me the same effects. I cant use nolva either as it makes me extremely lethargic within a few days , never been able to get ralox.

 

[jaxino]

Your gonna have to experiment with this yourself. Trest aromatases so much on its own and with high test it’ll just compound the issue.

If you wanna try Trest then utilize a low dose of Test with it. Something like 200mg/Test, & 50mg Trest. Keeping AI’s on hand should be a priority too! I’d run these dosages for 3 weeks then reevaluate. If sides seem low or manageable then increase the Test by 50mg and the Trest by 25mg. Re-evaluate every 2-3 weeks. Increase or decrease dosages depending on your sides.

Also, since Primo tends to lower your estrogen levels it’d be a good addition to keep things in check.

Cage

At this point, based on my personal experience, i will use just a fixed dose of 500 TestE per week.

Add on top 200-300 Tren Ace (that i know it won't hurt me at all).

Then add 100mg Trest Ace and raise it slowly until I find the right spot.

 

[jaxino]

Yeah estrogenic sides are a beast while on trest, if not properly delt with. I don't think test needs to be as high when using trestolone, but regardless of the test dose, I prefer using raloxifene for cosmetic estrogenic side effects (e.g. gyno). When it comes to growth, keeping estrogen on the higher side is preferable, but in order to combat cosmetic sides with an AI alone (especially with something like trest), the dose often needs to be so high that it will compromise growth. Therefore, I advocate using raloxifene for cosmetic sides effects....and if needed, using just enough of an AI to keep systemic estrogen in the desired range. This way, you get the growth benefits of estrogen, but don't have to deal with gyno. For some people, water retention may still be an issue, though.

Is that a bad idea to use Nolvadex instead of Raloxifene? I don't know why but i find Nolva more effective than Raloxifene....

 

[gains4000]

id rather just run test and hgh. i dont really see the point in running neurotoxic progestin steroids when they are not necessary.

 

[SouthernMuscle]

id rather just run test and hgh. i dont really see the point in running neurotoxic progestin steroids when they are not necessary.

please post more. I see a wealth of untapped knowledge just waiting to break free

 

[Mike Arnold]

The last time you were talking about estrogen you mentioned top level bodybuilders you knew leaving estrogen go sky high in the offseason , into the 1000's I think you said , for growth purposes, can you elaborate more on that ? I have a nightmare anytime I touch an a.i. for example on 1000g test a week even 6.25mg of aromasin twice weekly always leaves me crippled joints wise immediately come week 3.so it's either crushing me estrogen or just having it in my system is giving me the same effects. I cant use nolva either as it makes me extremely lethargic within a few days , never been able to get ralox.

Did you mean to say 100's? I didn't ever say 1,000's, so that's why I think you may have accidentally typed an extra zero on there. LOL. In order for estrogen to get into the thousands, one's test dose would have to be so high that it would be atrocious. Not good at all. LOL.

Now, as far as the 100's, yes, I have seen that often. It's not uncommon at all, and for many pros, was the norm prior to the advent of AI's. I have no problem with an estrogen reading in the 100-200 range. Quite honestly, when someone is using bodybuilding doses of steroids, having an estrogen level below 100 is suboptimal, for many reasons. Being in the 30-40 range may be fine for a man with normal testosterone levels, but having a "normal" testosterone (i.e. androgen) level is not the same thing as having massively elevated supraphysiological levels of androgens. The body needs some balance. I don't advocate a specific number because not everyone is using the same doses/drugs, nor does everyone have the same response. But, generally speaking, a reading in the 100-200 range seems to work very well.

Ralox is sold as a research chemical at MA Research (maresearchchems.net)

 

[Mike Arnold]

Is that a bad idea to use Nolvadex instead of Raloxifene? I don't know why but i find Nolva more effective than Raloxifene....

No, I wouldn't say it's a "bad" idea. It's just that ralox works better for most.