I've been holding off judgement until the end of the cycle. But since there's only 11 days left I'll outline my thoughts:
At the start of my cycle I did two weeks low dose d-bol/m-sten. Both definitely legit and the results showed exactly what I would expect.
I added 150mg tren-a and 150mg mast-p at the start of week 5. I think both of these are good. However, the doses are low and were only meant to supplement the main cycle, not be the primary drivers.
The big issue is that the heart of this cycle revolved around tren-e. I actually used two suppliers. After seeing very little results from my first vial, I switched. Both suppliers are sponsors on this board. Both products behaved the same. I do have some mild sides (night sweats but not too bad, elevated bp and resting heart rate, lower tolerance and easily frustrated.)
To clarify the cardio situation -- I meant it is fine relative to being on tren. My cadio performance is far below what it is normally. I can deal with relatively low/med intensity steady state, but not at my usual pace. Bike and elliptical are much easier at this point than jogging.
My opinion is that the tren-e is not completely bunk, but it is severely under-dosed. I also think this is a problem with the Chinese suppliers vs the labs. Has anyone seen a log where someone has good results from tren-e without other compounds? Everyone I see running it also runs orals and high doses of test. There is no way to tell if the tren is working in these cases. There are many threads that talk about tren-e vs tren-a and the wide majority seem to prefer acetate.
My next cycle will be late Feb. I'm thinking about going with tren-a, mast-p, and very low dose test (100mg per week). I'll just get over the inconvenience of pinning everyday.