For my next cycle I'm thinking:
1-12 Test E 400/wk
1-8 Tren E 245/wk
3-12 Mast E 400/wk
5-12 Winne 350/wk
3-12 hCG 500/wk
Or
1-12 Test E 250/wk
1-8 Tren E 245/wk
3-12 Mast E 400/wk
5-12 Winne 350/wk
3-12 hCG 500/wk
And PCT
The intention is run tren a little lower, but longer, than last time to keep prolactin and tren sides in check, and not hurt cardio too much, but take advantage of the amazing gains tren brings. ( i'm not even sure tren hurt my cardio that much last time. BP went up and cardio down before i even started the tren.)
Would like to run longer esters than prop and ace to avoid all the wasted time, hardware and product. Last cycle I ran 50 ed (25x2) tren ace, which is 350/wk, with test p and winnie, so i can handle 245/wk tren no problem.
The idea with the second option is that I think that most of the negative aspects--High BP, poor cardio, water, mild fat gain--of my last cycle, were due to Test aromatizing and cause elevated estrogen. So, if i don't run as much test, i wouldn't need as much aromasine, etc to control the estrogen and i would just let the tren do more of the work. But not sure if 250 test and 245 tren are enough to give the lean mass gains i'm after. And i wouldn't want to run more tren because of its progestin nature and the associated rubber dick issue. So a balance is what I'm after with enough anabolics to get the job done.
The goal is lean mass. To perform well at my fall/winter/spring sport i cannot have excess water or fat weight. Enough water to keep the joints happy, so not extreme, but no bloat and must be as lean or a little leaner than i am now.
Which option and why? What would you change and why?
I've heard rumors that Tren E is often impure or, as they put it, "dirty" for some reason. How common is this? Anyone have actual knowledge/experience on this?
Thanks.
1-12 Test E 400/wk
1-8 Tren E 245/wk
3-12 Mast E 400/wk
5-12 Winne 350/wk
3-12 hCG 500/wk
Or
1-12 Test E 250/wk
1-8 Tren E 245/wk
3-12 Mast E 400/wk
5-12 Winne 350/wk
3-12 hCG 500/wk
And PCT
The intention is run tren a little lower, but longer, than last time to keep prolactin and tren sides in check, and not hurt cardio too much, but take advantage of the amazing gains tren brings. ( i'm not even sure tren hurt my cardio that much last time. BP went up and cardio down before i even started the tren.)
Would like to run longer esters than prop and ace to avoid all the wasted time, hardware and product. Last cycle I ran 50 ed (25x2) tren ace, which is 350/wk, with test p and winnie, so i can handle 245/wk tren no problem.
The idea with the second option is that I think that most of the negative aspects--High BP, poor cardio, water, mild fat gain--of my last cycle, were due to Test aromatizing and cause elevated estrogen. So, if i don't run as much test, i wouldn't need as much aromasine, etc to control the estrogen and i would just let the tren do more of the work. But not sure if 250 test and 245 tren are enough to give the lean mass gains i'm after. And i wouldn't want to run more tren because of its progestin nature and the associated rubber dick issue. So a balance is what I'm after with enough anabolics to get the job done.
The goal is lean mass. To perform well at my fall/winter/spring sport i cannot have excess water or fat weight. Enough water to keep the joints happy, so not extreme, but no bloat and must be as lean or a little leaner than i am now.
Which option and why? What would you change and why?
I've heard rumors that Tren E is often impure or, as they put it, "dirty" for some reason. How common is this? Anyone have actual knowledge/experience on this?
Thanks.
