Tren vs Test dosages

[fhorst]

I was wondering, as tren is 5 times more effective then test, why do we still need such "high" dosages as minimal 75mg per day= 525mg per week.

Is this the same as 2.5 grams of test per week?
I guess not.

most ppl run test at 500-750 per week, so if tren would be 5 times more effective, would a dosage of 150mg tren per week have the same effect as 750mg of test? And, if not, why???

[taiboxa]

tren is far stronger than 5x test
especially since it has a nutrient proportion mechanism about it.

i get better gains off 100mg tren than i would from 3g Test

[fhorst]

that would mean if I take tren depot, with "long" acting ester (3 days) and I'll inject 2.3 times per week 100mg tren, I'm actually shooting 7 grams of test per week?

but I guess you mean 100mg tren per day = 700 tren per week right?

[Jnrmrplymouth]

tren is far stronger than 5x test
especially since it has a nutrient proportion mechanism about it.

i get better gains off 100mg tren than i would from 3g Test

You serious? You get better gains from 700mg tren a week than 3g of test.

Ive yet to use tren but this stuff seems to be awesome. Im looking forward to using it.

[mkrulic]

I ran 540mg tren /week on this run and got great results. Bench went from 4 plates for 3 to 5 reps to 475 for a paused single. squat went from 5 plates for 3 - 5 reps to 6 plates for a single. deadlift 5 plates for a single to 565 for a single. military from 275 to 315.
I run test in a one to one fashion w/ everything else. As an example, this run is
540mg tren/week
300mg deca /week
900mg test/week

[fhorst]

540mg tren /week
300mg deca /week
900mg test/week

that is a lot. I guess you even would have grown bigtime on the 900 test

[bigbouncinballs]

i dont exactly know the answer to this, i do know that i take 2-3g test/week with 800mgs tren /week and cant go higher cuz then i dont sleep. seems the five times deal is about where im at.

[arnold_of_malta]

so say you take 300mgs tren weekly is that ok?? will you grow on 300mgs tren???? would the side effects such as acen would be bad on 300mgs tren

[j martini]

I dont agree with taiboxa here, sure on paper tren should be much more powerful per MG than test, however test has always worked better for me than tren. Now a 500mg dose of tren per week for me would be more effective than 500mg of test, but tren is certainly not 7 times more effective, i also get more diminishing returns with tren as opposed to test. By tis i mean i could run 750mg of tren a week and it wouldnt have such a big effect as a similiar increase in the test dose would.

I think the reason wht tren isnt so much more powerful than test, than you would think looking at how well tren binds to the AR as opposed to tren, is because of the aromatization that occurs from tren, and estrogen appears to have a positive effect on growth through different mechanisms.

Here is a write up on the very thing by William Llewllyn
Not too many steroids have an air of mystique about them quite like trenbolone . It is one of those agents that you will hear talked up aggressively by some guy in the gym, to later find he has not even tried it himself yet. The bodybuilding literature is full of strong, unusual, and often-inaccurate statements about this drug, and consequently an air of misunderstanding has begun to cloud our view of trenbolone. The unusual history of this compound, including prolonged periods of very limited availability and high selling prices, has no doubt played a part in shaping the view of this steroid in the minds of athletes. It seems when anything is out of reach, overly expensive or both, people start looking at it in a different way. I therefore thought it would be a good idea to take a closer look at the physical properties of trenbolone, as well as its current state of availability and use.


Structure

Structurally trenbolone is a derivative of nandrolone , carrying two additional double carbon bonds at positions 9 and 11 (hence the prefix "tren", short for tri-en). The activity of trenbolone differs from that of its parent hormone considerably however. To begin with, trenbolone cannot aromatize to estrogen. The delta-9 group present on its structure occupies a bond necessary for aromatization of the A-Ring to be possible. Unless this group is removed metabolically, which it does not appear to be, estrogen synthesis is impossible in the body. Although nandrolone is a weak substrate for aromatase, estrogen levels can still rise during use. With trenbolone we actually expect a lowering of serum estrogen levels, as it should suppress endogenous testosterone release (the primary substrate for estradiol in men).



Trenbolone (17beta-hydroxyestra-4,9,11-trien-3-one)

Androgenic Activity

Although derived from nandrolone, trenbolone is comparatively far more androgenic than this steroid. In fact it is several times stronger in this regard than our primary androgen testosterone as well (1). The first contributing factor to this of course is that trenbolone is a strong binder of the androgen receptor. This trait is also characteristic of its parent nandrolone, which is several times more active than testosterone in this regard. Androgen binding is in fact further enhanced by the introduction of double bonds in delta-9,11 (2), which makes trenbolone an even more potent agonist of the androgen receptor than nandrolone. Perhaps more significant though is the fact that unlike nandrolone, the strong receptor binding potency of trenbolone is not diminished in androgen sensitive tissues by 5-alpha reductase. Trenbolone does not seem to undergo 5-alpha reduction in humans to any appreciable degree at all, which is evidenced by the fact that the major urinary metabolites of trenbolone all possess the original tri-en structure with an intact delta-4 group (3). So trenbolone retains its original potency as it enters cells in androgen target tissues with high 5AR concentrations, as this enzyme is not affecting it. These factors work together to allow trenbolone to be a potently androgenic steroid, instead of a primarily anabolic one in nature like nandrolone. .

Progestational Activity

It has been reported in other bodybuilding literature that trenbolone does not exhibit any activity as a progestin in the body. I am not certain where this belief originated, as trenbolone does appear to exhibit the classic progesterone receptor binding ability that is characteristic of nandrolone and its derivatives. One study looking at the bovine uterine progesterone receptor for example found trenbolone to be a very potent binder, startlingly even more so than progesterone itself (4). Another looking at the binding of various compounds to the androgen, estrogen, progestin, mineral corticoid and glucocorticoid receptors found trenbolone to be a more potent binder of the progestin receptor than nandrolone (5), a steroid normally noted for its usual activity in this regard. What does this mean for trenbolone? I don’t think it really means that much. Trenbolone clearly doesn’t cause gyno, water retention or fat buildup, which one might attribute to estrogenic or progestational activity. So whatever slight action it does have as a progestin on paper doesn’t amount to all that much in the real world. The absence of estrogen may be a significant factor, as progesterone is believed to cause gyno by enhancing estrogen’s stimulation of mammary gland growth (6). Perhaps when trenbolone is taken with other aromatizable compounds it could affect a person’s sensitivity level to gyno and water/fat retention. This seems logical, at least in a technical sense, although admittedly I have seen no evidence to support this.

Mass or Cutting Agent

The potently androgenic and non-aromatizing nature of trenbolone makes it an extremely effective hardening and cutting agent. In fact, it is thought of as unmatched in its capacity as a body-sculpting steroid. Many competitive bodybuilders similarly find it indispensable to any good pre-contest cutting stack. For this type of purpose I doubt another steroid would serve you better. Many people do additionally find they make very good muscle gains with trenbolone. It is a potent muscle-builder, although we should probably not consider it an ideal mass-builder when used alone. The absence of estrogen is an important factor, as this trait seems integral in this type of steroid. This probably has to do not only with water retention but also interactions between estrogen and muscle glucose utilization, GH release and androgen receptor proliferation. Today we are finally starting to understand why this hormone is needed for optimal growth. Trenbolone is probably still the most potent muscle-building agent of all the non-estrogenic steroids though, and admittedly is quite unusual in its potency in this regard. But I would still think that if mass were the goal and you were choosing only one steroid, testosterone, Dianabol or Anadrol would be more productive every time in terms of overall size, weight and muscle mass gain.

Availability

As mentioned in the opening of this article, trenbolone has been plagued by periods of manufacturing inconsistency, high prices and scarce availability since it first hit the market in the early 80’s. There is probably little need to revisit in detail the rise and fall of Finajet in the 1980’s, or the demise of Parabolan in 1997. Clearly the colorful history of trenbolone is well discussed. But today’s situation is no less interesting, as we are in a unique situation. For the first time in four years we have a legitimate injectable trenbolone again, as the Mexican veterinary drug firm Laboratories Ttokkyo has recently started producing Trenbol, a 10 ml bottle of trenbolone acetate (TA) in the strength of 75mg/ml. This product is not cheap, and usually sells for upwards of $150 a bottle. Reportedly Denkall is working on a similar item, and there are some reliable underground generics floating about as well that sell for a better price and usually supply a comparable amount of TA. There have been some questions about raw material supply lately though, and whether or not both types of product would remain on the market. This discussion was heightened by the recent removal of Trenbol from Ttokkyo’s website (www.ttokkyo.com.mx), which is making a lot of people nervous that this product may be on the way out. Hopefully this is just a website problem and not a repeat of the fate that fell on Finajet and Parabolan. If these products do dry up, trenbolone will still be available, but in the form of cattle implant pellets. In Part II of this article I will take a closer look at these unusual products, as well as the various methods utilized by bodybuilders in an effort to effectively use them.

References

1) Pharmacological and endocrinological studies on anabolic steroids . Neumann F. Environ Qual Saf Suppl 1976 (5) 253-64

2) Unique steroid congeners for receptor studies. Ojasoo, Raynaud. Cancer Research 38 (1978) 4186-98

3) Disposition of 17 beta-trenbolone in humans. Spranger, Metzler. J Chromatogr 564 (1991) 485-92

4) Characterisation of the affinity of different anabolics and synthetic hormones to the human androgen receptor, human sex hormone binding globulin and to the bovine progestin receptor. Bauer, Meyer et al. Acta Pathol Microbiol Imunol Scand Suppl 108 (2000) 838-46

5) Unique steroid congeners for receptor studies. Ojasoo, Raynaud. Cancer Research 38 (1978) 4186-98

6) Progesterone is not essential to the differentiative potential of mammary epithelium in the male mouse. Freeman, Topper. Endocrinology. 1978 Jul;103(1):186-92

[2deizel]

you will grow on 300 mgs if you do it right and have minor side effects

[fhorst]

Martini: Thanx for the exelent post!

@2deizel: Yes but you would also grow from 300mg of test per week.
as posted my Martini, you'll gain more for bulking from test.

But, the question was, is 300mg of tren just as effective as 1500 mg (5x) of test?

[j martini]

Martini: Thanx for the exelent post!

@2deizel: Yes but you would also grow from 300mg of test per week.
as posted my Martini, you'll gain more for bulking from test.

But, the question was, is 300mg of tren just as effective as 1500 mg (5x) of test?

IMO, no definitely not.

[fhorst]

OK Thanks. But I'm still confused.

If Tren is supposed to be 5 times as strong as test, how come you need to take 75mg per day? half a gram of test per week will make you grow also right?

So how much will you grow better from tren then from test?
Just curious.

[mkrulic]

nothing is linear. the least amount of tren I've taken is 75mg eod which amounts to 262.5mg/weekly. I got good results. but I don't think you can compare the two like this. that 300mg of tren would produce results different than any amount of test. imo

[taiboxa]

LoL martini have u ran test doses 3g+? have u ran tren w/a VERY LOW dose of test to compare? i have
i have ran tren at 100+MG ed w/ 50mg Prop EoD no limp dick btw because i still had ample test to support my wang.. that run test higher than everything else is a myth.. if u have more than 10mg TEST ED ur dick will WORK.

yes tren is far more superior than test for gains i assure u... even if you 5x ur test dosage u will have better gains from tren, harder gains less estrogen and nutrient proportioning agent... so EXPERIENCE SPEAKS FOR ITS SELF here.. f' your studies and paper

[taiboxa]

OK Thanks. But I'm still confused.

If Tren is supposed to be 5 times as strong as test, how come you need to take 75mg per day? half a gram of test per week will make you grow also right?

So how much will you grow better from tren then from test?
Just curious.

50-75mg ED is suggested because it gives u OPTIMAL GROWTH vs SIDES

sure u kan grow on 25mg ED and grow WELL but u will have about same sides as 50mg ED and somepeople dont even get sides up till 75mg ED so its how much bang kan you get for your buck

[taiboxa]

BTW i wanna hear what Pin has to say about this

[BARLOW]

im with tai on this one......tren is da shiznets......

[BARLOW]

I grow better off 300mg tren than 1.5g test a week.........so wuts argument for dat ><

[Daddy Fatsacks]

i'm gonna have to go with mr. tai on this one also. Tren is the grandaddy of em all if you ask me.