Deca vs NPP

**pur2020** · 07-01-2012, 09:14 AM

Hey guys, tryin to put together my offseason cycle and am lookin to use nandrolone for the first time, but having a hard time choosing between deca and npp.
On one side i have a friend telling me that NPP is a waste of my time saying that the point behind nandrolone is something that has a slow/sustained absorption to avoid serum blood level spikes and that using npp is like buying a ferrari and using regular gas aka i should be using it how it was "designed" to be used.
On the other hand, my other friend said that npp will get the same results and avoid a lot of the unnecessary sides/water retention.

Just wanted to get some experienced advice from you guys!

Thanks

**gearbox** · 07-01-2012, 09:51 AM

Going to need more info.
your stats?
what are you trying to accomplish/goals?

**pur2020** · 07-01-2012, 10:09 AM

5'8", 205lbs, 12% bf

just lookin to put on more muscle before i head into another show

**stocky121** · 07-01-2012, 10:49 AM

I have never used npp but if or when i cycle again i might think about using it.
I carnt understand what your first friends reasoning is behind nandrolone been designed for long realease. The only thing i have heard of is a fast acting boldanone and that is only because of the massive pain with it.
If it was my choice i would go with the npp

**swm1972** · 07-01-2012, 11:00 AM

Not saying you are ready for NPP or deca , but your friend doesn't know what he is talking about. They are the exact same parent component. The only difference between the two is the release into the blood stream controlled by carbon atoms attached and then cleaved off in a predictable manner. NPP and deca will both give the same results, one just gets you there quicker. Much like the difference between test prop and test cyp. Broscience will tell you prop is better for cutting, cyp for bulking. The reality is your body can't tell the difference. Results are determined by diet and exercise while using the compounds. Not the compounds themselves.

I think with something like a nor19 (deca/tren ) the less time on cycle the better. More time on usually means more difficult recovery time. Something like NPP can allow you to get where you want to go fast and then come off and start PCT earlier. Other then that, I don't think you will see any significant difference between the two.

**pur2020** · 07-01-2012, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by swm1972

Not saying you are ready for NPP or deca , but your friend doesn't know what he is talking about. They are the exact same parent component. The only difference between the two is the release into the blood stream controlled by carbon atoms attached and then cleaved off in a predictable manner. NPP and deca will both give the same results, one just gets you there quicker. Much like the difference between test prop and test cyp. Broscience will tell you prop is better for cutting, cyp for bulking. The reality is your body can't tell the difference. Results are determined by diet and exercise while using the compounds. Not the compounds themselves.

I think with something like a nor19 (deca/tren) the less time on cycle the better. More time on usually means more difficult recovery time. Something like NPP can allow you to get where you want to go fast and then come off and start PCT earlier. Other then that, I don't think you will see any significant difference between the two.

Awsome thanks for the info man. I didnt think there was a difference but never hurts to get other opinions

**DanB** · 07-01-2012, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by swm1972

Not saying you are ready for NPP or deca , but your friend doesn't know what he is talking about. They are the exact same parent component. The only difference between the two is the release into the blood stream controlled by carbon atoms attached and then cleaved off in a predictable manner. NPP and deca will both give the same results, one just gets you there quicker. Much like the difference between test prop and test cyp. Broscience will tell you prop is better for cutting, cyp for bulking. The reality is your body can't tell the difference. Results are determined by diet and exercise while using the compounds. Not the compounds themselves.

I think with something like a nor19 (deca/tren) the less time on cycle the better. More time on usually means more difficult recovery time. Something like NPP can allow you to get where you want to go fast and then come off and start PCT earlier. Other then that, I don't think you will see any significant difference between the two.

Good explaniation/advise

Some people make statements such as the one the OP friend did without having a basic understanding on the compounds, if they had a basic understanding then they would understand how ludacris it sounds

**stpete** · 07-01-2012, 01:41 PM

Your friend doesn't know what he's talking about. It basically boils down to cycle length for me. NPP and Deca are the same as mentioned above.

**Atomini** · 07-01-2012, 03:14 PM

I actually never refer to deca as "deca". When I discuss it with people, I refer to it as nandrolone because that's what it is, whether it is nandrolone decanoate or nandrolone phenylpropionate. Deca is a trade name, NOT the actual drug name. Everyone referring to it as 'deca' is a shortened form of its trade name 'deca-durabolin ', which really means nothing.

It has confused so many people that I have discussed said compound with people, and before I explained everything, they thought that deca and npp were two different things. They are the same things, and one just has a longer (a MUCH longer) half life than the other. Whether or not one is better than the other all depends on your goals and what YOU personally want.