Toying with the idea of cycle #2, a couple of questions

[BigGreen]

I'm a relatively long cycle proponent (in the way of 18-22 weeks) and also believe very strongly in a quality bulk with a cut at the end for purposes of affecting body composition as opposed to pure weight gain for purposes of retaining gains. While my personal experience is very limited, there is little that could be said to sway me from this position. That being said, here is a rough outline of what I'm hoping to do with cycle number two (as well as a few questions). Thank you in advance for any and all feedback.

Cycle Length: 20 weeks (see above or my diary for a more detailed rationale)

Weeks 1-4: dbol @40mg/day (i responded very well to 35mgs my first go around and would like to include it again)

Weeks 1-12: Test Enan @600mg/week (decided to up it just a bit since my previous cycle at 500mg for 15 weeks might necessitate enough to do that...could use some feedback on that though)

Weeks 13-20: Test Prop @75mg/day (obviously at week 13 I transition to my leaning phase...my big question here is how to I administer the prop correctly for those first two weeks given that the enan will still be tapering out of my system? I don't want a sudden surge of test from the prop and enan both being present initially.)

Weeks 1-17: Eq @500mg/week (though test is the base in two forms, this, standing alone as a compound, is the base compound of the cycle...I love what eq has done for me this go around, and it nicely fits my philosophy in a few ways as well).

Weeks 15-20: Fina @50mg/day (I've debated the use of fina for some time, and think i'll give it a run next go around, though I'll feel more comfortable doing so at a slightly lower than usual dose....is this a decent idea?)

Under "loose" consideration:
Weeks 15-20: Either var or winny. I'll be using winny shortly, so I'll have an actual idea as to how I respond to it...but i also like the idea of putting var in there as well (I won't do both at the same time, obviously...it's one or the other). However, I want to keep this as uncomplicated as possible (not exactly simple, but nothing overly unnecessary), thus the "loose consideration" qualifier.

I should also add that there is a temptation to get a little more aggressive. While fina fits that bill and then some, it is very difficult to say no to something such as insulin ...though I'm confident I can stay away for a a significant amount of time...i just thought it was worth pointing out that the notion is becoming appealing. Again, thanks for any help.

[BigGreen]

I should add that all post cycle therapy , anti-e's and hcg considerations have been accounted for...they're fairly standard and I felt no need to post that info.

[956Vette]

I like it BG! I would recommend you run the fina and the var for 8 wks towards the end. I think that would be great for your cycle/goals.
I know youve done your homework, so i am just throwing this out there for you.

[BigGreen]

I like it BG! I would recommend you run the fina and the var for 8 wks towards the end. I think that would be great for your cycle/goals.
I know youve done your homework, so i am just throwing this out there for you.

I've given the consideration to running the fina that long, but, even at the relatively modest dose, I'm a bit wary of taking a "harsh" compound that long. I'd run it six with option of extending to eight built in, but if things didn't work out, I'd be without it the final two weeks if I didn't end up utilizing that two week "contingency period". With regards to var, I often hear it is "cool" to run it a bit longer than your traditional 17aa, but I don't understand why. Are all 17aa's not created equal in this regard? For example, it's almost dogmatic that drol is harsh on the liver and var is not, but could someone explain why the difference when it is (as I understand it) the same attribute that gives each their hepatoxicity? I guess what I'm asking is "are there degrees of 17aa?"

thanks for the suggestions.

[956Vette]

i believe there are degrees of 17aa's. I remember reading a study of this a while back...Ill try to dig it up. In the mean time, ill bet ya JohnnyB has some info on this matter.

I definately understand your take on the fina. I am going to be running tren enth for the first time at a real low dose (300mg/wk) too. Just wanted to throw something out there for you.

[BigGreen]

Just wanted to throw something out there for you.

I appreciate it...that's why I've thrown this up there as opposed to just running with it or simply copying piece-for-piece a cycle that someone else has run successfully. I figure that by starting with my own ideas and philosophies and having guys that know a heck of a lot more than me give feedback and build on them, at the worst I'll simply have a much better idea of what I'm doing, but at best, I learn something completely new (like the 17aa thing) that I can use for the rest of my aas days.

[sigrabbit]

I have to agree with vette, you might want to consider the fina for 8 weeks. I am just past the three week mark and I am just feeling the effects. I will let you know how "harsh" it is after a few more weeks. So far, I have not experienced any unbearable side effects; a few zits and a little impatience, and the occasional night sweats. I like the rest of the cycle, and I am already considering a winter cycle for myself that will include some of the same goodies.

[BigGreen]

I'm bumping this mostly because I really need some feedback as to how to correctly transition from enan to prop without having more test in my system than is desired. I suspect that for the first three days I may want to only take in 1/3 of the intended prop dosage, bump it up to 1/2 for the next four (to bring me out to seven), 2/3 for the next three, and then, finally, bump it up to the desired dosage for the remainder? That's the best (very rough) pattern I can come up with that considers the clearing of the enanthate version. However, I'd really like to hear from people who have done this.

[custom fit]

You have 2 cycles in there. Have you thought about seperating them.

heres what i would propose if i had your stuff.

cycle 1:
d-bol weeks 1-4
test E weeks 1-12
EQ weeks 1-12

cycle 2
prop weeks 1-10
fina weeks 3-10
var/winny 6-12

i think you would be able to get better gains if you were to seperate these two cycles imo. I think you need to give your body some time to recover, and freshen up your receptors.

good luck, it does look like a great cycle.

[custom fit]

I will let you know how "harsh" it is after a few more weeks. So far, I have not experienced any unbearable side effects; a few zits and a little impatience, and the occasional night sweats. I like the rest of the cycle

I'll give you some sides i have experienced.
1) night sweats
2) insomnia <---bad case
3) short temper
4) some acne <---I was always prone too
5)FINA COUGH <---this is the absolute worst, I can taste the stuff in my mouth when I'm injecting, horrible coughs after I inject for about 5 mins, irritates me to the point I want to quite taking Tren .

[BigGreen]

You have 2 cycles in there. Have you thought about seperating them.

i think you would be able to get better gains if you were to seperate these two cycles imo.

I happen to sit on the other side of the fence on this one. I am a FIRM believer in slightly longer cycles comprised of what appear to be two separate cycles. I don't know that it's exactly "traditional" thinking, but I researched for a good year and a half or more and that is the conclusion I arrived at between the research and talking with people about their personal experiences. I certainly see the merit in your argument/viewpoint, but I happen to be approaching it from that other side.

[custom fit]

I happen to sit on the other side of the fence on this one. I am a FIRM believer in slightly longer cycles comprised of what appear to be two separate cycles. I don't know that it's exactly "traditional" thinking, but I researched for a good year and a half or more and that is the conclusion I arrived at between the research and talking with people about their personal experiences. I certainly see the merit in your argument/viewpoint, but I happen to be approaching it from that other side.

I agree with you 100%, but you have 2 seperate cycles, not 1.

If you decided to run the "bulk" cycle for 12-18 weeks I'd say go for it, but you have a "bulk" and a "cutter"

IMO, since you have two I would run one in dec 2003, for 12-15 weeks and then start with the cutter in may 2004.

I totally agree with your thought, but like i said if it was 1 cycle then yes I would run it longer.

you took the words right out of my mouth. read your quote

[BigGreen]

I'm confused about the "read your quote" hyperlink, can you elaborate?

Also, in my opinion, simply switching esters does not constitute a sufficient condition to classify something as two different cycles. If that were the case, someone running sus is trying to run four different cycles simulatneously. I tend to view this as one long cycle with test and eq as the base. Dbol at the beginning doesn't change this, nor does fina at the end (as several people elect to lean out at the end of a cycle utilizing either winny, fina, or var, etc).

I could see it being intepreted as two separate cycles altogether if i ran deca from 1-10 and then eq from weeks 11-20. Or if I otherwise entirely switched compounds in a similar manner...but basically what I'm doing is running a long test and eq cycle and switching esters. Again, if test enan and test prop were different compounds altogether (and not simply different "versions" of the same thing) I would in fact be dealing with two separate cycles, but as it stands now, i'm failing to see how the cycle can be realistically looked at as two entriely separate entities.

[BigGreen]

BigGreen i'm just curious as to why you are introducing so many different choices of gear into your second cycle?? you did test, dbol, and deca your first go around correct?? if that is the case my personal opinion would be to only introduce one maybe two new compounds in your next cycle rather than the 5 you listed. this way you can save other types of gear to hit your body in a different manner another time around. its just my thinking and you may disagree with it and thats perfectly fine but its at thought you could ponder.

My first was dbol , test, eq (and I'll in all likelihood be hitting winny @ the end) my second will be dbol, test, eq, fina. The only "new" compound I'll be introducing is fina. I may be the one who has this thinking very backwards here, but isn't testosterone testosterone regardless of the ester? I mean, whether you're running enan, cyp, prop, suspension or sus, you're doing test, correct? I simply do not see the transition from enan to prop in nearly the same light as switching from eq to deca or winny to masteron , etc, etc. Rather, I see it as no different (simplistically reduced, but it's the only way I can think of to make my point) than switching from casein to whey as a protein source for meal #5. Could someone please tell me if I'm off in this thinking??? Are prop and enan ENTIRELY different drugs in some sense other than the manner in which they are released into the bloodstream??? Up until this thread I would have said that was not the case, and I thought I had a decent grasp on things, now I'm second guessing all of that.

[FrkyBgStok]

biggreen, you make some very good points as do other bros as i have been toying with the one long cycle idea. i am interested in the what you said about introducing prop in week 13 and how to do it with enan. bump for opinions.

[BigGreen]

biggreen, you make some very good points as do other bros as i have been toying with the one long cycle idea. i am interested in the what you said about introducing prop in week 13 and how to do it with enan. bump for opinions.

I'm hoping for some good feedback as well on the somewhat non-traditional switch over from enan to prop...the norm being to transition from prop to enan in most cases.

Also, while I'm back on this thread, I think i should be a bit more clear in my philosophy regarding longer cycles, but more specifically my approach of instituting a clear and very intentional demarcation between a mass accumulation (as opposed to "bulk") and leaning (as opposed to "cut") phase. I have the impression that a number of people are of the opinion that I'm trying to add muscle and burn fat - in effect getting greedy and trying to accomplish to distinct things. Perhaps in the long run this is true, but as John Maynard Keynes so famously put it, "in the long run we are all dead". My approach to this stems from several years of natural training where I put on darn close to 100 pounds (some of which would have no doubt come without weight training as I finalized my "filling out", but much still a result of the weight room). During this time period, I came to realize that my body responded much better to minimal changes in overall deviations from approximately 242 pounds or so. Over this time, it became clear (given a nasty case of mono at one point that had me fat, and year off of school in which training was my absolute life) that my body very much desires to be within a few pounds of 245...whether it be as a pile of disgusting slop or fairly lean (comparatively speaking). Attempts to go significantly over or under resulted in nasty rebound effects in either direction (at least thus far)...i suspect that training beyond natural will prove no different. Thus, my cycle philosophy is to manipulate muscle gain and bodyfat loss, in as much as it is possible, within a relatively closed time period to avoid any retaliation on the part of my body that it was so quick to initiate over the last few years. An assessment of the way my body reacts dictated that I attempt to do this in a back-to-back fashion, before my body had a chance to fight back against the bulking phase. I figured if it's going to fight back to get to a certain weight, and i've found it "likes" the numerical weight, with the composition being secondary, I might as well get myself back down at or near that weight by trying to make as much as that numerical loss as possible bodyfat. Since cutting naturally during post-cycle therapy is not, in my opinion, a viable option, the solution became to extend the cycle but with a cutting characteristic. Intense research led me to believe that, given all that, 18-20 weeks seemed to be the magic number which would allow me to account for all of my own personal variables in this regard.

[956Vette]

What i think needs to be cleared up is the reason why you want prop in there in the end. Is it for the minimized bloat? What?
I agree with your philosophies on longer cycles. And i also agree test is test, and the base of your cycle is test/eq.

I have no experience with switching up the ester like you have it. but i think the way you have it presented would work. You may wait about a week after the last inj of enth though.

One reason i can think of that would lean me towards saying forget the prop, is just KISS-keep it simple stupid. If your goal behind running the prop is to lean up, i think that can be done in other ways. Other ways like the running fina and anavar /winstrol towards the end. -(i would highly recommend var over winny though).

[BigGreen]

I do agree concerning the prop at the end. My rationale currently is that, since I'll have to shoot fina ED, i may as well switch my test to one with a rep for less bloating. As soon as I upped my dosage of enan to what I believe to be 500 *actual* mg/week, my face, while not a moon face, began to show some of that famous bloat. However, when all is said and done, I do believe that chances are best I'll be running enan throughout .

[956Vette]

I do agree concerning the prop at the end. My rationale currently is that, since I'll have to shoot fina ED, i may as well switch my test to one with a rep for less bloating. As soon as I upped my dosage of enan to what I believe to be 500 *actual* mg/week, my face, while not a moon face, began to show some of that famous bloat. However, when all is said and done, I do believe that chances are best I'll be running enan throughout .

Okay, now maybe you should go into your anti-e strategy.