Is anyone familiar with Epistane enough to know if it can be run for the 1st 4 weeks of a long ester cycle? I was thinking that if you could run epistane and gain "10lbs of lean muscle" (as claimed) without any water retention or bloating, and minimal side effects due to its anti-E composition, it may make a good kickstart for a 10 week Test E cycle ... any thoughts would be appreciated
Quarter pounder instead of 1/2" thick porterhouse?
Can be done.
Dbol will produce better strength gains.
Epistane has more type I activity which may make it "better" for actually gaining muscle comparatively.
Dbol also aromatizes, hence the bloat, etc.
The epistane will cause little...
Either way BOTH would be better used midcycle instead of kickstarting.
Both are more beneficial once the test kicks in properly. The dbol is more dependant on the test for good lean gains than the epistane is, in my opinion.
Dbol without the test kicked in, a standard kickstart, is pretty much just type II activity, and isnt producing much muscle on its own. Certainly nitrogen retention and increased strength, etc, will produce muscle, but the lack of androgen receptor activity is a negative.
Epistane would feel alot like var if dosed high enough, but would be less effective.
Dbol would actually cost less, both dosed at 40-50mg/day.
Personally I prefer dbol, but feel free to experiement, both will result in pretty much the same ammount of muscle gains, dbol will net you better strength though.
Although Dbol excert most of its effect through type II activity, I still think it will pack on some decent muscle. If the user is willing to do an "apple to apple" comparision. For example, the widely used novice cycle is test-e/c for 10 weeks, 500mg/week. This amounts to 12.5 weeks of total HPTA suppresion.
If the user is willing to take 40mg of dbol for 12 weeks, I wager the end result will not be less significant. The quick intial gains will be due to transient sacroplamic hypertrophy, but the dry tissue gains will come eventually. But having said that, most people that care about their liver and lipid profile probably will not take that much dbol for 12 week.
I would be very interested in reading a study of that nature! That would be very cool IMO.
I would NOT agree that four weeks of dbol would be equivalent (in gains) to testosterone suspension/acetate/prop... But to be fair, my friend has never done a dbol only cycle to compare to a 4wk test run.
I said 12 weeks!!
We know Arnold Schwarzenegger took a lot of Dbol (handful everday allegedly) everyday. Surely worked for him hahah
Well stating that dbol has a type II activity and epistane has a type I activity, then maybe they would be appropriate for a stack with a 2 on 2 off:
week 1-2: 50mg Dbol/day 40mg Epistane/day week 3-4: off 20mg nolva/day week 5-6: 50mg Dbol/day 40mg Epistane/day week 7-8: off 20mg nolva/day week 9-10: 50mg Dbol/day 40mg Epistane/day week 11-12: off 20mg nolva/day
I already have Epistane (it was purchased when I had gyno issues during 1st cycle, letro took care of it but I still have it), and had plans to get some Test E in the near future ... I just wanted to combine something in the beginning to kickstart during the waiting period, (I figured since I already have it may as well use it) this was the topic as stated in my original post ... but after reading about the 2 on/2 off I wondered about changing my plans on the Test E to Dbol and running the 2 on/2 with Epistane...any thoughts on those two together??? Might possibly be a bit too hard on the liver? Might be better off to use it another way, another time?
I dont feel that epistane is a good choice for a type I steroid base.
That said, Im not personally familiar with 2on/2off besides the base concept.
Testesterone is nearly idiot proof and produces the best strenght, mass, fatloss, energy, recovery, mood, cortisol, etc...effects.
I would choose 8 weeks of test over 8 weeks of any combination of orals.
So you think an extended use of dbol would equate to "permanent" [myofibrillar (sp?) hypertrophy], but a shorter dosage would not? I saw the 12 weeks, but why would equivalent length of use not be equal at four weeks, but would be equivalent at 12?
Because of Sarcomere hypertrophy. This takes more time (and material) than Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy.
As you know, the main reason that aromatisable orals (AAS actually) give so much is primarily due to SpH.
One reason that Injectable compounds allow the user to build more actual tissue than oral cycles is because the length of time they are used for is more conductive to allowing SmH (ie. protein Synthesis).
I am not saying that the types of hypertrophy are totally exclusive to the drug used, but that the time the user is 'on' is a variable in the amount of SmH that can take place IMO.