+ 1 Bold Ace Vs Eq Frontload
I just want to start by thanking everyone in the forms that keep giving great feedback. The cycle I am about to post is a combination of lots and lots of reading and researching. Tell me what you think about my 2 cycles I would like a honest opinion on bold ace vs EQ frontload, or anything else for that matter. This cycle has been designed for a iron man competition, where speed and endurance are very important. Planning on running the comp during wk 16 what do you think? This is where im at currently 1 mile run 6:05, bench press max 375. 6ft 215 9-10%bf age 26. 5th cycle compounds used before, test p,c,e suston, deca, eq, tren, winny depot. Any feedback is welcome Thanks Dawg
1-4 prop 100eod
1-4 bold ace 100 eod
1-16 Eq 600 split
1-16 test e 500 split
14-20 Mast prop 100 eod
17-20 prop 100eod
1-22 12.5mg aromasin ed
22-24 6.25mg aromasin ed
10-18 Hcg 500iu split
nolva 20..20..10..10
Clomid 100..100..50..50
VS
1-2 Eq 1200 split
1-4 prop 100eod
2-16 Eq 300 split
2-16 Eq Cyp 300 split
1-16 test e 500 split
14-20 Mast prop 100 eod
17-20 prop 100eod
1-22 12.5mg aromasin ed
22-24 6.25mg aromasin ed
10-18 Hcg 500iu split
nolva 20..20..10..10
Clomid 100..100..50..50
- Bookmark
- 1
- 0
Just read the whole thread through due to not being online for a while... my personal take on the EQ debate is that the length of proposed use is the factor of a big frontload or not, i.e i never run it for less than 20wks even taking it to 30wks if all is well with bloods etc and i have no tren in the stack at that stage.
No doubt a big frontload will bring on the EQ effects faster due to the maths outlined below but the ultimate kicker would be bold ace used exactly like we would with a long estered test... i believe we should all use acetates as kickers with every compound we use.. prop with test .. tren ace on a tren E or HEX run.. NPP with deca etc etc etc.. due to us all wanting our cycles to be totally productive this to me is the only way to go period.
And a tip to kill bold ace PIP is to mix it EQ (just half ml)will do the trick so then you get smooth pinning with the best of both worlds getting that EQ plasma build up fast.
VIKE COMEBACK!!!!!!
Anonthat's good advice bro. i actually abandoned my ace kicker bc i was too chicken shit to deal with the pip. didn't think about mixing the shit..
on a related topic, what's your take on mixing high pip gear with B12? not sure that i'll ever try this, but someone recently was telling me this for lowering the pip in my kalpa prop. curious what your experience is, if any.
Folks didn't see the word eq CYP on other days discussion and freaked out over cycle too short. Then i got pm from a few folks didnt understand boldenone UND and boldenone CYP were different. Soon as ya see EQ....the mind goes to the traditional bold UND. Two different Esters with different half lives.
First one looks great. Eq base has a big pip for me so be prepared.
Mixing the two...not liking that. Pick one. Match it to your goals. Mixing the two would be like making 300 tpp and 300 test e.
I'm still wondering why more folks arent using eq CYP? Have both test and eq cyp banging by week 6.
U will be peaking between wks 8-12 if ur comp is in that window go for it. That's physical performance. For ur typical cycle I peaked wks 10-20. For me that's when the magic happened. wk 16 will be sweet if that's when u plan on running it.
Anonsorry, Martdawg. didn't mean to jack your post
I will say I frontloaded EQ the first 2 weeks and I had extreme hunger by week 2. Frontload works good with EQ in my experience.
Anonyou bet.
An EQ front-load of 1200mg for 2 weeks will see your levels peak at week 3 to 600mg/wk. You therefore have the option to run a EQ ace kicker at the start of your cycle.
Anonwhat P means is 1200mg for the first two weeks, and drop back down to 600 starting week 3.
Yep, thanks for the clarification
el super beastogood answers i was wondering this as well.
That cycle layout was created a while ago and the knowledge ive learned since has shown me that the cyp ester is unnecessary. Have a read of my and dossier31's conversation in the comments, i think you will find that particularly interesting.
P thanks for the well thought-out posts on EQ. I have read them all. I went to my log before I typed this out and saw you have already given some advice there. haha Thanks! I am planning to run EQ cyp and am wondering what you mean by specifically "the cyp ester is unnecessary."? Since the half life is shorter with the EQ Cyp it should raise blood levels quicker, especially with a frontload.
The benefit with the EQ Cyp of not having to run 16-18 weeks plus a two week taper with prop at the end! For a regular undecylenate ester, that is way too long for my boys to be shut down and be on cycle IMO. I'm not on TRT and looking to be anytime soon. Or am I mistaken? Is running the Cyp not worth it for some reason? Please advise or PM. Please see my cycle log. Happy New Year!
Here's the comment, which i think is valuable to this thread;
The method below of front-loading the EQ for 2 weeks will make sure that you hit a peak in EQ levels around week 3, as opposed to week 5/6 resulting from a 1 week front-load.
Here's one ways you can front-load your EQ:
Consider the half life of EQ for instance. 14 days.
If you would do this normally at... lets say 600/wk then after 2 weeks without any injection you would have 800 ish half life residue + 600 (injection) = 1400mg in your blood. This is what is actually effective on your receptors. It is slow releasing. In theory frontloading the amount you would normally have at the week that the substance is supposed to "kick in" will have it kicking in right away.
For the EQ you may do 1200mg for week 1 and resume normal dosing for the rest of the cycle if you're doing a 12 wk cycle. If you're planning a shorter one then preload EQ a bit more, but I wouldn't consider doing a 8 week cycle on EQ alone. (See: http://www.eroids.com/cycle_logs/eq-exploration-a-different-viewpoint)
Also, have a look at this thread, i found it very useful: http://www.eroids.com/forum/steroids-qa/steroid-cycles/front-loading-vs....
A front load of EQ for 2 weeks will see your levels reach 1800 by week 3 and remain at this dose consistently. This option is definitely the best, although you don't peak as high, you reach your peak by week 3, and then that peak is maintained throughout the rest of the cycle. So this way is clearly the best option for running an eq ace + eq und cycle.
Ok, to answer your question, by front-loading EQ for 2 weeks results in peak levels by week 3. If you run EQ cyp alongside this, it is unnecessary since you have the same compound in your body twice (since both estered variants of the same compound) are in your system. However what i would recommend is an EQ ace and EQ undecylenate cycle, where you are front-loading with the EQ ace in the period in which it takes for the undecylenate ester to kick in.
Also, for a front-load of the undecylenate ester, you have the option of running it for 12 weeks (for example) since it 'gets to work', in this case from week 3-12, and with an EQ ace kicker, you have the EQ compound in your system from weeks 1-12 (aka. the whole cycle period).
However, you do have another option, which is to run an EQ ace and EQ cyp cycle, in much the same format as a test prop and test e cycle. A 12 weeker will be sufficient in this case, and the cyp ester will be valuable in this case too.
To conclude, to get the best value for your money when running multiple EQ esters is to either use an EQ ace + EQ cyp cycle OR to run an EQ ace + EQ undecylenate (front-loaded for 2 weeks) cycle. They can both be ran for 12 weeks and I am definitely considering this for my next cycle.
You're the man! Thanks for the insight. This helps. To Roid Noid's and Dos31 point below, Im curious to see what others say, hopefully Tread or Vik can chime in here.
Anonhow about a 2 week front-load on a 15-16 week run. cut out the eq week 12 and run the ace as a 3-4 week taper? i'm not a fan of running less than 16 weeks on eq, but i suppose this method would work since the ideal of 16+ is due to the kick being 5-8 weeks. in this case, you're still getting a good 10 weeks at an active level if our theory is correct.
That another great idea (i dropped the EQ und at week 12, as a possibility for martdawg who was concerned about running a long cycle).
Personally, if i were to run it, i would do an EQ ace kicker alongside a prop kicker, with a 2 week front-load of EQ undecylenate and a taper of EQ ace and prop, and would consider running it for the full 18/20 weeks. And that my friend is my idea of an ultimate cycle, which has me salivating right just thinking about it!
P do that shit! Create a cycle log for others to replicate. Sounds a bit tricky for a 3rd or 4th cycle. Great to see you guys collaborate on this.
The Great EQ Debate (featuring multiple esters)
Book marked... haha
Anonthey are the same compound paired with separate esters, each with their respective release. that is a strange way to frontload... personally, i would stick with eq (bold undeca) for the frontload. boldenone does not reach an active level at the receptors until the blood levels are at 1200-1400. at 600/wk, it will not peak until week 5-6. if you frontload 1200mg/wk for 2 weeks, you will reach the active level on week 2 and levels will peak by week 3 and remain constant for the duration. for the simplicity of it, i'd stick with just eq and save the cyp for another cycle. or, i would use an ace kicker for 5-6 weeks. ace has some serious pip to it, so i'm told. for this reason, i opted out of mine and am going with the frontload i described above.
Perfect.
Its particularly good timing that we had this conversation about this the other day on my EQ cycle layout too
Anoni'm tellin ya. i keep seeing this eq kicker and frontloading more and more these past few days.
Me too, its going to be my next cycle too!
so in that scenario you are saying that a guy that uses a dose of 1200mg/w EQ he would feel it kick at week 3?
Anonin theory, you should feel it at week 2. unless my half life of 14 days is not correct, according to the roidcalc, we're looking at this:
day dose lvl (mg)
1 300 285
2 0 271
3 300 543
4 0 517
5 300 777
6 0 739
7 300 989
8 0 941
9 400 1275
10 0 1214
11 400 1535
12 0 1461
13 400 1770
14 0 1685
15 300 1889
16 0 1797
17 0 1711
18 300 1628
19 0 1834
20 0 1746
21 0 1661
22 300 1866
23 0 1776
24 0 1690
25 300 1894
26 0 1802
27 0 1715
28 0 1632
29 300 1838
30 0 1750
31 0 1665
32 300 1870
33 0 1779
34 0 1693
35 0 1612
36 300 1819
37 0 1731
38 0 1647
39 300 1853
40 0 1763
41 0 1678
42 0 1597
43 300 1805
44 0 1718
45 0 1635
46 300 1841
47 0 1752
48 0 1667
49 0 1587
50 300 1795
51 0 1708
52 0 1626
53 300 1832
54 0 1744
55 0 1659
56 0 1579
(that took more typing than i thought.. hope i didn't miss something)
you can see the levels peak by week 3 and for the most part sustain within range of that for the duration. i suppose 300mg/e3.5d starting week 3 would be most ideal for stability, but the chart didn't allow it.
The Roid calc will give you these numbers but many vets will tell you that they arnet always accurate, but it is a great tool understanding how esters work. I have always liked the EQ frontload and have advised many a cycle to do it. However I cant say that I believe your gonna feel it week 2/3, I know your counting ester half lives and on paper it comes out like that but i think more realistically with the double frontload like that it would be week 5/6. However i would like to see some vets give some feedback from personal experience on this one. whether 2/3 or 5/6 its still better then 7/8 and I would surely do the frontload.
I have to agree with you Noid. I really like that tool but choose not to use myself and would rather trust my body. Perhaps plasma levels are concentrating nicely by wk 2/3 but truly feeling it and experiencing gains would for sure be there wk 5/6. If one can see some real hard factual gains by wk 5 I say it's been a successful frontload. EQ is just such a slow acting compound. Heck bro I was running EQ900mg at the end of my last cycle and after 4 wks off my Test was still at 1400 on blood work. It works slow, gains slow, but the gains are so worth it. Theyre almost always permanent.
If u really want fast eq gains Ace is the way to go. Too bad I get a flu from it and the PIP was intense. With each injection it was brutal. You would think it would lessen as my muscles accostomed to it but nope. I dropped it from this cycle just so I could train
Anonyeah. i dropped the ace kicker from the cycle log because of what i kept reading about how painful it was. thought this to be a better option.. know worries tho.. the concept alone still makes sense to me, and i can only see an advantage with going this route as opposed to no frontload and sitting it out. it def can't hurt.
Some guys actually love it. I had Irish telling me one day how PIP was nuttin but a chicken wing. Then he got back to me about the EQ AcePIP. He agreed it was no joke. He didn't die from it but hell ya it's pretty strong PIP wise.
For whatever reason some guys are just not prone to pip/pain and suffering like us mere mortals. For whatever reason I couldn't see VIKING complaining about PIP.
Anonspeaking of viking, where the hell has he been hiding? i used to see him pop up every once in a while. liked reading his shit.
well there still could be a disadvantage to this concept and that is overloading receptors and decreasing the bounding of the EQ for the rest of the cycle.
Anonbut, how could the receptors become overloaded if plasma levels only reach this amount and maintain for the duration. assuming the figures are correct for the sake of argument, if you go for no frontload, the levels reach the same amount later in the cycle. the amount is the same, only the time frame is different, and only by a few weeks.
I have no proof and I dont think there is studies this is just what some believes happens. there was a good thread on it somewhere on the site. whether its true or not personally i would follow through with the frontload.
Anoni just get curious is all. i appreciate the brainstorming.
Roid Noid, do you think that you can fill up the receptors from a front load? I thought all that was Bro Science? Receptor clearing and whatnot. I mean take Tren or similar compound that is binding very tightly to the receptor, weeks later it is still making muscles grow as you progress throughout the cycle. How is this different, especially with a lower affinity? Your insight would be helpful.
AnonIt's a shame there is no serum level panel we can run on bold. I'd sure like to see how these doses truely affect the blood.
You will find this link very interesting and useful EQ Exploration: A Different Viewpoint
zewiWhy do you have both EQ C and EQ in your cycles?