# dianabol VS superdrol



## solja (Jun 1, 2009)

I WAS THINKING ABOUT DOING A DIANABOL CYCLE FOR 8 WEEKS AT 20 MG EACH DAY

BUT I HAVE BEEN READING ALOT ABOUT SUPERDROL AND SOME PEPOLE SAY THAT SUPER DROL IS BETTER THEN DIANABOL

IM LOOKING FOR THE BEST GAINS AT THE END OF THE CYCLE

WHAT ARE OTHER PEPOLES VEIWS ON THIS

IM HOPING THAT THIS LOG WILL HELP ME CHOOSE BETWEEN THE 2

IF YOU HAVE USED 1 OF THESE OR BOTH LET ME NOW WHAT YOU THINK THANKS

SOLJA


----------



## Arnold100 (Jun 11, 2009)

Hey mate, iv used both TBH they are both good, but i like SD gains seem to be more solid and hold less water than on Dbol, but theres no way you could take SD for 8weeks id say 4weeks max.


----------



## solja (Jun 1, 2009)

so if i did sd for 4 weeks would i get the same gains or better then 8 weeks on d bol

thanks for posting back


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

Personally I would not touch superdrol, as I have heard too many reports of difficulty recovering their HPTA post cycle and side effects.

J


----------



## Arnold100 (Jun 11, 2009)

Whats your cycle history? I think you should get better gains doing 8wks Dbol if i where you id up the dose 30mg a day.


----------



## Tom1990 (Dec 21, 2008)

similar to what joshua said, ive heard too many people saying that superdrol has ruined their sex lives etc etc, in my opinion its not worth the risk but its upto u at the end of the day! even JW the biggest guy on here lol says that dianabol was one of the best cycles hes done.


----------



## Arnold100 (Jun 11, 2009)

Iv never had any probs with SD no sides and recovering was fine, but then again every1 is differant.


----------



## solja (Jun 1, 2009)

ive done a epi cycle

and a epi and tren cycle

i was thinking about adding test with the d bol but i dont really want to inject is there some good test tabs i can use

thanks guys


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

I've used both mate. Liked superdrol but there really is no comparison Dianabol is much better. Gains on both can be kept if diet and training are consistent. I would still run a pct if your going to use superdrol though.


----------



## Arnold100 (Jun 11, 2009)

Id go for 10wk cycle Test E 500mg/wk Dbol 30mg/day wks 1-4


----------



## solja (Jun 1, 2009)

dianabol it is ive got a log on here showin what im going to do ill use this log when im on cycle

dose any one now of anygood test tabs i can get insted of injecting

thanks for the help so far guys :thumb:


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

solja said:


> dianabol it is ive got a log on here showin what im going to do ill use this log when im on cycle
> 
> dose any one now of anygood test tabs i can get insted of injecting
> 
> thanks for the help so far guys :thumb:


No such thing as a good test tab, anyways you said in an earlier post that you'd ran tren!!!!


----------



## redneil75 (May 6, 2009)

ran dbol many times. never ran sdrol but from what i understand gains slow right down after 2 weeks with it. ideal they say for a kickstarter but dbol is your friend for a slightly longer cycle.


----------



## solja (Jun 1, 2009)

im doin my dianabol now at 30 mg a day i started at 20mg and moved up i love it ive lost waight but look and feel bigger

my strengh is better day by day


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

solja said:


> im doin my dianabol now at 30 mg a day i started at 20mg and moved up i love it ive lost waight but look and feel bigger
> 
> my strengh is better day by day


You have lost weight on a dbol cycle :confused1: , whats the point of running it then?


----------



## Testoholic (Jun 13, 2009)

Joshua said:


> Personally I would not touch superdrol, as I have heard too many reports of difficulty recovering their HPTA post cycle and side effects.
> 
> J


x2, thing is i have a tub of superdrol in my supplies at home, just been sitting there for months now. was keen on trying till i read into other peoples bad experiences. thing that puts me off the most is the absolute trashing of your lipid profiles ect.


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

Recovering from Superdrol is just as difficult/easy as dianabol from my experience. Superdrol does tend to affect the lipids more so as already mentioned you can't really stay on it too long as sides can become quite bad. And as said gains do start to slow down although in my experience this is in week 4 onwards making 3 weeks the optimum length to run SD. It's less androgenic than dbol as well so for those who don't get on too well with the more androgenic compounds it's a better option.

There will always be people who'll prefer one over the other but you'll find that most people will prefer SD over dbol if they've ran both.

As for bad experiences, you'll get this on any steroid not just legal designers. I've read some pretty shocking stories about tren, and also read that sides become really bad after 8 weeks. I'm now in my 12th week on it and still no sides bar increased body temperature (which I cannot completely attribute to the tren as it's been very hot and humid around where I live this past couple of weeks). There are also people who dislike deca which I got on very well with. People rate Masteron quite highly, and Winny, I've got very little from both (possibly don't respond too well to dht derived compounds). Swings and roundabouts really, you won't know whether you'll like it or not until you run it.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

^^^ yea, pretty much disagree with everything you said.

At the end of the day aas have over 50 years of clinical studies behind them and a shed load of anecdotal evidence.


----------



## dog5566 (May 28, 2008)

firestorm said:


> Recovering from Superdrol is just as difficult/easy as dianabol from my experience. Superdrol does tend to affect the lipids more so as already mentioned you can't really stay on it too long as sides can become quite bad. And as said gains do start to slow down although in my experience this is in week 4 onwards making 3 weeks the optimum length to run SD. It's less androgenic than dbol as well so for those who don't get on too well with the more androgenic compounds it's a better option.
> 
> There will always be people who'll prefer one over the other but you'll find that most people will prefer SD over dbol if they've ran both.
> 
> As for bad experiences, you'll get this on any steroid not just legal designers. I've read some pretty shocking stories about tren, and also read that sides become really bad after 8 weeks. I'm now in my 12th week on it and still no sides bar increased body temperature (which I cannot completely attribute to the tren as it's been very hot and humid around where I live this past couple of weeks). There are also people who dislike deca which I got on very well with. People rate Masteron quite highly, and Winny, I've got very little from both (possibly don't respond too well to dht derived compounds). Swings and roundabouts really, you won't know whether you'll like it or not until you run it.


where do you get all this crap from? :whistling: :lol:


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

What about tbol?


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

I don't know! what about it?


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

lol


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

firestorm said:


> lol


Ok don't tell me then.


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

Good post by FGB on UGM:



> True, however many of the traditional steroids are hardly used for their original medical purposes any more because they were superseded by better products quite some time ago. It's not that they were fantastic, they were simply ok for the time they were developed. Keep in mind that we also use them at far higher doses then what they were developed for.
> 
> Don't forget some DS's were actually developed by Pharma companies originally & simply scrapped. It may well have been scrapped because of economic reasons.
> 
> ...


I'm not arguing against the fact that studies are important but how many people actually read those studies? When you run an AAS do you read all of the 50 years worth of medical studies on it before deciding whether to run it or not? Or do you go off what others say safe in the knowledge the studies are there? Not having a bash mate but I've never really gone for the medical studies argument. Superdrol is bar far the most popular legal steroid around, I would agree with FGB's opinion that there are probably as many people who have ran SD as tbol, if SD was dangerous etc people would be dropping like flies. Not exactly a scientific argument I know but again as stated steroids are generally used in higher doses than used in the studies, so just how valid are those studies? I've read a few where the studies were geared towards steroid use, so fair enough, but I'm not sure how valid a study on say using 20mg of testosterone a week when comparing to 500mg+ a week.

I've not read loads of studies myself, I go off mainly internet feedback from several boards before making a decision. Ultimately though if you've never ran a compound, and although there are studies on it, you're still experimenting? Would you agree with this? You're a unique person who may react differently to a compound than in the studies.

I'm no expert on it, just firing off my opinion. And no offence intended.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

Ok well thanks for plugging UGM, maybe you are better off over there, you have no argument mate, you are totally missing the point.

And you still haven't answered "what about tbol"?


----------



## ricey (Nov 28, 2008)

imo i would never go with any of these new designer sh*ts over an aas. ass have been researched tried and tested exstensively and all the info is there for you to find if you know where to look. the same cannot be said for the likes of sdrol and the like its newer its got more mistique in my book but i cant really be sure what im getting so sdrol can go f*ck itself up the bumhole


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

i know nothing regarding AAS. however, im curious.Take Dinabol,it was developed approx 50 years ago. Well im sure that not many compounds of that era are still in medical use.however, as we know its still used by athletes.My point is, surely in the last 5 decades, safer more effective compounds have been developed for medical purposes? so why are athletes not using these(if they exist?)instead of relying on what i would have thought to be a redundant drug, from half a century ago?


----------



## LittleChris (Jan 17, 2009)

mars1960 said:


> ^^^ yea, pretty much disagree with everything you said.
> 
> At the end of the day aas have over 50 years of clinical studies behind them and a shed load of anecdotal evidence.


That would be my argument as well. :beer:


----------



## LittleChris (Jan 17, 2009)

Can't Superdrol's popularity be attributed to the fact it is legal, and thus easier to source than any AAS.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

essexboy said:


> Well im sure that not many compounds of that era are still in medical use.however, as we know its still used by athletes.My point is, surely in the last 5 decades, safer more effective compounds have been developed for medical purposes?


Well they are and just exactly what safer AAS have been developed for medical purposes in the last 50 years?

They are all just synthetic forms of testosterone.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

LittleChris said:


> Can't Superdrol's popularity be attributed to the fact it is legal, and thus easier to source than any AAS.


Exactly that and no other reason.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

mars1960 said:


> Well they are and just exactly what safer AAS have been developed for medical purposes in the last 50 years?
> 
> They are all just synthetic forms of testosterone.


Mars mate, im asking a question not making a statement.i appreciate they are "just" synthetic forms of test.however from reading here,it would seem a lot of side efects can be had.I was merely curious as to whether new strains(dont know if that the correct term?)had been marketed that limited these side effects?

I was using a heart rythm drug. The potential side effects made aas look like a party.(liver failure,blindness, lung damage etc)That drug was refined, and a lot of the major issues were lessened, whilst maximising its potency.I was curious as to whether anyone was aware of this being done with aas, thats all.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

essexboy said:


> Mars mate, im asking a question not making a statement.i appreciate they are "just" synthetic forms of test.however from reading here,it would seem a lot of side efects can be had.I was merely curious as to whether new strains(dont know if that the correct term?)had been marketed that limited these side effects?
> 
> I was using a heart rythm drug. The potential side effects made aas look like a party.(liver failure,blindness, lung damage etc)That drug was refined, and a lot of the major issues were lessened, whilst maximising its potency.I was curious as to whether anyone was aware of this being done with aas, thats all.


No mate, not really as there is little need to as we are talking medical and the doses used cause little if any side effects, i guess the newest addition is test undecanoate specifically manufactured for TRT purposes.

The steroids that are already out there do the job for which they were designed and are very safe, espically when you consider "atheletes" have been using them at 10-100 times the recommended medical dose for years on end with very, very few incidences of serious clinical health problems.


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

LittleChris said:


> Can't Superdrol's popularity be attributed to the fact it is legal, and thus easier to source than any AAS.


Sorry mate, my point wasn't that Superdrol was popular but rather that so many people run it if there was something inherently wrong with it there would be a lot of causalities. I know this isn't exactly scientific but I still feel the point is valid. All steroids carry risks and have side effects, Superdrol is no different.

Mars1960: Sorry mate not sure what you mean, plugging UGM? I use 3 forums, UK-M, MT and UGM, I'm not affiliated with any of them. Plugging them implies I'm getting something out of it, which I'm not. I've mentioned UK-M on UGM before now, talking about jw007's journal, and my post was "in jw007's journal on UK-M...", doesn't mean I'm plugging UK-M?

Anyway, everyone is entitled to their own opinion I'm not telling any of you you're wrong. I'm just stating my opinion. If you don't want to run Superdrol because of the lack of studies then fair enough, that's your choice. Superdrol does have a following, not just with newbies but with more experienced people as well. But, no point arguing over it, there's plenty of AAS about for you to run.


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

LittleChris said:


> Can't Superdrol's popularity be attributed to the fact it is legal, and thus easier to source than any AAS.


Spot on mate IMO. When the Bush's (Jnr) prohormone clampdown came in, there was a big scramble to find PH would not be covered by the legislation in the US SD was released onto the market in massive amounts, and there was a considerable promotional/marketing effort.

Not only is it easier to source but there is convincing advertising out there to promote the stuff. I find it quite dismaying how so many people consider SD to be safer and more effective than traditional AAS.

As an aside, your point is also applicable to the legal high situation too. Greater availability and less publicity of the side effects, however the sides and risks are largely unknown.



> Sorry mate, my point wasn't that Superdrol was popular but rather that so many people run it if there was something inherently wrong with it there would be a lot of causalities. I know this isn't exactly scientific but I still feel the point is valid. All steroids carry risks and have side effects, Superdrol is no different.


I assume that the main market for SD is young males. I would imagine that reporting of erectile problems or persisting testicular shrinkage is not something that many teenage guys would openly admit. I have heard a number of anonymous claims however that SD caused considerable problems on these fronts.

J


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

firestorm said:


> Mars1960: Sorry mate not sure what you mean, plugging UGM? I use 3 forums, UK-M, MT and UGM, I'm not affiliated with any of them. Plugging them implies I'm getting something out of it, which I'm not. I've mentioned UK-M on UGM before now, talking about jw007's journal, and my post was "in jw007's journal on UK-M...", doesn't mean I'm plugging UK-M?


Ok, maybe not, but why are you pasting some MODS opinion from UGM, who gives a toss about his opinion.

Iv'e read you're posts on UGM RE: SD and all you do is come here and say the opposite, seems to me you don't really know what you are talking about.


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

Eh? I've used SD several times as documented in my journals. I've had bloodwork done after a cycle where SD was incorporated, lipids looked bad as expected. If you can post up where I've said the opposite to what I've said here about SD I'd appreciate it.

Joshua, those effects can be caused by all steroids? Granted the fact that SD is legal and it doesn't get the respect it deserves is wrong, but this is by no means solely down to the marketing of the compound. Many aas users claim it's mild and to move on to "real" steroids. When people research these legal steroids they can become confused.


----------



## LittleChris (Jan 17, 2009)

Does the fact you are a rep for a company have anything to do with your support for Superdrol?

Out of interest, who are the more experienced people who use SD?


----------



## firestorm (Feb 11, 2009)

Don't see how I'm not paid to push supplements mate. I have a journal up on MT which lists what I use, also if you have a search you'll see journals I've had over the years (before being a rep). For this particular thread, SD v dbol, I just prefer SD over dbol. Really didn't get on well with dbol, lots of sides and I felt terrible. I'm not saying dbol is rubbish, it's clearly one of the most popular oral steroids going and many people enjoy using it. I'm just putting in my opinion which I think you'll agree we're all entitled to do.

First name off the top of my head is mick_the_brick. Quite a few people in the TAOS section on MT use SD as a kicker, but just as many people wouldn't consider running it for the lack of studies as mentioned in this thread.

I first ran SD when Designer Supplements brought it to the market a good few years ago, with Pheraplex. Everyone at the time likened these legal steroids as sweets, I went quite high on the dose and it crippled me. Then over the years I've ran it a few times, different brands each time, enjoyed each course of it bar one where I ran it for 5 weeks and felt like topping myself (did a silly stack with two other methylated orals). It does have side effects, as with all steroids, and shouldn't be abused.


----------



## Testoholic (Jun 13, 2009)

I've had bloodwork done after a cycle where SD was incorporated, lipids looked bad as expected.

the very reason i wouldnt use it, ive had bloods done after dbol and lipids wasnt too badly raised. superdrol is renowned for trashing your lipids. so for the purpose of the thread, go with dbol if you value health..


----------



## LittleChris (Jan 17, 2009)

firestorm said:


> Don't see how I'm not paid to push supplements mate. I have a journal up on MT which lists what I use, also if you have a search you'll see journals I've had over the years (before being a rep). For this particular thread, SD v dbol, I just prefer SD over dbol. Really didn't get on well with dbol, lots of sides and I felt terrible. I'm not saying dbol is rubbish, it's clearly one of the most popular oral steroids going and many people enjoy using it. I'm just putting in my opinion which I think you'll agree we're all entitled to do.
> 
> First name off the top of my head is mick_the_brick. Quite a few people in the TAOS section on MT use SD as a kicker, but just as many people wouldn't consider running it for the lack of studies as mentioned in this thread.
> 
> I first ran SD when Designer Supplements brought it to the market a good few years ago, with Pheraplex. Everyone at the time likened these legal steroids as sweets, I went quite high on the dose and it crippled me. Then over the years I've ran it a few times, different brands each time, enjoyed each course of it bar one where I ran it for 5 weeks and felt like topping myself (did a silly stack with two other methylated orals). It does have side effects, as with all steroids, and shouldn't be abused.


Just had a read through your journal. My jaw is still on the floor.


----------

