# test and deca VS test and tren



## jamiedilk (Jul 6, 2010)

i have been getting mixed messages on what to do for my next cycle!!!

am i right in saying test-deca is considered a more bulky cycle whilst test-tren is more of a lean mass gain cycle???

i know food is the most important thing!! but from the cycle side of it which is better?? i want to get it right and get the most out of my experience :thumb:


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

Only one way to find out


----------



## 1010AD (May 30, 2009)

I think you are right decca will put you oin more size and I've not had tren but have been told it is better for cutting so your cycle choice depends on what you want from it


----------



## Airborne Shaun (Jun 20, 2011)

I found that using Test E & Deca I had more gains in mass but with Tren & test I still gained but it was a very lean gain however with Tren my strength went through the roof.


----------



## NorthernSoul (Nov 7, 2011)

It has to be Tren hands down. Not tried either but the consistant reputation of Tren never seams to die down.


----------



## DeDe (Feb 14, 2010)

I done 1g test and 750mg of deca before, now im on 1,2g test 400mg tren E and 350mg masteron and I think tren is a winner here. You might look more bulky on test and deca but thats because of water, with tren quality of the muscle you putting on is just outstanding.

Sent from my MotoA953 using Tapatalk


----------



## BodyBuilding101 (Mar 8, 2006)

Doesn't Tren make you more agitated/nervous etc? Been hearing the side are quite bad with Tren....for me id go with test and deca, keep diet clean and you should be ok.


----------



## The Oak 2009 (Sep 14, 2009)

Would say with a decent diet the gains (for a bulk) would be roughly the same TBH. If you are trying to cut, Tren would probs be the better option.


----------



## The Oak 2009 (Sep 14, 2009)

> *]It has to be Tren hands down*. Not tried either but the consistant reputation of Tren never seams to die down.


Even though you never tried either of them?


----------



## Fullhouse (Mar 31, 2010)

Tren for good lean gains


----------



## MRSTRONG (Apr 18, 2009)

tren is billed as king but deca is a good compound , comes down to sides .


----------



## Rick89 (Feb 27, 2009)

I prefer deca for size, tren better for strength


----------



## Fullhouse (Mar 31, 2010)

ewen said:


> tren is billed as king but deca is a good compound , comes down to sides .


Yep makes me nuts but I love the stuff, I would like to use deca long term to see if it helps my joints.


----------



## Zorrin (Sep 24, 2010)

They're both 19-nor compounds that put on lasting, keepable muscle. I'll admit that I haven't used deca yet myself.

Deca has a reputation for being more watery, but good for joints - the opposite of winstrol. Its a gradual,slow-build compound with few other sides, apart from "deca dick" if test levels aren't kept up. Its a weaker anabolic than test, but its considered more gentle, and the muscle you build is longer-lasting. I've always thought "why not just use more test?", and never bothered.

Tren causes "tren dick" without at least a little test, but its a much madder, more powerful, dry beast. mg for mg, its 3x more anabolic than testosterone. I've felt a bit hot, but sleep OK, never had night sweats or tren rage. I feel like tren is much more transforming. I find that, with an equal amount of test, I not only avoid "tren dick", but go a bit mad for the old hows your father.

I intend to try nandolone one day, but its less suited to my 6-week cycle lengths.


----------



## Rick89 (Feb 27, 2009)

Zorrin said:


> They're both 19-nor compounds that put on lasting, keepable muscle. I'll admit that I haven't used deca yet myself.
> 
> Deca has a reputation for being more watery, but good for joints - the opposite of winstrol. Its a gradual,slow-build compound with few other sides, apart from "deca dick" if test levels aren't kept up. Its a weaker anabolic than test, but its considered more gentle. I've always thought "why not just use more test?", and never bothered.
> 
> ...


Good post mate, tren turned me into an animal (and not always in a good way), strength and aggression was crazy high


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

Zorrin said:


> They're both 19-nor compounds that put on lasting, keepable muscle. I'll admit that I haven't used deca yet myself.
> 
> Deca has a reputation for being more watery, but good for joints - the opposite of winstrol. Its a gradual,slow-build compound with few other sides, apart from "deca dick" if test levels aren't kept up. Its a weaker anabolic than test, but its considered more gentle, and the muscle you build is longer-lasting. I've always thought "why not just use more test?", and never bothered.
> 
> ...


U could use npp though


----------



## NorthernSoul (Nov 7, 2011)

Never heard a bad thing about NPP, seams very popular on here but personally I prefer logn estered cycles.


----------



## jamiedilk (Jul 6, 2010)

ok i will choose test and tren not getting it just yet BUT would it be a good idea to run test at 500mg pw weeks 1-12 and tren at 400mg pw weeks 2-12 or is this still too much for my 3rd cycle i will also be running dbol as a kickstart


----------



## Itchy Nips (Jan 4, 2010)

iv ran a test tren mast bulk and also test and deca bulk and for me the test and tren blew the test and deca out the water. I ran 500mg test, 500 tren and 500 mast, then with test and deca i used 700mg test 350 and 400mg deca.


----------

