# Tren higher than test?



## topanga (Aug 30, 2010)

Hey guys,

I'm sure this has been asked many times so I apologize for asking again. Just wanted to ask again with my specific situation as it may differ from others.

Have seen and heard different opinions on the test/tren ratio's and was wondering what is supposed to be better. Ive recently read that since both the test and tren are competing for the same receptors, you would want them to prioritize the tren over the test. There are also different answers for which ratio provides less sides.

I've ran 500 test, 250 tren before and it was pretty great. I'm now wondering if I should run the same kind of cycle, at about 500 test, 350 tren... or switch it up and go 250 test, 450 tren. I'm running tren e and pharma grade test, and the goal is to cut.

Thanks!!


----------



## thewrongadvices (Apr 17, 2017)

I've done tren higher than test before. I prefer it for cutting, when you want less water from test and more trens awesome look. I get zero tren sides all that way, apart from some night sweats.

Some will always say test has to be higher than other compounds but that's rubbish in my opinion. In the old days anabolics were preferred (I know old timers that tell me this) and it was common for test to be lower.

Higher test has its place of course, for me it's when growth is the goal. So depends what you are trying to achieve.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

Ahh the age old "Tren higher than Test" argument.

Lets put it this way, have you ever seen anyone thats actually done Tren higher than Test and posted their results? No? Funny that.....its because Test is a fantastic drug for building muscle, its the base of any good cycle.

Im currently on Test, Tren and Mast, Test is much higher than both Tren and Mast and im 19st 7lbs at 6ft 2" with abs.

Stop trying to reinvent the wheel and do what works mate - KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid.


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

Chelsea said:


> Ahh the age old "Tren higher than Test" argument.
> 
> Lets put it this way, have you ever seen anyone thats actually done Tren higher than Test and posted their results? No? Funny that.....its because Test is a fantastic drug for building muscle, its the base of any good cycle.
> 
> ...


 You need to be a TV show. Go into acting dude! You never know!


----------



## AestheticManlet (Jun 12, 2012)

Currently using it on cut. 300 test 400 tren. My previous bulk was 250 test 500 tren and gained well.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

JohhnyC said:


> You need to be a TV show. Go into acting dude! You never know!


 Hahaha yea right! I wouldnt even know the first thing about where to start doing that,


----------



## Abc987 (Sep 26, 2013)

Chelsea said:


> Ahh the age old "Tren higher than Test" argument.
> 
> Lets put it this way, have you ever seen anyone thats actually done Tren higher than Test and posted their results? No? Funny that.....its because Test is a fantastic drug for building muscle, its the base of any good cycle.
> 
> ...


 What do you cruise on these days to keep your size? Do you use high on a cruise also?


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

Abc987 said:


> What do you cruise on these days to keep your size? Do you use high on a cruise also?


 Last time i cruised i was using NP Test 400 mate, the idea was to do 1ml every week but i usually forget and do 1ml every 10 days, seems to keep me ticking over nicely.


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

topanga said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I'm sure this has been asked many times so I apologize for asking again. Just wanted to ask again with my specific situation as it may differ from others.
> 
> ...


 I've always gone low test high tren and gains are amazing with very few sides. 250 test 500-700 tren was standard for me.

For mass higher test is marginally better but the increased sides just aren't worth it for the slightly better gains imo



Chelsea said:


> Ahh the age old "Tren higher than Test" argument.
> 
> Lets put it this way, have you ever seen anyone thats actually done Tren higher than Test and posted their results? No? Funny that.....its because Test is a fantastic drug for building muscle, its the base of any good cycle.
> 
> ...


 They both work mate. The "have you seen pics" argument doesn't carry water for me. I know how I've gained with high tren low test and that's good enough for me.

If no one ever reinvented the wheel we'd still be bumping along the roads on wooden wheels with no tyres lol.

Personally, I love my Bridgestones...the ride is smoooooth!!


----------



## Major Eyeswater (Nov 2, 2013)

After reading many threads on the topic, the only answer to this argument it "it depends on the person"

I've tried both, and prefer test higher than tren. I don't get particularly bad tren sides at 200pw with test at 400, but when i tried 400 tren 200 test, my acid reflux became intolerable, my cardio capacity went to crap and my libido dipped.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

stuey99 said:


> I've always gone low test high tren and gains are amazing with very few sides. 250 test 500-700 tren was standard for me.
> 
> For mass higher test is marginally better but the increased sides just aren't worth it for the slightly better gains imo
> 
> ...


 Hahaha i get what you are saying mate but the proof has to be in the pudding. Everything i do on here is documented so people can see what works. Saying that "have you seen pics" doesnt carry water for you is exactly what the problem is, if high Tren low Test was so good then every fcker would be doing it, including the top guys and i can assure you they arent, i know a good few high level amateurs and an IFBB pro along with top class coaches and none of them are giving out protocols such as this.

I think it boils down to people not being able to handle sides, at the end of the day, what are you going to grow more from:

250mg Test with 600mg Tren

or

750mg Test with 600mg Tren.

Simply put.....the latter.


----------



## swole troll (Apr 15, 2015)

skimmed this because i dont want to get caught up in the ongoing debate akin to the bro split vs higher frequency

there is arguments for both camps and id recommend both dependent on goals and ability to handle side effects

the benefit of keeping your test at lower dose (200-400mg) and tren as high as you like is to do with trens binding affinity to the androgen receptor and the fact that side effects are caused by free floating hormone binding to other receptors around the body and or aromtizing

whilst in a calorie deficit it makes more sense to keep test on the higher end of that low dose scale but i personally would still take the test lower than tren approach whilst on a cut for mental stability and keeping oestrogen lower, that and you arnt building any muscle on a deficit so better to use the minimum amount of hormones possible whilst still retaining maximum muscle

for bulking i think the higher or equal dose of test is the better option however because of the above reason of tren binding faster and stronger to the AR and pushing any testosterone off the receptor until its been absorbed you will more than likely suffer from greater sides

in both scenarios you can of course keep both lower dose (sub 400mg) and still make great progress with minimal sides

overall will you make greater gains with more gear? yes, always (with all things being equal) however sides will also go up with the dosage


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

Chelsea said:


> Hahaha i get what you are saying mate but the proof has to be in the pudding. Everything i do on here is documented so people can see what works. Saying that "have you seen pics" doesnt carry water for you is exactly what the problem is, if high Tren low Test was so good then every fcker would be doing it, including the top guys and i can assure you they arent, i know a good few high level amateurs and an IFBB pro along with top class coaches and none of them are giving out protocols such as this.
> 
> I think it boils down to people not being able to handle sides, at the end of the day, what are you going to grow more from:
> 
> ...


 Agreed, if sides are the same. But if high test hits you with terrible sides...lack of appetite, poor sleep etc then gains will be much better from higher tren.

Personally, for me, I gain better from a cycle that I'm happier on. I've done both ways and although higher test does bring better gains, they're not THAT much better in all honesty.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

stuey99 said:


> Agreed, if sides are the same. But if high test hits you with terrible sides...lack of appetite, poor sleep etc then gains will be much better from higher tren.
> 
> Personally, for me, I gain better from a cycle that I'm happier on. I've done both ways and although higher test does bring better gains, they're not THAT much better in all honesty.


 Fair play. With that in mind though, would it not make sense to just use a different compound to Tren seeing as that is the compound causing the sides in the first place?


----------



## DLTBB (Jan 26, 2015)

Either can work. Was on low Test high Tren in my profile pic while dieting and had a nice crisp look. For growing I think higher Test is better because my appetite and sleep is better.


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

Chelsea said:


> Fair play. With that in mind though, would it not make sense to just use a different compound to Tren seeing as that is the compound causing the sides in the first place?


 I see what you're saying, but no...lol

By far the best bulking cycle I've ever ran was 250test 700tren. By far!!

The test was meditech as well and I suspect underdosed...but the tren was spot on. I absolutely believe that although high test lower tren is marginally better, low test high tren still blows any other combo out the water.


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

So how would a 250mg test / 250mg tren cycle look compared to 500mg test? At what point does the addition of TREN start to become noticeable

I never do Tren mainly because I don't do large AAS doses but often curious about the "Tren effect"

Anyone try lower doses?


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

JohhnyC said:


> So how would a 250mg test / 250mg tren cycle look compared to 500mg test? At what point does the addition of TREN start to become noticeable
> 
> I never do Tren mainly because I don't do large AAS doses but often curious about the "Tren effect"
> 
> Anyone try lower doses?


 Tren would be noticeable even at a weekly dose of 250mg mate. Ive been cycling for years and 600mg per week is more than enough!!


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

Chelsea said:


> Tren would be noticeable even at a weekly dose of 250mg mate. Ive been cycling for years and 600mg per week is more than enough!!


 Thanks mate, if its noticeable of a lump of a man like you it will definitly work on me lol. I'll have a bash for curiosity sake (as soon as I finish this never-ending cut!)


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

I enjoy higher tren then test. I highly rate it.


----------



## DLTBB (Jan 26, 2015)

And there you have it, 2 of the biggest guys on the forum (Chelsea and theBEAST2002) have contrasting opinions on which is better, reinforcing that age old phrase - find what works best for you.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

DLTBB said:


> And there you have it, 2 of the biggest guys on the forum (Chelsea and theBEAST2002) have contrasting opinions on which is better, reinforcing that age old phrase - find what works best for you.


 Good point! Trial and error for the win.


----------



## topanga (Aug 30, 2010)

Haha as expected, no clear cut winner. Looks like I'm going to have to flip a coin on this one :confused1:

Btw, does it matter that I'm only going to be running 450 tren if I go with higher tren than test. Is that high enough for the "higher tren" approach? Like mentioned it's basically between 250 test/450 tren or 500 test/350tren.

Thanks to all for the previous and future answers!! :thumb


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

topanga said:


> Haha as expected, no clear cut winner. Looks like I'm going to have to flip a coin on this one :confused1:
> 
> Btw, does it matter that I'm only going to be running 450 tren if I go with higher tren than test. Is that high enough for the "higher tren" approach? Like mentioned it's basically between 250 test/450 tren or 500 test/350tren.
> 
> Thanks to all for the previous and future answers!! :thumb


 Mate you'll gain from 250/250 600/600 200/800 800/200

There's no magic formula and really no answer to your question tbh. Bang in 800mg total (or 600 or whatever) with whatever test tren ratio you choose and gains will be good.

The secret isn't anything to do with ratio...it's bro science. You wouldn't ask what ratio to run test and dbol would you lol

2 secrets to a good tren cycle..diet and estrogen control. It really is that simple


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

theBEAST2002 said:


> I enjoy higher tren then test. I highly rate it.


 I think the "enjoy" part is so important here. A tren cycle full of unpleasant sides aunt gonna be a productive one


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

Chelsea said:


> Tren would be noticeable even at a weekly dose of 250mg mate. Ive been cycling for years and 600mg per week is more than enough!!


 Make 600 into 700 and I'm with ya lol


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

stuey99 said:


> Make 600 into 700 and I'm with ya lol


 Mate......700mg feels like i would just be a sweaty mess! No thanks :lol:


----------



## bonacris (May 20, 2015)

stuey99 said:


> Make 600 into 700 and I'm with ya lol


 i wouldnt function on that. 300mg is plenty for me to change my look. i cant eat with tren so pointless me trying to bulk. more power to the guys who can handle it


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

Chelsea said:


> Mate......700mg feels like i would just be a sweaty mess! No thanks :lol:


 Everything gets better for me upto 700...after that there's just no point.

If ya wanna know about sweaty mess..the 250 test 700 tren cycle I mentioned earlier...was 2 summers back...in Dubai lol



bonacris said:


> i wouldnt function on that. 300mg is plenty for me to change my look. i cant eat with tren so pointless me trying to bulk. more power to the guys who can handle it


 Tbh I go abit nuts with tren doses. Thing with me is, it actually gives me more of an appetite, so as long as I control estrogen and keep the other sides at bay I can afford to go a bit mental lol.

If I run higher test the first 4-6 weeks are always great, but then after that estrogen tends to get away from me and it all goes a bit pear shaped.

I could quite happily do 250test 700tren for 6 months if I wanted to, no issue


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

DLTBB said:


> And there you have it, 2 of the biggest guys on the forum (Chelsea and theBEAST2002) have contrasting opinions on which is better, reinforcing that age old phrase - find what works best for you.


 ^^^ this ^^^

This is like a journey of self discovery. Your discovering how your body reacts to certain things. Over time you will find out what works for you. For some it takes longer them others.


----------



## topanga (Aug 30, 2010)

theBEAST2002 said:


> ^^^ this ^^^
> 
> This is like a journey of self discovery. Your discovering how your body reacts to certain things. Over time you will find out what works for you. For some it takes longer them others.


 Yay for learning :clap:

Alright, goona try higher tren than test to switch it up and see how my body reacts to it. Cheers everyone for the input!


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

topanga said:


> Yay for learning :clap:
> 
> Alright, goona try higher tren than test to switch it up and see how my body reacts to it. Cheers everyone for the input!


 The big difference is whether or not test is high enough to increase estrogen. Try 200-250 test and maybe 500-600 tren...no ai.

If bulking then eat like you've never eaten before lol. It's more difficult to pile on massive weight but what you gain will be quality


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

topanga said:


> Yay for learning :clap:
> 
> Alright, goona try higher tren than test to switch it up and see how my body reacts to it. Cheers everyone for the input!


 Gets some caber just incase the tren sides are horrid.


----------



## topanga (Aug 30, 2010)

stuey99 said:


> The big difference is whether or not test is high enough to increase estrogen. Try 200-250 test and maybe 500-600 tren...no ai.
> 
> If bulking then eat like you've never eaten before lol. It's more difficult to pile on massive weight but what you gain will be quality


 Yea, I was planning on running 250 pharma grade test and about 450 tren. Could jump to 500 if it makes a noticeable difference but feel more comfortable with 450, if that makes any sense :tongue:

Also, this is more so for a cut than a bulk. In addition to diet and cardio, the goal of this cycle would be to get leaner and keep the size/muscle I've put on from a prior bulk. Any size gained would be a plus xD is this a realistic outcome?



theBEAST2002 said:


> Gets some caber just incase the tren sides are horrid.


 I'm not sure if I can get my hands on caber. If I get an ai or serm, would that suffice? I was planning on grabbing letro for on cycle, but recently read that it's not ideal. Any input on that for this specific cycle?

Thanks guys


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

topanga said:


> Yea, I was planning on running 250 pharma grade test and about 450 tren. Could jump to 500 if it makes a noticeable difference but feel more comfortable with 450, if that makes any sense :tongue:
> 
> Also, this is more so for a cut than a bulk. In addition to diet and cardio, the goal of this cycle would be to get leaner and keep the size/muscle I've put on from a prior bulk. Any size gained would be a plus xD is this a realistic outcome?
> 
> ...


 Mate my advice is run the 250/450 and recomp with about 300 cals over maintenance. The fat will drop off and you'll gain nicely. PPL 3 on 1 off


----------



## lucav79 (Aug 19, 2013)

why upping tren so much? I mean, too much tren will saturate cause the number of receptors is given by mother nature.

Why not exploiting a good Combo with test? they work well together


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

lucav79 said:


> why upping tren so much? I mean, too much tren will saturate cause the number of receptors is given by mother nature.
> 
> Why not exploiting a good Combo with test? they work well together


 Sorry, what will happen??? Lol


----------



## Goranchero (Mar 26, 2015)

Is it normal to have completely different sides in two tren cycles?

End of 2016, 250mg Test / 750mg Tren A - massive night sweats, killer acid reflux(almost threw up in sleep a few times), emotional rollercoaster and sporadic ED issues

Now, 400mg Test E / 700mg Tren A / 700mg Mast E - no night sweats, only slower indigestion, loss of appetite and acid reflux, otherwise feeling fantastic and off the charts libido.

Is it all down to estrogen and prolactin management? I had worse AI last time and no caber.


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

Goranchero said:


> Is it normal to have completely different sides in two tren cycles?
> 
> End of 2016, 250mg Test / 750mg Tren A - massive night sweats, killer acid reflux(almost threw up in sleep a few times), emotional rollercoaster and sporadic ED issues
> 
> ...


 Yes, and yes.

This pretty much comes with any drug...sides are just a lot more noticeable on tren though


----------



## MrBishi (Mar 10, 2016)

I think when your starting out trying tren keeping the test low (150-200mg) is definitely a must whilst toying with the amount of tren. At least then you can see how suseptible to the bad tren sides you are.

I'm currently on week three of my first Tren cycle, running at 175mg/350mg pw (prop/ace). Trying to hold back on bumping the tren up even though I'm not experiencing no bad sides, even wondering whether this ROHM stuff is bunk due to the lack of sides.


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

MrBishi said:


> I think when your starting out trying tren keeping the test low (150-200mg) is definitely a must whilst toying with the amount of tren. At least then you can see how suseptible to the bad tren sides you are.
> 
> I'm currently on week three of my first Tren cycle, running at 175mg/350mg pw (prop/ace). Trying to hold back on bumping the tren up even though I'm not experiencing no bad sides, even wondering whether this ROHM stuff is bunk due to the lack of sides.


 Lack of sides due to estrogen being in range mate, simple as that

Keep us posted on the cycle yeah?


----------



## lucav79 (Aug 19, 2013)

stuey99 said:


> Sorry, what will happen??? Lol


 synergic effects. why not using 1gr test alone? better to Combine 500 with something else no?


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

topanga said:


> Yea, I was planning on running 250 pharma grade test and about 450 tren. Could jump to 500 if it makes a noticeable difference but feel more comfortable with 450, if that makes any sense :tongue:
> 
> Also, this is more so for a cut than a bulk. In addition to diet and cardio, the goal of this cycle would be to get leaner and keep the size/muscle I've put on from a prior bulk. Any size gained would be a plus xD is this a realistic outcome?
> 
> ...


 An AI won't help with tren sides. If you can't get a hold of a dopamine antagonist the over dose on vit b6 of have oral winny on hand.


----------



## lucav79 (Aug 19, 2013)

theBEAST2002 said:


> An AI won't help with tren sides. If you can't get a hold of a dopamine antagonist the over dose on vit b6 of have oral winny on hand.


 it depends from how much otjher components aromatize and elevate e2


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

lucav79 said:


> it depends from how much otjher components aromatize and elevate e2


 No it does not, I've had bloods to prove elevated prolactin with both test and E2 in range whilst on TRT and just 250mg of Tren per week, nothing was aromatising and I still got sides. Aggression and insomnia also.


----------



## lucav79 (Aug 19, 2013)

yes simply because the other components were not aromatizing eccessively


----------



## Dead lee (Jul 4, 2010)

There are sides on both protocols anyone who thinks there isn't is kidding themselves.

The combo with higher amounts of test adds to a more powerful stack, less sides less powerful.. If estrogen Wasnt in range people who are prone would be getting gyno and there not... Controlled with an AI the effect with more test is still more powerful, your estrogen levels could still be the same on either protocol so I don't see the argument.

You will grow regardless on each protocol... You will grow on any cycle.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

lucav79 said:


> yes simply because the other components were not aromatizing eccessively


 So by your logic if I had high rates of aromatisation I would have less sides?

What da fvck mang?


----------



## theBEAST2002 (Oct 16, 2011)

Dead lee said:


> There are sides on both protocols anyone who thinks there isn't is kidding themselves.
> 
> The combo with higher amounts of test adds to a more powerful stack, less sides less powerful.. If estrogen Wasnt in range people who are prone would be getting gyno and there not... Controlled with an AI the effect with more test is still more powerful, your estrogen levels could still be the same on either protocol so I don't see the argument.
> 
> You will grow regardless on each protocol... You will grow on any cycle.


 ^^^ this ^^^

For certain people different side effects are tolerated better or not even noticed. Less test and higher tren leads to a dryer and more vascular look. Where as vice versa is more rounded with a bit more water but more total mass. It's all about YOU and working out what is better for you.


----------



## lucav79 (Aug 19, 2013)

Quackerz said:


> So by your logic if I had high rates of aromatisation I would have less sides?
> 
> What da fvck mang?


 i was not talking about sides. can you read?


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

lucav79 said:


> i was not talking about sides. can you read?


 Of course I can read.

Do you even forum?


----------



## stuey99 (Nov 30, 2012)

lucav79 said:


> synergic effects. why not using 1gr test alone? better to Combine 500 with something else no?


 No, I mean to mother nature's receptors? Lol

Yes to synergistic effects, no to receptor saturation...there's plenty to go round mate (at least at the dosages we're talking about here)


----------

