# Boldenone or Deca



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

ive heard alot of people saying that stacking Boldenone in a bulking cycle is better than Deca for keeping most size..??? is that true?

ive always thought that Deca would be a much of better option to stack it in a bulking cycle....but then deca holds more water and u will loose that water later on anyway... wat u guys think?


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

Deca is a far superior drug to Boldenone, and as for how much you keep, there are far too many factors involved, the only difference between drugs is water if you are prone, so should not be a concern.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

aussieboy said:


> ive heard alot of people saying that stacking Boldenone in a bulking cycle is better than Deca for keeping most size..??? is that true?
> 
> ive always thought that Deca would be a much of better option to stack it in a bulking cycle....but then deca holds more water and u will loose that water later on anyway... wat u guys think?


Deca wins hands down.


----------



## ARNIE (Dec 19, 2006)

i agree that deca is a better drug for gains but the sides i seem to get from a few weeks on deca make my choice boldenone, i find bold gives me great pumps good vascularity and recovery is good also,

for me deca sends me in to a emotional baby (not sure why but it does) especially through pct i find recovery hindered when i used deca over when i substitute it for bold.

I would say though 300mg a week of deca is better for gains than400mg of bold but for the reasons i have stated id go bold,

many people will different expirience on this and do great with deca, so id say try them both in cycles and see how you react!


----------



## TaintedSoul (May 16, 2007)

Deca and Sust with some dbol has always been a winner for me.


----------



## Trenzyme (May 4, 2008)

tren


----------



## FATBOY (Mar 4, 2008)

deca


----------



## Big Scouse (Sep 30, 2008)

Trenzyme said:


> tren


How did we know you would say that!


----------



## stow (Jun 5, 2007)

Boldenone beats deca if you ask me


----------



## Guest (Feb 8, 2009)

stow said:


> Boldenone beats deca if you ask me


Interested to know why you think that mate?


----------



## bkoz (Apr 29, 2008)

DECA


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

ive used deca with good gains i have some eq their for my next cycle so we shall see.


----------



## anabolic ant (Jun 5, 2008)

good ol trusty deca...used it many a time...always a good 1!!!!

cant say anyone i know would hold boldenone automatic in higher regard than deca!!!!


----------



## dantheman (Feb 8, 2009)

eq - amazing appetite, vasc, and easier recovery than deca.

deca bloats me up like a dead fish.


----------



## Beans (Sep 1, 2008)

If you don't grow from a Test/Deca/Dbol cycle, you wont grow.

It's just that simple.


----------



## Mars (Aug 25, 2007)

Beans said:


> If you don't grow from a Test/Deca/Dbol cycle, you wont grow.
> 
> It's just that simple.


LOL, if you take the test out of that statement you'd sound just like Dan Duchaine:lol:


----------



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

wat about Nandrolone Phenylpropionate...??? would that be a better option as Normal DECA takes about 4-5 weeks to fully kick in...

Like if u do a 10 week cycle, wouldnt the Nandrolone Phenylpropionate be better as it would start working quicker...???????


----------



## Rebus (May 22, 2006)

Beans said:


> If you don't grow from a Test/Deca/Dbol cycle, you wont grow.
> 
> It's just that simple.


A good old Mick Hart cycle there


----------



## Big Scouse (Sep 30, 2008)

aussieboy said:


> wat about Nandrolone Phenylpropionate...??? would that be a better option as Normal DECA takes about 4-5 weeks to fully kick in...
> 
> Like if u do a 10 week cycle, wouldnt the Nandrolone Phenylpropionate be better as it would start working quicker...???????


If you could handle pinning eod for 10 weeks!


----------



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

thats not the point bro...

anyone else knows the answer for that?


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

aussieboy said:


> thats not the point bro...
> 
> anyone else knows the answer for that?


NPP and Deca are both Nandrolone and the ester size is about the same, so the amount of drug you get with each is the same, as will the results.

Blood levels of Deca will start to rise after a few days, so it does not take weeks to kick in at all.


----------



## Cheater2K (Apr 3, 2003)

Prefer EQ myself - again recovery is much easier, gains have always been good.

Deca gave me all sorts of problems - gyno being one of them.

Basicly i wont use deca again because of the sides.


----------



## Trenzyme (May 4, 2008)

aussieboy said:


> wat about Nandrolone Phenylpropionate...??? would that be a better option as Normal DECA takes about 4-5 weeks to fully kick in...
> 
> Like if u do a 10 week cycle, wouldnt the Nandrolone Phenylpropionate be better as it would start working quicker...???????


i like npp. exellent lean mass compound little bloat and very few sides

much better than deca imo

you can shoot npp e3d if you cant handle eod


----------



## jayt (Dec 10, 2007)

deca and bdol....brilliant ;-)


----------



## LukeVTS (Dec 7, 2008)

Beans said:


> If you don't grow from a Test/Deca/Dbol cycle, you wont grow.
> 
> It's just that simple.


If you dont grow from a Test/eq/Dbol cycle, you wont grow.

If you dont grow off a Test/Dbol cycle you wont grow!

Ive had neither but am running eq within the week.


----------



## stow (Jun 5, 2007)

Just had better gains and I think Ganabol compliments long chain test extremely well. Deca just loads me with water and then it all comes off.


----------



## itraininthedark (Oct 3, 2007)

boldenone hands down.. too many sides from deca.


----------



## Felzy21 (Mar 16, 2008)

Iv never used deca, but iv done a EQ only cycle and the gains are hard and kept, low water retention, low sides (none to be honest)

am now running sust and boldenone at the moment.

boldenone increases blood pressure and red blood cell count = better oxygen supply and from what i can tell excellent pumps, iv got 10% BF and very good circulation due to burst training rather than slow size gains, bicep curls bring my veins bulging out, front of delts, big ones down the middle of the biceps, and about 7 in either forearm, i dont get this anywhere near as much when not on EQ so i geus its generally down to this.

as for gains on EQ alone it was alot slower than EQ and sust, in 2 weeks 4 days iv put on the same weight on Sust/EQ at 500mg each per week, that i put on in 6 weeks on EQ alone.

from the research iv done, and pics of a mate who done sust/deca, massive gains but harder to keep by far.

and what i like most about EQ, it makes me want to eat all day, i normally struggle to find the interest to eat, but on EQ i can sit thru a meal at my work canteen, get up and go get another full meal, brilliant for appetite.


----------



## Felzy21 (Mar 16, 2008)

another few things to note, 6 weeks on EQ @ 400mg a week i didnt bother with HCG, just some clorid and tamoxifen, recovered easily.

both cycles iv felt more aggresive, i control it cus i know why im feeling it but i seem to want to get every mate and family member in spar gear and train so its not really abad thing


----------



## stone14 (Mar 24, 2005)

felzy

what doseeq did you run on eq alone?

did you get libido problems?

how long was cycle?

did you need hcg?


----------



## LukeVTS (Dec 7, 2008)

lol he answered 3/4 of those questions!

felzy why didnt you run test with it? it should be a base for pretty much any cycle


----------



## Donnie Brasco (Oct 23, 2008)

Im on 400mg of eq and it making me so hungry and can see my gains from it to, using gen xl good stuff although some are putting it down


----------



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

do you guys reckon doing 8 weeks of EQ is pointless???

i wanna do a cycle wit test suspension, but dont wanna do test for longer than 8weeks i get bad sides from any test.... dont know if its worth doing EQ for only 8weeks, or doing fast acting deca (npp) ????? any advice?


----------



## Nytol (Jul 16, 2005)

I think it is pointless.


----------



## Sylar (Sep 7, 2008)

aussieboy said:


> do you guys reckon doing 8 weeks of EQ is pointless???
> 
> i wanna do a cycle wit test suspension, but dont wanna do test for longer than 8weeks i get bad sides from any test.... dont know if its worth doing EQ for only 8weeks, or doing fast acting deca (npp) ????? any advice?


Why the fcuk do you want to run Test Susp? & What's the point running a steroid with a half life of as little as 12 hours with a very long ester like EQ?

If you're going to run NPP, why not run a similar estered Test like Testosterone Propionate?


----------



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

Sylar said:


> Why the fcuk do you want to run Test Susp? & What's the point running a steroid with a half life of as little as 12 hours with a very long ester like EQ?
> 
> If you're going to run NPP, why not run a similar estered Test like Testosterone Propionate?


the only reason i suggested suspension is because i will gain alot more than i would on prop....It will start working straight away so i dont need to run it for too long. TEST = TEST. the only dif is the ester attached to it. thats the reason some test takes longer to see effects, but they r all the same. ive heard really good things about bold and susp together (12weeks) but dont wanna run test for that long. thats why i thought npp and susp would be a good combo (+ igf1, insulin and t-bols)...if im only runing it for 8weeks...doesnt that make sence to anyone?


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

no mate thats total rubbish you contradict ureself sevreal times. you will not gain any more with suspension that prop as you say ureself test is test just depends on the ester so why would one be better than the other for gains.

If you dont wanna run test that long why choose sust which takes 2-3 weeks to kick in fully instead of prop which takes 2-4 days. i dont think you understand the difference between these compounds and you need to do alot more research.

eq and suspension is a foolish coice of compounds in my opinion as eq takes very long time to kick in were as suspension is within hours.


----------



## Sylar (Sep 7, 2008)

aussieboy said:


> the only reason i suggested suspension is because i will gain alot more than i would on prop....It will start working straight away so i dont need to run it for too long. TEST = TEST. the only dif is the ester attached to it. thats the reason some test takes longer to see effects, but they r all the same. ive heard really good things about bold and susp together (12weeks) but dont wanna run test for that long. thats why i thought npp and susp would be a good combo (+ igf1, insulin and t-bols)...if im only runing it for 8weeks...doesnt that make sence to anyone?


Yes mate, i understand esters. I don't think you do though. This thread is 3 pages long and i don't think you've listened to one word anyone has said. :cursing:

How do you work out you'll gain "allot more" off Test Base than you would Prop??? Rubbish!


----------



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

Sylar said:


> Yes mate, i understand esters. I don't think you do though. This thread is 3 pages long and i don't think you've listened to one word anyone has said. :cursing:
> 
> How do you work out you'll gain "allot more" off Test Base than you would Prop??? Rubbish!


i know from what alot of ppl have said. and mate why dont u tell me how do u know u wouldnt gain more on test susp than prop? if test is test, the only different is how long each test takes to kick in, than why not take something that works faster for shorter time..?? wouldnt that be the same thing? instead of talkin like that y dnt u explain, theres no point u being here if al u gonna say is "yes mate i understand esters.....


----------



## Sylar (Sep 7, 2008)

aussieboy said:


> i know from what alot of ppl have said. and mate why dont u tell me how do u know u wouldnt gain more on test susp than prop? if test is test, the only different is how long each test takes to kick in, than why not take something that works faster for shorter time..?? wouldnt that be the same thing? instead of talkin like that y dnt u explain, theres no point u being here if al u gonna say is "yes mate i understand esters.....


You know what "from what alot of ppl have said" ??

You already said it yourself numerous times... TESTOSTERONE is TESTOSTERONE!!! - It doesn't matter what ester is attached or not attached.

Yes, Base has no ester so has no ester weight to be taken into account, so mg for mg it contains more Test, i.e:

100mg Test Base will contain 100mg Test

100mg Test Prop will contain approx 83mg Test

Big deal... Just shoot a tiny bit more Prop, Enan, Cyp etc to make up for it if that's what you're worried about.

If you don't mind pinning upto twice a day throughout the entire cycle, be my guest and go with Base... But the only extra gains you will make compared to estered Test will be the increased amount of scar tissue.


----------



## LukeVTS (Dec 7, 2008)

Agreed. To answer you original question. Yes i personally think eq would be pointless at 8 weeks. thats when you will be seeing the most benefits. How do you mean you react bad to test mate?


----------



## aussieboy (Sep 29, 2008)

k all good. thanx for advice. ill use prop instead....one of the bad sides that i get is hair loss....i just found out i cant use proscar wit deca (bcos itl make it worse..), but is it ok to use it with boldenone???? or tren?


----------



## Felzy21 (Mar 16, 2008)

stone14 said:


> felzy
> 
> what doseeq did you run on eq alone?
> 
> ...


cycle was cut short to 6 weeks due to injury, kinda little labido probs, basically lasting longer in sex, GF despite being very fit just didnt turn me on as much, ended up splitting with her cus she wasnts dirty enough 

was running 500mg a week aprox, 250mg every 3-4 days.

didnt see the need to run HCG nuts werent too bad, i noticed it coming off tho but it didnt last long.

@luke, was a noob, didnt want to go all out just wanted a taster of gear and i have appetite probs when im not on so i went for bold cus of the hunger.

Currently running bold and sust, (up over a stone) but iv been given 20ml of 250mg Test E, so im introducing this to the cycle today. as it runs out in 2 months im going to use what i can before then.

Luke you from essex?


----------



## Felzy21 (Mar 16, 2008)

aussieboy said:


> do you guys reckon doing 8 weeks of EQ is pointless???
> 
> i wanna do a cycle wit test suspension, but dont wanna do test for longer than 8weeks i get bad sides from any test.... dont know if its worth doing EQ for only 8weeks, or doing fast acting deca (npp) ????? any advice?


as most things will come in 20ml, id say run 500mg a week with a test at about the same dose, if test gives you bad sides then maybe lower the test does but from when i did EQ alone its not the greatest for size and gains, nice for appetite, pumps and oxygen supply as it increases red blood cells but IMO without a test to build the size these 3 perks are pretty useless.

Comparing my test and EQ stack to my EQ only stack id say the EQ stack will give you 25 % of the gains.


----------



## geezuz (Oct 29, 2007)

Interresting read gents. I currently do a cutting cycle on 500mg Bold/w, clen and ECA, t3 will be in between 12 with days interval. I must say boldenone personally since it is less surpressing of nuts thus easier recovery.

So far ECA has been better than clen, mostly because it keeps appetite in check. BOLDENONE. For cutting. I'll try primo next time.


----------



## Donnie Brasco (Oct 23, 2008)

Im using bold 400mg aweek less water and good gains to ,also great for making you hungry


----------

