simpllyhuge
New member
eq is only had as adrogenic as test?
Ponderosa said:True, it's not as strong. But is strength-of-compound the only benefit worth measuring? Surely EQ must have advantages that test does not?
I feel I could have gotten the same results with or without the EQ. Maybe not that dramatic but close.DocJ said:From a biochemical standpoint it should've "felt" like you were only on test...do you mean it felt like you were taking the 750mg test only?
Ultraboy said:I just got off a cycle of sustanon at 750mg weekly and finishing it off with eq at 400mg weekly with 75mg of fina eod im on my 3 week of eq doesnt really feel the same as the sustanon but I know it took about 4 weeks for me to feel the sustanon hopefully I start to see the strength gains from the eq ill keep you posted the good thing about eq is you can go long cycles without many side effects the gains are slow but you keep them
skarhead1 said:on a power scale of 1-10 EQ is a 2.5 while test is a 9 NOT even comparable!!! EQ half as effective as Test? You must've had some jacked up EQ or some SHITY ass test!!!
and where there is strength, there is potential for size increase.skarhead1 said:Tren would be 10, it doesn't really add very much mass for most though. If we were talking about strength alone I think test would be an 8, EQ 2, and Tren, of course, 10.
DougoeFre5h said:and where there is strength, there is potential for size increase.
simpllyhuge said:so how is eq different thank adding double the amount of test?
I've noticed this as well...winny also fits in that catagory.LiftTillIDie said:From what I've seen people either love EQ or think its worthless.