explodingHeart
Member
Assuming all other variables are the same (E2, etc.) how would you say they compare to test percentage wise?
Example: Primo is 60% strong as test. Mast is 70%.
Example: Primo is 60% strong as test. Mast is 70%.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
How "strong" would you rank Primo/Mast as vs Test?
- Thread starter explodingHeart
- Start date
lukiss96
Well-known Member
Primo is like one third of Test at best, mast? 10% maybe on a good day with placebo effect on. Really not the players to compare to. All worthless without Testosterone. There is nothing to compare.
accidentaljedi173
Well-known Member
A member on this board described mast perfectly recently. He compared it to putting salt on your food. It's not anything but a little flavor to your cycle. It's not a main driver but will definitely enhance your cycle. I've never done primo but I'd say it's in the same boat. I personally love masteron.
WilliamH.Bonney
New Member
What does "strong" mean? There's really no viable question to answer here. Are you talking about mass, strength, aggression? What exactly do you want to know?
29trt
Well-known Member
masteron will give you increased strength in the gym which in turn will allow you to build more muscle, it might not be as anabolic as primo but primo is shit for strength ....so I'd rather use more test for anabolism with mast than less test with more primo
keep in mind that dht deriv. will fuck up your lipids more than test
at the end of the day you have to experiment for yourself maybe you hate mast....who knows
I tried mast at just 300mg and it gave me a better strength increase than my first test cycle... and even at 600mg i do not get any sides from it....
primo at 700mg gave me ZERO strength increase and marginal muscle gain on top of even more test than I did with mast.... at 3 times the cost....
oh and mast makes you look harder ...
oh and for me mast>test , primo<test for strength
keep in mind that dht deriv. will fuck up your lipids more than test
at the end of the day you have to experiment for yourself maybe you hate mast....who knows
I tried mast at just 300mg and it gave me a better strength increase than my first test cycle... and even at 600mg i do not get any sides from it....
primo at 700mg gave me ZERO strength increase and marginal muscle gain on top of even more test than I did with mast.... at 3 times the cost....
oh and mast makes you look harder ...
oh and for me mast>test , primo<test for strength
xrayphoton13
Member
Try them both and see. I hated how I felt on primo. Tried it at 1/4 to 1/2 dose of testosterone. Felt lethargic, low energy, heart rate up, some brain fog. Even mixing primo and mast caused this same feeling
Masteron makes me feel even better and more energetic than test alone. No lethargy. Easy choice for me. Even if primo was as potent as test, I still wouldn't use it because if I feel bad, my gym performance and home life will suffer.
Masteron makes me feel even better and more energetic than test alone. No lethargy. Easy choice for me. Even if primo was as potent as test, I still wouldn't use it because if I feel bad, my gym performance and home life will suffer.
Last edited:
BigTomJ
Well-known Member
Im a big fan of both, but i think the whole argument for "strength" of a compound compared to anything is stupid.
its all apples and oranges, each tool has its use. Which is stronger? a flat head screwdriver or Philips head?
From strictly muscle gain its gonna depend on the individual. I make better progress with a gram of mixed test +mast/primo than on a gram of test alone, but id never say they are "stronger" than test. Thats also not to say that someone else might grow better on just the test.
For me, primo gives me a general sense of wellbeing and lightly manages my estrogen (i still need an AI, just less) and mast makes me strong.
neither options negatively impact my bloodwork as much as a comparable dose of test, making them very safe options for me to run higher/longer than other alternatives.
its all apples and oranges, each tool has its use. Which is stronger? a flat head screwdriver or Philips head?
From strictly muscle gain its gonna depend on the individual. I make better progress with a gram of mixed test +mast/primo than on a gram of test alone, but id never say they are "stronger" than test. Thats also not to say that someone else might grow better on just the test.
For me, primo gives me a general sense of wellbeing and lightly manages my estrogen (i still need an AI, just less) and mast makes me strong.
neither options negatively impact my bloodwork as much as a comparable dose of test, making them very safe options for me to run higher/longer than other alternatives.
I’d take mast over primo any day. Quarter of the price and probably the most well tolerated injectable out there. If lowering E2 is your goal, then mast won’t do that, but I’d take EQ over primo for that any day, and enjoy the collagen synthesis and endurance boost that goes along with it.
narta
Member
Primo was, is and will continue to be a fad for strength and bodybuilding. At this point in time is THE drug to use along test "safely".
If you are a non competitive gym rat, Test along with hgh is all you need. For the adventurous ones, add another anabolic in the likes of nandrolone or eq and for the idgaf ones, tren.
If you are a non competitive gym rat, Test along with hgh is all you need. For the adventurous ones, add another anabolic in the likes of nandrolone or eq and for the idgaf ones, tren.
buzzingonaas
Well-known Member
I’m not sure. Body composition is much better on test+ primo or test+mast vs test only. Body composition while on cycle doesn’t mean a ton though. I do notice I grow better and feel better on 2:1 test to primo vs 1.2:1 or 1:1. So I think for myself it’s safe to say more works better than less test. And a little bit of dht derivative works better than none
BigTomJ
Well-known Member
this.
Primo is often overhyped as the perfect AAS (im definitely guilty of contributing to that as a big fan of primo) but its not that special.
Theres nothing magical about it, while it may be "safer" than some alternatives, its still not the perfectly safe option its often toted as.
I like primo and its included in all my blasts nearly, but i could almost certainly get the same results, while paying way way less with other options.
Primo over the last few years seems to be approaching tren in its mystic efficacy
buzzingonaas
Well-known Member
Disagree. I find myself fuller and bigger on primo even when a little fat. Mast, on the other hand, if I’m over 10% bodyfat all I notice is I feel flat and smaller. Under 10% and I feel hard, vascular, albeit a little flatter
Spaceman Spiff
Well-known Member
So Primo is not anabolic unless you are sub 10% BF?
not trying to be a dick. people say the same shit about Mast.
I just want people to think about these statements.
Is there a certain dosage that gets you there on primo? Assuming it’s also in addition to a test base. Maybe next spring I’ll blast with it - if the timing is right
I wasn’t saying that. From what I read it didn’t seem right for me. I don’t use it due to the cost per dosage and I’m not sub 10% bf. I’m sure everyone has their own responses. But for me I do just fine with test only. I’m also not a veteran in this game
buzzingonaas
Well-known Member
No specific dose but I’ve never ran under 350 with a similar dose of test so can only vouch for 350+ adding an aesthetic look
buzzingonaas
Well-known Member
It’s a little funny because the vast majority of people say primo is more anabolic than mast and mast is very weak. Then there’s PED “experts” like john jewett and victor black who say test, primo, and mast are all equal. Then there’s “PED expert” Dave crosland who claims primo is weak and masteron is much much stronger. The only commonality is that everyone is incredibly confident that they’re right and almost nobody knows what they’re talking about
UncleBuns
Well-known Member
I think there's an insane amount of overly confident bro science thrown around about mast and primo.
- they are both anabolic and likely the difference in their anabolism is small enough that it's not going to matter
- different people can be affected quite differently from both of them as far as mood, aesthetics, health markers, etc
- from what I can tell they are more similar than they are different. There are definitely distinct differences but in the realm of AAS they are neighbors
Just try each individually and see how you do with them. You will probably just feel better, have better labs, and enjoy one of them more. Or why not use 50/50 of both. I find them to be complimentary during a heavy training phase, although I am not a bodybuilder so I don't focus on pure anabolism/hypertrophy.
If you focus on your training, your nutrition, and your sleep/recovery then the difference between these two will be a drop in the bucket.
- they are both anabolic and likely the difference in their anabolism is small enough that it's not going to matter
- different people can be affected quite differently from both of them as far as mood, aesthetics, health markers, etc
- from what I can tell they are more similar than they are different. There are definitely distinct differences but in the realm of AAS they are neighbors
Just try each individually and see how you do with them. You will probably just feel better, have better labs, and enjoy one of them more. Or why not use 50/50 of both. I find them to be complimentary during a heavy training phase, although I am not a bodybuilder so I don't focus on pure anabolism/hypertrophy.
If you focus on your training, your nutrition, and your sleep/recovery then the difference between these two will be a drop in the bucket.
Spaceman Spiff
Well-known Member
My dad can beat up your dad
