Test prop vs test e for a 10 week cut, which makes more sense
5 posts · started by NYCgains · Jul 9, 2024
Posts: 237
Joined: Nov 2019
Rep: 10
👤
NYCgains
237 posts · joined Nov 2019
Jul 9, 2024 at 12:00 AM
#1
Planning a summer cut, 10 weeks. Debating test prop vs test e for this run. I know prop clears faster which is useful if you want to get back to TRT quick, but the EOD pinning gets old. My test e TRT baseline runs smooth so I trust the compound. Anyone cut with prop and find it worth the extra injection frequency? Or is test e just easier to manage and close enough?
Posts: 1,016
Joined: Mar 2015
Rep: 10
👤
Jock
1,016 posts · joined Mar 2015
Jul 10, 2024 at 12:00 AM
#2
Test e for a cut every time. The EOD pinning of prop adds friction to what is already a mentally tough phase of training. The serum level difference over a 10 week period is minimal. Unless you are competing and need to clear fast I would not bother with prop.
Posts: 463
Joined: Aug 2017
Rep: 10
👤
Mick AU
463 posts · joined Aug 2017
Jul 11, 2024 at 12:00 AM
#3
Agree with Jock. Prop made sense when people were doing short cycles to minimise detection time. For a 10 week cut with no competition there is no practical benefit. Stick with test e.
Posts: 552
Joined: Jun 2016
Rep: 10
👤
Beantown Rick
552 posts · joined Jun 2016
Jul 12, 2024 at 12:00 AM
#4
Only reason I would go prop is if you want to dial in your AI protocol quickly - shorter ester means E2 responds faster to dose changes. But for a regular cut cycle that advantage does not outweigh the pinning hassle. Test e is the call.
Posts: 278
Joined: Dec 2018
Rep: 10
👤
MunichMarc
278 posts · joined Dec 2018
Jul 13, 2024 at 12:00 AM
#5
What is the typical PIP like with test prop? I have heard it is worse than long esters. Is that true across the board or does it depend on the carrier oil and concentration?