As far as enanthate variants go, this one is “particularly interesting”.
As you may be aware, masteron propionate was discontinued in the 80’s allegedly due to the release of more effective anticarcinogenic compounds. As masteron had already infiltrated bodybuilding circles, it became tremendously popular over the next few decades despite of the “official” discontinuation.
Throughout the 80’s and 90’s, it established itself as one of the all time “greats” in regards to cutting purposes. When underground laboratories realised that the drug was somewhat of a goldmine, they started to produce an enanthate version in the early 2000’s. As a result, masteron enanthate (like many other “base” product derivatives) is a “baby” of the underground scene, and has never undergone any official medical testing, research or analysis.
In truth, this doesn’t particularly matter. The propionate ester version and its effects on the body are so well documented as a result of its widespread medical use that we largely understand the enanthate variant by default. The addition of a long chain ester in no way serves to modify the base properties of masteron. You’ll still be getting every ounce of the benefit from this version as you will from propionate.
Masteron Side Effects
The difference here, of course, is the speed in which this version “feeds” itself into your system – this version has an active half-life of between 7-10 days within the system. As a result, you’ll only need to administer it twice per week. When we compare this to the propionate version, that means roughly half as much administration time – when it comes to convenience and making things as easy as possible, that’s obviously a huge difference.
As previously mentioned, the very characteristic that makes the enanthate version so useful is also the one that makes it potentially dangerous for some users. Those who opt to use this steroid for the first time have no preconception in regards to whether or not it is going to create adverse issues within their body.
As a result, they may prolong these issues, should they manifest by the integration of a long acting ester. On balance though, those who are “qualified” for enanthate integration as a result of performing a propionate cycle are going to enjoy the fact that they don’t have to administer the product at regular intervals. This is really the main reason why anyone would choose an enanthate variety as opposed to a propionate variety – it’s simply far more convenient from a practicality point of view.
It’s also worth noting that not everyone likes the “spike” effect that propionate ester variants create. If for instance, you’re running a longer cycle, then you’re going to benefit far more from a drip fed and sustained product release than you are from a series of “pulsating” surges. Arguably, this makes sustainable and easily manageable results a more concrete reality.
On balance though, some shorter cycles need the “hard and heavy” approach provided by propionate in order to optimise the results on offer – this shorter release simply synergises better with the other compounds being used in such an instance (plus mixing esters makes it difficult to incorporate effective PCT.)
Choosing the “right” version
Now that you’ve read through our analysis of both compounds, you should have a much better idea in regards to their functionality and how they can work for you.
It’s probably reasonable to assume that if you’re having to read this profile, then you haven’t used this product before. For that reason, you already know that it would prove prudent to run your first cycle with propionate.
Following this, it’s all about what you choose to do in the future. If you’re running a longer cycle, then stick with enanthate. If it’s a shorter and “sharper” cycle; go for propionate.
It’s actually possible to perform a procedure known as “front loading” with any propionate variant. You may have come across this tactic before, whereas a “surplus” of the compound is integrated into the system prior to the main.
This means that your body gets a “kick-start” before the main cycle begins. When this takes place, it’s theorised that your initial results come in a little faster, and are then sustained as a result of maintaining the product administration over the course of your main cycle.
In this instance, there would be little reason to integrate this tactic. It would make sense to do so with an off-season compound like dianabol, but considering that this item is primarily to be used for “drying” the muscles out during and towards the latter end of a cut; such a procedure would prove rather wasteful here.