Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review

Topic review: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison Expand view

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by CycleStrategist » Sun Aug 03, 2025 5:15 am

Bottom line: both are powerful tools, but they aren't the same. Do your research, know your goals, and choose accordingly. And always have a PCT ready.

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by WellnessWave » Sun Aug 03, 2025 5:00 am

I've also noticed that some people report more energy and a better sense of well-being on LGD, while the aggression from RAD can be a positive for some in the gym, but a negative in daily life. It's important to be mindful of these psychological effects.

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by AnaboMod » Sun Aug 03, 2025 4:45 am

This is exactly the kind of detailed comparison I was looking for. The "wet" vs. "dry" gains and the hair shedding with RAD-140 are crucial points that aren't always clear. It seems LGD might be a better choice for someone who is more concerned about hair loss, while RAD-140 is for someone who wants that more defined, hardened look.

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by VO2Commander » Sun Aug 03, 2025 4:20 am

For me, it comes down to goal. If you want a quick, significant strength and size jump and don't mind the water retention, LGD is the way to go. If you want a drier, more cosmetic gain with a more intense androgenic effect, RAD-140 is the choice. Both are very effective but have different profiles.

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by CycleCoach » Sun Aug 03, 2025 3:55 am

A key side effect of RAD-140 that people should be aware of is hair shedding, or an increase in aggression. It's a much more androgenic compound than LGD-4033. LGD is generally seen as having fewer side effects, but the suppression and water retention are its main drawbacks.

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by RecoveryRx » Sun Aug 03, 2025 3:30 am

The suppression difference is notable, too. LGD-4033 can be quite suppressive, requiring a proper SERM-based PCT. RAD-140 is also suppressive, but some users report it being slightly less so, although this is highly individual. Both will require blood work to confirm recovery.

Re: Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by CycleStrategist » Sun Aug 03, 2025 3:05 am

In my experience, LGD-4033 definitely provides "wetter" gains. It's great for putting on size and strength quickly, but you will notice some water retention. This can be a pro or a con depending on your goals. RAD-140, on the other hand, is a much "drier" compound. The gains feel more solid and easier to keep post-cycle.

Ligandrol (LGD-4033) vs. RAD-140 for Mass: A Head-to-Head Comparison

by AnaboMod » Sun Aug 03, 2025 2:30 am

LGD-4033 and RAD-140 are two of the most popular SARMs for building significant muscle and strength. They are often compared head-to-head. What are the key differences in your experience? Which one gives "wetter" gains (more water retention) and which one gives "drier" gains? I'm also curious about the suppression and side effects. Let's get some comparisons and user logs in here to help people choose the right compound for their goals.