• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ

Brand New Phen? - 2,5 Dimethoxy 3,4 MDMA

B

Bishop

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
76
Ok, so a very bright and capable acquiantance of mine has recently shown me a substance which he has synthesized, it's still not dry enough to start gel-capping doses though. He claims it's new and not in pikhal or tikhal, and I sure as hell am not aware of any such compouned, he says it's his own creation as far as he knows, and that the synthesis model is something he came up with entirely on his own - apparently disregarding iso-saffrole and starting directly from benzene.

In lay terms for a less-informed friend he described as a 2C-MDMA compound. From what I understand, though I could be mistaken about the positions of the methoxys, it's Methamphetamine with the methylenedioxy bridge on the 3 and 4 position (making it MDMA) but it also has a methoxy on the 2 and 5 (as with 2Cs). Anybody have some insight or feedback on this potential molecule? One thing I was wondering is if a standard dose of MDMA is 100mg and a decent dose of a 2C is between 15-30mg depending on the analog, how would one take a dose of this compound which is substantial enough for the MDMA structure to have that empathenogenic push without triple ODing in the 2C sense? In terms of conjecture, what might be a reasonable assumption to make regarding effective dosages and the effects of this compound? Only two of our friends have tried it and both are away and therefore unavailable for feedback, all I was told is that it's apparently mind-blowing.

Given the sort of stuff this buddy does on a regular basis, I don't think he's making it up at all, but I'm kind of stumped as to how/what this compound would be....
 
If this compound has not yet been synthesized by anybody else and hasn't been made illegal, your friend is looking at the potential of making big bucks!
 
If your not a idiot..... you would start with around .25 milligrams. and work your way up from there, say .25,.5,.75,1mg and then up one mg each time till you find a threshold effect. Sure you might be ok if you started higher...but how do you know it isn't going to be a lethal poison or have horrific side effects. You don't.... so why risk it.
 
Yeah thats true... A real good chemist wouldn't test out a new synthesis on friends, but lab rats or whatever... There is big risk for this kindof thing, at least initially.
 
The first thing your friend should do, IMHO, is stop regarding this compound as being a combination of MDMA and 2C-H. Sure, they have many similarities, but it is an entirely new drug.

Something tells me that it is probably inactive. I very well could be wrong.

I will go with the above recommendation of starting extremely low and titterating at very low fractions.

Also, give at least a couple of days between each trial to avoid Tolerance issues.

Keep us informed of how it goes...

EDIT: BTW, how does your friend know for sure that he has 3,4-methylenedioxy-2,5-dimethoxy-a, N-dimethylphenethylamine?
 
Names

I couldnt help but look at 2C-MDMA and think the name doesn't look right, then, aha!; 2C-XXX refers to phenethylamines, but MDMA is an alpha-methylPEA.

Actually from Shulgin's naming system it would be DMMDMA (2,5-DiMethoxy-3,4-MethyleneDioxy-MethylAmphetamine). The N-methyl version of DMMDA-1, but from reading PIHKAL, Shulgin didn't reckon either of the DMMDA's were that special. Also, whereas MMDA-1 (3-Methoxy-4,5-methylenedioxyamphetamine) had unique and interesting properties, as soon as there was a methyl group on the amine, it turned into a bit of a dud.
So following those trends, I wouldn't get too overly excited about that particular compound, as it has two qualities that should put it in the "also ran" group of psychedelics (but hey, who knows; when Albert Hoffman was testing other lysergic acid amides for activity similar to ergotamine as a uterine contractant, he never thought he might come across something as awe inspiring as LSD).

Anybody with a big chemistry set, and a desire to make something not in PIHKAL, wouldn't go far wrong, in my opinion, to making 2C-EF (4-(2-fluoroethyl)-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine). Shulgin makes a point somewhere on the bit about 2C-T-21, that the 2-fluoroethyl group is the same electronic configuration as a halogen atom (I'll just have to take his word on that). So, he made DOEF, and it was active at dosages not much higher than DOB, it also felt subjuctively like the DOI/DOB/DOC group of compounds. So... 2C-EF's effects would hopefully live somewhere between the space inhabited by 2C-B and 2C-I, and be active at about the 10-15mg level.

If someone does get busy, please let me know how things turn out. Curiosity, you know...
 
Last edited:
"EDIT: BTW, how does your friend know for sure that he has 3,4-methylenedioxy-2,5-dimethoxy-a, N-dimethylphenethylamine?"

No, he has 3,4-methylenedioxy-2,5-dimethoxy-a, N-methylamphetamine. You're forgetting the alpha methyl. He's confident that this is what he's produced. I know for fact that he has access to GC/MS and a whole bunch of other fangled tools. I'd take his say so on it personally.
In terms of it being active, it's definately active... it's been fed to two people who found it to be quite active. I'll have to wait on any kind of a trip report though. But I've been told it is a full blown psychedelic.

Also, I should reitterate that I'm not 100% certain on the positioning of the methoxys- though it seems most likely that they'd have to be on the 2 & 5 anyway. Buddy (not the chemist) was also saying something about the symmatery of the 4 oxygens or some such shit making it a more likely candidate for unexplored psychoactivity. Though I didn't really clearly understand what he was trying to say here.
 
theyre the same

3,4-methylenedioxy-2,5-dimethoxy-a, N-dimethylphenethylamine is 3,4-methylenedioxy-2,5-dimethoxy- a, N-methylamphetamine (although the second name doesn't need the alpha (green a) designation as the name amphetamine is a contraction of Alpha-MethylPHenEThylAMINE. The first name is based on the IUPAC rules for naming organic compounds (should actually be 2,5-dimethoxy-3,4-methylenedioxy... substituents in alphabetic order, but that's nit picking).

And if there is some doubt about where the methoxy groups are it could be the N-methyl version of DMMDA-1 or DMMDA-2. Still have doubts about it being a full blown psychedelic as only the entactogens benefit from n-alkylation of the parent substituted phenethylamine.

One more thing. Why would anyone start from benzene? I mean, avoid isosafrole at all costs, but if you really want to go back to basics, start with catechol (1,2-dihydroxybenzene), so you have at least just about everything in place for a methylenedioxy group on the benzene
 
3,4-methylenedioxy-2,5-dimethoxy-a, N-methylamphetamine = DMMDA-2

The description painted so far online can be summed up as: "A long lasting jittery seratonergic stimulant with vaguely MDA like effects". As the total number of reports available anywhere (including shulgin's) can be counted on 1 hand, and most attempts were at a very low dose, nobody knows for sure whether this compound is worthwhile or not.

was also saying something about the symmatery of the 4 oxygens or some such shit making it a more likely candidate for unexplored psychoactivity
Click to expand...
I believe he is referring to the fact that the molecule would be SYMMETRICAL, which makes it PRETTY, but doesn't say jack shit about its pharmacology. Neither does the fact that it resembles BOTH the 2Cs and the MD*s.

There are a couple trip reports over at the land of the bees by a guy named Antibody aka antibody2. There is also 1 report on the N-Methyl version, DMMDMA-2. Both are made from the Dillapiole contained in Parsley seed oil in exactly the same manner as MDMA is made from sassafrass oil, however unfortunately paresley seed oil containing Dillapiole is almost impossible to find.

This brings up my last point, there is a good possibility that somebody is BULLSHITTING.
 
this seems like it could be active. GANESHA is active, and this is pretty close to an alpha methyl analogue of that, except with two less oxygens and the methyl groups shared.
 
The compound I believe buddy to have isn't as I understand it DMMDA-2 or DMMDA.
DMMDA-2 = 2,3-DIMETHOXY-4,5-METHYLENEDIOXYAMPHETAMINE . The positions are off and the methyl on the amine is missing. With DMMDA the positions appear to be correct, but the methyl is still missing.
So this would lead me to believe what buddy we're trying to refer to here would be DMMDMA. Given that Pikhal describes 75mg of DMMDA as comparable to 75-100ug of LSD. I think that leaves the possibility wide open for MDMDMA to be a full psychedelic. I'm still inclined to believe my buddy.

Shulgin never actually tried this, but there was a few mentions of it's potential psychoactivity in Pikhal:

"Several people have asked me what I thought about the potential activity of a compound with a methyl group added to DMMDA. One of these possibilities would be the N-methylated derivative, 2,5-dimethoxy-N-methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, or METHYL-DMMDA (or DMMDMA for the dimethoxy-methylenedioxy-methamphetamine nomenclature). It is a MDMA analogue, and is described in the recipe for METHYL-MMDA-2. "
&
"DMMDMA has not yet been launched into an evaluation program, and I wouldn't be surprised if the needed dosage might be up there somewhere over 100 milligrams. I feel quite sure that the answers may be known in the near future. There is a surprisingly large number of inconspicuous chemical explorers out there all over the world, doing their synthetic thing in their private laboratories. They are truly the astronauts of inner space. "

I'm not so sure I agree with your scepticism in light of this...
 
I'd give it a go so that everyone would stop speculating and instead have some factual data. Just remember to be safe and to slowly work up to the proper dose. Don't take Shulgin's word and dose 150mg or something the first time. Even if you were to live through and not OD on that much, it still wouldn't establish a threshold dose (which can be handy to have).

-jj
 
I would be really interested to hear the anicdotal evidence on this one, if any of your friends would be so kind Bishop?
 
i intend to ask them as soon as they get back. I also intend to see if I can buy about 300mgs of it to sample at various doses Pikhal style. I'm thinking given that DMMDA & DMMMDA-2 both seem to be active begining at around the 25-30mg mark. I figure I'll give it start this one out at 6 mg and progressively up the dose over a few trials towards a +++, a bad reaction or something in the neighborhood of 140mgs, whichever comes first.
 
"Both are made from the Dillapiole contained in Parsley seed oil in exactly the same manner as MDMA is made from sassafrass oil, however unfortunately paresley seed oil containing Dillapiole is almost impossible to find.
This brings up my last point, there is a good possibility that somebody is BULLSHITTING."

Shulgin's synthesis models are not the only ones for most any of the chemicals he discusses. In most cases, they aren't the most efficient either. There are many several potentially different synthesis routes for any of these chemicals using different precursors.
 
hi, it's my first post but i'm just going to jump right in,


i have also heard much about this substace, when i heard about it, it was refered to as "2c-mda", i quickly determined that it probably didn't exist under that name, and discounted my friends stories as bullshit or mistaken dosings,

though now hearing you speak of it, many of the points they brought up fit in with what you have described, and coupled with the fact that i trust the word of the people who mentioned it to me, i think it very well may be a potent psychedelic of some sort

apparantly it was synthesized from a precursor extraced from fresh parsley seed, the compound was unable to be dried into powder at the time, it was stored suspended in an inert liquid right up untill the time of ingestion, it apparantly rapidly degraded when exposed to normal atmospheric conditions,

i know 3 people who directly ingested the compound, none of them was made aware of the exact dosage, just that it was enough to get them where they wanted to go,

all reports were of a positive nature, the effects were described as being highly visual, much moreso than lsd or 2c-b,

effects apparantly lasted in excess of 14 hours, all 3 of them mentioned the fact that by the end of the trip they were bored of the effects and wanting to sleep, though they were unable to despite repeated attempts,

one mentioned that he greatly prefered the substance to lsd, noting that it lacked a heavy body load,

another said that although he enjoyed the psychedelic effects, it made him feel "speedy" and lasted far too long

the other found it "very interesting" and "very enjoyable" "definatley worthy of furthur experimentation"

from what i have heard about it, i'm quite interested in giving this one a go,though up untill this point i haven't been able to find a single shred of information on this substance
 
what constitutes close

this seems like it could be active. GANESHA is active, and this is pretty close to an alpha methyl analogue of that, except with two less oxygens and the methyl groups shared.


In terms of structure activity relationship, adding a methyl and removing two oxygen atoms can end up producing a drug that has the opposite effect on the receptor, make an inactive compound or even a drug that influences a different neurotransmitter altogether. In terms of grouping together psychedelics with similar actions, the only really well researched drugs are the variations in the 4 position of 2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine and 2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine.
In that sense, you can group together drugs with similar actions by their chemistry eg 2C-C; 2C-B and 2C-I (all halogens in 4 position), 2C-D; 2C-E and 2C-P (all alkyl groups in 4 position), and 2C-T; 2C-T-2 and 2C-T-7 (all alkylthio in 4 position)

Although there may be some variation within a group, as to the specific effects (with 2C-D, it is fairly easily directable; with 2C-E it has less of a directable nature and 2C-P, which can be overpowering. The thing they share that groups them together is the intense depth of introspection they produce. In a similar way 2C-C/2C-B/2C-I all have a certain MDA like entactogen quality).

Changes like adding an extra methoxy group, or turning a methoxy group into a methyl group on the benzene ring can change the underlying essential nature of the effect of the drug.
 
Well we know what it is ... It's METHYL-DMMDA or if you prefer, and I do, DMMDMA. Or to spell it out, 2,5-dimethoxy-3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine.

Shulgin has mentioned it in Pikhal. However, he never explored it. He included DMMDA and DMMDA-2 in Pikhal but no synth model or qualitative comments on DMMDMA is included. He did however mention, as is quoted above - a few of my posts up, that he did suspect it may be active and quite interesting.. and expected that in the not too distant future some chemists would start playing around with it. Well, now we have. Hopefully in the next week I'll get my hands on some.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top