How we rolled in the 90s when the pills were super strong

[dezz]

I agree. Two of my friends went to raves in holland in seperate occasions - both reported super super clean MDMA pill and it kept them raving it up for hours.

Do you take 1+2 pill or 2 pills at once? I presume 1 then another. Someone else said here, 1st dose = big, 2nd dose = smaller to keep it going.

1 pill, half later for a boost generally, although sometimes Im stupid and chase the high so it adds up... lol ^^

 

[thizzlemonster86]

i dont think its something they can explain very well except it was just "more intense". i think they pretty much mean all of the above bro. they mean the whole roll is just not as intense nowa days lol. im still very skeptical of this whole thing. its hard to beleive that they synthed better MD back then. its hard to imagine it being any more intense than it has been for me. i think if it was any more intense i would probably just be a brainless puddle on the floor all night lol.

 

[TennerPop]

Hi guys, new here. Just gonna chip in my 2 cents.

One thing we know for sure is that, GENERALLY, Ecstasy contains more MDMA than it did in the 90's. That is FACT (PillReports,EcstasyData etc) However, that does not mean that for example Speakers (Aprox 200mg) are any better than old school Ecstasy (Mitsis, Rolexs' etc) because we are all taking into account QUANTITY and not QUALITY. Think of it as Cocaine ( I know Cocaine in pill form is very inefficient. Just for arguments sake) If i took 250mg of average UK Cocaine and pressed it into a pill, that pill would be SHIT, regardless how much 'Cocaine' is in it. Where as if i used 100mg of high purity cocaine, that will would be GOOD. The point i'm making is we're all getting caught up on quantity and not QUALITY! How do we know, for whatever reason, regardless of quantity, that the MDMA put into old school pills wasn't more pure.

PS. The Yanks giving it the big one about their 'Pure Molly' It's a well known fact that Molly is never pure. At the end of the process, the end product is AT MOST 87% pure. Take into account the likelihood that your Molly came direct from the Lab and no one has cut it for personal gain/profit. Unlikely to say the least.

 

[Vader]

It's a well known fact that Molly is never pure. At the end of the process, the end product is AT MOST 87% pure.

That's a misunderstanding, a sample of MDMA HCl will only ever contain 87% MDMA molecules by mass, but it's pure MDMA HCl nonetheless. MDMA is MDMA is MDMA, it makes no difference what synthetic route is used. There are two ways that a sample of MDMA with an entantiomeric consitution other than the racemate could be formed. One could either perform a chiral synthesis, and produce both enantiomers separately, then combine them. This is a difficult, expensive ballache of a task, and no-one in their right minds would bother with it if they weren't explicitly selling the product as being non-racemic. The other way would be to produce the racemate, resolve the isomers, then recombine them. This is less of a ballache technically, but if you are combining them in any proportion other than 50/50, you're going to end up with a surplus of one of the isomers, and what are you going to do with that? Throw it away? I don't think so. btw, Folley, you certainly can perform an analysis to determine the enantiomeric composition of a sample.

 

[dezz]

Lol. Like MDMA is giving you all these effects. It's just a trigger to release all the stuff in your brain thats making you feel that way. Now what seems more logical: Somehow ALL MDMA is different now... or.. your brain chemistry changes when you get older.

 

[thizzlemonster86]

^^^^brain chemistry changing SEEMS more likely. i thought 84% was the purest you can possibly synth MD, guess i was wrong......

 

[Decline1]

Hi guys, new here. Just gonna chip in my 2 cents.

One thing we know for sure is that, GENERALLY, Ecstasy contains more MDMA than it did in the 90's. That is FACT (PillReports,EcstasyData etc) However, that does not mean that for example Speakers (Aprox 200mg) are any better than old school Ecstasy (Mitsis, Rolexs' etc) because we are all taking into account QUANTITY and not QUALITY. Think of it as Cocaine ( I know Cocaine in pill form is very inefficient. Just for arguments sake) If i took 250mg of average UK Cocaine and pressed it into a pill, that pill would be SHIT, regardless how much 'Cocaine' is in it. Where as if i used 100mg of high purity cocaine, that will would be GOOD. The point i'm making is we're all getting caught up on quantity and not QUALITY! How do we know, for whatever reason, regardless of quantity, that the MDMA put into old school pills wasn't more pure.

PS. The Yanks giving it the big one about their 'Pure Molly' It's a well known fact that Molly is never pure. At the end of the process, the end product is AT MOST 87% pure. Take into account the likelihood that your Molly came direct from the Lab and no one has cut it for personal gain/profit. Unlikely to say the least.

I'm not sure I follow man, if those Dutch pills are tested at 200mg then quality doesn't come into it. There aren't good types and bad types of MDMA (baseless comments regarding isomers notwithstanding), there is just MDMA. UK coke is shit because there is little or no actual coke in it.

 

[thizzlemonster86]

I'm not sure I follow man, if those Dutch pills are tested at 200mg then quality doesn't come into it. There aren't good types and bad types of MDMA (baseless comments regarding isomers notwithstanding), there is just MDMA. UK coke is shit because there is little or no actual coke in it.

^^^^yep.

 

[TennerPop]

I'm not sure I follow man, if those Dutch pills are tested at 200mg then quality doesn't come into it. There aren't good types and bad types of MDMA (baseless comments regarding isomers notwithstanding), there is just MDMA. UK coke is shit because there is little or no actual coke in it.

Oh, so MDMA can't be produced at varying levels of purity straight from the lab? I see what you mean about MDMA being MDMA. So it is purely just the dosage that counts towards quality?

 

[thizzlemonster86]

Oh, so MDMA can't be produced at varying levels of purity straight from the lab? I see what you mean about MDMA being MDMA. So it is purely just the dosage that counts towards quality?

no i think it means that quality is not the issue here because MDMA is MDMA is MDMA is MDMA. 200mg of MDMA is still 200mg of MDMA. if im understanding this correctly.

although i thought he MAY have presented a good point about the purity. but it seems that most of the good MD being synthed at the moment is quit pure. so i still dont think it has anything to do with purity as most of the MDMA being synthed is of fairly high quality nowa days.

 

[Folley]

If you took 250mg of UK coke and put it in a pill or whatever it wouldn't be as good because it's not actually 250mg of coke. It's like 50mg of coke and 200mg baking soda and levamisole lol... and if you tested it, that's what it would come up as.



If you test MDMA and it comes back at 200mg though, it's 200mg of MDMA. The quality of that MDMA can change some, but that's because of synthesization byprocucts, not the MDMA.


The quality of those Defqons, Q Dances, Speakers and Triforces could be less of that than pure MDMA though, even if it is amazing quality. If it's not the racemic than it would probably be less effective or magical than just regular stuff.. but would still have you rolling ballsacks

 

[thizzlemonster86]

maybe there was less byproducts in 90's MD?

 

[Folley]

Seems unlikely, chemists would only get better with time and practice...

 

[thizzlemonster86]

^^^^yes, you would think so.

 

[thelastclubkid]

. If it's not the racemic than it would probably be less effective or magical than just regular stuff.. but would still have you rolling ballsacks

from what ive read you need to have racemic for MDMA to work properly... so it wouldnt be one isomer or the other but rather the specific ratio of the two...

http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/shulgin/adsarchive/isomers.htm


to further address the question of isomer ratios i found text indicating that you can in fact affect the isomer ratio via different synthesis routes and even simple adjustment of external factors.. (see the following link where they talk about selecting for higher ratio of a particular isomer by adjusting acid-base ratio...( look under polar organic phase)

http://www.ehow.com/list_7356584_methods-chiral-hplc.html

 

[humblegro]

Been in the rave scene and md scene for 13 years. Still ain't a dude in the place that can get down like I do. Still rolling strong. Find real molecules. I only roll up to 4 times a year, but usually three times. I dont do anything special. my job is a full body workout, and I eat decent. MDMA is a great chem it does not degrade. I still got old ass md and it is pure flavor. I am talking '99 shit. Be responsible with usage. Mdma is my fave shit and I savor it. I know all folk vary and not all are as lucky to be as fit as I seem to be even though I roll out rather frequently. I am blessed, but if you are losing magic try some of the tips on this site to restore the magic. I am trying to help, becuz I cannot understand this topic. The dance floor esthetic is as real as ever to me. PS I love the dutch superpills. They rival any pure mdma, dosage wise, I have consumed at any time.

 

[Dr. Drugs]

Seems unlikely, chemists would only get better with time and practice...

From what I can gather, the issue most of the time is obtaining the precursors rather than with the production. The typical synthesis route (from [iso]safrole) is pretty straightforward for anyone with chemistry training. However, safrole has become very hard to come by in the past ten years due to international crackdowns, particularly in southeast Asia. As a result, the major MDMA manufacturers have started to try other syntheses or switched to other drugs entirely. The rise in piperazine pills in the late 2000's was likely to due to major safrole interceptions in Cambodia in 2008. Less MDMA was available to put in pills, so pressers started using piperazines to satisfy the global demand for "ecstasy."

 

[jasonmccarthy5]

Will the MDMA come back? I wish I woulda got into it in the 90s, but I was only 17. Oh man!

 

[TangerinO]

Any experienced roller or the people that actually take the time to "experience" the drug and notice the different feel of it instead of "just another drug to fuck me up," will tell you that every different molly has different "personalities" to it even when the process of creating it is all the same just like wine is rotten grape juice right? But just like wine, they each have different characteristics and different feels just the same as wine has different flavors and different notes even though the process how it's made is the same.

I had the beautiful magic of MDMA years after I abused meth, so that is not it. Set and setting is a no-go because I still have the same gigs set up exactly like we used to do. I don't think there will ever be a definitive answer to this argument. But I'm totally with ya clubkid, shit is different. There's no way to prove it, but I know you know what I mean just the same.

I barely do that much MDMA, and even I can say this is true. I've been lucky to try a bunch of different high quality crystals in the last year, different batches definitely affect the body differently.

I had one particular lot of crystals from Holland that didn't even make my jaw clench. Practically no body pains, cramps or side effects of any kind and yet I was off my head without a doubt.
Explain that, I've never had MDMA that didn't make my body clench up before, it's the main reason why I use it so sparingly.

 

[jam uh weezy]

note sure if it means anything to you guys talking about the chemical makeup...just doing some research and thought it might be relevant...

MDMA is a chiral molecule, possessing two enantiomers, S(+)-MDMA and R(-)-MDMA, with S(+)-MDMA being more potent than R(-)-MDMA [48, 49]. All research in humans to date and the majority of nonclinical studies have used racemic MDMA, or an admixture containing equal amounts of both enantiomers. Studies of drug discrimination in rodents [50, 51] and self- administration in primates [52] suggest that not only do the enantiomers produce different effects, but that there may be some synergy between the two. It seems that R(-)-MDMA may have hallucinogen-like effects, compared to S(+)-MDMA, which exhibits psychomotor stimulant-like effects. According to an in vivo microdialysis study, S(+)-MDMA may be associated with greater dopamine release in specific brain areas [53]. A recent study in monkeys found that S(+)-MDMA, but not R(-)-MDMA, significantly increased extracellular dopamine levels in the dorsal striatum, whereas S(+)-MDMA significantly increased serotonin levels [54]. MDMA available for human use is racemic, containing roughly equal amounts of both enantiomers. Any differential effects of the enantiomers remain untested in humans.