6-APB (1-(benzofuran-6-yl)propan-2-amine) CAS number?

[seep]

Why the tall peak around 4.7?

edit: never mind: it's a solvent peak.

 

[The Spam]

The question is, what about 1-(benzofuran-6-yl)butan-2-amine or 6-ABB?

 

[Black]

The question is, what about 1-(benzofuran-6-yl)butan-2-amine or 6-ABB?

why? i expect that one not to be as good and most likely very selective for 5-HT. 6-APDB or n-methyl-6-AP(D)B sound much more interesting.

 

[Phener]

does anyone know who claims fame to 6-APB? (one of the chem suppliers in china getting in to R+D or some evil western genius?)

Also such simple idea, why didn't shulgin try that back then when he was modding MDMA?(or even nichols recently) Is it a complex synth?

I'm baffled

 

[Torabora]

well 6-APDB was developed by David E. Nichols, 6-APB is very smiliar only being the unsaturated version so you dont have to be a genius to get that idea.

I would be very interested in the n-methylated version of 6-APB maybe its even more like MDMA and shouldnt be much harder to make, trip reports until now sound a lot more like MDA

 

[blobbymahn]

http://www.mediafire.com/?zqi5dywwwnj

Here is a lab analysis of some 6-APB that has been made. Nothing to do with the 'official vendors'

What can you guys make of this?

 

[vecktor]

http://www.mediafire.com/?zqi5dywwwnj

Here is a lab analysis of some 6-APB that has been made. Nothing to do with the 'official vendors'

What can you guys make of this?

looks pretty ugly. it is full of acetone or less likely acetonitrile, maybe the NMR lab is at fault they ran in CDCl3 anfd maybe that was impure more likely it is in the material.

I'll let someone else do peak by peak breakdown.

 

[nuke]

does anyone know who claims fame to 6-APB? (one of the chem suppliers in china getting in to R+D or some evil western genius?)

Also such simple idea, why didn't shulgin try that back then when he was modding MDMA?(or even nichols recently) Is it a complex synth?

I'm baffled

Lilly pharmaceuticals invented the compound ages ago. Shulgin only had so much time to assay chemicals and probably wasn't terribly interested in MDA analogues (aside from the sterically remarkable F-series) since he didn't seem to find MDA/MDMA all that insightful or interesting.

Will look at the NMR later, at first glance there are a lot of impurities

 

[blobbymahn]

looks pretty ugly. it is full of acetone or less likely acetonitrile, maybe the NMR lab is at fault they ran in CDCl3 anfd maybe that was impure more likely it is in the material.

I'll let someone else do peak by peak breakdown.

Cheers mate. It is claimed 98% purity.

Is it possible to say whether that compound is actually 6-APB though, or just a graph for something else? Thanks.



Some kind fellow has had a quick look and come up with this...

Its quite a messy 1H spectrum of a molecule but it does look like the structre could be in there.

a - 5.4
b - 3.65
c - ~1.35
d - 3.0/3.3
e - 7.45
f - 7.15
g - 7.6
h - 6.75
i - 7.6

Im not really sure with C, i would expect a large peak around that area. e/f/g/h/i are all guesses but looks about right to what it would be.

You can't really tell that much just from this spectrum, a carbon-13 or dept spectrum would help. There seems to be some contaminents in there too, could say what it is without a GC-MS. I should add that the peaks do not have a strong signal.

 

[FiR3]

hey, I've managed yesterday to get a hold of the above NMR, a detailed interpretation would be great from you guys.

also... how difficult would it be to create a fake graph of the supposed substance? don't want to go into vendor-land but it would be nice to know if the purported analysis could have been created just to act as customer eye-candy.

 

[vecktor]

^ any non independent analysis is not really worth the paper it is printed on.

 

[FiR3]

@vektor: so your assumption would be that it's more probably a legit NMR analysis of a substance that seems to be 6-APB?

your opinions will be quite helpful, so many thanks!

 

[MurphyClox]

Bahhh! What kinda gross crap is this? That's an awful dirty spectrum.

I already provided an interpretation for the 1H-NMR of 6-APB, which was posted by Shambles (measured in D2O). For the moment, take that one for comparison.

Interpretation of the 1H-NMR provided by blobbymahn:

1. As Vecktor already said: Spectrum was measured in CDCl3 ([email protected] ppm; reference value: 7.26 ppm). Water signal at 1.7 ppm (ref: 1.56 ppm); the water signal changes its position easily, so this difference is not problematic.

2. Large impurity signal @2.19 ppm, probably acetone (ref: 2.17).​

Note: As you can see from 1. & 2. are all signals 0.02 ppm downfield than expected. No need to worry though, it's just a matter of calibration (see 8.!).

3. Broad singulett @8.5 ppm: Presumably -NH3+. There's definitively a shoulder at the left side, but this signal does not appear in one of the 2 zoomed panes.
CDCl3 is actually one of the worst solvents for salts (but usually a standard in NMR), as salts dissolve only very bad. For this reason appear the signals for CDCl3 and water at such an exaggerated size and the baseline noise is comparably high.

4. 5 Signals in the aromatic range (@ ca. 7.58, 7.56, 7.45, 7.13 & 6.75 ppm); signal splitting and coupling constants look OK. Chemical shift is more or less comparable to Shamble's spectrum. These are the 5 aromatic CH, of course.

5. Dublett @1.44 ppm: -CH3.

6. One of the 2 signals at 3.00 and 3.35 ppm, respectively, is the -CH-. What the other one is...?...Probably an impurity from the synthesis (direct precursor).

7. Can't find unambiguously the signal for -CH2, but it should be somewhere around ~3 ppm. Too much dirt around that position.​

Note: Compare the aliphatic signals in the D2O-spectrum: CH3 @1.2 ppm, CH2 @2.9 ppm, CH @ 3.6 ppm. The relative order should be the same, no matter in which solvent the spectrum was measured. The chemical shift on the other hand changes.

8. EVERY else signal not mentioned yet is an impurity! It's pointless to attribute these to reference shifts of common solvents, because there are just too many. GODDAMNIT! It already starts that there are 2 (!) signals for TMS WTF? And who calibrated the x-axis? Some kinda blind retard? Neither TMS, nor the water signal, nor the solvent base peak are exactly where they are supposed to be.​

Conclusion: Yes, it's probably 6-APB (13C-NMR, please). BUT: After we have seen a 1H NMR-spectrum with some minor impurities we have now a reference for a grossly impure one. Could be (as Vecktor stated before) that the impurities dissolved better in CDCl3 than 6-APB-hydrochloride itself, and therefore, appear unproportionally high. The alternative explanation is that this batch is just dirty as hell (which is the usual case with recent RC drugs).
I'm highly convinced that the impurities are not just solvents (comparably, but not entirely harmless), but synthesis intermediates, too. Absolutely nobody knows their biological activity though (MAO-inhibitors? The next Parkinson triggers? Reuptake inhibitors? Or maybe releasers? In the end just some funny hepatotoxins...)

My strong recommendation is NOT to consume this chemical unless you perform further purification.

Stay safe!!!


PEACE! - Murphy



P.S. The position of the amine's signal is not certain. Maybe it's the one @3.6 ppm. The expected range for interchangeable protons is quite large though...

 

[seep]

Water signal at 1.7 ppm (ref: 1.56 ppm)

The broad peak at 1.7 isn't from the N-H protons?

Just asking.

 

[MurphyClox]

^Nope, with certainty, it's not. Chemical shift is too low for an amine. Furthermore is the integral ~10! Take the aromatic signals as reference for the integrals.

- Murphy


P.S. The integral of an 1H-signal correlates directly with the number of protons that cause this signal. Bear in mind that these are always just relative values and not absolute ones. The integrals are usually provided as step-like line (not present in the last spectrum but in the one from Shambles, although they are really hard to recognize there) and/or as numeric values at the bottom of the spectrum (the 'vertical' numbers).

 

[FiR3]

thanks very much Murphy.
So, as a conclusion:
- IYO the batch has way too many impurities to be consumed. Just to make it clear, would you presume the impurities are from the synthesis or due to it being measured in CDCl3?
- what would the presumed impurities be besides acetone?
- what would the real risks be specifically if this mix of 6-apb/acetone was ingested by mistake? what about if it contained some other impurities? what would the risk be then?
- could one with a limited chemistry/pharmacology knowledge attempt a "purification" of the material and what would you approximate the chances of a successful purification would be?

again, I bow to the gods of organic chemistry and hope that these analysis will be understandable some day.

 

[MurphyClox]

^Really ALL these questions were answered in my 2nd last post

Again:
- The impurities come most likely from an amateurish purification procedure and include both solvents AND synthesis intermediates. Synthesis discussion is verboten here, so you have to find out on your own what the usual synthesis are, and therefore, how the expected intermediates look like.
- The exact nature of the impurities is uncertain, but most likely contains acetone + X.
- The risk when ingesting this batch without further purification are...goddamnit uncertain. Take some (...nah! take A LOT!) and find it out! NOBODY can tell you what these impurities are nor what they can cause.

The easiest way for purification is in my opinion recrystallisation of the (presumable) 6-APB salt. See Vogel's Handbook (copies are available online) for standard procedures.

DO NOT INGEST THIS BATCH WITHOUT FURTHER PURIFICATION! If you have any further doubts about this warning please read the story about how MPTP was discovered. Like to be the next guinea pig for the RC community? Go ahead...


- Murphy

 

[Mugz]

I thought I would post a 1H-NMR and HPLC for 6-APB that isn't from the "official lab"

Not sure if it is the same NMR as the one commented on above.

1H-NMR

HPLC

 

[Skyline_GTR]

^the NMR one is identical, but with a different reference at the top...

 

[Mugz]

^ I had a suspicion that that may be the case, they were received from different people though.

I had been told that a lot of NMR reports do look similar and hadn't checked thoroughly to see if it was identical.