• 💊 OTHER DRUGS 💊 Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Notable Threads 1 Notable Threads 2
    Dangerous Combos Addiction Support
    Emergency Services Benzo Guide v.1
    Addiction Stories Scary Case Studies
    Biology, Pharmacology & Drugs 101
  • Select Your Topic Then Scroll Down
    Alcohol Bupe Benzos
    Cocaine Heroin Opioids
    RCs Stimulants Misc
    Harm Reduction All Topics Gabapentinoids
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums

Heroin Black Tar Heroin

dustin11928

dustin11928

Greenlighter
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
19
Really just a simple question here I suppose, I was wondering what the difference is between black tar heroin and the other forms such as the pure and base forms.
 
Last edited:
Black tar heroin is worse in every way and more expensive.
 
Ever hear of wikipedia?

Or the OTHER thread called "black tar heroin" in this very same forum that you would have seen if you even made the laziest attempt to look for info before posting this?
 
You can smoke tar as opposed to most people snorting/slamming powder. I did get some fine powder once out here in the west and didn't know what to do with it so i smoked it...it worked out. burned up pretty damn quickly. but DAMN could I tell the difference instantly, so much more clean. aw I miss it.
 
Tar will RUIN your veins if you pick up a needle -1. You can also smoke tar. +1

East coast powder (I dunno what # it is) can be shot for years without losing veins if you do it correct +5.

Heroin is a two way fork, your're either headed for jail or death. I had to say it buddy , 'cause its like 10% of people that can fuck with that shit and then turn away.

Nothing can make you whole again once heroin breaks you, until you pick up the pieces.
 
skoat, actually it's more like 10% of people who try heroin ever had an addiction problem. 90% try it somewhat and never become addicted.
 
Black tar heroin is a pretty impure form of heroin, they skip a few steps, not sure which ones exactly, never looked much into how heroin is manufactured. Tar usually is pretty bad, but there is some really good tar out there. The really good tar tends to cook up really light brown/yellowish. Overall, I like powdered a lot more; I get a way better rush from it. Unfortunately powder is pretty hard to find around here(California) and when it is around it seems to come and go. Some people like tar though because it has a high level of monoacetylmorphine compared to powdered, so it lasts longer. But the rush just isn't as good in my honest opinion. High quality tar is around the same level of average powder.

Its a good idea to double filter with tar if you aren't able to get wheel filters, even if it cooks up really light brown/yellowish, it can still be kind of gummy. I wish the Mexicans would start producing powder...but its kind of the evolution of heroin. 50 years ago, the east coast supposedly had mostly black tar heroin. Hopefully we will start seeing more powder in 10-15 years on the west coast.
 
I believe "black tar heroin" is actually a varying mixture of heroin, the equally as good opioid 6-monoacetylmorphine, and inactive 3-monoacetylmorphine. I also heard the black color has nothing to do with the impurities, but rather the heroin and/or 6-MAM in the salt form found in tar is a black color naturally.

Can anyone verify these rumors?
 
Yeah Black tar is got a mixture of the other opioids like 6-momo..etc.. and all that shit Coolio is right except for the color being black because its got the other stuff..you may be mainly right about that tho,but from my understanding the mexicans skpi steps and go from black raw opium to heroin and dont use acetic anhydride whihc is used in making the powder heroin and they don't wash out the heroin with ether and chloroforn and all that like with the powder which is Number 4 heroin aka heroin hcl...heroin base is number 3 heroin base (obviously base..lol) number 2 heroin is morphine base or some shit and heroin #1 is like some raw morphine and #1 and #2 heroin are not actually heroin only steps in the process of making the good powder heroin which is #4 heroin...the good stuff,,until or uless it gets stepped on all to hell...lol
 
Coolio said:
Black tar heroin is worse in every way and more expensive.
Click to expand...



Your subjective opinion and just straight up misinformation.

some junkies actually prefer tar. since there is a mix of different opiates it can lend to somewhat of a synergy. tar can provide quite a rush, might have more of a smacky, euphoric and cerebral high than powder.

And what is this bullshit about expense. one of the main attractions about tar is that, while it contains a lot of waxes, fibers, oils, and god knows what else, it can often provide a solid amount of opiate for your dollar.

without going into too much detail, i can score a gram in the east bay that costs the same as a movie ticket and a treat from the concession stand. now, it aint china white by a long shot, but that isnt expensive by a long shot.
 
Yeah, tar is pretty affordable, lol. I think it comes out to 4-5 dollars per shot for me. It was pretty amazing going from 40-60 dollars of oxy in a single shot to 4-5 dollars per shot of heroin.
 
Coolio said:
skoat, actually it's more like 10% of people who try heroin ever had an addiction problem. 90% try it somewhat and never become addicted.
Click to expand...

It's actually 25% of people who ever try it become addicted.
 
well, there's a damn good reason why its addicting, and that's because it rules.
 
wanted to thread jack for a moment

the 6-mono in black tar is something i've just recently found out about, and was wondering why there is more of it (and other opioids) in black tar? something to do with the black tar process no doubt? but how would it make powder any less effective or for that matter any less potent wouldnt more diacetyl in the powder in fact render more 6-mono when its introduced in the body as a conversion?
 
dokomo said:
It's actually 25% of people who ever try it become addicted.
Click to expand...

I sadly couldn't find a real statistic in time for my post. Where'd you find a source?

I just knew the ratio was not skewed towards becoming addicted.
 
yoursecrettime said:
without going into too much detail, i can score a gram in the east bay that costs the same as a movie ticket and a treat from the concession stand. now, it aint china white by a long shot, but that isnt expensive by a long shot.
Click to expand...

Yeah but with powder heroin, a gram will be 20+ doses. A gram of tar is like two doses.
 
if i were to try heroin it would be either orally adminstered or white powdered insulfated, but i hate snorting shit and i dont wanna gag on a gross taste
 
Coolio said:
skoat, actually it's more like 10% of people who try heroin ever had an addiction problem. 90% try it somewhat and never become addicted.
Click to expand...
im leaning more towards this one, i'll have to rewatch through the penn and tellers bullshit episode on the war on drugs
 
blackjesus said:
the 6-mono in black tar is something i've just recently found out about, and was wondering why there is more of it (and other opioids) in black tar? something to do with the black tar process no doubt? but how would it make powder any less effective or for that matter any less potent wouldnt more diacetyl in the powder in fact render more 6-mono when its introduced in the body as a conversion?
Click to expand...

I am not completely sure, but I think its because black tar doesn't proceed to the purifying steps that powder does, and I think 6-mono is something that is more related to raw morphine. Powder has more diacetylmorphine(heroin) instead of 6-mono, which I personally think is a good thing. The amount of 6-mono in tar can make the effects last longer though, which some people like, but I don't think the rush from tar is as nearly as good as decent powdered. "Tar will take you far," but it will also wreck your veins a hell of a lot faster than powder.
 
Coolio said:
I sadly couldn't find a real statistic in time for my post. Where'd you find a source?

I just knew the ratio was not skewed towards becoming addicted.
Click to expand...

Someone linked it here one time, and I just heard the statistic again in a documentary several days ago. I'll try and dig up an actual source when I'm off my phone.

And although its a minority, a 1 in 4 chance of becoming an addict is still a pretty big fucking risk, if you ask me. Addiction is almost always the symptom of other problems in life, so I think the statistic makes sense. There are some who are more inclined to become addicted thanks to biological makeup, others who are more likely to become addicted because they are driven to find relief from some problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top