Disappointing GG MDMA results (77% purity from EC)

I didn't want to post a full review, but I recently got results back from an Energy Control lab test of GG MDMA. I ordered "ultra pure" but I ended up getting crushed powder. I didn't realize it at the time, but I think I got his regular MDMA. It came fast to the US, around a week and a half, but it is was about 10% light. I know that is somewhat commonly reported with him, but this is for personal use so it isn't a big deal.

EC says 77% with no measured adulterants. (to be clear they compare against the HCL, so 100% would be perfect) Not a huge deal, but I was hoping for a little better. I didn't spring for the extra money for all the detailed EC analysis, so I have no way to prove anything. However, I hope my post history at least shows I am not a shill for the competition.

As an aside, my understanding is the 23% of non-pure stuff is just left over from the synthesis. Does anyone know what this usually is, or how it might affect a roll? I have been using stuff that was 82% tested at EC and it has always been a great experience with no hangover, so I am sure it will be fine. Just disappointing. :-(

I've reached out to GG and will edit post if he replies.

edit1: My sample was white powder-ish and had the letters "XX" on it, so I may have received the correct order. It is possible this is a measurement glitch. I may send in a sample again and see what happens.

edit2: Code was YNDX8193 if anyone wants to check

edit3: GG responds at TMG: http://talismanrestz7mr.onion/index.php?topic=305.1845

edit4: Jeebus, stop talking about 84%. Purity is measured on a scale of 0%-100%. Full stop.

edit5: Picture. Not great pic, but it is just white crystalline powder, so this gives you an idea of the color. https://anonimage.net/view/o0FhbgoeQU


Comments


[6 Points] mdamthc:

What's the code?


[4 Points] None:

I can understand your frustration with it being underweight, but is 77% vs 82% really that big of a jump? I ask out of ignorance, having only rolled a few times. Now if it's 77% out of that max of 82% then that's a bit shittier.

edit: thanks for downvoting a question :|


[2 Points] None:

[deleted]


[2 Points] None:

77% is pretty fucking good. Last year or so all that '84'% shit was testing at 57


[2 Points] None:

gammagoblin himself has already addressed this in TMG

We'd like to address this concern. First of all, we're in contact with the customer and we're trying to get more detailed info about his product to pinpoint the issue.

I have already talked to the chemist and the only "impurity" in the stuff that could account for that result is water that might be stuck in the crystals (for those who don't know - the final re-x of ultrapure is from distilled water and that ensures the transparent structure of the crystal).

The batches of ultrapure change every 3-4 weeks so the current product will test differently, also there might be differences between larger crystals and the powder of the same batch for the reason stated above. Making this type of crystal is quite tedious and cannot be done on large scale (large crystals would trap a lot of water).

In any case this doesn't have anything to do with our standard MDMA stuff. However judging from the feedbacks on both products we assume that they are both free of organic impurities that add to the harsh comedowns, which was our main motivation in repurifying the already pure stuff.

http://talismanrestz7mr.onion/index.php?topic=305.msg193006#msg193006


[1 Points] BobbyLite79:

I think you would know if you had the "ultra pure" stuff. It's pure white like snow. His regular is usually grey in color. And it all comes in powder like that, but the listing did in fact say little crystals which ended up being false for me. I have 2gs I was saving for personal and haven't done it yet so I can't comment on the strength, sorry.


[1 Points] None:

[deleted]


[-2 Points] drimilr:

as i understand it, if you have 77%, then at least 16% is the hcl, so you'd only have 7% impurities.

100% pure is 84% mdma and 16% hcl.


[-6 Points] None:

[deleted]