Correct me if I'm wrong, but both reactions create the same chemical, so with sufficient cleaning and re-crystalizing there should be no difference in quality. Is this correct?

Sorry, but it is not correct. It's all about optical isomers.

Methamphetamine that is from l-ephedrine or l-psuedoephedrine will always reduce to d-meth. Straight up d-methamphetamine is the strongest form of meth. It will have a buzz that is characteristic by an immediate intense rush, the kind with major teeth clench, with major concentration, motivation etc, but will not be as long lasting (and of course with other tell-tale meth shit like hair and body tingles). Now, whenever a non-active or slightly active meth-like substance (i.e. l-ephedrine, l-psuedoephedrine, l-methamphetamine) is introduced into the system, it is beleived that the optical l isomers take up the same enzymes as the d ones to metabolize, so that affects the buzz. d-meth with a lot of l-meth or l-ephedrine in it will not be a rush at first, but more of a mellow uppitty feeling, that'll still keep you going good, but not with intense rushes or major teeth clench, and the buzz lasts much longer.
So different reduction methods and how the chemists cleans his or her product determin the type of buzz.

Lets say that the chemist was cheap and just did a good a/b and re-crystalization and washing on their product. It would be clean, but it would have unreacted l-ephedrine in it. So meth from a sound high-yeilding reduction method like Pd + H2 or LAH or Birch will produce a lot of d-meth and little to no l-ephedrine, giving you the edgey teeth clench type. But something less yeilding like HI or H2/Ag/Ultrasound (yes I had to throw that in there ) would have more l-ephedrine, so a less edgy and longer lasting buzz, with not much rush, but still concentration.

Now if the chemist wanted nothing but d-meth and took the time to separate it, then the buzz will be balls to the wall rush teeth clench major tingles, and you'll need less.

Now P2P dope is different. Any product of reductive amination of an amine and ketone yeilds 50/50 racemate product. That means that after reductive amination of P2P and methylamine, one will have a product that is 50% d-methamphetamine, and 50% l-methamphetamine. A buzz rom straight up P2P dope is little teeth clench, uppity but not much rush, little tingly but long lasting type.

OOOPS: http://www.rhodium.ws/chemistry/racemate.resolution.txt
------------------
Thats just the way it is...
Things will never be the same..
Thats just the way it is.
I see no changes
All I see is racist faces
Misplaced hate brings disgrace to races.-2pac

[This message has been edited by madchemist (edited 11-20-2001).]

Don't think it is the same with all drugs though. For instance, d-MDA or d-MDMA are very slightly active if at all, and l-MDA and l-MDMA are very active, but the racemate or ketone product (d,l-MDA or d,l-MDMA) seems to be the best over both d or the l by themselves.

So it seems to me that an ephedrine reaction would result in better meth for the amount of high, yet I have heard many people saying p2p dope is better.

Maybe if you wanted more of a lasting high you could add a small amount of ephedrine to the finished product.

Well it is all a matter of preference. P2P dope wouldn't be as twitchy or edgy, and longer lasting, and to some people that is more pleasurable than a straight up jacked rush. SWIM likes the pure d stuff himself. But it's hell on the gums, cause of the teeth clenching. Also the pure d-meth will be the type that you only have to do a small bump, as to a line of P2P dope.

Also the come-downs may play a role too. Some people like P2P dope better because it isn't as an intense "up", so the comedown is gradual and slow. But the pure d shit is intense up, so the come-down will be harder, more depression involved.

------------------
Thats just the way it is...
Things will never be the same..
Thats just the way it is.
I see no changes
All I see is racist faces
Misplaced hate brings disgrace to races.-2pac

[This message has been edited by madchemist (edited 11-20-2001).]

[This message has been edited by madchemist (edited 11-20-2001).]

Pure d sounds fun to me, I think thats the stuff I dreamed of using in the past.

about the mdma thing, some people think getting a speedier pill or a smackyier ;-) pill is the result of being cut . .. is this an effect of those optical isomers ? btw you are right on about the birch yeilding a balls to the wall high, however most meth cooks who use the birch dont even extract the e from the pills, they just toss them in , minus the red dye, im not positive if this would adversly effect potency/yeild, because of the sheer power of the birch,

Anyone have a description of the birch reaction thats not the one on chemhead? I would like to see a few peoples versions before I consider anything...

[This message has been edited by PsychoTropic (edited 11-22-2001).]

the method on chemhead, is pretty the bible of birch, however chemguys site has some interesting twists on the birch, i think you can find the link on rhodium...

if you are a meth chemist...99% of the time there is only one method (for meth) that you use. i have met a lot of ppl that cook and they all stick with one method. It all depends on what chems you have readly available. which is why like 90% of the cooks use the Hi reduction of ephedrine. its by far the easiest method. from personal expierience I like the ephedrine method the best. much better high than the p2p way.

------------------
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
CHEMHEAD CHEMISTRY
http://www.angelfire.com/mi3/chemhead

Thanks for the info guys, someone has started getting the supplies together and they are gonna give this a shot, looks like acidmelt's method is going to be used, cause the idea of a reaction happening in a sealed container is kinda scary to them. I'll probably be asking some more questions for them in the near future, but for now it all looks clear.

quote:

---

about the mdma thing, some people think getting a speedier pill or a smackyier ;-) pill is the result of being cut . .. is this an effect of those optical isomers ?

---

Maybe, but to the speedy/smacky thing I think that is more of a MDA/MDMA type thing.