# Which MX is closest to the latest A314?

**URL:** <https://pheromonetalk.com/t/which-mx-is-closest-to-the-latest-a314/5480>\
**Category:** Men's Pheromone Advice & Field Reports\
**Created:** [September 10, 2007, 6:21am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/which-mx-is-closest-to-the-latest-a314/5480 "2007-09-10T06:21:31Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dec6dc/32.png) [@sigma](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/sigma)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2007, 5:00am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/which-mx-is-closest-to-the-latest-a314/5480/9 "2007-09-11T05:00:26Z")

</div>

> [@MadisonTate](#):
>
> I thought MX102 was one of the earlier attempts. The latest revisions of A314 are supposed to have mad (haha) numbers of pheremones…14 instead of 9.
> 
> By not “getting” A314 i mean that managing oil-based fragrances is different from managing sprayable alcohol-based ones.

There’s certainly a difference between oil based and alcohol based A314. Oil based A314 is much more subdued, and has a very smooth effect.

The alcohol based version of A314 seemed much more ‘active’ and pronounced. MX105 was nice and upbeat…MX102 felt a little erratic at times.

A314’s effects seem to translate more appropriately in its oil based form. The newest version is very smooth and collected…much sexier to me than the other variants. Very good stuff.

Funny how minor tweaks to A314’s formula can create so many different types of effects.

---

_[View the full topic](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/which-mx-is-closest-to-the-latest-a314/5480)._