Cost No Object: Free Weights and Gym Equipment, the BEST OF THE BEST

Health Nut

New Member
May 26, 2010
25
0
0
I have just about concluded my 2+ years of research, flying around the country, and have assembled and evaluated the best fitness equipment available on the planet. I thought I would share my results. I have been absent from audio and video due to the length and involvement with this dream project and other hobby of mine. But here is the latest version of my results:

I am focusing primarily on machines, benches, attachments, and bars. I think it is best to stay away from racks since there are tons of great rack choices on the market, and people have different priorities when it comes to picking their cost no object rack.

Another thing here is this is not meant to be a Free weights vs machines thread, and I think we got that out of the way early in the thread. This thread is simply about discussing all the choices of various free weights and machine choices on the market that people feel represent the best choice, regardless of cost. Certainly best bang for the buck is always relevant as well, but the thread is primarily focused on what is the best product available.

The short answer is that no company makes all the best equipment, not even close. Additionally, some extreme body types (very short, very tall, very large, etc..) might work better with some equipment rather than others. However, a machine that is voted best of best is often because it is very adjustable and can be used with the widest variety of body types and still have the best biomechanics. Ultimately, when it comes to machines, biomechanics and how a machine feels being used is the most important factor in determining what machine is best. One of the best ways to determine biomechanics, is the ability of a machine to allow perfect form using a maximum amount of weight on the target muscle being isolated. Additionally, the ideal machine will also have adequate starting position (pre-stretch) and a very large range of motion. One example is the Cybex VR3 arm extension (tricep). It is one of the few tricep machines (of that type of machine) that has upper back support. Other similar machines without upper back support do not allow one to use heavier weights due to the need to use abdominal muscles to hold your position. Without the upper back support, you are pushing backward against your abdominal muscles. In my opinion, the Cybex VR3 with heavy stack (and older VR2) provides the best biomechanics on the market for that particular type of tricep extension machine. Cybex absolutely nailed the grip, arm pad, length of the arms, pad angle, seat, and distance between the grips, pre-stretch, and range of motion. In my opinion, it is the best of all available machines of that specific type and gets a 100% for biomechanics for a neutral grip tricep extension machine. There are certainly other types of triceps machines on the market as well, however, at the moment, this piece also represents my favorite tricep machine. Again, this is in regards to comparing machines, not to comparing machines vs. free weight skull crushers, dumbbell work, or cable pushdowns with various attachments, etc. Which bring us the topic of specialty benches. Certainly we have autospot benches and specialty benches (such as designed specifically for just for skull crushers, dumbbell pullovers, etc...) which are all to be discussed.

Ultimately, only a personal opinion can be offered about what someone considers as the best possible choice in a machine. The vast majority of the choices I feel are superior to all other choices in terms of biomechanics. Sometimes there is a type of machine that you have a few good choices (rows and leg presses for example) therefore all of the choices should be listed, and ranked according to personal preference.



Leg presses:

TOP-TIER:
MedX Avenger Leg Press
Atlantis 40 degree Leg press (with modified wide foot plates)
Rogers Athletic Power Squat Pro
Rogers Athletic Pendulum Hip Press
Atlantis Power Squat (modified additional wide foot plate surface)
Nebula Vertical leg press

Runner-ups:
Nebula 35 degree leg press
Nebula 45 degree Leg Press
Atlantis Fitness Pivot Press (with wide footplate mod)(felt to be better than the Cybex)
UCS adjustable 35-45 degree leg press (difficult to demo)
Elite FTS Mondo 45 degree Leg press
Cybex Plate loaded Leg Press
Strive Plate loaded leg press
Atlantis Fitness Pendulum Leg press (similar to the old Paramount leg press)



Leg Curl:

TOP-TIER:
Star Trac makes the best prone leg curl and bested kneeling leg curl on the market bar none:
Star Trac Prone Leg curl A+
Star Trac Kneeling Leg Curl A+
Various standing Leg Curl units: (Icarian, Atlantis, Legend) (The best standing leg curl to be determined, but prefer standing leg curls to seated leg curls)


Runner-ups:
Cybex plate loaded kneeling leg curl A



Leg Extension:

TOP-TIER:
Strive Fitness plate loaded A+



Leg Abductor/Adductor:

TOP-TIER:
Strive Fitness combo abductor/adductor A+



Calf Machines:

TOP-TIER:
Sorinex seated calf A+
Atlantis standing calf A (Lack of rounded calf block keeps this unit from achieving a perfect score)
Nebula seated calf A
Sorinex Donkey calf
Free Motion Epic calf ext A



Shoulder:

TOP-TIER:
Rogers Athletic Pendulum: Shoulder/Incline/Chest machine A+
Hammer Strength Plate loaded Iso lateral A+
Strive selectorized lateral raise A+

Runner -ups:
Hammer Strength Plate loaded Super Incline (or older version called iso lateral military shoulder press) A- However, improved to A with back pad spacer mod behind upper set of back pad screws)
MedX Avenger Shoulder (overhead press) A-


Traps:

TOP-TIER:
Rogers Athletic Pendulum 5 way neck with shrugs.
Elite FTS Pro Rickshaw
Power Lift DEADLIFT / TRAP BAR
Sorinex Diamond Bar




Triceps:

TOP-TIER:
Cybex VR2/VR3 arm extension. Heavy stack option is absolute MUST have on VR3. Older VR2 is also top tier and has heavy stack included. A+
Atlantis D-123 Pulldown with various tricep attachments. A+
Atlantis Dipping station A+
Hammer Strength Plate loaded seated dip
Nebula reverse dip bench



Biceps:

TOP-TIER:
Strive plate loaded bicep A+
Sorinex Adjustable Preacher Curl Bench A+
Hammer Strength plate loaded bicep A



Back:
TOP-TIER:
Rogers Athletic Pendulum Combo Lat Pulldown
MedX Avenger Row
Hammer Strength Iso lateral MID ROW, with modified chest pad.
Atlantis D-123 pulldown, also comes with 310 lb stack (best cable pulldown on the market, hydraulic seat, etc...)
Atlantis D-132 cable High Row (310 lb weight stack is standard on this).
Dual stirrup Hampton cable attachment or similar chain with Black Iron Strength stirrup handle upgrades.
Strive Plate loaded and selectorised Low back extension with seatbelt.
Legend Reverse hyperextension with curved pendulum and tiltable top vs. Legend older model tiltable with straight pendulum

Runner -ups:
Rogers Athletic Pendulum Row
Hammer Strength High Row
Hammer Strength Low Row
Hammer Strength Pulldown
Atlantis plate loaded Pulldown



Chest:

TOP-TIER:
Hammer Strength HORIZONTAL iso lateral chest A+
MedX Avenger Iso lateral vertical chest
Rogers Athletic Pendulum Shoulder/Chest/Incline A+
Rogers Athletic Pendulum Vertical Chest (non-converging design will cause varying opinions on this machine, highly recommend demo before purchase).

Runner -ups:
Hammer Strength Wide chest
Hammer Strength Decline Chest



Abs:

TOP-TIER:
Hammer Strength MTS selectorized Ab Crunch A+
Hammer Strength Plate loaded AB Crunch A+ (I demoed the plate loaded one in Vegas and it was just as good and also allows twisting of the seat for obliques. Also 4 weight horns for unlimited weight).
Strive fitness Rotary Torso: A+ (modified to have 225 lb weight stack, predominantly to help make setting 2 adequately challenging).
Strength Inc. Inverted Sit Up (revision of the Old Body Master Inverted Sit Up. Designed for the Hard Core Sit Up user).
Atlantis fitness adjustable ab bench


Benches:

TOP-TIER:
Nebula Awesome utility bench
Elite FTS Collegiate 0-90 bench
Williams strength signature Military dumbbell bench
Nebula reverse dip bench
Nebula dumbbell pullover bench
Nebula flat bench that is adjustable at both sides for incline, decline, and flat of various heights.
Sorinex Autospot benches
Atlantis Fitness Autospot benches



Glute Ham Developer:
UCS Glute Ham with custom wide footplate and wide footpads (36" width footplate)



Pullover Machines:
Nautilus
Hammer Strength plate loaded (with custom pad spacers as shown in thread)


MISC:

Rogers Athletic Pit Shark
Rope machines
Power -Lift Adjustable plyo boxes
Elite FTS Swiss Bar
Black Iron Strength fat bars
Black Iron Strength attachments.
T-Grip Barbell bars and attachments
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Sorry to burst your bubble but machines are basically useless unless you're dealing with someone with special needs :( In fact, machines are less than useless since they're essentially setting you up for injuries in oh so many ways (among them uniplanar movement patterns, burning out of all the motor units in that one plane of motion, altered muscular firing patterns, lack of building up of those local based, joint stabilizers). And why would you want to sit down/lay down when you do that all day? Training is about doing things in a gravity based manner because that demands high threshold neural processing. Training is composed of multiple biomotor abilities among them strength, explosiveness, mobility, stability, etc.

As far as those Ab machines--they're probably the worst of the lot---and be sure make an appointment with your back doc cause you're going to need him :( . The absolute worst way of training your core because you're not training your core musculature but your spine. Especially those rotary type trunk machine. For instance, look at the anatomy of the spine. The lumbar vertebrae are large, heavy with big transverse processes that are built for weight bearing but not movement. Move through the lower back and you're setting yourself up for injury. Power comes from the hips and where the hips go, the lower back will follow. As we ascend the spine, the vertebrae become smaller and more mobile all the way up to the cervical spine. So the lumbar region is built for support and movement should optimally be attained through the thoracic spine (the most important joint in the body since it affects joints above and below).

Check out some of the work done on the subject by Stuart McGill. Also understanding of the joint-by-joint approach enumerated by Gray Cook and Mike Boyle are also good reading. Core training is about grooving motor patterns, building endurance, firing patterns, anti-rotation and the ability of the core musculature to turn on and off in an instant (something elite athletes can do very well). All this has to be done in a coherent, well thought out, needs based, program.

Oh and if you're talking about biomechanics and machines are almost an oxymoron. Esp. the Hammer strength. If you look at the pattern of neuromuscular activation, you have a triphasic firing pattern. Agonist, antagonist and agonist again. Machines screw that firing pattern up so that the antagonist/braking portion is later than it should be, etc. And there is no such thing as isolating a muscle contrary to what you may read in a BB magazine.

And of course that assumes everyone has the same force vs ROM curve--where something with a cam mechanism which is supposed to add weight where it's easy during the ROM and subtract weight when it becomes harder totally falls apart. But people don't. Take for instance a deadlift. Some people have no problem separating the bar from the floor but have trouble locking their knees out; others have trouble separating the bar from the platform but once they get the bar moving, have no problem locking the knees out. Nautilus holds the cam patent and every company has to change the cam to get around their patent and each one goes further and further from the ideal.

Power Lift (the company) rack and platform, bench, barbell, dumbells, kettlebells and some bumper plates are all you need for a gym.

But more than that, there is no best exercise. There's only the right exercise for the right person at the right time. That requires careful needs assessments and goal setting and a program written out for a year macrocycle. Too often, all people do is come into the gym and do the same thing every day. And we know the definition of insanity. So in the end, training doesn't require complex tools; what it requires is good programming.
 

Health Nut

New Member
May 26, 2010
25
0
0
Sorry to burst your bubble but machines are basically useless unless you're dealing with someone with special needs :( ... Power Lift (the company) rack and platform, bench, barbell, dumbells, kettlebells and some bumper plates are all you need for a gym.


You are not bursting any bubble, that is absurd. As a physician and long time health and fitness expert, this post is limited to machines. I don't have the time or desire to debate the entire field of human physiology or exercise with you here. The list is simply meant for people who are looking for the best of the best available machines. You seem to be overstepping your bounds and also the meaning of this post. Personally, I do cross-fit, yoga, group classes, and a wide variety ... This list is exactly what it is meant to be, not to be taken out of context.

Power Lift (the company) rack and platform, bench, barbell, dumbells, kettlebells and some bumper plates are all you need for a gym.

I'm glad you have the all the answers for everybody, lol...
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
You are not bursting any bubble, that is absurd. As a physician and long time health and fitness expert, this post is limited to machines. I don't have the time or desire to debate the entire field of human physiology or exercise with you here. The list is simply meant for people who are looking for the best of the best available machines. You seem to be overstepping your bounds and also the meaning of this post. Personally, I do cross-fit, yoga, group classes, and a wide variety ... This list is exactly what it is meant to be, not to be taken out of context.



I'm glad you have the all the answers for everybody, lol...

Just like you seem to also. I always find it interesting that some MDs, Dr. Odd coming to mind, think that a professional degree makes them an expert on just about every subject. Rather than dismissing what I said, you might find some interesting information relating to training not being about the equipment.

If you want to pull rank, I'd be more than glad to send you my resume too. I've written more than a few articles also for the industry dating back to the late '90s and have received awards. That's not to mention training for the Olympics in the late '70s as well as a competing Masters athlete in OLifting at 57.

As far as debating, I think you need to read some more first: a short selection includes Tom Myers, Mark Latash, Gray Cook, Mike Boyle, Mike Stone, Stuart McGill, Vladamir Janda, Vladamir Zatsiorsky, Schmidt and Wrisberg, Charlie Weingroff, Pavel,Craig Liebenson, Dan Johns, etc.
 

treitz3

Super Moderator
Staff member
Dec 25, 2011
5,459
961
1,290
The tube lair in beautiful Rock Hill, SC
OK gentlemen, it looks as if this thread got started off on the wrong foot. Let's hit the reset button, cool the tone down, lighten the spirit of the thread a bit and discuss the topic at hand while realizing that everybody is entitled to their opinion. From this post forward, please discuss as if you were talking to your college professor. Cordial discussion is key. Thank you.

Tom
 

RBFC

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
5,158
46
1,225
Albuquerque, NM
www.fightingconcepts.com
As with most other "interests", exercise equipment and methodologies often raise heated debate.

I absolutely love my Nebula Fitness Super 1/2 Rack, complete with Phase Bench and several optional attachments. I also own the Nebula Glute-Ham Machine, and it is extremely nice. Coupled with my Eleiko bar and a ton of plates, it's a fairly complete workout center. There should be some pictures here:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1556-Weightlifting-Equipment

Lee
 

RBFC

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
5,158
46
1,225
Albuquerque, NM
www.fightingconcepts.com
Free weight vs. Machines

Tubes vs. Solid State, here we go....

I personally believe that a muscle only sees a "resistance" to movement in that muscle's range of operation. The muscle doesn't know what the "type' of resistance is, but only how much resistance is being applied to its effort to move its assigned joint. You can build muscle using machines, free weights, or just bodyweight. The important variables are frequency, intensity, and genetics. Many pro athletes use machines for some of their training, and certainly for rehab from injuries/surgery.

That said, machines begin to falter when a subject attempts to perform sport-specific movements, etc. that require coordination of multiple joint movements simultaneously. The balance and core tension required to make some athletics maneuvers are not well developed when using many machines. Machines tend to lock the body into a supported position so that maximal isolated effort can be applied to the target muscle group. The variables encountered when you try to put a heavy box of books up onto a high shelf are not well-duplicated by most machines. Of course, machines can provide additional safety when the subject must drop the weight suddenly, etc....

Nothing wrong with gaining strength via machine training, just need to supplement them with actual free-space movements.

All IMO!

Lee
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Tubes vs. Solid State, here we go....

I personally believe that a muscle only sees a "resistance" to movement in that muscle's range of operation. The muscle doesn't know what the "type' of resistance is, but only how much resistance is being applied to its effort to move its assigned joint. You can build muscle using machines, free weights, or just bodyweight. The important variables are frequency, intensity, and genetics. Many pro athletes use machines for some of their training, and certainly for rehab from injuries/surgery.

That said, machines begin to falter when a subject attempts to perform sport-specific movements, etc. that require coordination of multiple joint movements simultaneously. The balance and core tension required to make some athletics maneuvers are not well developed when using many machines. Machines tend to lock the body into a supported position so that maximal isolated effort can be applied to the target muscle group. The variables encountered when you try to put a heavy box of books up onto a high shelf are not well-duplicated by most machines. Of course, machines can provide additional safety when the subject must drop the weight suddenly, etc....

Nothing wrong with gaining strength via machine training, just need to supplement them with actual free-space movements.

All IMO!

Lee


Or we could say that the brain doesn't know a bicep from a quadricep; it instead creates a movement pattern eg. rolling, reaching, squat, locomotion/lunge, etc to make our bodies move.We can broadly break them down into, run (squat, snatch), jump (clean, clean pulls) and throw (push-press, jerk) :) One of the big differences between machines and "functional" training is velocity or as the renowned Russian coach Yuri Verkhoshansky ("father" of plyometrics) put it, the velocity about the joint in training must match that encountered in competition--or even every day activities. For instance, you can take an older person and improve their say leg strength but it won't necessarily reduce their falling because that is a much faster process.

Or as the Russians showed, if you train slow, you will only be strong at slow velocities; if you train explosively, you will be strong at all velocities.

http://www.skillteam.se/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Quickness-and-Velocity.pdf
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
HI

Still jet-lagging thus waking up/sleeping at odd hours. Can I conclude, in a nutshell, that free-weights or body weight are better to overall physical health than machine?

Would of course cost less too :)
 

rblnr

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 3, 2010
2,151
291
1,170
NYC/NJ
For me, working with a trainer and moving away from machines, changing the way I workout, has been transformative. I always instinctually felt that exercises limited to one or two muscle groups/planes were misguided -- my body has confirmed this for me as I moved away from them. Among several other things, chronic upper back/neck pain is now gone.

Though I use it in a very limited way with my trainer, my favorite piece of workout equipment is the TRX. Versatile, challenging, efficient and easy to travel with. Was in Chicago last week and hooked it to a tree near the lakefront.
 

RBFC

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
5,158
46
1,225
Albuquerque, NM
www.fightingconcepts.com
HI

Still jet-lagging thus waking up/sleeping at odd hours. Can I conclude, in a nutshell, that free-weights or body weight are better to overall physical health than machine?

Would of course cost less too :)

Frantz,

Overall health is very dependent upon dietary and genetic factors. One can work out on machines and be very healthy. Sports performance, etc. relies on coordinated use of multiple muscle groups (provided by a limited number of machines). If there is no sporting requirement, one can gain/maintain muscle using only machines.

That said, subjects that utilize workout routines that involve total muscle failure can perform those routines far more safely on machines (i.e. leg press vs. squat). So, machines have their place in even the most advanced applications.

Health Nut's original premise is accurate, IMO. The listed machines are of the highest quality and will allow you to work extremely hard in safety. The rest of the debate is akin to "I believe that the best beef is Kobe." and the next response is "I'm a vegetarian, so all beef sucks." In their place, these high-quality machines are useful.

Financially, and space-wise, the use of isolated machines is expensive both dollar-wise and room-wise. They take up a large footprint compared to a multi-station approach.

Lee
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Frantz,

Overall health is very dependent upon dietary and genetic factors. One can work out on machines and be very healthy. Sports performance, etc. relies on coordinated use of multiple muscle groups (provided by a limited number of machines). If there is no sporting requirement, one can gain/maintain muscle using only machines.

I disagree Lee. Life is about moving the body. Everyone has "occupational" tasks they must perform whether it be a mother having to lift her children to carrying luggage to putting bags in an overhead compartment to having to run across the street or suddenly get out of the way of an oncoming cab. Or in the case of WBF, lifting that heavy Krell amp or huge tube amplifier with its unbalanced load.

How does sitting on a machine prepare you for that task? It doesn't and can result in injury. Sadly, most people narrow their movement patterns down to 1 (sitting) as they get older. My clients have a number of goals (aethetics, health, strength, rehabbing issues, athletics, etc) but they need to move their bodies again before anything else eg. exercise does not cure or correct pre-existing injuries, etc. . Or as Gray Cook so aptly put it: mobility before stability; stability (since it's a neuromuscular function) before movement. If you don't have the right range of motion, the ability to properly stabilize the joints beginning with the big toe, then you're going to break down at some point. It's just a matter of time as we know we can break injuries down into traumatic, sprains and strains and repetitive movement patterns or pattern overload.

So baiscally machines just promote and add to muscle imbalances and do nothing for PROPER core stabilization, hip, shoulder or any other joint. Plus they affect and distort the PROPER joint centration.

After all strength is force applied against an external resistance and this is the key and often forgotten, "in a useful direction."

That said, subjects that utilize workout routines that involve total muscle failure can perform those routines far more safely on machines (i.e. leg press vs. squat). So, machines have their place in even the most advanced applications.

Why do you want to go to failure. If we're talking repetitive effort, then going to failure is going to work endurance while stopping before failure promotes rate of force development (RFD). But more than that, what does that amount of stress actually do for the adaptation process. Failure is a meathead idea that if a little bit of stress (insert drug here) is good, then more must be better (insert drug here too).

Unfortunately it doesn't work that way and that "wasted" stress cause the body to breakdown. How does that stress cause joint degeneration? Simple thermodynamics. What is in excess of what's needed to cause adpatation and specificity is released as heat and at the "microscopic" bone on bone level, produces enough heat to break the joint down.

Same goes for what we know about human physiology and xfit. You can't go balls to the wall to fiailure every workout and expect the body to recuperate and achieve a goal. Not to mention doing crap in bad form (yes clean and olifting come to mind here).

Health Nut's original premise is accurate, IMO. The listed machines are of the highest quality and will allow you to work extremely hard in safety. The rest of the debate is akin to "I believe that the best beef is Kobe." and the next response is "I'm a vegetarian, so all beef sucks." In their place, these high-quality machines are useful.

It would have been nice to know what criteria were used in the selection process. I can also think of much better machines that I would like in my gym. I can also think of some of the machines that I wouldn't ever have in a gym (unless you're selling memberships) if they were the last piece of equipment in the world. Fior example, abdominal machines esp. the rotary machines scare the living hell out of me. Then there's the dumb AB/AD machines that every woman thinks is actually doing sometihng. Well they are, just to their back.

Financially, and space-wise, the use of isolated machines is expensive both dollar-wise and room-wise. They take up a large footprint compared to a multi-station approach.

Lee

And don't get the results that MOST people need! We can argue that machines are good for BB but truth be told, look at what the "old time, old school" BB used before we had all those machines!!! They squatted, dlifted, benched, did pull-ups, etc.

Here lies the problem with the whole fitness industry. If someone can't do a full squat that a two year old can, then do a half squat. If you can't do a half squat, do a quarter squat. If you can't squat, do a leg press. What happened to correcting the issues, since we once had that ability to move without restriction when we were born, rather than copping out?
 
Last edited:

RBFC

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
5,158
46
1,225
Albuquerque, NM
www.fightingconcepts.com
Myles,

I don't personally use machines. I like the ability to control my body as I move it, or also an additional resistance, freely through space. I have no argument with the fact that many folks (including many who seek out personal training) have become so de-conditioned that they must re-learn how to move. I also believe that machines can be useful in developing enough muscular strength to put these individuals back on the road to mobility. Note that my (and your) definition of mobility is probably a bit more "severe" than that of the general populace. If someone cannot rise from a chair, of course 1/2 or 1/4 squats can be a start. So can limited range leg press, etc. to improve cross-sectional quadricep composition. I doubt that most folks envision themselves in the UFC or Sasuke! Getting going is the basic challenge.

Lee
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Agreed and one may use selected machines depending on the person (say like my 85 yo client) but I try and wean them off. After all my 85 yo clients (who started training with me a little over a year ago) still has to walk, do his gardening, get up and down and many other things.

Or if someone is coming off an injury or surgery. But therein lies the problem also. PTs asses/reassess the client and will finally discharge them based basically on pain, strength and joint ROM. But they fail to look at movement (pain distorts posture also) and how their brain/bodies compensated and developed alternative movement patterns to allow them to do their task. After all the brain is not going to pick the "best" or most efficient movement pattern, it's going to chose the easiest :( So what happens. They go out and hurt themselves again and are back in PT (nothing makes me crazier than someone having back surgery and the physician not recommending PT!).
 

trponhunter

New Member
Apr 30, 2012
77
0
0
I'm not a professional trainer, but I have worked out with free weights and machines for 30 years. No contest - free weights and especially large multi muscle movements (squats, deadlifts, rows, presses) cannot be duplicated by machines, in my experience. Most people do not want to do these types of movements, simply because they are too hard.
I recently injured my back and have not done squats for about 8 months, and my legs and glutes have atrophied , no matter how hard I try to work on machines only (leg press and extensions).
Machines have their place as well, but only in addition to free weights.
 

Soundproof

New Member
Jan 13, 2012
429
1
0
Oslo, Norway
Couldn't agree more with Myles here. The machine jungle is absurd and counterproductive, and contributes to injuries. It was developed due to body builders' needs to isolate particular muscles, in order to stimulate their growth. What happens when you're in a machine is that the isolated muscle being worked to bulk or shape is not being taught to coordinate with other muscles, in a complete movement pattern.

A few years down the road and we'll be laughing at the traditional room full of machines in gyms.

Greg Roskopf earn a fortune repairing pro athletes' muscles and getting them fit to fight again. His blunt opinion:

"Conventional weight training isolates muscle groups, but it doesn't teach the muscle groups you're isolating to work with others," says Greg Roskopf, MS, a biomechanics consultant with a company called Muscle Activation Techniques who has worked with athletes from the Denver Broncos, the Denver Nuggets, and the Utah Jazz.
"The key to functional exercise is integration. It's about teaching all the muscles to work together rather than isolating them to work independently."
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
Couldn't agree more with Myles here. The machine jungle is absurd and counterproductive, and contributes to injuries. It was developed due to body builders' needs to isolate particular muscles, in order to stimulate their growth. What happens when you're in a machine is that the isolated muscle being worked to bulk or shape is not being taught to coordinate with other muscles, in a complete movement pattern.

Which is what the Russians talked about almost 50 years ago :) All movement begins with the brain and CNS system. And you have intermuscular and intramuscular coordination going on as well as areas distant from the joint affecting affecting another joint. Our bodies act like a geodesic dome with the connective tissue acting to give it stability (think myo and fascial components to all movement. you shorter one thing, something else has to lengthen to compensate, that leads to altered movement (tenegrity)

A few years down the road and we'll be laughing at the traditional room full of machines in gyms.

While I'd like to think you're right, the reality is gyms need to sell memberships and you need to have machines, no matter how crappy (wtd. ab crunch, rotary trunk, AB/AD, hyperextension, knee extension, Smith, etc. machines). :(

Greg Roskopf earn a fortune repairing pro athletes' muscles and getting them fit to fight again. His blunt opinion:

"Conventional weight training isolates muscle groups, but it doesn't teach the muscle groups you're isolating to work with others," says Greg Roskopf, MS, a biomechanics consultant with a company called Muscle Activation Techniques who has worked with athletes from the Denver Broncos, the Denver Nuggets, and the Utah Jazz.
"The key to functional exercise is integration. It's about teaching all the muscles to work together rather than isolating them to work independently."

Greg was the head strength coach with the Broncos and he developed the MAT - muscle activation technique. Have done it myself and sent many clients so a MAT practitioner. Very strange but it works! The guy who I work with actually works with many pro athletes and also the NY Giants! ;)
 
Last edited:

treitz3

Super Moderator
Staff member
Dec 25, 2011
5,459
961
1,290
The tube lair in beautiful Rock Hill, SC
...Another thing here is this is not meant to be a Free weights vs machines thread...

Just a reminder gentlemen, this was a quote from the author of the thread on the first post.

Tom
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing