Work the forearms, all parts, wrist flexors and extensors, and do reverse/hammer curls to build up that brachioradialis and brachialis. Bringing up the lagging parts tends the work well from both an aesthetic and functional standpoint, and leaves you less vulnerable to injury. Not to mention that the brachialis makes up an appreciable amount of mass of the upper arm.
For how weak your curl is, I’d say you have some decent sized arms. I hit 17inches at 205-210 at 5’10" and could ez bar curl 145 for 3 sets of 6, and decline close grip bench 315 for 3 sets of 5. Just get stronger and leaner.
I also have a higher attachment point on biceps and always thought it gave me more strength. Not sure why though.
this isn’t my avater it’s henry rollins.
thanks for the advice guys. im going to do aomething like this:
barbell curl - work up to a set of 8-15 reps
hammer curls - 3 sets 8-10
some sort of cable curl - 3 or 4 sets 8-12
oh shit huge miscalculation. 16.5 cold. no fucking wonder. i need to shut the fuck up and train them in the hypertrophy range with adequate volume and progression.
my short term goal is 135x5.
[quote]schultzie wrote:
oh shit huge miscalculation. 16.5 cold. no fucking wonder. i need to shut the fuck up and train them in the hypertrophy range with adequate volume and progression.
[/quote]
amen to that.
Good luck, let us know progress 
wow. training with a 6 day bodypart split is giving me WAYYYY better progress on strength and size than any powerlifter style split or fullbody split i ever did. insane. I think I have really found a training style that my body likes
[quote]schultzie wrote:
wow. training with a 6 day bodypart split is giving me WAYYYY better progress on strength and size than any powerlifter style split or fullbody split i ever did. insane. I think I have really found a training style that my body likes[/quote]
You know that after a few days on it? 
Or are you just pulling our legs here…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Wow…these authors have really done a number on these guys if they though training biceps directly made them a “bro” or a douchebag.
I feel sorry for those who listened.[/quote]
I drank from their kool aid as welll. Although including curls in my workouts didn’t make me feel like a douchebag, it seemed every article I read when I first joined this site gave the message that chinups were the best thing in the world for biceps and they didn’t really need to be worked directly. So instead of working them directly, I did 5 sets of pullups followed by 5 sets of chinups on my back day. I didn’t think my arms were that disproprationate until I saw others posting their #'s.
OP, things can be worse. I’m 6’ 220 and my arms measure 16". Thanks for making this thread, I didn’t realize my curls sucked so bad until other people posted about how much they work out with. I’m at 100x6 on the EZ curl bar and 45lbs dumbells for 3 sets of 10. To put it in perspective I can Bench 305 so I’m way out of wack. My goal is going to be 135x6 on curls. If can get them that strong, they shouldn’t suck so bad.
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Wow…these authors have really done a number on these guys if they though training biceps directly made them a “bro” or a douchebag.
I feel sorry for those who listened.
I drank from their kool aid as welll. Although including curls in my workouts didn’t make me feel like a douchebag, it seemed every article I read when I first joined this site gave the message that chinups were the best thing in the world for biceps and they didn’t really need to be worked directly. So instead of working them directly, I did 5 sets of pullups followed by 5 sets of chinups on my back day. I didn’t think my arms were that disproprationate until I saw others posting their #'s.
OP, things can be worse. I’m 6’ 220 and my arms measure 16". Thanks for making this thread, I didn’t realize my curls sucked so bad until other people posted about how much they work out with. I’m at 100x6 on the EZ curl bar and 45lbs dumbells for 3 sets of 10. To put it in perspective I can Bench 305 so I’m way out of wack. My goal is going to be 135x6 on curls. If can get them that strong, they shouldn’t suck so bad.[/quote]
Sorry to hear about that. However, don’t go thinking you are a strong bencher or have strong triceps. That is a weak bench for someone of your size. Work on bringing that up as well and you should have at least 17 inch arms at 220 I would think.
[quote]BenceJones wrote:
Sorry to hear about that. However, don’t go thinking you are a strong bencher or have strong triceps. That is a weak bench for someone of your size. Work on bringing that up as well and you should have at least 17 inch arms at 220 I would think. [/quote]
No, I don’t think I’m a strong bencher but I don’t think it’s that weak considering I’ve only been training 11 months. I just know my triceps are relatively alot stronger than my biceps. I could tell just by seeing guys smaller than me at the gym who can curl more than I do. Just about everyone that’s stronger at pressing exercises is always noticeable bigger than me. Just an observation I made.
[quote]BenceJones wrote:
sam_sneed wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Wow…these authors have really done a number on these guys if they though training biceps directly made them a “bro” or a douchebag.
I feel sorry for those who listened.
I drank from their kool aid as welll. Although including curls in my workouts didn’t make me feel like a douchebag, it seemed every article I read when I first joined this site gave the message that chinups were the best thing in the world for biceps and they didn’t really need to be worked directly. So instead of working them directly, I did 5 sets of pullups followed by 5 sets of chinups on my back day. I didn’t think my arms were that disproprationate until I saw others posting their #'s.
OP, things can be worse. I’m 6’ 220 and my arms measure 16". Thanks for making this thread, I didn’t realize my curls sucked so bad until other people posted about how much they work out with. I’m at 100x6 on the EZ curl bar and 45lbs dumbells for 3 sets of 10. To put it in perspective I can Bench 305 so I’m way out of wack. My goal is going to be 135x6 on curls. If can get them that strong, they shouldn’t suck so bad.
Sorry to hear about that. However, don’t go thinking you are a strong bencher or have strong triceps. That is a weak bench for someone of your size. Work on bringing that up as well and you should have at least 17 inch arms at 220 I would think. [/quote]
Your comment just SCREAMS jealousy.
Don’t be a prick.
sneedy be glad u learnt the truth this early. I know people that have been training for years that still think chins r the sheet for biceps, and u dont need curls
they also think kettlebell snatches are great for building lats
While I dont particularly bodybuild, I too have run into a problem b/c of not doing direct arm work. I consider myself a powerlifter, so I followed the same advice about not working your biceps. This has contributed to a couple tendonitis issues in my forearms due to some of the muscles not being strong enough to handle bench weights.
I started reading this yesterday and decided to play with EZ curls yesterday. 3 sets of 8 with 80lbs was probably the most I could handle. I feel like not doing enough curls might actually have created issues for me in some of my other lifts. I do have 17"+ arms tho…
Looks like I have some work to do…
man, i’m 6’0.5", relatively lean (4-6 pack), 205 ish and my arms aren’t much over 15" right now, and i’m still getting my legs (a little over 26") and back bigger before i care about adding any size to them (well thats not completely true, as i’d like to get my tri’s stronger…but just because we’re talkign about biceps), …i must have some sort of fucked up idea of what looks like a balanced physique
[quote]Stuntman Mike wrote:
BenceJones wrote:
sam_sneed wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Wow…these authors have really done a number on these guys if they though training biceps directly made them a “bro” or a douchebag.
I feel sorry for those who listened.
I drank from their kool aid as welll. Although including curls in my workouts didn’t make me feel like a douchebag, it seemed every article I read when I first joined this site gave the message that chinups were the best thing in the world for biceps and they didn’t really need to be worked directly. So instead of working them directly, I did 5 sets of pullups followed by 5 sets of chinups on my back day. I didn’t think my arms were that disproprationate until I saw others posting their #'s.
OP, things can be worse. I’m 6’ 220 and my arms measure 16". Thanks for making this thread, I didn’t realize my curls sucked so bad until other people posted about how much they work out with. I’m at 100x6 on the EZ curl bar and 45lbs dumbells for 3 sets of 10. To put it in perspective I can Bench 305 so I’m way out of wack. My goal is going to be 135x6 on curls. If can get them that strong, they shouldn’t suck so bad.
Sorry to hear about that. However, don’t go thinking you are a strong bencher or have strong triceps. That is a weak bench for someone of your size. Work on bringing that up as well and you should have at least 17 inch arms at 220 I would think.
Your comment just SCREAMS jealousy.
Don’t be a prick.[/quote]
Just trying to help the guy not get so comfy with his tricep strength level. Fact of the matter is a 305 bench at 6’ 220 is nothing to be jealous of. And that is likely the reason his arms are only 16 inches at that weight. Some of us (me) had to build a lot of strength to get the added size along with it.
FYI I had to get to a ~350 bench at 208 and 5’11 to get 17inch arms.
I regret that my initial post sounded harsh, tough love perhaps.
[quote]brian.m wrote:
man, i’m 6’0.5", relatively lean (4-6 pack), 205 ish and my arms aren’t much over 15" right now, and i’m still getting my legs (a little over 26") and back bigger before i care about adding any size to them (well thats not completely true, as i’d like to get my tri’s stronger…but just because we’re talkign about biceps), …i must have some sort of fucked up idea of what looks like a balanced physique
[/quote]
I don’t understand how you can train your biceps yet not care about adding size to them, that just makes no sense to me.
Personally I train every bodypart so that I can get more size, but maybe I’m just weird.
i saw some 19 yr old girl with 15 inch arms today…
FML…
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
nz6stringaxe wrote:
I’m curious about this as well, as my biceps are weak in both aesthetics and performance.
I’m trying to give them a higher frequency of training.
I don’t know if this helps, but I observed that most of the guys in and before the 70’s had huge arms, particularly in relation to the rest of them. I have a feeling arms were a focus (I know Arnold mentioned such things in “The Education of a Bodybuilder”), and were therefore trained very hard, very often.
It’s funny you said they’re rarely sore, because mine are the same way. I feel like they can take more punishment than other bodyparts.
Considering your avatar, I’d be more worried about triceps to be honest.
[/quote]
I’m well aware. I’m currently trying new things at the moment to directly focus on my arms. I’ve been frustrated because both sides are pretty small, but my biceps are relatively weak and triceps relatively strong. I’ve been doing dips with dumbbells ranging from 80lbs-120lbs since high school, but strength and ability to produce work obviously have not done the best job for my tricep size. I’m planning on incorporating way more close grip pressing, narrower dips (my current dip station is pretty old school), and more frequency.
[quote]MODOK wrote:
My bis have always responded to 12 and higher reps for some reason. If I go as low as 8…I get nothing, 10 moderate success, but when I hit 12 and even 15 reps thats when the bis grow for me. It seems to be that way with a lot of the folks I talk to in the gym as well. Just an aside.[/quote]
Fair point though, just like how doing the DC style of calf training, or a derivative thereof, is an effective tool for calves. Doesn’t fit the conventional model, but definitely good evidence that it works for that muscle group.
waylanderxx, i know it sounds stupid but i stopped training biceps directly (no i didnt just train them half assed to make sure i didnt grow haha)…i started only training upper body for longer than i’d like to think and still feel my legs/back are catching up, so at my current level of development, i didnt feel it necessary to include, even if its not best to totally cut out a muscle group
[quote]nz6stringaxe wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
nz6stringaxe wrote:
I’m curious about this as well, as my biceps are weak in both aesthetics and performance.
I’m trying to give them a higher frequency of training.
I don’t know if this helps, but I observed that most of the guys in and before the 70’s had huge arms, particularly in relation to the rest of them. I have a feeling arms were a focus (I know Arnold mentioned such things in “The Education of a Bodybuilder”), and were therefore trained very hard, very often.
It’s funny you said they’re rarely sore, because mine are the same way. I feel like they can take more punishment than other bodyparts.
Considering your avatar, I’d be more worried about triceps to be honest.
I’m well aware. I’m currently trying new things at the moment to directly focus on my arms. I’ve been frustrated because both sides are pretty small, but my biceps are relatively weak and triceps relatively strong. I’ve been doing dips with dumbbells ranging from 80lbs-120lbs since high school, but strength and ability to produce work obviously have not done the best job for my tricep size. I’m planning on incorporating way more close grip pressing, narrower dips (my current dip station is pretty old school), and more frequency.[/quote]
If you’ve been doing dips forever and they did jackshit, I’d honestly consider saying “fuck you, dips” and going the In-Human or Wide-RGB route in the smith so you can press towards your feet as well as up + PJR’s or EZ extensions lying on the flat bench from a dead stop behind your head or some such…
Also… If you still want to do dips, then you’ll just need to get stronger than using +80-120lb…
But I dunno, not my first choice when it comes to tricep training… Too hard on my shoulders (when doing them tricep-focused vs. chest focused) and they’ve never really done shit for me, despite hanging multiple plates from the belt and going anywhere from low to high in reps.
Many swear by the HS dip machine though… Could give that one a try as well.
And of course get bigger overall at the same time