Free Weights vs. Machines

Training Bodybuilding
61

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
scottiscool wrote:

I don’t use gloves, wraps or a belt. I train barefoot, even on leg day, but use a pad for squats because it’s more comfortable. Here’s another confession. I own a bosu ball and have found that when my shoulders are acting up it is great for doing presses on. It supports the back of the girdle and allows me to work better.

[/quote]

I’ve never really used the half ball. I like doing presses on the ball, but you have the added risk of ball explosion and smashed arms. Do you raise the BOSU on a bench of floor press it?

If you go heavy on the BOSU do you adduct you shoulder blades for the entire ROM?

62

[quote]texasguy1 wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
CaliforniaLaw wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
I think isolation machines are just silly.

Thanks for your contribution. How much do you weigh, by the way?

185 after lunch. How many plates can you move on the hip adductor?

I would guess quite a few and you’d probably make a good post work out meal for him. Hip abductors and squats are two different animals though are they not?[/quote]

I’d have to say that they are different. I can move the whole stack on the hip abductor and the adductor machines. I do what turned out to be about six second negatives on them to start my workout, using the whole stack (I am doing a four count, but it turns out I was counting a little slow when it got timed).

I hit those two machines to start my work-out to warm up, since I’m pressed for time. I’m learning squats but I’ve found that (a) the dumbbell squats I’m doing work my arms (maybe I need to move them to earlier in the workout?) and are much different from the machines. I’m still just learning, so at present I’m just on 2 35 pound dumbbells. Full range of motion. I’m not flexible enough for my but to hit the floor, so it is from about six inches off (I’m wearing shoes) to standing on them.

I think there is a place for both in the workout.

63

[quote]texasguy1 wrote:
Ramo wrote:
CaliforniaLaw wrote:
FightingScott wrote:

I do train for aesthetics as well as strength. I’m not interested in strong man strength so much, my sport is grappling and amature mma.

[/quote]

Ahh. So you are doing other training that involves the whole body and applied strength on a regular basis. That is important. It is why a lot of football programs are happy with the machines mixed in the workouts.

64

Im a big believer in the idea that everything has a place. Machines allow you to overload the target muscles with a greater load than free weights, but the trade off is a loss of having to control the weight in 3 dimensions. I use machines a good bit for the last movement in my workouts, and sometimes if there is a particularly brutal machine (such as the Hammer Strength Wide Chest or High Row) I may use it as my main or secondary motion. If youre training for aesthetic purposes, I dont see how you could deny the advantage of being able to load 100 more lbs onto the target muscle group through a similar range of motion.

65

[quote]scottiscool wrote:
I equate differences in strenght on A) the fact that machines and free weights aren’t the same and B) potentially being unfamiliar with the movement.

I played soccer for most of my life and therefore got pretty darn good at kicking a soccer ball. I was playing around with the varsity kicker for the football team and hit some 30-40 yard field goals with him. He hit a 45+ yard field goal and I couldn’t match him. Being frustrated I took him over to the soccer field for some redemption and had him kick a soccer ball from the penalty box out towards the other goal. He hit it just short of midfield in the air.

I came up next and hit it a good 20+ yards farther. Who had the stronger leg? Depends on what discipline it was because I was better at what I’ve done(be it soccer or machines) and he was better at what he’s done(football or free weights). Does that make sense or am I just rambling haha?

The person pressing 5 plates a side on the HS incline press isn’t “weak” and I think he knows he likely can’t do 495 on a barbell. But someone who trains with a barbell might struggle on the HS to match the weights of someone more familiar with it. [/quote]

I don’t think your example is a good one in relation to the machine vs free weight comparison. No one is saying anyone is weak rather that the guy who is maxing 300 free is stronger then the one maxing 300 on the smith. Even though using the smith exclusively with progressively bigger poundage’s will get you stronger. Using a free barbell will get you stronger faster since it’s requires more strength for the same weight.

According to your comparison if the fellow who benches 300 on free had his smith benching friend ask him to do it on the smith he probably couldn’t do it because your view is that he isn’t practiced or used to it, his discipline, as you said.

However it doesn’t come down to a practiced discipline rather raw strength and the guy who can bench 300 free could easily come do it on the smith. Hell, he could probably do 315 as it would be easier for him when he is used to having to stabilize the whole thing free and the smith would give him an advantage. There are too many other variables in the football or soccer-ball comparison. Does that make sense or am I just rambling? :slight_smile:

D

66

Strength is a very relative term and is VERY lift specific. Benching with freeweights and doing a machine bench press are completely different animals and much like barbells vs. dumbells, there is no use in trying to compare them. There is carryover between the two, but trying to analyze that carryover is an exercise in futility.

67

[quote]fightingtiger wrote:
Strength is a very relative term and is VERY lift specific. Benching with freeweights and doing a machine bench press are completely different animals and much like barbells vs. dumbells, there is no use in trying to compare them. There is carryover between the two, but trying to analyze that carryover is an exercise in futility.[/quote]

When you are at the gym next why don’t you try the simple flat bench comparison. Try it free first and then on the smith and then honestly come back and tell us which one your were able to lift more weight on. Your statement may be true in some cases for some lifts, but not this one in my view. I agree that they are completely different animals however due to the fact that one gives assistance and one doesn’t.

D

68

[quote]Dedicated wrote:
fightingtiger wrote:
Strength is a very relative term and is VERY lift specific. Benching with freeweights and doing a machine bench press are completely different animals and much like barbells vs. dumbells, there is no use in trying to compare them. There is carryover between the two, but trying to analyze that carryover is an exercise in futility.

When you are at the gym next why don’t you try the simple flat bench comparison. Try it free first and then on the smith and then honestly come back and tell us which one your were able to lift more weight on. Your statement may be true in some cases for some lifts, but not this one in my view. I agree that they are completely different animals however due to the fact that one gives assistance and one doesn’t.

D[/quote]

See, the problem with that example though is that the bar in the Smith machine doesn’t weight 45 lbs like the free weight bar does. So, are we talking about an actual 300 lb smith bench vs. an actual 300 lb free weight bench? Or are we talking about the same amount of plates on both?

Also, are we talking about a 1RM or are we talking about multiple reps?

If it’s multiple reps, then Scott’s example would probably hold pretty true. Both guys would be able to do the other’s preferred method of benching. It’s just that the Smith guy would be better at the Smith, and the free weight guy would be better at the free weights.

69

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Dedicated wrote:
fightingtiger wrote:
Strength is a very relative term and is VERY lift specific. Benching with freeweights and doing a machine bench press are completely different animals and much like barbells vs. dumbells, there is no use in trying to compare them. There is carryover between the two, but trying to analyze that carryover is an exercise in futility.

When you are at the gym next why don’t you try the simple flat bench comparison. Try it free first and then on the smith and then honestly come back and tell us which one your were able to lift more weight on. Your statement may be true in some cases for some lifts, but not this one in my view. I agree that they are completely different animals however due to the fact that one gives assistance and one doesn’t.

D

See, the problem with that example though is that the bar in the Smith machine doesn’t weight 45 lbs like the free weight bar does. So, are we talking about an actual 300 lb smith bench vs. an actual 300 lb free weight bench? Or are we talking about the same amount of plates on both?

Also, are we talking about a 1RM or are we talking about multiple reps?

If it’s multiple reps, then Scott’s example would probably hold pretty true. Both guys would be able to do the other’s preferred method of benching. It’s just that the Smith guy would be better at the Smith, and the free weight guy would be better at the free weights.[/quote]

Whether multiple reps or one rep max my contention is the guy with the higher free weight bench amount will be able to out perform the smith guy with the same amount of weight.

D

70

[quote]Dedicated wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
Dedicated wrote:
fightingtiger wrote:
Strength is a very relative term and is VERY lift specific. Benching with freeweights and doing a machine bench press are completely different animals and much like barbells vs. dumbells, there is no use in trying to compare them. There is carryover between the two, but trying to analyze that carryover is an exercise in futility.

When you are at the gym next why don’t you try the simple flat bench comparison. Try it free first and then on the smith and then honestly come back and tell us which one your were able to lift more weight on. Your statement may be true in some cases for some lifts, but not this one in my view. I agree that they are completely different animals however due to the fact that one gives assistance and one doesn’t.

D

See, the problem with that example though is that the bar in the Smith machine doesn’t weight 45 lbs like the free weight bar does. So, are we talking about an actual 300 lb smith bench vs. an actual 300 lb free weight bench? Or are we talking about the same amount of plates on both?

Also, are we talking about a 1RM or are we talking about multiple reps?

If it’s multiple reps, then Scott’s example would probably hold pretty true. Both guys would be able to do the other’s preferred method of benching. It’s just that the Smith guy would be better at the Smith, and the free weight guy would be better at the free weights.

Whether multiple reps or one rep max my contention is the guy with the higher free weight bench amount will be able to out perform the smith guy with the same amount of weight.

D[/quote]

On the free weights yes, on the smith I don’t think they will.

Yes, free weight benching requires more stabilizer strength, balance, and coordination. But, that just means that they’re better at stabilizing balancing and controlling an unstable load. It doesn’t mean that if they switch to an exercise that eliminates the need for those qualities (i.e. a Smith machine) that they’ll be able to lift more weight. And it doesn’t mean that they’ll be able to out perform someone who practices the specific exercise (i.e. Smith benching) in that exercise.

Could it happen? Sure. But I don’t think that it’s a given that it will happen.

71

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

On the free weights yes, on the smith I don’t think they will.

Yes, free weight benching requires more stabilizer strength, balance, and coordination. But, that just means that they’re better at stabilizing balancing and controlling an unstable load. It doesn’t mean that if they switch to an exercise that eliminates the need for those qualities (i.e. a Smith machine) that they’ll be able to lift more weight. And it doesn’t mean that they’ll be able to out perform someone who practices the specific exercise (i.e. Smith benching) in that exercise.

Could it happen? Sure. But I don’t think that it’s a given that it will happen.[/quote]

Due to the factors you listed above I believe the opposite of your contention. Again, to put it simply if two guys trained exclusively in one manner i.e. smith or free flat bench press and both worked up to a specific weight, let’s say 300 pounds and then decided to see who was stronger on the opposite movement.

My assertion is the free weight guy could either lift over his 300 free max on the smith or perform more reps of say, 250, on the smith, then the smith guy could do, again, on the smith. The opposite being that the smiths guy 300 pound max from the smith would likely not be matched on the free weights or that would he be able to do a higher number of reps with a lower weight then the free weight guy could do.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I would like to see if others agree or disagree with this.

D

72

[quote]Dedicated wrote:
fightingtiger wrote:
Strength is a very relative term and is VERY lift specific. Benching with freeweights and doing a machine bench press are completely different animals and much like barbells vs. dumbells, there is no use in trying to compare them. There is carryover between the two, but trying to analyze that carryover is an exercise in futility.

When you are at the gym next why don’t you try the simple flat bench comparison. Try it free first and then on the smith and then honestly come back and tell us which one your were able to lift more weight on. Your statement may be true in some cases for some lifts, but not this one in my view. I agree that they are completely different animals however due to the fact that one gives assistance and one doesn’t.

D[/quote]

Re read my post.

Ok, now tell me where I said anything about not being able to use more weight on smith machine than on a free press. Thats right, I didnt say anything about that. Re read the post a second time if you need to.
Now…

What I did say is that is useless to bitch and complain about which one is easier or harder because they ARE NOT THE SAME LIFTS. I dont see what is so difficult about this that some people can’t grasp it. If pressing in the smith machine were exactly the same as pressing with free weights, there would be no need for smith machines. As to which movement is “better” depends on your personal goals and it seems that some of you are stuck entirely in this “absolue strength with freeweights only” paradigm and this is why you dont get it.

Your body doesnt know if you are lifting in a smith machine or on a flat bench beyond the fact that in one situation, it is being loaded with more weight in 2 dimensions and in the other it is being loaded with less weight in 3. All your body knows is that it is being stimulated.

If your main goal is absolute strength with free weights only, then by all means use free weights only in your training, but dont go fucking getting down on someone with different goals just because they might use machines in their training. No moron who has been lifting for more than 8 months will honestly tell you that their 400 lb smith machine press equates to a 400 lb free press.

What we have though is someone is proud of their 400 lbs smith machine press though because it is pertainent to their own goals and some other asshat gets little dick syndrome and has to build themselves back up by applying their own parameters for success to that person by demeaning their accomplishment with statements like “Well, anyone could do that because its easier to bench in a smith machine. I only use free weights. Im more hardcore.”

This is exactly the same bullshit weak people who call themselves powerlifters talk about bodybuilders because they are smaller and usually weaker, but somehow more hardcore because they train for a different set of goals and still havent accomplished anything.

Or how about the ever-hated planet fitness super functional personal traier? You do realize that most of the people who bag on others for using machines are just like him in that they are 1) applying their own goals to someone elses accomplishments and 2) seeing their own methods as being the only effective way for anyone to reach their own, unrelated fitness goals.

73

This could literally go on forever. What about a guy with a 300lb free bench who doesn’t touch the bar to his chest? Is he stronger than someone who benches 300 on the smith with a full ROM? There’s a tough one! What’s more annoying to the ever-so-hardcore-super-
functional-freeweights-or-die gymrat: people who pretend they can bench a weight they can’t touch, or people who bench on the smith?

All we really know is that if he was ACTUALLY strong he wouldn’t be using a bar in the first place. Everyone knows the really hardcore people only use kettlebells…
:wink:

74

[quote]fightingtiger wrote:
Re read my post.

Ok, now tell me where I said anything about not being able to use more weight on smith machine than on a free press. Thats right, I didnt say anything about that. Re read the post a second time if you need to.
Now…

What I did say is that is useless to bitch and complain about which one is easier or harder because they ARE NOT THE SAME LIFTS. I dont see what is so difficult about this that some people can’t grasp it. If pressing in the smith machine were exactly the same as pressing with free weights, there would be no need for smith machines. As to which movement is “better” depends on your personal goals and it seems that some of you are stuck entirely in this “absolue strength with freeweights only” paradigm and this is why you dont get it. Your body doesnt know if you are lifting in a smith machine or on a flat bench beyond the fact that in one situation, it is being loaded with more weight in 2 dimensions and in the other it is being loaded with less weight in 3. All your body knows is that it is being stimulated.

If your main goal is absolute strength with free weights only, then by all means use free weights only in your training, but dont go fucking getting down on someone with different goals just because they might use machines in their training. No moron who has been lifting for more than 8 months will honestly tell you that their 400 lb smith machine press equates to a 400 lb free press.

What we have though is someone is proud of their 400 lbs smith machine press though because it is pertainent to their own goals and some other asshat gets little dick syndrome and has to build themselves back up by applying their own parameters for success to that person by demeaning their accomplishment with statements like “Well, anyone could do that because its easier to bench in a smith machine. I only use free weights. Im more hardcore.”

This is exactly the same bullshit weak people who call themselves powerlifters talk about bodybuilders because they are smaller and usually weaker, but somehow more hardcore because they train for a different set of goals and still havent accomplished anything.

Or how about the ever-hated planet fitness super functional personal traier? You do realize that most of the people who bag on others for using machines are just like him in that they are 1) applying their own goals to someone elses accomplishments and 2) seeing their own methods as being the only effective way for anyone to reach their own, unrelated fitness goals.[/quote]

One of the original questions asked by the OP was “how do you feel about machines,”. I have given my opinion regarding his question and it seems to upset you a great deal. Why do you need to convey your view on the matter in such a hostile, snarky, and immature manner. You like I have an opinion and we should be able to discuss it not talk down to someone as if you are the end all be all.

In regard to your view that they aren’t the same exercise my stance it they are very nearly the same exercise except one provides a little assistance where as the other does not. That is why I prefer one over the other, and would recommend one over the other, and feel one stimulates more strength and hypertrophy gains, over the other one.

It would be nice if you learned to communicate your view a little more positively.

Take care,

D

75

[quote]lurker26 wrote:
This could literally go on forever. What about a guy with a 300lb free bench who doesn’t touch the bar to his chest? Is he stronger than someone who benches 300 on the smith with a full ROM? There’s a tough one! What’s more annoying to the ever-so-hardcore-super-
functional-freeweights-or-die gymrat: people who pretend they can bench a weight they can’t touch, or people who bench on the smith?

All we really know is that if he was ACTUALLY strong he wouldn’t be using a bar in the first place. Everyone knows the really hardcore people only use kettlebells…
;)[/quote]

If he wasn’t touching the bar to his chest he isn’t doing a full rep in my opinion and I wouldn’t consider it a 300 bench. :slight_smile:

D

76

[quote]Dedicated wrote:
I will just add this. I have seen guys who could bench X amount of weight on the Smith machine like 300 pounds and couldn’t do that amount with a barbell. Not saying it’s always the case, but definitely true in many cases.

D [/quote]

I’d be willing to say that it is always the case. Never seen someone do the same amount of weight, even if you take into account the counterweight of the smith machine. Like have them bench 250 lbs free weight instead of 300 lbs on the smith. Just won’t happen.

I’m going to quote someone here so forgive me because I can’t remember who said it (maybe someone will). He said that if you took two guys and removed all other variables (like genetics, steroids, diet) so that everything was the same. Have one do free weight moves like squats and the other do leg extensions, etc. Train them for a while.

At the end, the leg extension guy won’t even be able to get close to squatting what the “squat guy” can. Conversely, the guy who squats will kill the leg extension guy on the leg machines. Again that’s a strength and not necessarily a hypertrophy anecdote.

To the OP. I use mostly free weights but some machines for certain moves mainly due to convenience or because the angle feels better.

The smith machine isn’t the most evil thing in the gym (as opposed to say, the personal trainers you see a lot of time) but I think that the longer the stroke of a move, the more unnatural the exercise feels. For example a shoulder press or squat or upright row feels completely off-kilter. But a shrug feels about the same to me. That’s my opinion.

77

I refuse to believe there is as big a difference as people might say.

I think that maybe if you took somone who has exculsively DB benched/BB benched for 5 years vs. somone who has used only a machine press for 5 years you would only notice a few differences.

They’re both going to get you where you want to be IMO.

78

Dedicated,

Let’s see if we can clarify some things. This was posted in the bodybuilding section so when I’m talking about strenth I’m referring to strength gains as a function of getting bigger. Not necessarily powerlifting strength where strength is the means AND the end.

Do you feel there would be any difference in size gains from someone spending their time say incline benching in the smith or with free weights? I’m thinking if we can make it a little more clear what each person is talking about the discussion won’t get sidetracked too much haha.

79

[quote]medevac wrote:
Dedicated wrote:
I will just add this. I have seen guys who could bench X amount of weight on the Smith machine like 300 pounds and couldn’t do that amount with a barbell. Not saying it’s always the case, but definitely true in many cases.

D

I’d be willing to say that it is always the case. Never seen someone do the same amount of weight, even if you take into account the counterweight of the smith machine. Like have them bench 250 lbs free weight instead of 300 lbs on the smith. Just won’t happen.
[/quote]

That’s quite an extreme example, and I’ve actually seen quite a few people press about the same amount of weight with free weights as on Smith (taking the lack of weight of the Smith bar into account) for about the same number of reps. Once again, I’d say that they’re about equal in terms of building strength, but the free weight bench is superior in terms of building balance, stabilizer strength, and coordination.

Using a comparison between squats and leg extensions isn’t a good comparison. Those two exercises are completely different, and honestly anyone who argued that they were equal for strength building obviously has never done them both.

Maybe something like machine hack squats vs. front squats might be a more appropriate comparison.

[quote]
To the OP. I use mostly free weights but some machines for certain moves mainly due to convenience or because the angle feels better.

The smith machine isn’t the most evil thing in the gym (as opposed to say, the personal trainers you see a lot of time) but I think that the longer the stroke of a move, the more unnatural the exercise feels. For example a shoulder press or squat or upright row feels completely off-kilter. But a shrug feels about the same to me. That’s my opinion.[/quote]

I agree.

80

[quote]scottiscool wrote:
Dedicated,

Let’s see if we can clarify some things. This was posted in the bodybuilding section so when I’m talking about strenth I’m referring to strength gains as a function of getting bigger. Not necessarily powerlifting strength where strength is the means AND the end.

Do you feel there would be any difference in size gains from someone spending their time say incline benching in the smith or with free weights? I’m thinking if we can make it a little more clear what each person is talking about the discussion won’t get sidetracked too much haha.[/quote]

I feel size and strength gains will be greater in someone who’s primary benching whether it be flat, incline, or decline, is with free weights vs a smith. If something requires more muscles (the main muscle and stabilizers both) it’s going to stimulate more in terms of gains. I’m not saying someone exclusively using the smith isn’t going to have gains, rather free weights are going to be superior in this case in stimulating gains.

Also, after you have blasted the movement with free weights, I do agree that hitting it on the smith where the smith is taking over for your exhausted stabilizers will allow you to further exhaust the pecs yielding bigger gains as you can also do with cables.

So, first using the harder free then the smith or cables is ideal. But, if one in a hypothetical situation had to choose one, I would (obviously) pick free weights over the smith. In my view their superior for stimulating gains period, both in size and strength.

D