I’m curious about the nautilus compound tricep. I can’t seem to find much info at all regarding it, and only a handful of photos?
I know the machine had to be decent as Arthur put one out similar with MedX. I’m curious on how the movement feels (either nautilus or medx) vs the traditional multi-tricep that was eventually mass produced.
I personal feel the multi-bicep is a much more filling pump then that if my compound 2-seated bicep. I know triceps could be a whole new ball game
Check out this [Is the Arms Up Compound Nautilus Biceps Curl Better? thread. I think you’ll find some of the info you’re after.
I’ve never seen a compound tricep in person but I heard it was hard to keep your arms down once you started adding weight. Others say that’s because it was used improperly?Very little is out there on it other than the basics. Like the compound bicep I’ve always wanted a compound tricep but I think they are even more rare than the bicep. Is the compound tricep any better than say a multi tricep? Who knows?There’s one or two people on the internet who made one from other machines. Michael Petrella’s gym has one.
I have a good idea how to make one from another Nautilus machine but I haven’t found the right one cheap enough to tear apart .
Scott
Check out my thread on the Darden column about arm up bicep machine. I’m reading a book written by Ken Hutchins about the design and use of the compound bicep machine. To cut to the chase I think it says Jones thought the bicep was it’s strongest in the contracted position so he designed the arms up compound with that in mind . Later they realized the contracted position was not the strongest there , in fact that was near the other end of the motion. I think the same is true of the compound tricep. The compound bicep machine is not the optimum design to work the bicep. The plate loading bicep was better. The compound bicep has its usefulness in rehab work or similar things or as an alternate machine to use when you want a change .
Scott