Over the last few decades T-Nation has done an admirable job of debating, dissecting and disseminating meathead wisdom. I suspect many members use commercial or collegiate gyms, since these are more common and we don’t all live in areas with famous gyms. Still, philosophies change over time; and even the machines get updated eventually.
Granted, I like machines more than some T-Nation writers. A Smith machine will probably never replace free weights. But for certain moves it has its uses. And I like using some machines in the second half of a workout when you have done the primary thing, but still want to stress a muscle or movement. The Smith machine is pretty good for overhead lifts, front squats, and floor presses, in my view. You may disagree, thinking it only good for “Katzenjammers” (ballistic throw-ups). But it seems to be in constant use and gaining more acceptance (which does not necessarily mean it is useful).
What interests me more, though, is newer machines in my gym. One passably mimics rope climbing. It is safer and less strenuous than actually climbing a rope. But it works the same muscles and offers very significant resistance at high settings, and seems to give a decent cardio workout at intermediate resistances.
Another machine mimics hip thrusts and pelvic bridges. Much more convenient and somewhat less painful than barbells. I’m sure there is some payoff in terms of isolation and efficacy, but they do give decent results so again seem to be in constant use.
So I thought I would ask the learned people here if their views on machines have evolved. Are there any new ones they like? Have people used climbing machines or other new ones? Am I overstating the benefits? Are there newer machines in use or on the horizon that I don’t know about? Or is the future mainly free weights, for fifteen fortnights?
I assume that you are talking about the Marpro rope trainer.
I use that one quite often. We had it in two gyms that I’ve trained/worked at. My wife an I have been using it in one of our recent program.
This time we used it to simulate rope climbing in a strength-endurance circuit in which he did:
Max bodyweight dips
Rope climb machine x 60 seconds
Hitting the heavy bag x 20 jabs and 20 crosses
Zercher carries 60m
But in the past I often used it for bodybuilding purposes. It can be used to build the biceps by pulling the rope up only with arm flexion (so no torso, upper arm or shoulder movement) and the triceps by pushing the rope down only with arm extension.
I would superset these with a regular lift for biceps or triceps.
For example:
A1. Preacher curl x 6-8 reps
A2. Biceps on rope climb machine x 30-45 seconds
or
B1. Rope triceps pressdown x 6-8 reps
B2. Rope climb machine triceps ext x 30-45 sec
Yeah, these are very common now. Again, the gym my wife and I go to train has one and she uses it. She prefers it over the barbell hip thrust which she find both uncomfortable and less effective (she is quads dominant, and the machine seems to hit her glutes better)
I personally love most of the “Prime” line. The cool thing with these plate-loaded machine is that you can change the resistance profile of an exercise (e.g. putting more tension in the lengthened position, or in the mid-range, or at the top depending on what you want to work on),
There is also this machine that looks like a barbell on rails BUT you can rotate the rails to change the angle of the push/pull. It can go from pushing (or pulling) perfectly horizontally (like a chest press machine or seated row machine) to pushing/pulling vertically (like a overhead press or pulldown) and all the angles in between.
I have not tried that one, or even seen one in person, only in Instagram reels. And I can’t find it because I don’t know what it’s name is.
No. Strictly for hypertrophy, machines are at least as effective as free-weight and possibly better. The reason why they might be better for hypertrophy is that they are more stable than free-weights. This allows you to focus your neural drive only on activating the muscles lifting the weight instead of dividing the drive to muscles that are used to stabilize the movement or the posture. This makes it easier to recruit the fast-twitch fibers in the target muscle and produce more tension, which is the key to hypertrophy.
Again, strictly for building muscle (not focusing on strength and athletic performance) machines are at least as good as free-weights, and often better. And I think that if anything, people will move toward more machine-based workouts. Because machines are becoming less and less stigmatized as being less hardcore and effective than free-weights. I also think that safety is becoming more important as more types of people are getting into resistance training, rather than just having the meatheads lift.
As always, thanks for your learned opinions. Yes, I was referring to the Marpro. In addition to the uses you mention, I also enjoy using it for the occasional endurance workout.
(I never really quite trust the “calories burned” on cardio machines, which often seem hugely exaggerated. That is probably true of the Marpro too, but it seems to me since you are using a fixed resistance and pulling a known distance it should be a lot easier to accurately calculate and so better than, say, a treadmill.)
Yeah, I’d agree with that because it likely calculate the energy expenditure of the task based on the amount and rate of worked performed. Since most exercises on the Marpro rope climber don’t involve the body weight, it is possible to evaluate the demand of the task itself and be fairly accurate or, at least, consistant.
Machines that use heart rate to evaluate energy expenditure can be problematic. Essentially they use an algorythm estimating caloric expenditure based on heart rate.
The problem are that
not everyone will have the same heart rate at any given activity level. For example, an obese individual in poor metabolic health might have a resting heart rate of 100 bpm and a highly trained endurance athlete might have a resting heart rate of 45. So, for both of them 120bpm doesn’t represent the same intensity of work.
mental state can affect heart rate without significantly increasing caloric expenditure. For example, my wife is very fit (she does Crossfit, 3-4 times a week, spinning once or twice per week, boxes once a week and takes between 12 000 - 20 000 steps per day). Her normal resting heart rate is around 55. But she had a stint of serious anxiety a few months back and her resting heart rate was 140… for over 4 days. Had she done exercise at that time, it might have went up to 160-170 which would have grossly overestimated her caloric expenditure. Another example; I sometimes do live Q&A while walking on a treadmill. My heart rate can get up to 140 because of the adrenaline from answering the questions. But, in reality, at the effort Ievel I’m using on the treadmill, my heart rate would normally be around 110bpm. This would also overestimate caloric expenditure.
activities in which you have to move the whole body in space will burn more energy. But also, if you are heavier, the same task will require more energy. Now, some machines do ask for your bodyweight and use it to better estimate caloric expenditure. But most cardio machine don’t. As a result the caloric expenditure estimation can be off significantly.
Most treadmills I have used do ask for your weight and don’t (to my knowledge) use heart rate to estimate calories. Least I hope not, as this does not meaningfully correlate with energy expended. Even in the absence of stress, medication, time of day, caffeine intake, diet, hydration, age or many other things, as you point out.
The MarPro I use has seven resistance settings. Their website says the maximal resistance is 200 pounds. I like to use it at middle resistances, one minute on, short rest (untimed but usually fifteen to thirty seconds off), rinsed and repeated. The distance is known; I’ve done up to six km. At somewhat intense speeds of 60-80 m/min, the machine claims calorie burn of maybe 20kCal/min (of actual work). I thought this might be high and did the math, but it worked out to a resistance around 70-75 pounds, so I’m willing to say it is a reasonable estimate.
The biomechanics behind treadmill are more complex, and the mass of the runner important, but even still they seem to do a poor job - though perhaps these high numbers encourage those who never seem to find their way to the part of the gym with weights and stuff.
Living in the Mountain West, we often see innovations in nothing but trucks. Someday I would like to go through an X Force circuit. I have read it is incredible, I have read it sucks. I would like to find out for myself.
