Are free weights really better than machines?

[SVT-TROY]

I use free weights religiously, machines once in a great while.

 

[anotherbutters]

Sorry to continue to harp on but, if it's still not clear, all of that unrestricted 'safe' pushing ever widens the gap between the force you are able to muster and the force you are able to control away from the machine when your stabilizers and support muscles are called upon to help and support in a real-world movement.

This is the part I meant about being an injury waiting to happen. Pushing some significant poundages on a machine doesn't mean that you can do the same to a free weight in the real world. A free-weight program will lead to a fuller, stronger, better-developed, functional body.

This is probably the most articulate explanation of the difference between freeweights and machines I've ever read. We should start calling you maddog

 

[Jim Ouini]

I've heard the crazed one go off on machines many many times. It might be stickied in the 5 x 5 thread somewhere, even.

But just for the sake of argument, don't dumbells take the stabilization and functional aspect a step further than even barbells?

You might say you can stimulate the body better with barbells due to the load, and at most gyms dumbells probably top out at 130 or 150 so practically speaking they top out before you can get high enough intensity.

Still, doesn't the load continuum go: machine>barbell>dumbell. And the stab/functional continuum go: dumbell>barbell>machine

i.e, a 500lb machine chest press doesn't stimulate the body as well as a 300lb barbell bench, due to stabilizers and such as explained very well above. Does a 300lb bench stimulate as well as 100lb dumbell chest press for the same reasons (or if you watch the infomercial, a does 100lb dumbell press stimulate as well as 50lb bowflex powerods ) ? Or is it just a case of dimishing returns?

Of course there's the practical aspect of getting the weight into position for, say, squatting. But this is just for argument

 

[blut wump]

Barbell in each hand is the way to go.

 

[anotherbutters]

It's a fair point. But could it be the case that dumbbells go one step too far in their use of the stabilizer muscles? They may never get big enough to control a dumbbell heavy enough to give the main muscle a good workout.

Could you imagine a big powerlifter bench pressing two 300lb dumbbells?

 

[bignate73]

they arent for singles, they are for rep work. PL'ers use them quite a bit actually when doint rep work. WSB has the repetition work that goes hand in hand with speed and max effort.

 

[danbo]

I would use free weights, but i have the following reasons for not doing it.

• I dont have a spotter

• My gym doesn't have a squat machine or a cage

• Some weights are simply too heavy to get them from the floor to where i want them. E.g. When i do calf raises i am lifting 160kg; i couldn't lift this from the floor onto my back (just behind shoulder blades) if i tried it

• Some of the weights i lift would put a big hole in the floor if i dropped them (calf raises would made a massive hole). Using machines prevents this

 

[muscelove]

The machine does fine for calf raises. What most are talking about here is exercises like the bench press and shoulder press and even rowing movements. All of which free weights are superior to machines. Legs too like the squat. Theres no replacement for it.

This is a Great Quote----Totally true
"A free-weight program will lead to a fuller, stronger, better-developed, functional body."

 

[perp69]

What about the stability ball? It is superior to free weights and machines for muscle growth.


LOL!!!

Free weights for me 99% of the time.

 

[blut wump]

What about the stability ball? It is superior to free weights and machines for muscle growth.


LOL!!!

Free weights for me 99% of the time.

Funny that you should mention that.