Are free weights really better than machines?

[view]

Funny that you should mention that.

care to expand?

anyone, freewiehgts are way more superiour than machines. you can train with half the effort and still get better results than if you went balls to the walls on machines. nuff said.

 

[kustom]

Yeah i'd have to go with freeweights > machine.
I only use machine for pulldowns and leg work.

 

[Kane Fan]

I think weights are better then machines by a lot overall

 

[rbtrout]

Some strength coaches swear by db's. I swap them every couple of weeks for flat and incline bench.

 

[Fury20]

Most people would say that free weights are better than machines. And in some ways, they are as far as recruiting more muscle fibers. But let me ask you this: Who has bigger pecs? a) The guy incline pressing 225, or the guy incline smith pressing 395?

Just a thought. You can take any exercise to its limit and gain. Strength is strength. Machine or not.

 

[bignate73]

bad argument....no correlation between a guy incline smith pressing 395 and the guy using 225. thats not a valid parallel carryover.

the guy incline pressing 395 had damn sure better be able to press 225 and more! likewise, i'm willing to bet that someone using 225 on incline isnt going to be able to magically throw 170 more lbs on the same movement by taking stability out of the movement.

 

[Fury20]

My point is that the guy incline smith pressing probably can do 225 on a bb press, but he chooses to use a smith. he has gotten very strong on that movement and has worked to 395 for "x" # of reps. So i'm willing to bet his chest is pretty big, regardless of whether or not he is using a machine. It could just as easily been an incline hammer press or whatever. The guy using 225 on the incline bb press, is strong yes, and probably has a lot of mass on his chest but more than likely not near as much as the guy using the smith. My point is strength is strength on whatever you are doing. I am only talking about bodybuilding here. I would not apply this training for a sport like football or basketball where free weights should without question be the basis for weight training.

Now back to my example, say incline bb boy works up to a 305 pound press, that great and he's going to have a lot more mass on his chest. But if incline smith boy keeps pushing at the same rate as mr. incline bb, he will still be bigger. Granted neither of these two hit a plateau and gain strength at the same rate.

 

[thelion2005]

What about the guy in the BowFlex ads?
(Joking ... )

 

[blut wump]

To maintain the comparison shouldn't we be looking at the third guy who can bench 395 with a free weight?

Does anyone know of studies where they've taken groups of rookies and compared progress between free benchers and Smith pressers?

I think we're all agreed that for functional, real-world strength free weights are the only sensible option.

 

[WalkingBeast]

I find freeweights to be the best overall as many have said. The stabilizer muscles get much more interaction. I started off on alot of machine work however. I made good gains over the years on machines as well. But Ive ALWAYS combined them with lots of freeweight work. These days I do all my heavy freeweight work first, then Ill finish off with machine work. There are exceptions depending on what I feel that day, but machines are always secondary to my routines. I like to exhaust the stabilizers first, then when I go to a machine I can focus solely on whats left of that muscle. That way I can systematically tear that shit apart. Thats why I like machines as a secondary exercise. Once the stabilizers are exhausted its time for some heavy machine work. Always training to failure. KILL THAT SHIT!!