Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below Only1eagle
New member
What is the weight of a smith machine bar? I know its not 45lbs is it 25lbs??
Thanks
Thanks
Smith machine bar weight?
- Thread starter Only1eagle
- Start date
zackdarnell
New member
It depends on the individual machine.
C
Citruscide
Guest
yeah, just count the weight you do on the bar...
When I do the hammer strength thingies... I only count the plates... and feel like subtracting 100lbs...
C-ditty
When I do the hammer strength thingies... I only count the plates... and feel like subtracting 100lbs...
C-ditty
louden_swain
New member
Really what difference does it make?
As long as the load forces you to work and become bigger and stronger, there should be no concern on the weight of a smith machine bar.
As long as the load forces you to work and become bigger and stronger, there should be no concern on the weight of a smith machine bar.
~ "TRUE MA BROTHA!"
MsBeverlyHills
New member
my gyms Smith is a Cybex.. unloaded bar weighs 15lbs.
K
kronk
Guest
Personally, I use the Smith Machine for Shrugs. I never count the bar as weight. I always just go by the plates that are there.
I think it is a great machine for certain isolation movements, specifically traps.
I think it is a great machine for certain isolation movements, specifically traps.
louden_swain
New member
skaman607 said:
What does this have to do with the weight of the bar?
Dirty Workout
New member
To Everyone who is so tough they wont even go within 10 ft of a smith machine:
I have no choice but to use smith machine----I do DC training with no spotter. I grab a spotter on flat bench (free weight) and have to explain to him that I am doing one big set with rest pauses and its a whole fuckin production every time. Guy always looks at me like "what the fuck?"
If I was to do this with all other exercises what a nightmare.
So I guess my stabilizer muscles wont look as big at the beach this summer as they used to
I have no choice but to use smith machine----I do DC training with no spotter. I grab a spotter on flat bench (free weight) and have to explain to him that I am doing one big set with rest pauses and its a whole fuckin production every time. Guy always looks at me like "what the fuck?"
If I was to do this with all other exercises what a nightmare.
So I guess my stabilizer muscles wont look as big at the beach this summer as they used to
Don't worry about it; stabilizers are contextual. By that I mean that a certain movement may use a muscle as a stabilizer, and then another movement a few days later will use it as a prime mover. If you work your whole body, don't worry about stabilizers because chances are you're working them directly at some later point.
-casualbb
-casualbb
I think if you're just trying to build some muscle, and it's your only option, then by God, do what's safe.
If your objective is to build a big, bad squat, then the issue I see is that a squat is more of a front to back motion, and the Smith machine requires more of an up and down drive. I don't care for the way it torques my body in circa maximal movement, but that's just a personal opinion. Here's an old post on the "squat theory and execution" thread from Arioch, as this applies to strength athletes:
Certain misinformed and so-called “personal trainers” will have people squat in a smith machine, which is, quite simply, an idea both hideous and destructive. This is often done under the misguided “squat this way until you are strong enough to perform a regular squat” premise. Even if one overlooks the obvious fact that it is better to learn to do something right than build bad habits from the start, there are numerous other factors to be considered. The smith machine stabilizes the bar for the lifter, which does not teach the skill of balancing the bar, balance being important to any athlete, as well as the fact that free weight squatting strengthens the synergists which goes a long way to preventing injuries. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the smith machine leaves far too many weak links. To say nothing of the fact that free weights provide a greater transfer of functional strength than machines. (23)Furthermore, the bar moves straight up and down, and very few people squat in this manner, which means that the smith machine does not fit a lifters optimal strength curve. (24) The smith machine also requires that the lifter either squats with his torso much closer to vertical than would be done with a real squat, which mechanically decreases the involvement of both the spinal erectors and the hamstrings. While this would be fine if it was done by the lifters muscular control, when the smith machine does this it is disadvantageous to the lifter by virtue of decreasing the ability of the hamstrings to protect the knee joint. Another mistake made, aside from simply using it in the first place, is allow the knees to drift forward over the toes, the chance of which is increased by the smith machine. As was previously mentioned, this greatly increases the shearing force on the knees. This from a device touted by the ignorant as “safe.”
If your objective is to build a big, bad squat, then the issue I see is that a squat is more of a front to back motion, and the Smith machine requires more of an up and down drive. I don't care for the way it torques my body in circa maximal movement, but that's just a personal opinion. Here's an old post on the "squat theory and execution" thread from Arioch, as this applies to strength athletes:
Certain misinformed and so-called “personal trainers” will have people squat in a smith machine, which is, quite simply, an idea both hideous and destructive. This is often done under the misguided “squat this way until you are strong enough to perform a regular squat” premise. Even if one overlooks the obvious fact that it is better to learn to do something right than build bad habits from the start, there are numerous other factors to be considered. The smith machine stabilizes the bar for the lifter, which does not teach the skill of balancing the bar, balance being important to any athlete, as well as the fact that free weight squatting strengthens the synergists which goes a long way to preventing injuries. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the smith machine leaves far too many weak links. To say nothing of the fact that free weights provide a greater transfer of functional strength than machines. (23)Furthermore, the bar moves straight up and down, and very few people squat in this manner, which means that the smith machine does not fit a lifters optimal strength curve. (24) The smith machine also requires that the lifter either squats with his torso much closer to vertical than would be done with a real squat, which mechanically decreases the involvement of both the spinal erectors and the hamstrings. While this would be fine if it was done by the lifters muscular control, when the smith machine does this it is disadvantageous to the lifter by virtue of decreasing the ability of the hamstrings to protect the knee joint. Another mistake made, aside from simply using it in the first place, is allow the knees to drift forward over the toes, the chance of which is increased by the smith machine. As was previously mentioned, this greatly increases the shearing force on the knees. This from a device touted by the ignorant as “safe.”
JollyRogers
New member
37 lbs is the weight for the one at the YMCA, here
louden_swain
New member
skaman607 said:
I see what you are saying.
:...don't even care about real squats & deads & bench-n-shit, that cool....plenty cats got swole off the Smif....i just aint feelin' it" 
Jxaxsxe530
New member
hmm i dont care about the number, i just put on enough plates to give my muscles a tough time *shrugs*
Similar threads
