heavier weights for fat loss

[grignasty]

is using heavier weights with sets of 6-8 better for fat loss then 10-15 reps.

of course assuming my diet and cardio is in check

[loftros]

not necessarily, if youre aiming for fat loss id look at how long youre waiting between sets. If you want fat loss superset alot of your sets and keep the rests under 1 min between sets

[acaylian]

check your pulse/heart beat dude. Test it out. The idea is to get your heart pumping to lose fat. Just make sure not to overdo it but whichever one makes your pulse go quicker is likely going to help you lose more fat. For most people this should be heavier weight, not all though. Also, heavier weight = more muscle development since you're tearing the muscles more and exerting them to the max. more muscle = more fatloss in general if that's an end-goal. You can also think of this like HIIT; exert yourself to the max, stop and cool down, exert yourself to the max, etc ---- ultimately leads to more fatloss throughout the rest of the day once you're done working out. This also coincides with what loftros is saying: less time between sets = higher heart rate.

[drmmrRT]

higher reps. lower weight

[Tiffany_P]

No. Higher reps will burn more calories overall. However, I do believe that low reps is a better strategy. When dieting, your body will only hold onto muscle mass that it needs, so make sure your body knows that it needs all the muscle it has. Lift heavy to preserve muscle mass, and create a calorie deficit through diet or cardio. No one gets "ripped" in the weight room.

[in10city]

is using heavier weights with sets of 6-8 better for fat loss then 10-15 reps.

of course assuming my diet and cardio is in check

If heavy training gives you the best growth results, it will also help retain muscle while dieting. Switching to "higher reps" (define it) or lower reps for that matter for the sake of it will probably result in some muscle loss.

So if you get results from heavy training, stick with it but with more intensity techniques. Same with higher reps. And let your diet and cardio take care of the body fat for the most part. But don't be afraid to include some higher rep work in order to stimulate and activate other muscle fibers and adaption mechanisms.

While heavy training is good for maintaining muscle mass while dieting, it doesn't have a large impact on factors such as hormones involved in lipolysis and muscle glycogen depletion. Depletion/metabolic training (weights or cardio) expends more energy, generates a lipolysis hormonal response and depletes muscle glycogen. A combination of the two makes sense from my experience.

[phyphoestilic]

intensity is the most important thing.

[Danzig747]

I am trying to lose weight and also lifting. When I lift 5-7 reps....my heart races a lot faster than when I can put up a lot more with less weight.

I will follow my heart on this one

[grignasty]

hey thanks alot guys i appricate the quick and helpful responses. i think im gunna do heavy weight on compunds because thats harder for me but more reps for smaller iso muscles such as arms. m yea so anyway thanks alot for the input

[martina92685]

hey thanks alot guys i appricate the quick and helpful responses. i think im gunna do heavy weight on compunds because thats harder for me but more reps for smaller iso muscles such as arms. m yea so anyway thanks alot for the input

Why not heavy weights on isolation exercises?

[grignasty]

Why not heavy weights on isolation exercises?

you know what i have no idea, but anyway ill test and see what works, i just got back from the gym. i did back, 3 sets of 6 of heavy deadlift with about 45seconds in between sets then rows with little rest then one arm rows with little rest then lat pull downs everything except deads were 8 reps. i think it went well because my heart was racing after deads then 40 mins on eliptical 30 mins regualr then the last 10 of hiit. just in case wanted to see how it went

once again thanks for the replies everyone.

[mpipes]

Why not heavy weights on isolation exercises?

because you'll toast your joints this way after already working them hard with the compound movements.

Heavy compound lifts already hit the smaller isolated muscles well enough as it is to maintain them, and compounds are highly stressful to the CNS and rest of the body. You can drop the isolations altogether because they really are not needed, but if you're compelled to do them, use a 12 rep range for the sake of your joints... and this is coming from someone who put up with a lot of pain working his way up to a 210lbx6 rep preacher bicep curl while also deadlifting and rowing heavy.

[bigbody10]

Low reps heavy weights is all i did, lost about 75 pounds doing it and kept pretty much all my muscle. I agree with everyone saying lifting heavy tells your body to keep the muscle and burn something else...fat

[grignasty]

hey awsome guys i really apprciate all the feedback its really going to help me during this cut

[TheManofSteel]

No. Higher reps will burn more calories overall. However, I do believe that low reps is a better strategy. When dieting, your body will only hold onto muscle mass that it needs, so make sure your body knows that it needs all the muscle it has. Lift heavy to preserve muscle mass, and create a calorie deficit through diet or cardio. No one gets "ripped" in the weight room.

Tiffany, you are a great poster, but I do have to disagree with the first part of your post (the second part is spot on of course). I am pretty sure that the calorie burned difference between doing extra reps and sacrificing the poundage is insignificant. If I find the research article I am thinking of, I will post.

I believe (like you) heavier weights with a 8 rep range at most, with minimum rest periods will ramp up your calorie burn than doing 12 reps of a medium weight. Sure you will burn more calories in the actual workout, but the boosted metabolism and muscle gain will be better overall.

intensity is the most important thing.

Good Point.


Don't forget your cycling peoples!

If you been doing high reps 10-12 for awhile, don't hesitate to change it up!
Change is a good thing. Don't get caught in a rut!

If you've stuck to the same rep range and same weights, challenge yourself by changing number of sets, number reps and weight!

I think optimally for fat loss, keeping your eye on your rest periods is too-oft overlooked. Keeping a stopwatch with you and staying right around 45sec-60sec recovery between sets is great.

And also, don't forget the almighty circuit training.

[Danzig747]

When talking about lifting heavy instead of going lower with more reps...should I do 3 sets still?

Like...say I can lift 180lbs 5x, but I can do this for 3 sets....should I do this or...

Lift like 220lbs 5x for just 1 set?


Sorry if this sounds confusing

[Tiffany_P]

Tiffany, you are a great poster, but I do have to disagree with the first part of your post (the second part is spot on of course). I am pretty sure that the calorie burned difference between doing extra reps and sacrificing the poundage is insignificant. If I find the research article I am thinking of, I will post.

I believe (like you) heavier weights with a 8 rep range at most, with minimum rest periods will ramp up your calorie burn than doing 12 reps of a medium weight. Sure you will burn more calories in the actual workout, but the boosted metabolism and muscle gain will be better overall.

I hope that's true. I'm always looking for more ways to rationalize not doing cardio I'd love to see the article if you can find it.

I've been on both sides of the training spectrum. Personally, when I do 12-15 reps, I am completely wiped out by the end of the workout. I do more sets, and I rest less between them. Leg day was absolutely brutal. When I do 5-8 reps, I usually rest a lot more and do fewer sets. I take a lot of sets to failure, but at the end of my workout, I haven't broken a sweat and it doesn't feel like I did much. It's hard to believe that I burned nearly as many calories as when I do high reps, but perhaps that's because the total volume is so much less for me.

[Polarex]

I agree that lower reps is the best thing to do. Especially since diet is the KEY!

I also believe that you need to "shock" your muscles though as well so they do not get use to the same patterns. So using12-20 rep method is good. If you do that too much you are much more likely to get burned out and we all know that that is never a good thing. I like to shock my muslces about 1 time a month and I found that that is good in developing or maintaining my size while on a caloric deficit.

When I say I shock my muscles 1 time a month, I usually just do 1 exercise of each muscle group 15-20 times for about 4 sets with as much weight as I can.

My opinion on what has/is working for me. just another idea

[k_delaplain60]

I have also been wondering this question. I have been doing 3 sets of 10 on all my lifts with the weight heavy enough that I end up struggling for about the last to reps on every set. I thought that maybe this was the best way to get the fat burning process to going becuase I can feel my muscles working and know that they are not slacking. I just wondered if heavy weight and low reps would have any benefits.I may have to switch it up in a few weeks if I feel like a change.

[Danzig747]

When talking about lifting heavy instead of going lower with more reps...should I do 3 sets still?

Like...say I can lift 180lbs 5x, but I can do this for 3 sets....should I do this or...

Lift like 220lbs 5x for just 1 set?


Sorry if this sounds confusing

can someone please answer this?

sorry for the bump

[rhizome]

If heavy training gives you the best growth results, it will also help retain muscle while dieting. Switching to "higher reps" (define it) or lower reps for that matter for the sake of it will probably result in some muscle loss.

So if you get results from heavy training, stick with it but with more intensity techniques. Same with higher reps. And let your diet and cardio take care of the body fat for the most part. But don't be afraid to include some higher rep work in order to stimulate and activate other muscle fibers and adaption mechanisms.

While heavy training is good for maintaining muscle mass while dieting, it doesn't have a large impact on factors such as hormones involved in lipolysis and muscle glycogen depletion. Depletion/metabolic training (weights or cardio) expends more energy, generates a lipolysis hormonal response and depletes muscle glycogen. A combination of the two makes sense from my experience.

This.

Intensity is what you need to maintain regardless.

[cawiau]

I tried both but I prefer heavy weights and lower reps!
Just personnal preference!

[TheManofSteel]

I've been on both sides of the training spectrum. Personally, when I do 12-15 reps, I am completely wiped out by the end of the workout. I do more sets, and I rest less between them. Leg day was absolutely brutal. When I do 5-8 reps, I usually rest a lot more and do fewer sets. I take a lot of sets to failure, but at the end of my workout, I haven't broken a sweat and it doesn't feel like I did much. It's hard to believe that I burned nearly as many calories as when I do high reps, but perhaps that's because the total volume is so much less for me.

I love 15 rep range for legs. Those are killers. I am currently in love with 8 reps of heavy weight. I mean, even doing heavy 8 sets, I keep my rest at a minimum that gets a good sweat going.

Although, I never do 12 or 15 reps for my upper body (excluding shoulders). Usually, 15 reps is exclusive to calves, and some leg exercise (leg extensions, leg press machine..)

[in10city]

When talking about lifting heavy instead of going lower with more reps...should I do 3 sets still?

Like...say I can lift 180lbs 5x, but I can do this for 3 sets....should I do this or...

Lift like 220lbs 5x for just 1 set?


Sorry if this sounds confusing

If you can lift 180x5 and 220x5, then the first one really isn't close to your 5 RM - you're just moving light weight (i.e. it's really not "heavy"). Why not 3x 220x5

Volume is individual. Most people are better off doing more than one set.

[Danzig747]

because lifting 220x5 for 3 sets would be too much for me....but 180 I can handle.

[csmilz9]

because lifting 220x5 for 3 sets would be too much for me....but 180 I can handle.

try what I used to do....start with 180x5 then do 190x5 then on your last one do 225xhowever many you can do(if not 5)...then drop down say 10 lbs to finish up the 5 reps.....it'll make you hurt later

[kasha]

I recommend doing compound exercises that target more than one muscle group with medium weight/reps that will increase your heart rate and exert more pressure on your central nervous system.

Have you looked into kettlebells? I hear those workouts (that target multiple muscle groups) burn fat like crazy AND build muscle = the holy grail. Seated bicep curls aren't going to cut it, so lets get moving!

[ceno]

Always heavy!
Cut/Bulk go heavy
You're not trying to lose fat via lifting, you're trying to maintain your muscle mass.

To lose fat, hit cardio and create a calorie deficit....