Bowflex Vs. Free weights

[gomez26]

Since when do these spring loaded chest expanders offer progressive overload? Even when taking off and putting on springs it is very hard to vary the load to any precise amount. Are they also capable of working the muscle through the same range of motion compared to other multijoint exercises? They also wear out over time. How would you perform multijoint exercises with these contraptions? This is a rather poor comparison
.

my point was countless teenagers (just like today with dumbells) do only arm exercises, not compounds for the whole body. they immediately felt how much better using dumbbells are just working their arms compared to springs & saw the difference in results. this isnt a whole body vs just work ur arms debate.

regarding the load, u could always get some pretty heavy duty springs on these things. varying the load to 'precise amounts' as u put it is irrelevant. as u pointed out urself only progressive overload is important, if u start with 1 spring & its challenging for a certain number of reps & end up using 6 springs u have progressed, who cares that u cant get a precise number of what the loading actually is from zero to stretch, only the fact that its challenging & progression has occurred is important. u are starting to sound like one of those guys who argues that benching 200 on a universal machine aint really 200 coz of the leverages .... who cares? progression is progression.

finally ur wrong about the springs wearing out. i know a fair bit about this coz part of my job is dealing with machine parts replacement like springs, comparing fatigue cycles etc from wear & tear. the notion that a human will 'wear out' a spring out due to fatigue is ludicrous, as long as its used in its elastic range (ie not stretched to ridiculous length where plastic deformation may occur) u will never have a human wear out even a low quality spring. these things maintain their integrity over millions of cycles. rubber straps or those polymer rods bowflex uses may be a different story, but not steel springs.

[SumDumGoi]

my point was countless teenagers (just like today with dumbells) do only arm exercises, not compounds for the whole body. they immediately felt how much better using dumbbells are just working their arms compared to springs & saw the difference in results. this isnt a whole body vs just work ur arms debate.

regarding the load, u could always get some pretty heavy duty springs on these things. varying the load to 'precise amounts' as u put it is irrelevant. as u pointed out urself only progressive overload is important, if u start with 1 spring & its challenging for a certain number of reps & end up using 6 springs u have progressed, who cares that u cant get a precise number of what the loading actually is from zero to stretch, only the fact that its challenging & progression has occurred is important. u are starting to sound like one of those guys who argues that benching 200 on a universal machine aint really 200 coz of the leverages .... who cares? progression is progression.

finally ur wrong about the springs wearing out. i know a fair bit about this coz part of my job is dealing with machine parts replacement like springs, comparing fatigue cycles etc from wear & tear. the notion that a human will 'wear out' a spring out due to fatigue is ludicrous, as long as its used in its elastic range (ie not stretched to ridiculous length where plastic deformation may occur) u will never have a human wear out even a low quality spring. these things maintain their integrity over millions of cycles. rubber straps or those polymer rods bowflex uses may be a different story, but not steel springs.

First, until you provide a piece of credible information your "opinion" has little to no merit. When this exact question has been researched in the past, they did not find any difference between various forms of resistance whether it is from a free weight, resistance bands, etc. The point you keep trying to make is not a good one because as it turns out resistance is resistance. There isn't even a physiological mechanism for the claim you are tying to make. Free weights don't cause the muscle to behave any differently than any other form of resistance.

Also, your analogy regarding the universal machine is my point entirely. It doesn't matter in regards to leverages, elasticity, etc. Resistance is resistance and as long as you produce overload you are correct, who does care? It simply doesn't matter. The point that I was making however, in regards to the post you quoted was that those spring gadgets are not very versatile pieces of equipment. Because of their reduced functionality no one will stick with them for very long.

Also, congrats on your working with springs. How high of quality of springs do they normally place on those gadgets? They are essentially cheap, mass produced pieces of garbage with limited functionality. Maybe in a world where people give a damn regarding the quality of those pieces of equipment the springs wouldn't wear out. However, when they are being built by a 6 year old kid form some third world country who is making 12 cents per hour to help feed their family a half cup of rice for dinner I would begin to doubt their quality.

Anyway, until you provide some evidence along with a physiological mechanism for why the muscle contraction would behave any differently with a different form of resistance performed at a comparable intensity there is simply no use in arguing over this non issue.

As I have said many times before on these boards. Your results are not limited due to the equipment that you have, they are limited by how hard you train with the equipment that you do have.

[feltmann]

However, when they are being built by a 6 year old kid form some third world country who is making 12 cents per hour to help feed their family a half cup of rice for dinner I would begin to doubt their quality.

You got any studies to back that up or you been watching too much FOX news?

there were mr.t kits, hulk hogan kits, rambo kits etc etc that were pushed to teenagers with a lot of financial backing -

What??? Are you saying Rambo didn't build himself with that spring kit? I've been lied to all my life

[SumDumGoi]

You got any studies to back that up or you been watching too much FOX news?



What??? Are you saying Rambo didn't build himself with that spring kit? I've been lied to all my life

At least when I made that joke it made sense. You recycling the joke just shows your lack of originality.

[_XYDREX_]

First, until you provide a piece of credible information your "opinion" has little to no merit.

Your attitude is disturbing. You do realize this is a public training forum where people gather to discuss their experiences & the opinions that stem from these. You should perhaps spend your time on a scientific forum dissecting conference papers & journals if this is your primary criteria for validity. Here, people's real life experiences are primary, research articles although useful & interesting will take a back seat & so they should. The internet is a big enough place & has forums for all interests, you should find one that suits yours better.

One other thing to consider is that many trainees often get used to the Bowflex's weight "stack" and rather quickly outgrow it, even with upgrades. Not everyone of course, but from what I have read on various sites, that seems to be the rule rather than the exception. This is just my opinion, and I'm sure there are conflicting opinions out there.

Apparently they have a 310lb resistance standard upgradable to 410lbs. That should be more than enough for most people for bodybuilding. Hell, even pros like Cutler get criticism for doing high volume fast paced workouts using weights not much over 300lbs on things like chest presses. Serge Nubret, though he had a very good 1 rep max, never used much more than a couple hundred pounds to build most of his chest size also using high volume with fast pace.

, a friend of mine has one and I've tried it a few times and I will admit that the "feel" is somewhat different from using barbells/dumbbells/machines.

free weight u work against gravity & fluctuations in inertia.
elastic systems u only work against elastic force.
totally different dynamic.

So it should feel different. I agree the difference is coming from lack of mass in the bowflex which results in little resistance to acceleration, you have only resistance to displacement. The static resistance curve (with displacement) however should be very similar to free weight. From my understanding the rods in the Bowflex have actually been designed to give as constant resistance as possible, not the zero-to-extreme curve that the stretching of a spring or rubber band provide as per Hooke's Law that Douglis mentioned earlier.

I think the resistance in Bowflex (regardless of rep speed) is similar to very slow reps with free weights, say a 4/4 rep cadence. The difference is with Bowflex the resistance will not change much with the rep speed, however it will with the free weights. I think this is the disadvantage with the Bowflex.

Consider this: imagine you are doing a seated row with 200lb from a weight stack. If you let go of the handle & the stack drops from a height of 1m, it will reach the ground in about 0.5 seconds. If you hold a 200lb resistance with a Bowflex & release it, say the combined mass of handle & rods is 3kg, it will snap back to the starting position over the 1m in about 0.08 sec, the handle will fly back like a bullet. Same force in the 2 scenarios, but the Bowflex's lack of mass will not resist accelerations & this does change the dynamic of exercise a lot.

What this means is, during exercise with the Bowflex, if you apply anything even slightly less or slightly more than exactly 200lbs, the position of your hands will move very rapidly away from whatever position they were in before this change occurred. Of course I am not suggesting the dropping of loads, I simply pointed out the extreme example just to highlight the differences. The reason I think this is a disadvantage is because I believe with most compound movements (using weights) an aggressive style of training is superior, say using a rep cadence of about 1/1 or close to. I believe this primes the CNS better & recruits more motor units more efficiently. I don't have studies to back this up but you rarely, if ever see anyone with any decent mass or strength performing mostly slow repetitions with weights e.g. the 4/4 speed. Also with my own personal experience you do feel much deeper stimulation using explosive (but still controlled) movements.

At a speed of 1/1 using weights (or weight stack), the applied load will fluctuate about (+/-) 10-to-15%. So a 200lb dead load may reach 220 or 230 as you blast through the sticking point due to inertia, while it drops to 170 to 180 at the top of a rep just before change of direction. With the Bowflex performing a rep speed of 1/1 you will have little negligible load fluctuation since you have negligible mass. To actually try & produce 230 or 170 with an elastic load of 200 that has little mass would result in huge accelerations (because there is nothing to resist the accelerations from the force change) & the handle will quickly proceed out of control.

But I agree for many home gym owners with only modest goals of maintaining a good state of health & fitness, it probably wont make much difference.

[feltmann]

Also, could you stop mentioning "our previous encounter". I can assure you that I have no idea who you are

At least when I made that joke it made sense. You recycling the joke just shows your lack of originality.

Ha! So you DO remeber, this just shows your lack of credbility.

[GuyJin]

HYDREX,

A very good post. I will admit that physics is definitely not my strong point but that is what I noticed. My friend's Bowflex only went up to 310 pounds (he never bothered getting the upgrades) but I found that the resistance was just as you described so aptly. It was certainly a different feel; that's all I'll say. However, all things considered with the limited experience I had with it, I'd still stick with free weights. In the future, I shall have to join a gym again, and will have access to some machines, so I'll be in a better position to judge just what is what. (I have used machines before but that was a long time ago).

I will also agree that when working with free weights or even some machines, it may be better to accelerate the weight in certain exercises as quickly and smoothly as possible, although there will always be a debate whether that is desireable or not. If it is done under control, then I see no problem with it. I don't advocate "throwing up" or "tossing" the weights at all; that is a definite no-no. But I am in agreement with the acceleration idea you advocate.

Nice post.

[N@tural1]

Blah blah blah, I would appreciate it if you would stop using this tired excuse for why you can not back up your views with any real evidence.

You miss my point. I acknowledge the usefulness in studies, i do not however pin my beliefs 100% on them. You are the only person on this board that does so. The rest of us have something called practical experience over the long term.

[N@tural1]

ha! So you do remeber, this just shows your lack of credbility.

lol

[Kirra]

Fun this thread is.

[SumDumGoi]

You miss my point. I acknowledge the usefulness in studies, i do not however pin my beliefs 100% on them. You are the only person on this board that does so. The rest of us have something called practical experience over the long term.

Please explain where your experience using this piece of equipment is coming from. Also, certainly experience is always the king. Obviously everything that the big guy in the gym says is 100% factually accurate because he can back it up with 10+ years of him doing the same basic thing.

Also, I can never once remember a time of you acknowledging the usefulness of research. That is unless the research says exactly what you would like it to say, then you agree. If any myth gets proven to be false then you adamantly jump up and down, cry and eventually hold your breath until you get your way. Unfortunately, you will start breathing again at some point and the cycle will continue.

[SumDumGoi]

Ha! So you DO remeber, this just shows your lack of credbility.

Not sure what you think you have here. I remember making the joke. I don't remember you. I get the feeling this happens often in your life.

[SumDumGoi]

Your attitude is disturbing. You do realize this is a public training forum where people gather to discuss their experiences & the opinions that stem from these. You should perhaps spend your time on a scientific forum dissecting conference papers & journals if this is your primary criteria for validity. Here, people's real life experiences are primary, research articles although useful & interesting will take a back seat & so they should. The internet is a big enough place & has forums for all interests, you should find one that suits yours better.

What is my attitude? Yes this is a public form and the last I checked I was a member of the public forum. Am I not allowed to discuss points of view which may be unpopular with the internet kids? Or is it that I actually provide support for my reasoning that makes my contributions unwanted? I am sorry if I take on the occasional bro-tology myths from time to time on here. I understand that it is upsetting to some when certain myths are debunked, but that is not my problem.

The muscle does not behave any differently under different types of resistance. There is no physiological basis for the resistance coming from free weights to be any different than the resistance coming from machines. The only thing the body responds to is overload. However you choose to induce the overload is up to the person.

However, in the rest of your post you did mention one of the problems associated with the bowflex. The resistance only goes up to 310 pounds. If you were to do a leg press as I mentioned above there simply would not be enough weight for a lot of people who have been training. This would be true even if you upgraded to the 410 lb stack. This might be enough if you were to perform squats instead of a leg press, but my concern would become whether or not the squat on a bowflex is a natural movement.

You also mentioned differences between the resistance in the rest of the post I chose not to quote. Yes, the differences in resistance would cause some differences during the contraction in regards to rep speed. What you would find out is that if you were to train on the bowflex is that your strength would increase on the bowflex, but the same degree of strength would not occur if you moved to free weights. Before you go patting yourself on the back, the same would be true if you were to move from freeweights to the bowflex. In other words the same increase in strength would not be observed if you testing your strength on the bowflex. This would indicate that the increase in strength is specific to the modality being used. However, increases in lean body mass would be comparable between the 2 modes of exercise. This is what most people care about and is also what was observed in the above studies.

[Kirra]

Before you go patting yourself on the back, the same would be true if you were to move from freeweights to the bowflex. In other words the same increase in strength would not be observed if you testing your strength on the bowflex. This would indicate that the increase in strength is specific to the modality being used. However, increases in lean body mass would be comparable between the 2 modes of exercise. This is what most people care about and is also what was observed in the above studies.

Got any studies to back that up?

lol

[SumDumGoi]

Got any studies to back that up?

lol

You joke, but all you need to do is go back a page. They are there.

[Wannagetbig94]

Ok, I am into looking at getting a bowflex. I heard they are good, but are they as good as free weights? I have been told it does the same thing. However, it's hard for me to believe it works just as well because when you are using free weights, such as doing bench or curls, that weight is pushing you down, and then you must push the weight back up. Hwoever, on a bowflex, there is not weight pushing you down, you just have to push out. To me, it seems like it is not working as many muscles, and as efficiently. NE1 here try a bowflex and disagree with me? Ne comments would be great..thanks all.

Uhmm wtf free weights are always superior to piece of s**** machines. Free weights fire off multiple stabilizer muscles and require your central nervous system coordinate the motion. A machine often puts your body in an unnatural position which can cause injury, plus the machine does half the work for you. Machines should be in your workout, but they NEVER SHOULD BE the staple of your workout. Machines are good for achieving pumps, cool downs, warm ups but never should replace free weights. Now speaking of gravity, resistance bands are also great, they are much different from machines, With a resistance band there is constant tension on the muscle and you still use your stabilizer muscles to hold the bands. It's not a workout if you aren't using dumbbells or a barbell.

[Farley1324]

When this exact question has been researched in the past, they did not find any difference between various forms of resistance whether it is from a free weight, resistance bands, etc.

Do you have a 'study' yet that used a freeweight barbell back squat to proper depth??

[ThickAsABrick]

I'm glad this thread from 2006 was bumped, and I'd like to report that the OP went with the shakeweight. It is superior to both.

[Farley1324]

I'm glad this thread from 2006 was bumped, and I'd like to report that the OP went with the shakeweight. It is superior to both.

Which model?

[ThickAsABrick]

Which model?

He switches models for muscle confusion.

+ dropsets with the Fleshlight.

[Farley1324]

He switches models for muscle confusion.

+ dropsets with the Fleshlight.

Ah, an advanced user.

[jaydillera]

I have never tried bowflex but I use machine weights combine with free weights. I know free weights is better but machine can also do the job. To me, as long as you have resistant on your work-out then its all good.

[BringtheNoise]

I have never tried bowflex but I use machine weights combine with free weights. I know free weights is better but machine can also do the job. To me, as long as you have resistant on your work-out then its all good.

Machines are good for drop sets on the rare occasion I do them.

[delineator]

However, increases in lean body mass would be comparable between the 2 modes of exercise. This is what most people care about and is also what was observed in the above studies.

certainly experience is always the king. Obviously everything that the big guy in the gym says is 100% factually accurate because he can back it up with 10+ years of him doing the same basic thing.

This is a distortion of our logic. All the people here who value experience most highly will not hold much value for the experience of just one man. Its the experience of many successful men over many decades that holds the most value. There are many differences between people and there are many choices in ways to train, the choices of the majority of successful men can't be ignored & certainly wont be overridden by the results of 32 women studied over a 12 week period.

[N@tural1]

Please explain where your experience using this piece of equipment is coming from. Also, certainly experience is always the king. Obviously everything that the big guy in the gym says is 100% factually accurate because he can back it up with 10+ years of him doing the same basic thing.

Strawman arguments (again) not once did I suggest experience equates to being the "biggest guy in the gym"

Also, I can never once remember a time of you acknowledging the usefulness of research. That is unless the research says exactly what you would like it to say, then you agree.

You'd have to be more specific here, I can accept the validity of some studies, others are obviously flawed. Many studies arrive to different conclusion though testing for the same thing. It's not as black and white as you would suggest.

[N@tural1]

This is a distortion of our logic. All the people here who value experience most highly will not hold much value for the experience of just one man. Its the experience of many successful men over many decades that holds the most value. There are many differences between people and there are many choices in ways to train, the choices of the majority of successful men can't be ignored & certainly wont be overridden by the results of 32 women studied over a 12 week period.

^^ Absolutely.

[SumDumGoi]

This is a distortion of our logic. All the people here who value experience most highly will not hold much value for the experience of just one man. Its the experience of many successful men over many decades that holds the most value. There are many differences between people and there are many choices in ways to train, the choices of the majority of successful men can't be ignored & certainly wont be overridden by the results of 32 women studied over a 12 week period.

Free weights are obviously the most common modality that has been used. In the past many machines lacked in quality and in addition the range of motion was limited and restricted. Free weights have been the traditional form of resistance training from the beginning and they did not limit range of motion and were more versatile. Additionally, the weight stacks of machines (especially earlier ones) were also very limited and often did not supply enough weight to create overload. This led to a large number of people to use free weights over machines. Therefore the experiences of the many are biased towards free weights as this is what they are most familiar with and what those before them have taught them. What you are doing is confusing popular opinion with fact. Just because something is popular does not make it true.

Strawman arguments (again) not once did I suggest experience equates to being the "biggest guy in the gym"

But if someone went to the gym for 10+ years and was not a hulking beast I bet you still wouldn't argue that he has experience now would you?

You'd have to be more specific here, I can accept the validity of some studies, others are obviously flawed. Many studies arrive to different conclusion though testing for the same thing. It's not as black and white as you would suggest.

Yes, no study is perfect. No one ever said they were. Also yes, studies do disagree with each other. However, that is why it is important to look at the preponderance of evidence that exists and make an informed decision. However, I have noticed a trend towards how you see "flaws" in studies. Your litmus test for whether or not a study is flawed is whether or not it agrees with your opinion. If it doesn't agree with your opinion then you claim it to be flawed. If it does agree with your opinion then you accept it. Unfortunately that is not the process of how truth is to be learned. Sometimes you need to learn to accept that many of the common weight lifting beliefs in the gym are myths. If you are to learn anything you must be willing to accept that your opinion could be either right or wrong. You must play both sides of the coin and then look at studies which controlled for relevant details and then make an informed decision.

I remember previously having a 10 page discussion with you regarding protein requirements of athletes. I posted up countless research articles examining this specific issue and all you kept telling me was that the individuals in the study were not bodybuilders, but rather just trained athletes who were looking to increase their muscle mass. We went round and round about the fact that an athlete trying to gain muscle mass occurs through the same mechanism of a bodybuilder trying to gain muscle mass. However, because you had to be right you kept looking for any single flaw contained within the studies that were presented hoping it would give you a foothold so that you could continue to maintain your belief.

The truth is Natty is that within the context of your posts you are not looking for truth. You are not looking to learn anything new. You are simply looking for validation in regards to yourself being right. In your mind that is the only reason why a study would be of benefit to you. If it validates your pre-existing belief you view it to be true. If it doesn't, well then it must be flawed because your years of experience would never lie. That is despite the fact that your years of "experience" is lacking in relevant controls,and is very limited in scope.

[jaydillera]

Machines are good for drop sets on the rare occasion I do them.

I totally agree!

[Engineer_Guy]

Please let this thread die.

[Farley1324]

Do you have a 'study' yet that used a freeweight barbell back squat to proper depth??

I presume the answer, due to lack of response to this question, is "no".


Damn. Maybe one of these days....