Machines vs. freeweights

[patro]

Why does it seem so much easier to lift with a machine than with freeweights? There are exercies, like biceps curls that I can do WAY more weight with on the machine.

Or might I just have shitty form with freeweights? With a very experienced lifter, should the two forms of lifting be equally difficul/easy?

PATRO
SWEATING MY ASS OF IN SINGAPORE

 

[needsize]

I have always stayed away from machines as much as I can, as a result I think I'm actually stronger on free weights

 

[MonStar1023]

I have gone a step further away from machines and moved strictly to dumbbells over barbells.. dumbbells are even more "freeweight" because you have to balance each one individually.

I use barbells for preacher curls- and maybe squats or whatever. Not too much else.

 

[DaCypher]

patro,
The weight used in a machine means absolutely nothing compared to free weights. The weight in the machine is not the actual force that you are exerting because of the pulleys, etc. If you have shitty form with freeweights you could probably be doing a lot more weight. In terms of ease of the lift, the free weights should be a bit more difficult simply because you have to use some additional stabilizer muscles during the lift, whereas a machine will force your body into a position where those stabilizer muscles aren't use.

MonStar,
Yea, I'm a big dumbell fan. I also use barbells every other week for military presses (along with bicep curls and squats).

Like most other somewhat advanced lifters, I find machines to be less than effective. However, there are a few machines that I still use every once in a while. For example, the pullovers machine (I like to pre-exhaust the lats before doing pulldowns), the lat pulldown/rowing machine, and maybe some of the ab machines.

 

[Blood&Iron]

Obviously if you have to stabilize the weight as you do with free-weights it's going to take a good deal more coordination. In general I prefer the feel of free weights, but I don't believe them superior for building an impressive physique. Your muscles don't have eyes. Resistance is resistance. A *properly* designed machine--many are complete shit--can in some ways be superior to free weight movements, due to fact that it can be adjusted to fit the natural strength curve of a muscle. This was what was so revolutionary about the Nautilus cam system. I still prefer a loaded barbell, though.

 

[karde]

I have been doing more dumbell, and hammer strength machines to even out my strength differences. it has definatly worked. I will be moving back to more barbell work in a couple months.

 

[squatter]

any one in this discussion over 150 pounds?...

 

[Ingram]

any one in this discussion over 150 pounds?...

What's your point?

 

[movie muscle]

Real steel over machines boys.Machines do the work of stabilizing for you, thus the small stabilizers don,t get trained.You should all remember the first time you tried a free weight bench press,not like the machine was it!They also lock the motion in a constant plane which may not be bio mechanically correct for everyone.This is a topic that could go on for ever.P.S..cables still require the body to stabilize.

 

[riskybizz007]

I've heard lots of stuff about these "stabilizer muscles", and how much growth do you really think these stabilizers will attribute to the overall growth of for example your delts or your chest or your quads? Do you really think stabilizers attribut to growth? If it did i would say minimally. I believe the growth from free weights comes from how much more strenous the exercise is versus some free weight machines do the straining for you. Some machines are total crap IMO, and some i believe are very useful b/c you could really use the machine and exert the same amount of force and strain as you would w/ the free weights.