bench press machine

[timpatrick]

How do I compare the bench press machine to the actual bench?

[Deviation]

You don't. Typically you'll be able to press more on the machine than with a barbell. In other words, they aren't interchangeable.

[OptikaNET]

The range of motion is much less, the actual movement-path of the machine is usually unnatural, and it doesn't recruit the shoulder for stabilisation.

About the best that can be said for benchpress machines is that they are useful if you are recovering from an injury because they don't stress the shoulder...

Kind Regards
Dave

[tophalf]

It totally depends upon the machine with regrads to ROM (range of movement). Some machines, say Hammer Strength, have a bi-lateral movement with independant arms so that you can actually acquire a deeper press than on a bench as there is no bar to restrict movement. Agreed that machines do not work your stabilisers however I wouldnt discount them completely. They are useful to the fact that you can more easily perform high intensity work safely, ie forced reps, drop sets etc and also this can be done when training by yourself. Also, some of these machines work in an arc like plane so that you can acquire a good squeeze at the top of the ROM that again you dont get from using a bar on a bench.
The above said I do work bench, even more so I use dumbbells for the above reasons pertaining to some machines, the advantage here is that your stabilisers are employed to an even greater extent, the downside being the requirement to have a training partner to train to max intensity.

I would never discount a "good" machine but there is plenty of rubbish out there. Machines and free weights both have their place in training, it is using them correctly that is the key. Some people avoid free weights as they are lazy and they like to be the "I bench this much" hero when in reality they dont. You also get people who wont touch machines as they see them as cheating etc. For me you should remove the hero and cheat thoughts completely and use the equipment that fits best with your goals.

To finish though I would like to add that I always base my routines around free weights and I would never replace bench with a machine, machines for me are a nice addition but not a replacement. As Optikanet has mentioned, when coming back from injury that would make a machine a better option but that would be the only time.

[OptikaNET]

Good points, Tophalf. I was being overly generalistic and I do agree with most of what you've said with the caveat that, although there are good machines out there (I have always quite liked Hammerstrength equpment) you don't often find it in the common-or-garden gym. My current gym has adequate equipment but not good equipment.

I don't currently use any press machines and I currently favour dumbell presses (flat, incline, decline) because I tend to have a lazy side and using dumbells prevents me favouring one side over the other.

I used to Smith Machine my bench because I never had a training partner and I had some bad experiences with people I had asked to "spot" so it was the only way I felt safe, but the motion path is unnatural and when I realised that the weights I was lifting on the smith did not equate to weights I could lift on the free bar, that was something I had to give some thought to.

At the moment, returning to the gym after a period of inactivity - and having some problems with a core-injury - I am keeping the weights low so Dumbells are fine. Once I start to lift heavier it may become an issue...

I do actually sometimes use the Pec Deck (sometimes called Machine Flyes) because it allows me to achieve a peak contraction in the centre of my chest that I cannot quite get with dumbells, but it is always the last exercise on my list and I do find the movement tends to force me to arch my back and can also cause a neck injury, so I have to be cautious with it.

Shoulders, on the other hand, are too weak to work with dumbells at the moment so I use machines, and I use machines almost exclusively for working back and legs (I used to squat a lot and will probably return to that later, the compound exercise I do for legs is lunges with dumbells).

So machines certainly have their place in my workout, but specifically the machine chest press is one that I feel I grew out of. I used it as a beginner, and I have sometimes used it during injury recovery, but it really doesn't form part of my repertoir anymore.

Kind Regards
Dave

[tophalf]

Agreed Dave, good machines are not always easy to come by and a badly designed machine for me is a waste of time.
It is definately horses for courses with training, a hell of a lot of people have injuries myself included. I injured a disc some years back and I was out of the game for what seemed like a lifetime. When I came back I had lost so much tissue some people in the gym though I had been in a car accident, not good. Took me 2 years to get back to what I would consider a proper routine and then more time to get back up to good working weights in my main exercises (squats, deads etc).

As for the Smith machine, I have to say I am not keen either, the linear movement just feels wrong, I prefer to work in a power rack so totally natural but I am lucky as I have one at home where I sometimes train (mainly legs, sometimes chest).

Nice to see you do lunges, old school training, good stuff.

Hope you can get back to squats soon, I cant do without them ;-)

[OptikaNET]

I can't go deep enough with squats. Recently I tried doing them at home with no bar or weights, but I still can't get deep enough...

I really, really hate lunges. If it wasn't for the fact that I can feel they are very effective, I would drop them in a heartbeat!!! I actually put off working legs because I don't want to do them.

But, much as I hate to say it, they work!

Kind Regards
Dave

[OptikaNET]

Chest, on the other hand, is my stubborn bodypart. No matter what I do I don't seem to get any growth at all.

Kind Regards
Dave

[tophalf]

I can't go deep enough with squats. Recently I tried doing them at home with no bar or weights, but I still can't get deep enough...

I really, really hate lunges. If it wasn't for the fact that I can feel they are very effective, I would drop them in a heartbeat!!! I actually put off working legs because I don't want to do them.

But, much as I hate to say it, they work!

Chest, on the other hand, is my stubborn bodypart. No matter what I do I don't seem to get any growth at all.

Kind Regards
Dave



I had a friend who struggled with squats, when he went low he basically fell forwards. I got him to put his heels on a board, job done, he could squat right down. Again though a very indivdual thing.
I used to hate legs too, but due to competing I had no choice, I had to do them, The strange thing is I now enjoy training them, the feeling of achievement is greater than with other body parts due to the weights that get shifted and how utterly wrecked I am after training, thats me anyway.

As for chest I had the same issue, I found sticking my chest out and not "reaching" with my shoulders at the top of pressing movement helped me to focus on the muscle tissue rather than just the movement itself. This in turn helped me get a better mind muscle connection and my chest improved from there. Never had that problem with my back or my shoulders but they always grew more easily so I think it is a genetic factor also.

[OptikaNET]

I always pull my shoulder blades together before bench press to isolate the chest better. Squats - if I go down far enough for my thighs to be parallel to the ground (ie 90 degrees), I can't get back up again - even without weight. Best I can do is about 60 degrees and that is really hard.

The thing about legs is that I used to do a lot of cycling (and I still use the bike as my main way of getting around) so I've always had strong legs. Consequently, if I'm short of time and have to "sacrifice" a bodypart workout, it's always legs that go. I've tended to neglect shoulders too, not deliberately but because they tend to be at the end of my workout week.

However, at the moment, I really want that bulging shoulders look so I have been targetting shoulders as my second most important bodypart after chest. The problem is that in trying to keep exercises that work the arms as far apart from each other as possible (to allow my arms to recover) I still have to push shoulders to the end of the week. (I try to work antagonistic muscles close together, so after working chest (my most important workout) I work back so that I am working antagonistically. This means I have to leave at least 48 hours before working shoulders. That means I need to insert either legs or arms. If I insert arms (which are important to me, so that's what I usually do) that makes it even more important to work shoulders later... It's a bit of a catch-22 situation.

For chest - at the moment I'm trying to include compound exercises like dips, but I have previously ignored these because I am very weak in that direction and cannot lift my own bodyweight. Fortunately there is an assisted dips machine at my gym so I am trying to develop strength using that. Not seeing much improvement yet though...

I do get DOMS from dumbell/barbell exercises, but Benchpress Machines (to return to the topic of this thread) just don't do anything for me at all - I only really feel them in my triceps.

Kind Regards
Dave

[timpatrick]

Thanks for the help. I am doing my bench on the machine and with dumbbells. There aren't very reliable folks at the gym to spot during my lifts.

[Deviation]

Nothing wrong with dumbbells at all. Especially if you don't have a spotter.

[OptikaNET]

Deviation... Are you feeling alright old chap?

Kind Regards
Dave

[Deviation]

Deviation... Are you feeling alright old chap?

Kind Regards
Dave
Not saying I'd consider it a direct replacement, but it's better than sitting on the chest press machine.

[OptikaNET]

I only ask because your comment implied that our comments were the exact opposite of what we were actually saying!!!! We were saying machine- bad(ish), Dumbells good, and you weighed in to say there was nothing wrong with dumbells, and I was like "What?"

I think you misread the posts.

Kind Regards
Dave

[Deviation]

My part was directed at the OP's last response about lacking a spotter.

Machine < Dumbbells < Barbell

For main lifts anyhow.

[OptikaNET]

I disagree - I think dumbells are better than barbell.

Kind Regards
Dave

[mrwright]

I hate chest press machines, is the way i hurt my shoulders....somehow i think (i think it was because the grips went too far back, so when doing a weight probably to heavy for me it dropped back abit quick and no idea)

i use a smith machine or dumbbells now, strangly tho i can lift more on the smith than i now can on the machine

[Bumble Z]

My ortho surgeon strongly recommends the smith machine for bench, incline, and military presses. After rebuilding my shoulder and removing my short head bicep tendon resulting from a bench press injury, I didn't think I was ever going to bench again. He had me switch to the smith machine after my recovery. That was a year ago and now I'm totally sold on the smith machine. Yes, at first the motion seems un-natural but it doesn't take long to get used to it. I try and vary the path of motion by moving the position of the bench every other bench day to make sure I'm getting the full benefit. He and I had a discussion about how strong I'm getting recently and he filled me in on some aspects of using the smith machine I hadn't really considered before.

1. Most of the weight lifters he operates on for shoulder injuries caused by bench press motion were doing traditional barbell bench presses.
2. The damage from doing traditional bench press is cumulative. The majority of his clients with this injury are in their late 30's to late 40's.
3. The benefits of touching your chest during bench pressing is a myth and is actually placing far too much unnecessary stress on the shoulder. His advice to me was "let those macho preconceptions about bench press go".
4. Most people who use the smith machine for bench press place the motion in the wrong place, too close to the neck. I see this all the time at the gym so he is certainly right about this.

The real beauty of the smith machine for bench press during my recovery was the ability to adjust the stops at various heights above my chest. I started with them about 2 feet away a few months after my surgery and gradually over the year worked to the point where I'm at now with the stops set about a hand-width away from my chest (the point my surgeon recommends). Once I could do that with no pain or discomfort, then I started adding weight. Before my surgery I was doing 1 rep benches (barbell style) at 320 pounds. Now I'm at 440 and that's after having major work done on my shoulder. I'm 5'7" and 168 pounds and just turned 54 so I've got to think my surgeon is a freakin genius. Also, my surgeon is a lifter who is totally ripped.

Just to amplify on previous comments about spotters - lifting really heavy weight like this with just one spotter is nuts. It's dangerous for you and potentially dangerous for your spotter's lower back if you get in trouble.

The smith machine I use at my gym is made by Cybex. I happened to run into a Cybex mechanic at a gym in Florida on a business trip who was repairing a counter-weight on one and asked him how much credit to take for the weight of the bar. He said 27 pounds as opposed to the normal 32 to 35 pounds of a traditional barbell.

[mrwright]

Everyone keeps saying the motion of the smith machine etc is wierd and different to a barbell, just wondering why?!
Surely with a barbell you go up and down, and you go up and down with a smith? apart from the twist to rack/unrack it it's the same isn't it?!

[OptikaNET]

No, in a barbell bench, the bar travels in a slight curve. The peak of the motion is closer to the face and the base of the motion is the middle of the chest.

Kind Regards
Dave

Edited to add: Ironically that makes the motion of a benchpress machine better than a smith machine because most have the pivot point behind/above the head, which means the handles travel upwards, towards the face as well as away from the chest.

[Deviation]

And that's a great use of a smith machine Bumble Z.

Most people doing barbell bench presses take the motion too far below parallel trying to touch their chest. When the upper arms drop below parallel the stress increases on the shoulders. Grip width, physiology, and form all affect this. Like you said, it's not necessary to touch your chest. Not to say you should be doing half reps either though.

So you're surgeon is right. But it's not the barbell bench press that's causing the shoulder injuries. It's the person doing it incorrectly.


Everyone keeps saying the motion of the smith machine etc is wierd and different to a barbell, just wondering why?!
Surely with a barbell you go up and down, and you go up and down with a smith? apart from the twist to rack/unrack it it's the same isn't it?!
Barbell bench press isn't straight up & down. How the bar travels depends on your grip width.

[Bumble Z]

Mrwright, Not so much. With a traditional bench the bar starts on the rack positioned somewhere close to over your face. As you unrack the bar, you have to move the weight in a arcing motion from over your face to over your chest. This is necessitated by the need to clear the bar from the tabs that stick out on the rack. With a smith machine, the bar follows exactly the same path whether unracking the weight or performing the actual lift - straight up and down. The result is that you have the weight in the proper position throughout the lift.

The real difference, and the thing that makes the traditional setup more difficult is the balance. With the smith machine, the linear guideways prevent the bar from becoming off balance. You can easily see the difference for yourself with this experiment. Set up a smith machine bench press with just a single 25 pound plate on each end, lay down on the bench and lift the weight off the hooks. Now take one hand off. You can easily continue to hold the bar up. Now try and repeat that process with a traditional bench press set up. Make sure you use a spotter because this will result in a guaranteed fail....:)

[Bumble Z]

Deviation, I agree entirely with the caveat that using the smith machine and setting up correctly GUARANTEES you will perform the lift correctly, with a traditional bench their is always risk especially as the weight increases.

[Bumble Z]

So this morning was chest day and I hit a new record for myself of 450. When I was done a guy came over and started chatting me up and related a story about a friend of his who was into power lifting. It's common for power lifters who are training for bench press to use a wooden board to make a spacer on their chest to keep from going too low. His friend was doing a 575 lift with a single spotter and failed. The bar landed on the board and broke his sternum and two ribs. If he had been using a smith machine with the stops set correctly, he wouldn't have gotten hurt - just embarrassed.

There was a USC football player in the news last year who failed on a bench press lift during training and had the bar land on his neck. He was lucky to live and likely won't be playing football any longer. The more I think about this the more my surgeon's advice about setting aside the macho preconceptions about traditional bench press ring true.

Stay safe everyone....

[Bumble Z]

Ironically that makes the motion of a benchpress machine better than a smith machine because most have the pivot point behind/above the head, which means the handles travel upwards, towards the face as well as away from the chest.

Not sure how that makes the motion better, unless your aim is to put additional strain on your shoulder muscles. One thing is for sure, you need to be comfortable with whatever motion you are using so if this is more comfortable for you.....

[OptikaNET]

I think I made it plain that I'm not a fan of benchpress machines!!!

What I meant was that the pivot point behind the head makes the motion of the machine bar closer to the path that would be taken during a barbell bench press. When I say "closer", I don't mean "the same as", and I'm not advocating them as an equivalent. Just that raising the bar in a curve is more natural than the rigid up and down movement of a smith machine.

I still don't like benchpress machines.

Kind Regards
Dave

[Bumble Z]

Got it. I guess I was confused by your use of the word "better". Agreed, bench press machines would not be my choice either.

[Bumble Z]

Most people doing barbell bench presses take the motion too far below parallel trying to touch their chest. When the upper arms drop below parallel the stress increases on the shoulders. Grip width, physiology, and form all affect this. Like you said, it's not necessary to touch your chest. Not to say you should be doing half reps either though.

Unfortunately, the bench press power lifting competitions still require the bar to touch the chest for at least 2 seconds, perpetuating the myth that you need to touch your chest.

[Deviation]

Unfortunately, the bench press power lifting competitions still require the bar to touch the chest for at least 2 seconds, perpetuating the myth that you need to touch your chest.
Yes, but you have to look at their body position too. They aren't laying flat on the bench. They have an arc from their butt to their lats. That position pushes your chest up and reduced your travel so your arms don't really drop below parallel much if any. It also helps with leg drive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUcjOIZc80c&amp;list=PL08C52FCD086F6694&amp;index= 1&amp;feature=plpp_video
The video above isn't powerlifting specific, but he shows the same type of body posture used. Plus he's also got a bunch of other videos worth watching. ;)

[Bumble Z]

Point well taken. His upper arms only drop slightly below his back. However, he's got a HUGE freakin chest also....

[Deviation]

Point well taken. His upper arms only drop slightly below his back. However, he's got a HUGE freakin chest also....
LOL Yeah there aren't many powerlifters that aren't thick.

[Bumble Z]

Wait... what?

[Deviation]

LOL Yeah there are many powerlifters that aren't thick.
Ehem. I meant AREN'T thick.

[Bumble Z]

So, I did an experiment yesterday and laid down on a regular bench press station and arched my back like the dude in the video shows and lowered the bar to my chest. My arms were WAY below parallel with the floor and my elbows pointed down at about a 45 degree angle. The lesson here I believe is that this arching of the back thing may make touching the chest safe for some people but certainly not all of them. The most important thing is to not overstress the shoulders by letting you upper arms move past parallel with the floor, no matter what position you use. I'd hate to think people might end up having the kind of surgery I did based on a false sense of security simply by arching their backs.

[Deviation]

That's very true. I can't touch my chest without dropping below parallel. So I don't. ;)

[mrwright]

Isn't the arching of the back dangerous for the back tho?
the only times i've done it, admittedly only when trying to force out the last 1 or 2 heavy reps its been uncomfortable and put quite abit of strain on the middle/lower back?

[Deviation]

Isn't the arching of the back dangerous for the back tho?
the only times i've done it, admittedly only when trying to force out the last 1 or 2 heavy reps its been uncomfortable and put quite abit of strain on the middle/lower back?
What you did isn't what we are talking about. That's why it hurt. You have to start that way.

Your upper back/lats are actually the base of your bench. That's what supports you through the lift. When you use the powerlifting style, you force your upper back into the bench, squeeze your lats, and lock your feet down. You upper back and butt still maintain contact through the lift and your legs provide a sort of lever (prob not the right word here). A bench press isn't comfortable. ;)