# Leg Press VS. Squat...



## DIVINITUS (Nov 17, 2005)

Why do lots of people do both in their leg routine?  I always thought of the squat as a more complete type of "leg press".  Can someone explain a bit the benefits of doing both?  Currently my leg day consists of squats, lunges and calf raises.  Should I incorporate the leg press?


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 18, 2005)

do you train legs once a week? you could always swap out the lunges for leg presses and add a ham dominant movement. full squats are superior and not interchangeable. just because other people are incorporating both doen't mean you should. tons of people use heinous form too ...


----------



## The Monkey Man (Nov 18, 2005)

I used to use the leg press because I split front and rear legs...

So leg press on Quad dominant WO day...

Plus I would use it to isolate quads for THKNS


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 18, 2005)

The benefit to using machines is you can often generate more force with the target musculature.  The more your body has to do to maintain balance, the more force is dissipated from the prime movers to the stabilizers.  

From a functional or athletic standpoint, the squat is king hands down.  In terms of hypertrophy, it is debatable.  I think including both is a reasonable proposition; just don't neglect some lower body movements that focus more on movement around the hip joint in exchange.


----------



## slider (Nov 18, 2005)

on my leg/arm days I do both, the press is nice cuz you can really whale on the wieght and the lung is good cuz it promotes symitry and core strength.  Start out the with press next do a hammy articulation(ie standing leg curl) and then do lunges.  You'll be feeling it every where and it makes for a great superset


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 18, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> The benefit to using machines is you can often generate more force with the target musculature.  The more your body has to do to maintain balance, the more force is dissipated from the prime movers to the stabilizers.
> 
> From a functional or athletic standpoint, the squat is king hands down.  In terms of hypertrophy, it is debatable.  I think including both is a reasonable proposition; just don't neglect some lower body movements that focus more on movement around the hip joint in exchange.


the reason you can generate more force is because it's on a fixed plane therefore taking your stabilizer muscles out of the equation entirely. that's not a good thing. leg press is good for isolation and that's all. 

"the squat is king" = i agree (full squat that is ).


----------



## eastbaylifter (Nov 18, 2005)

Probably related to what the others said, but some people go conservative on the weight when doing free-weight squats, but they can go all-out on the leg press.  I think it's more a psychological rush to load up 20 plates than it is actual benefit.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 18, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> the reason you can generate more force is because it's on a fixed plane therefore taking your stabilizer muscles out of the equation entirely. that's not a good thing. leg press is good for isolation and that's all.



I use hardly any machines and share your sentiment.  However, my concern is not purely mass.  I lift for maximum strength, relative strength, and strength endurance; mass is merely a byproduct for me and serves as a mean to my ends.  The lifts I care about are all freeweight movements.  Using machines frequently doesn't make all that much sense for me.

However, when it comes to bodybuilding, training for function is not a necessity.  All you need to do is overload the muscles in question and cause a response from your endocrine system.  Supplementing your training with movements like the leg press could be beneficial.  I still typically suggest that people base their routines around freeweight movements.  My point is merely that machine movements can have their place in a bodybuilder's routine.




> "the squat is king" = i agree (full squat that is ).



Damned straight.


----------



## JordanMang (Nov 18, 2005)

Supplement both into your workout.  Your muslces like a change in routine.  But, nothing beats below parallel deep squats.


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 18, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> My point is merely that machine movements can have their place in a bodybuilder's routine.



i concur .


----------



## The Monkey Man (Nov 18, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> i concur .


----------



## redman12 (Nov 18, 2005)

Full Squat will ALWAYS be king

-ALWAYS


----------



## GFR (Nov 18, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> the reason you can generate more force is because it's on a fixed plane therefore taking your stabilizer muscles out of the equation entirely. that's not a good thing. *leg press is good for isolation and that's all.
> *
> "the squat is king" = i agree (full squat that is ).


I disagree 100%
The leg press is as good for mass as the squat.....if you are just training for Bodybuilding then either one is great.

Obviously doing both from time to time is best.


----------



## garethhe (Nov 19, 2005)

I'm one of those previously-mentioned guys that does both squats and leg presses.  I agree that the squat is king; that's why I do it first before any other lift.  Towards the middle of my workout, my arms will tire and need a rest.  Rather than spend five minutes picking my nose (which is generally frowned upon in my gym for some odd reason), I'll do a couple sets on the leg press, then get back to work on upper-body stuff.

Is there a different leg-only exercise I could substitute for the leg press?


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 19, 2005)

The Monkey Man said:
			
		

>


that means i agree...


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 19, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> I disagree 100%
> The leg press is as good for mass as the squat.....if you are just training for Bodybuilding then either one is great.
> 
> Obviously doing both from time to time is best.


what are you disagreeing with? i didn't mention anything about mass.


----------



## GFR (Nov 19, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> what are you disagreeing with? i didn't mention anything about mass.


*This*


			
				The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> the reason you can generate more force is because it's on a fixed plane therefore taking your stabilizer muscles out of the equation entirely. that's not a good thing. *leg press is good for isolation and that's all.*
> 
> "the squat is king" = i agree (full squat that is ).


Isolation movements are not the best thing for building mass.....I don't see the leg press as a true isolation movement for quads....................I do see thigh extensions as an isolation movement.

Love to see somebody build huge legs only doing thigh extensions.


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 19, 2005)

do we agree that the full squat is a superior exercise?


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 19, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> do we agree that the full squat is a superior exercise?




I have a superior exersize I think I could show you...


----------



## GFR (Nov 19, 2005)

Yes


----------



## Stu (Nov 19, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> I have a superior exersize I think I could show you...


 i've always wondered what it must feel like to be shameless


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 19, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> do we agree that the full squat is a superior exercise?


 I would agree that free weights are superior to machines in nearly all aspects related to training I would consider worthy of my time.


----------



## luke69duke69 (Nov 19, 2005)

Man, I've been missing out.  I thought most of the smart ass comments were in anabolic zone.


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 19, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> I have a superior exersize I think I could show you...


i think that would be the other way around sparky...


----------



## The13ig13adWolf (Nov 19, 2005)

Stu said:
			
		

> i've always wondered what it must feel like to be shameless


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 19, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> I have a superior exersize I think I could show you...




I believe yours to be an exercise in futility, young EMO ninja.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 19, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> i think that would be the other way around sparky...


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 19, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> I believe yours to be an exercise in futility, young EMO ninja.



That was before i started EH, thanks very much.


----------



## DIVINITUS (Nov 19, 2005)

I do legs once a week and because I play basketball I work them for sports more than building them up for looks.  Currently I do my squats on the Smith Machine because I am still recovering from a torn ACL and I am still learning the proper form.  I know Barbell is the best and I will be switching over in another month or so.  

For my leg day how does squats (on smith machine, for now), lunges, calf raises and dead lifts sound?


----------



## joshp (Nov 24, 2005)

I can't do squats because it bothers my bad right shoulder.  If I place the barbell across shoulders and then reaching back around with my right arm to grasp the barbell hurts it.  I have stuck with leg press because of this and also because I have a fear of getting an injury from bad form.  I'd want some personal trainer to show me how to do it correctly and tell me if I'm doing it correctly before I do it, but even at that my shoulder just doesn't like the position it is put in on that exercise.  

That being said I've gained a lot of mass in my legs through the leg press.


----------



## LAM (Nov 24, 2005)

The13ig13adWolf said:
			
		

> do we agree that the full squat is a superior exercise?



depends on the biomechanics of the person pefroming the exercise.  back squats are not the king of all leg exercises for everyone.


----------



## luke69duke69 (Nov 24, 2005)

I like doing full barbell squats because of the other stabilizer muscles used, as well as the back muscles incorporated, but if I'm trying to do more weight and really tax my legs, I use the leg press.  When I'm able to isolate my legs like that, I feel like I can work my legs to failure better.  I feel doing squats first is crucial over starting with leg presses from a safety standpoint.


----------



## exnews (Oct 7, 2009)

*Why Both*

Hello all,

I am new to this forum and possibly here for completely different reasons than the average bear. I am 51 and until 18 months ago had never touched weights. I am a retired military pilot and was in good shape as a younger man. My docile civilian life took its toll in the form of some clogged arteries and I also became Diabetic (Type II). I was on oral meds and my doc said I would be for life...Sorry DOC - WRONG ANSWER 
I am now off oral meds after 18 months on the weights! This brings me to the reason both are good. The leg press isolates the largest muscles in the legs and they are more powerful than the other leg muscles and I get great benefit from burning them out. I lift for one reason...TO DEPLETE the energy stores in the cells of my muscles and to GROW new muscle. New muscle is virgin and NOT insulin resistant thus the more new muscle the better the body is with sugar. So I push to failure and failure is only possible on machines for safety reasons (I work out alone) I use the Hammer Strength V Squat for the same reason. I do not want to put actual numbers here but in general I find I can Max v Squat about half of what I can Leg press.  Remember (all of you) for every person working out there are hundreds not lifting and being unhealthy at home???Encourage all who come here for whatever reason and  remember any weight work is better than none??? If anyone is from the Indianapolis area I would enjoy a workout partner once in a while.

Thanks for reading and look forward to future exchanges.


----------



## tropo (Oct 24, 2010)

slider said:


> on my leg/arm days I do both, the press is nice cuz *you can really whale on the wieght* and the lung is good cuz it promotes symitry and core strength. Start out the with press next do a hammy articulation(ie standing leg curl) and then do lunges. You'll be feeling it every where and it makes for a great superset


 
The amount of weight you can "whale on" a machine is totally irrelevant except maybe for some peoples' egos. It's the stress on the muscles which counts, not the total load on a machine.

Let's look at the real reason you can "whale on" so much weight on a leg press compared to a regular squat. There's 3 main reasons, and once I've covered these you'll never feel so excited about how much weight you've "whaled on" again lol. Sorry, but let's get real and stop kidding ourselves.

We have to make some assumptions here for our hypothetical calculation. Let's say the leg press sled is on an exact 45 degree angle and weighs 60 lbs. Let's assume the trainee has a bodyweight of 200 lbs.

1. If the leg press is angled at a true 45 degrees, then you're only pushing approximately 71% of the weight. In this example the person is using 12 x 45 lb plates on a 45 degree leg press. Including the weight of the sled that's a total of 600 lbs. The actual weight he's pushing is 600 x 0.71 = 426 lbs.

2. In the squat our hypothetical trainee is pushing his bodyweight minus the weight of his lower legs as they are not traveling up against gravity. Let's say that's a total of 180 lbs (assuming his lower legs weigh around 20 lbs in total). On the leg press he is not pushing any bodyweight at all. Now we can subtract a further 180 x 1.41 ~ 254 lbs (254 x 0.71 = 180) from the 600 lbs "whaled on" to the leg press.

We're already down to 426 due to the 45 degree angle, now let's subtract a further 254 lbs. We end up with 172 lbs. 

Therefore a 12 x 45 lb leg press is equivalent to using 172 lbs in the squat. You could make the argument that the leg press trainee is pushing his lower leg weight, so then you can add 20 lbs x 0.71 - another 14 lbs.

3. We can further reduce the comparative load because leg press doesn't require the use of stabilization muscles. In the squat the entire trunk and upper body is being used to keep the weight on the shoulders, which uses a lot more energy. In this example the trainee would have to load the leg press to 254 lbs to equal free squats (no weight).

Sorry about the long winded illustration, but next time you think you're a he-man because you can load up a leg press, think again. It's all in your head.

If a leg press happens to be a lower angle than 45 degrees, the comparison becomes far more severe. For example, at an angle of 30 degrees the load is half.


----------



## unclem (Oct 24, 2010)

i do both but only 225- 240 max on squatt, but i do alot of leg presses, leg curls, lying leg extensions, lunges with very light weight. but i do alot of reps i train legs 1x wk and alot of sets as by the time for next leg day my pump has subsided.


----------



## tropo (Oct 25, 2010)

unclem said:


> i do both but only 225- 240 max on squatt, but i do alot of leg presses, leg curls, lying leg extensions, lunges with very light weight. but i do alot of reps i train legs 1x wk and alot of sets as by the time for next leg day my pump has subsided.


 
So you're saying the pump in your legs lasts for 7 days. That's amazing. My pump has subsided by the time I leave the gym.


----------



## LAM (Oct 25, 2010)

tropo said:


> The amount of weight you can "whale on" a machine is totally irrelevant except maybe for some peoples' egos. It's the stress on the muscles which counts, not the total load on a machine.
> 
> Let's look at the real reason you can "whale on" so much weight on a leg press compared to a regular squat. There's 3 main reasons, and once I've covered these you'll never feel so excited about how much weight you've "whaled on" again lol. Sorry, but let's get real and stop kidding ourselves.
> 
> ...



none of the above really matters...the human body is designed to exert forces via the muscles on planes perpendicular to the resisting force or load

the correct formula of a sled or leg press with a 45 degree angle would be:

Load x (sin 45)  = actual weight moved

so 500 lbs loaded on a 45 degree leg press would equate to 350 lbs.  but it doesn't matter as the biomechanics of both are totally different.  in the squat the torso bears the load and moves up/down while on the leg press the legs/hips bear the load and move while and the torso is stationary.


----------



## OTG85 (Oct 25, 2010)

Squat big.My legs are huge and easily overcast my upperbody : (   I love training legs.I can get 425 for a max(deep breaking parallel) if I wrap my knees tight.


----------



## tropo (Oct 26, 2010)

LAM said:


> none of the above really matters...the human body is designed to exert forces via the muscles on planes perpendicular to the resisting force or load
> 
> the correct formula of a sled or leg press with a 45 degree angle would be:
> 
> ...


 
"none of the above really matter". What kind of statement is that in relation to what I posted?

It all matters a lot as it demonstrates why a person can manage much higher loads on the leg press than squat.

If you'd paid attention you would have read "approximately 71%" in my post, which is calculated by using sin45 - but that didn't really matter.

You're making the same mistake as most others and not taking into consideration the bodyweight which you squat - and that really matters a lot.

As I caculated (using sin45) a 282 load on the leg press would approximate bodyweight (free) squats for a 200 lb trainee. (200/0.71 = 282)


----------



## gtbmed (Oct 26, 2010)

LAM said:


> none of the above really matters...the human body is designed to exert forces via the muscles on planes perpendicular to the resisting force or load
> 
> the correct formula of a sled or leg press with a 45 degree angle would be:
> 
> ...



Actually, it does matter.  The weight of the torso is additional weight that has to be squatted in a free squat but not in a leg press.

And as far as the biomechanics being totally different - they are, but not entirely for the reasons you described.  The absolute motion in space of the torso isn't really what's important here.  Rather, it's the motion of the hips, knees, and ankles.  Both free squats and leg presses are going to involve similar movements of the hips, knees, and ankles.

The biggest mechanical difference between the two is the fixed movement plane in the leg press.  Because of this, free squats allow a lot more flexibility in the degree of hip, knee, and ankle movement necessary to complete the lift.  So the loads around these joints can vary dramatically between 2 lifters who squat differently.  The loads will be pretty similar between 2 lifters leg pressing on a sled.

Also, stabilizer muscles in the torso aren't going to be contracting during a leg press.  But you already stated that.


----------



## LAM (Oct 26, 2010)

gtbmed said:


> Actually, it does matter.  The weight of the torso is additional weight that has to be squatted in a free squat but not in a leg press.
> 
> And as far as the biomechanics being totally different - they are, but not entirely for the reasons you described.  The absolute motion in space of the torso isn't really what's important here.  Rather, it's the motion of the hips, knees, and ankles.  Both free squats and leg presses are going to involve similar movements of the hips, knees, and ankles.
> 
> ...



the mechanics of the exercise are different as I explained.  with the back squat the torso moves and the load generates compression forces on the spine,hips, etc. none of this occurs with the leg press.  the fixed movement of the leg press is moot the target muscles still move perpendicular to the load or resistance just like the squat.


----------



## tropo (Oct 27, 2010)

legendkiller85 said:


> Squat big.My legs are huge and easily overcast my upperbody : ( I love training legs.I can get 425 for a max(deep breaking parallel) if I wrap my knees tight.


 
Do you wrap your knees for every set? If you always wrap your knees your knees are going to get very weak. It's not a good idea unless you're competing, but even then you shouldn't wrap unless you're near your maximum weight.


----------



## Kleen (Oct 27, 2010)

I disagree on the Squat being King of all *MASS* building work for legs. *Now for the leg exercise that offers the most overall benefit it is hands down the king.* I don't think it is superior for leg mass however. The biggest I have ever had my legs was during a lot of use of leg presses after I quite squatting due to only activating my posterior chain. I alternate them most of the time now. Some people can not stimulate much on their quads with regular squatting. I don't get much stimulation on my quads even in close stance squatting. I am hip dominant so my glutes, hamstrings and adductors get sore but not the quads. I go both parralel, and ass to ankles too depending on squat variation / stance.

I really think it depends on what you are doing it for. You will get more testosterone production out of a squat due to the entire body being involved which helps with size. However I used almost all of my body pretty vigorously when leg pressing too. If athletic performance is the key then again the squat. If just putting as much stimulation on the targeted muscle as possible to stimulate growth I have to give the leg press the nod for ability to create sheer mass. 

There is no isolation in a leg press it is completely impossible it is a compound movement. You can change the emphasis of the lift by changing foot position, IE high and wide for adductors and hamstring more, lower on platform hitting the quads a bit more but you can not isolate any muscle. You work all of the muscles of the lower body and several mucles of the core and upper body as well from holding yourself in a safe osition under extremely heavy weight. Abs are tight, back is tense and arched, traps are activated holding you into the seat, quads, hamstrings, adductors, glutes, calves all get worked during the leg press and with a lot more weight than can be used in a squat. 

That being said I do both regularly. Often I will do squats first then move to Leg Press to finish my legs off heavy but with more safety than the squat allows me in continuing my abuse. 

The biggest thing to remember if using the leg press is USE A FULL RANGE OF MOTION!!!! I swear I want to bitch slap people I see with 20 plates on the leg press only doing half reps. You won't see growth that way same as doing a half squat pretty much the only thing you are benefiting is tendon strength with that short of a ROM. 

This goes along the same lines as Hammer Strength machines for chest. You will grow your chest more on them than you will doing barbell bench due to the pec specific range of motion. However the major downside is you get no stabilization muscles involved so Bench or DB bench needs to be done to keep a balance of strength in the stabilizing muscle. 

When it comes to pure aesthetics and size the reason for exercise choices varies greatly from that of a functional lifter, performance athlete or power lifter.

As an example Paul Dillet never did squats built his leg mass off of Leg Presses. These are pretty impressive legs to say the least.


----------



## gtbmed (Oct 27, 2010)

Take one guy who does only leg presses and one who does only squats.  My conjecture is that the one who does only squats will see more overall development of musculature whereas the one who does only leg presses will see more quad (and possibly glute) development.

The thing I don't understand is why both can't be used in a training program?  I use squats to build squat strength and leg presses to build quad strength and starting deadlift strength.  There's nothing wrong with doing both.


----------



## tropo (Oct 28, 2010)

Kleen said:


> Abs are tight, back is tense and arched, traps are activated holding you into the seat, quads, hamstrings, adductors, glutes, calves all get worked during the leg press and with a lot more weight than can be used in a squat.


 
You're focusing on what is loaded on the machine. If you compare the force produced there won't be much difference. Try using the Unilateral Hammer Strength Leg Press and you'll find you won't be loading many plates compared to the standard 45 degree version because of the leverage of the machine. The number of plates you load on a machine is irrelevant.


----------

