# Hammer Strength equipment VS Free weights



## mrmark (Apr 17, 2006)

I've just received a guest pass to a swanky gym that has LOADS of Hammer Strength machine. I've tried the row and the pull down machines and they initially felt very odd but strangely enjoyable.

It's not a long term choice for me as the pass is just for a week but it's something I'm curious about. With all their precision designes in motion/movement how do they compare to free weights?


----------



## GFR (Apr 17, 2006)

I use both, I like Hammers rows and pull downs but do not like there presses.


----------



## CowPimp (Apr 17, 2006)

Although I don't feel any machine can replace free weights, I do like some of the Hammer Strength equipment.  Like Foreman said, their rowing machines are the ones I like best.  The pressing stuff is okay, but I don't like it nearly as much.


----------



## themamasan (Apr 17, 2006)

I always use the different row machines and I love them.  The presses I will do once a month usually just to change things up a bit.  Although I do use the decline bench machine quite often.


----------



## mrmark (Apr 17, 2006)

I used the shoulder press Hammer Strength today and I was a little disapointed. I really prefer dumbell or military press.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Apr 17, 2006)

I always thought that the human body automatically follows the most natural, comfortable and efficient pattern possible when doing any movement. Using a machine to alter that seems pointless to me. Obviously I'm not as educated as many here, but the knowledge I've assimilated thus far has allowed me to infer this to be true except under special circumstances (rehabilitation, special goals, etc.).


----------



## CowPimp (Apr 17, 2006)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> I always thought that the human body automatically follows the most natural, comfortable and efficient pattern possible when doing any movement. Using a machine to alter that seems pointless to me. Obviously I'm not as educated as many here, but the knowledge I've assimilated thus far has allowed me to infer this to be true except under special circumstances (rehabilitation, special goals, etc.).



The advantage to using machines is that very little tension in the muscle is dissipated to stabilizer muscles.  Therefore, the prime movers involved in machine movements can be overloaded to a larger degree, at least theoretically.  Of course, then you have to take into consideration that the nervous system does not get as excited when you perform machine movements, so they could conceivably counteract the benefit just listed in smoe cases.  However, I use machines sometimes so that I can continue to maintain a fairly high level of training volume with a little bit less stress on the nervous system.  At the same time, I hate using machines so I do this sparingly.


----------



## TheCurse (Apr 18, 2006)

i like the hammer horizontal row, low row, and wide grip flat press.


----------



## MACCA (Apr 19, 2006)

When i joined the gym the hammer strength equipment was good to use as a newbie but i rarely use it now, free weights i think are much better overall.


----------



## scbz01602 (Apr 19, 2006)

A balance between the two (in some workouts) can prove to be very effective.

Of course, we all agree that free weights is definetly the way to go... it's the most natural and most beneficial (stabalizers) way to lift weights. But, Hammer Strength strives to simulate the most natural movement. For example, recall doing the shoulder press. Remember how the push sort of rotated, attempting to get a more natural feel?

Hammer strength can't nail the most natural movements, as everyone is different, but using some machines that are excellent (Hammer strength row machines in particular), you can get some great results.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Apr 19, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> The advantage to using machines is that very little tension in the muscle is dissipated to stabilizer muscles. Therefore, the prime movers involved in machine movements can be overloaded to a larger degree, at least theoretically. Of course, then you have to take into consideration that the nervous system does not get as excited when you perform machine movements, so they could conceivably counteract the benefit just listed in smoe cases. However, I use machines sometimes so that I can continue to maintain a fairly high level of training volume with a little bit less stress on the nervous system. At the same time, I hate using machines so I do this sparingly.



I suppose I just never think of less stabilizer involvement as being an advantage. This makes it easy to forget that they're designed to do this.


----------



## CowPimp (Apr 19, 2006)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> I suppose I just never think of less stabilizer involvement as being an advantage. This makes it easy to forget that they're designed to do this.



Heh, I know what you mean.  Actually, oftentimes machines place more stress on the joints because of the fact that the stabilizers are taken out of the equation and you are moving through an unnatural range of motion.  However, if implemented properly, I still feel they have merit for bodybuilders.


----------

