# Dumbell vs Barbell bench press



## god hand (Aug 13, 2005)

What do u think is more effective Db bench press or Bb for mass and shape?

And for tha love of God just answer tha fuckin question.


----------



## The Monkey Man (Aug 13, 2005)

DB overall better I think

Makes you have to lift and handle the weight

requires more overall body strength and balance


----------



## GFR (Aug 13, 2005)

Barbell....bigger weight=bigger muscles and strength.


----------



## god hand (Aug 13, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Barbell....bigger weight=bigger muscles and strength.


But do dumbells really take the stress of your shoulders?


----------



## GFR (Aug 13, 2005)

I think they do for some exercises, I do barbell bench but will not do barbell inclene.....it puts too much pressure on my shoulser joints. 

I think its best to do both.


----------



## TheCurse (Aug 13, 2005)

its gotta be barbells, im afraid.  i suppose we can have an arguement over the shape part, but for mass, barbells.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 13, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Barbell....bigger weight=bigger muscles and strength.


 The fact that you can do more weight makes the barbell easier pound for pound. This makes the dumbbell the more effective tool because, for the same amount of weight, it's much more difficult to do the exercise with dumbbells.


----------



## mr_oo3 (Aug 13, 2005)

DB for me.  BB better for strength, but DB you get a better range of motion.  Also for DB it's easier to drop set.


----------



## Mudge (Aug 13, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> The fact that you can do more weight makes the barbell easier pound for pound. This makes the dumbbell the more effective tool because, for the same amount of weight, it's much more difficult to do the exercise with dumbbells.



So by this logic, concentration curls while standing tip toed on one foot are the ultimate bicep mass builder.

Good to know!


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 13, 2005)

Mudge said:
			
		

> So by this logic, concentration curls while standing tip toed on one foot are the ultimate bicep mass builder.
> 
> Good to know!


 No. I realize you're joking, but read what I posted and think again. The DBs train the stabilizers much better, give you a greater ROM, and force your arms to balance and move the weight independently. The BB lets you use one arm as a crutch to the weaker one and use more weight because of this. It doesn't have as great of a ROM and is easier, so it allows you to use more weight. If you do a BB curl with perfect form, and then do one while rocking, you can use more weight rocking, but that doesn't make it a better exercise. That's basically the logic behind the BB group (other than saying that it works better for them, which I can't and am not arguing with).

 Want another example? Do flies the right way, then do them with the DBs touching your chest so you're just rolling them along. You can use a lot more weight this way, but more weight doesn't mean a better exercise. I'd expect most of the people standing behind the BB to think about this, but it seems this has escaped them.


----------



## Mudge (Aug 13, 2005)

If a barbell were to make a problem of one weaker problem worse, imagine how many people would have one huge side and one small side. Somehow I have benched over 400 and I dont think it was just one arm performing the task, hmm no problems with barbells here!

Flys? Why would I do flys???


----------



## min0 lee (Aug 13, 2005)

I cycle both, is that a bad thing?  
3 months of barbell then switch back to dumbells.


----------



## Mudge (Aug 13, 2005)

Bad? Nope.


----------



## Akkers (Aug 13, 2005)

Barbells all the way. I reckon that a workout should have a barbell pressing movement in it always. They're your meat and potatoes exercise for chest.


----------



## TheCurse (Aug 13, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> If you do a BB curl with perfect form, and then do one while rocking, you can use more weight rocking, but that doesn't make it a better exercise. That's basically the logic behind the BB group


 
 bad form has nothing to do with my logic.  muscle growth has everything to do with it.


 show me the muscle.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 13, 2005)

My point was that most people think "I can do more with a barbell; it must be better than the dumbbell exercise." This seemed to be where you were coming from. Like I said, if someone says that the BB has worked for them much better, that's great. For me, DBs have always given me better strength gains and will always carry more functional strength. I realize that the question was about size, so it's definitely possible that I'd change my mind if I were going for that instead of strength.

 A barbell does indeed make the problem worse for people with one weaker and one stronger arm. Doing it with DBs means that you do equal weight on each arm. This means that the most you can do is the max for your weaker arm. For benching, you can do more than double what your weakest arm can. The stronger arm helps pick up the slack, and the whole is more than just the sum of its parts. In other words, that's not the only reason that you can do more for the BB than you can for the DBs.


----------



## TheCurse (Aug 13, 2005)

dammit i was just about to write the whole is more than the sum of its parts!





 yea i think you need to do both, actually.


----------



## min0 lee (Aug 13, 2005)

TheCurse said:
			
		

> dammit i was just about to write the whole is more than the sum of its parts!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Let's just say that they are both good and they compliment each other.


----------



## P-funk (Aug 13, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Let's just say that they are both good and they compliment each other.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 13, 2005)

Well that's no fun!


----------



## The Monkey Man (Aug 13, 2005)

You can't do fly's with a barbell


----------



## god hand (Aug 13, 2005)

Remember, the question is about size not strength. I have gained nothing from doing barbell presses. Maybe because of form I dont know


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 13, 2005)

The Monkey Man said:
			
		

> You can't do fly's with a barbell


 You can if you're really strong. How hard could it be to bend the bar like that?


----------



## Mudge (Aug 13, 2005)

If you want size you have to eat your way there. I dont know how you could not get a workout from doing a movement. 

I dont do a lot of flat barbell work, for reasons covered already.


----------



## GFR (Aug 13, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> The fact that you can do more weight makes the barbell easier pound for pound. *I agree with this* This makes the dumbbell the more effective tool because, for the same amount of weight, it's much more difficult to do the exercise with dumbbells.*I fail to see the logic in this*




Bottom line as I said in post #5. Doing both is best.
But If I had to choose only one, without question it 
would be barbell.


----------



## The Monkey Man (Aug 13, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Bottom line as I said in post #5. Doing both is best.
> But If I had to choose only one, without question it
> would be barbell.


 WRONG!!...

































































Bottom line is... This is another stupid question by GotHand?


----------



## JayBee (Aug 13, 2005)

everyone talks about how the dumbell hits the stabalizers harder, thats fine and dandy.. but if youre doing just dumbells, you will be limited on how hard you can train your pecs because the stablizers act as a bandpass... 

thats why you need to do both.  you want your stabalizers stronger, but you want your pecs to be stronger than your stabalizers... as they should be.  all of these exersizes have their individual places and you need to do a variety of them.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 13, 2005)

Actually I feel that my pecs get a much better workout from the DBs. Otherwise I wouldn't value them so much as a chest exercise...


----------



## JayBee (Aug 13, 2005)

try to combine the db bench press with an isolateral bench press.... its killer!  i tried it once at the begining of my workout and i was doing 2 45s on the iso lateral... after my workout i wanted to do it again...  i could only do 25s i was so shot from it...


----------



## OMNIFEX (Aug 15, 2005)

For me its Dumbbells. 

I've achieved the best results, doing decline dumbbell presses.


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Aug 15, 2005)

I've almost never incorporated Dumbells into my chest routine, but lately I have been doing them a lot.
And today I have totally disregarded the Barbell for chest (for the meantime anyway  )

I find that I feel the movement in my chest much much more whilst using dumb' than while using Bar'


----------



## tommyboy11 (Aug 15, 2005)

i mix up barbell and dumbell presses in my routine, about every 3 weeks or so i switch it up.


----------



## rogor1 (Aug 15, 2005)

I recently started back to the gym going to a small facility that has only dumbells.  At first I wished for a flat bench, enough so that I bought a flat bench setup for the house.  

The most I can db bench is 170 x 3 reps.  I do that with no shoulder pain or wrist pain. (no gloves or wrist wraps)

I can take 20lbs off of that on bb bench and have shoulder and wrist pain after 1 rep.  When I used to do nothing but bench a few years ago, I needed wrist wraps.

and lastly, you can go as heavy as you want with db bench without a spotter.

For me, it's dumbells from now on.


----------



## tommyboy11 (Aug 15, 2005)

wow 170 pound dumbells thats fukin heavy i give yu props for that


----------



## rogor1 (Aug 16, 2005)

170lbs total or one 85lb db in each hand


----------



## TheCurse (Aug 16, 2005)

i wish my gym had 170 pound dumbells.  bastards dont think anyone needs anything over 120.


----------



## MuscleM4n (Aug 16, 2005)

there is no such thing as which is better dumbell or bench pressing!

you use BOTH for muscle gains

just yesterday i heavy bench pressed (got a new PB 160lbs at 125lbs  )
then after dumbell pressing 50lbs.

just an example how i incorporate both exercises....their is no better way. They both stimulate the pectorals


----------



## Doublebase (Aug 16, 2005)

I just made the poll even.  I like barbell.  They both kill my chest but I like barbell better because it hits my shoulders and lats too.  Its more of a compound movement for me.


----------



## fUnc17 (Aug 16, 2005)

I use both, but prefer dumbells


----------



## da jock (Aug 17, 2005)

I prefer DB's always for flat & inclined....


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 17, 2005)

MuscleM4n said:
			
		

> there is no such thing as which is better dumbell or bench pressing!
> 
> you use BOTH for muscle gains
> 
> ...


 That's fantastic, but that's not the subject of the thread. We all know that incorporating them both would work very well for many people; we want to know why you would prefer one over the other. Dumbbells just require more all-around strength and give you a better all-around workout. More stabilization means more work for less weight. People who say 'Well you can do more weight for BB bench' are just being ignorant IMO. They've always bench with a barbell and are too stubborn to look at the benefits of dumbbells because everybody uses a barbell, so that MUST be the best thing, right?


----------



## AKIRA (Aug 17, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> That's fantastic, but that's not the subject of the thread. We all know that incorporating them both would work very well for many people; we want to know why you would prefer one over the other. Dumbbells just require more all-around strength and give you a better all-around workout. More stabilization means more work for less weight. People who say 'Well you can do more weight for BB bench' are just being ignorant IMO. They've always bench with a barbell and are too stubborn to look at the benefits of dumbbells because everybody uses a barbell, so that MUST be the best thing, right?




Alright then shit, back to the topic.

I used to just do barbell.  We are talking from 15 years old to 21 years old.  Barbell was always an ego thing to me.  And you something?  It sucked.  So one day this lil fat kid got me doing dumbells.  I was weak at first, but since no one bugged me on "max," I kinda stuck to it.

Well, I FLEW up in weight (meaning dumbell weight).  HOWEVER, people said I had looked bigger.  Didnt see it myself, but I figured it wasnt impossible considering I went from 60s to 110s (DBs) in over a year.  

BUT.  I wanted to see if this new workout had added strength to the Barbell, so I went back for a lil bit  and yes I got stronger, but still the fact remains..

I didnt appear bigger in MASS nor cut (yea thats right) until Dumbells, so they get my vote.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 17, 2005)

Yeah, and I don't think many people realize that DB bench gains transfer over to BB bench gains, either.


----------



## Tough Old Man (Aug 17, 2005)

How Fucking Stupid. Max Weight Equals Strength And Gains. Can You Do More Weight With A Barbell Or Dumbells?


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 17, 2005)

Strength can be measured in many ways. We're talking about getting a better workout and becoming stronger. The man who DB benches 300 is much, much, much stronger than the man who BB benches 300. Say what you want, but facts don't argue.


----------



## AKIRA (Aug 17, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> The man who DB benches 300 is much, much, much stronger than the man who BB benches 300.


----------



## The Monkey Man (Aug 17, 2005)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> How Fucking Stupid. Max Weight Equals Strength And Gains. Can You Do More Weight With A Barbell Or Dumbells?


No but if you can't pick up a barbell
off the floor,
lay down on the bench with it
then hit a few reps
then place it back on the floor
how strong are you

Dumbells make you overall strong


----------



## Mudge (Aug 17, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> The man who DB benches 300 is much, much, much stronger than the man who BB benches 300.



By my numbers, as someone not good with dumbells, 15-20% maybe.


----------



## god hand (Aug 17, 2005)

AKIRA said:
			
		

> I didnt appear bigger in MASS nor cut (yea thats right) until Dumbells, so they get my vote.


Thats what I wanted to know.


----------



## god hand (Aug 17, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> Yeah, and I don't think many people realize that DB bench gains transfer over to BB bench gains, either.


I dont think so..........but I havent tried so I need to shut the fuck up!


----------



## Cowbell (Aug 17, 2005)

use to do declined all the time with dumbs....I was a lot stronger then....lost a lot of chest strength since then


----------



## Cowbell (Aug 17, 2005)

TheCurse said:
			
		

> i wish my gym had 170 pound dumbells.  bastards dont think anyone needs anything over 120.




 You are going to blow your intestines out your ass


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 18, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> I dont think so..........but I havent tried so I need to shut the fuck up!


 It's definitely true. It strengthens everything you use in the BB bench and more. Besides, I've gained 20+ pounds on my BB bench by DB benching exclusively over a period of about six weeks. It works.


----------



## CowPimp (Aug 18, 2005)

I much prefer barbells.  I think part of this is because it is much more comfortable to go heavy (5 reps or less) with a barbell as opposed to dumbbells.  However, that doesn't mean dumbbells are useless.  I incorporate dumbbells into my training routine now and again.  I think both are great.


----------



## Psycho Dad (Aug 18, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> I dont think so..........but I havent tried so I need to shut the fuck up!


please do dumb ass


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 18, 2005)

Excuse you.


----------



## Skate67 (Aug 18, 2005)

On chest day I used to do flat bench with the bar, then go over to the incline bench and use DBs.  Then the next chest day switch it up flat DB press and incline bar.  Gotta keep the body guessing.


----------



## Mudge (Aug 18, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> It's definitely true. It strengthens everything you use in the BB bench and more. Besides, I've gained 20+ pounds on my BB bench by DB benching exclusively over a period of about six weeks. It works.



Not me, I lose strength on my bench by switching long term. But I also bench a lot more than my bodyweight.


----------



## Cold Iron (Aug 18, 2005)

Both have there place; however, if i'm going under 3 reps-- BB's are the only way to go.


----------



## TheCurse (Aug 18, 2005)

Cowbell said:
			
		

> You are going to blow your intestines out your ass


 maybe if i was a slack jawed faggot.


----------



## Cowbell (Aug 18, 2005)

TheCurse said:
			
		

> maybe if i was a slack jawed faggot.



Thats damn brutal...thats hurts ninja


----------



## ROCKPILE (Aug 19, 2005)

I've just added dumbbells to my training regime in the last 6 months. I alternate bb - db on chest days. Recently I've exp. alot of shoulder joint pain with db presses. Any ideas? I want to use both, but my shoulders are screaming!


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 19, 2005)

That's kind of strange. From what I've heard most people can use DBs with less pain than BB. Have you tried a palms-in approach (they face each other and your body)? That could help. Of course, if it continues to hurt, that's a sure sign to stop doing the exercise.


----------



## ROCKPILE (Aug 19, 2005)

Haven't tried that yet, have heard about it. Thanks for the help.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Aug 19, 2005)

You're welcome.


----------



## Cowbell (Aug 19, 2005)

ROCKPILE said:
			
		

> I've just added dumbbells to my training regime in the last 6 months. I alternate bb - db on chest days. Recently I've exp. alot of shoulder joint pain with db presses. Any ideas? I want to use both, but my shoulders are screaming!



Maybe you should try using less weight, technique is more important than weight...you could just be doing it wrong


----------



## SuperFlex (Aug 19, 2005)

For size barbell..........
For shape and symmetry dumbbells...


----------



## jwg (Jan 12, 2006)

I always do both when I do chest.

I do feel like I get more shape and size from DBs though.


----------



## juggernaut2005 (Jan 12, 2006)

I switched to Dumbells only cuz I started feeling shoulder pains with flat barbell bench.   I also subsitituted barbell shoulder presses for dumbells..  Lifting HEAVY ungoldy weight is not worth hurting your cuffs (IMO)


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 12, 2006)

I prefer DB's. I work out alone...you can never get stuck under a DB...
So, when I am pushing it and think that I can know out that one last rep...but can't...easier to justput the weight down..than get the bar stuck on chest...


----------



## Imwithstupid926 (Jan 12, 2006)

I like both they're both used for different gains in muscle.


----------



## GFR (Jan 12, 2006)

SuperFlex said:
			
		

> For size barbell..........
> For shape and symmetry dumbbells...


OMfG


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 12, 2006)

..well...one DOES wanna make sure the inner and outer pecs are hit...


----------



## DOMS (Jan 12, 2006)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> I prefer DB's. I work out alone...you can never get stuck under a DB...
> So, when I am pushing it and think that I can know out that one last rep...but can't...easier to justput the weight down..than get the bar stuck on chest...



I've BPed to failure and never been stuck under the bar.  I just lower it my chest, roll it down to my lap, get up and reset the bar.

On topic, I enjoy DB presses more because it requires more use of the stabalizing muscles and has a greater ROM.

Also, why kind of fucked up question is, "What do u think is more effective Db bench press or Bb for mass *and shape?*"


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 12, 2006)

DOMS said:
			
		

> I've BPed to failure and never been stuck under the bar. I just lower it my chest, roll it down to my lap, get up and reset the bar.


I've only gotten stuck once...on deceline BB press...nowhere to roll...


----------



## DOMS (Jan 12, 2006)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> I've only gotten stuck once...on deceline BB press...nowhere to roll...



So, are you still stuck there?


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 12, 2006)

Yeah... a little help please...typing with this thing on me is a bugger...


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 12, 2006)

I don't see how most people think it's so easy to just roll out from under 80%+ like it's nothing. It's difficult to hold up, nonetheless roll all the way down your body or do a sit up with. I haven't been stuck in a long time, but from what I remember it wasn't very fun.


----------



## DOMS (Jan 12, 2006)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> Yeah... a little help please...typing with this thing on me is a bugger...


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 12, 2006)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> I don't see how most people think it's so easy to just roll out from under 80%+ like it's nothing. It's difficult to hold up, nonetheless roll all the way down your body or do a sit up with. I haven't been stuck in a long time, but from what I remember it wasn't very fun.



I've never had an issue with it...


----------



## PWGriffin (Jan 13, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I've never had an issue with it...



well how much do you bench??  

I've always been under the impression that when ur benching and the weight is not moving forward that that's when the most stress is being placed on the shoulders, the supra spinatus (sp?) mostly....so benching to failure without a spotter to move the weight along would be the absolute worst thing you could do no??


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 13, 2006)

PWGriffin said:
			
		

> well how much do you bench??



About 265.  I have handled a little more than that when doing lockouts, although I generally do those in a rack.




> I've always been under the impression that when ur benching and the weight is not moving forward that that's when the most stress is being placed on the shoulders, the supra spinatus (sp?) mostly....so benching to failure without a spotter to move the weight along would be the absolute worst thing you could do no??



I've never heard such a thing.  From a physics standpoint I don't see how that's possible.  Whether the bar is moving or not, if you are applying the same amount of force, then the reactive force is going to be the same.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 13, 2006)

Maybe by 'forward' he really means 'down towards the feet.' Otherwise, I guess less of a force would be placed on the shoulders if you weren't able to move the bar. That would just mean that you couldn't produce as much force as if you were able to move it and that would seem to be safer to me.


----------



## huesoloco (Jan 14, 2006)

Trying to move 250lbs off your chest after failure is hard as hell. I didnt enjoy the experience.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Jan 14, 2006)

For what it's worth, I start with a lot of stretching then hit the dumbbell bench press first. Start with 2 warm up sets then hit 3 or 4 sets after that. Then I finish the work out session with a barbell bench press after being  fatigued and load up as much as I can handle up to about 8 reps at most. That's what I do anyways.


----------



## bulldogge (Jan 14, 2006)

Barbell benches are  my choice,Db benches are for assistance excercises.

No size or strength from barbell benches need to check your form----do you pause your reps at the bottom????????or do you bounce your reps??????





> huesoloco Trying to move 250lbs off your chest after failure is hard as hell. I didnt enjoy the experience.








now wouldn`t this cure your problem of trying to get out from under a bar when you go to failure?????????????


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 14, 2006)

Well, the other thing you must consider is that I bench press powerlifter style.  If I get stuck, then the bar is already on my stomach.


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 14, 2006)

huesoloco said:
			
		

> Trying to move 250lbs off your chest after failure is hard as hell. I didnt enjoy the experience.


sounds like you need to date 'smaller' women...

...sorry...couldn't resist that one...


----------



## Ghost_Dog (Jan 14, 2006)

I think the bowflex is better.


----------



## Skate67 (Jan 14, 2006)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> sounds like you need to date 'smaller' women...
> 
> ...sorry...couldn't resist that one...


----------



## maxpro2 (Jan 14, 2006)

Burner02 said:
			
		

> sounds like you need to date 'smaller' women...
> 
> ...sorry...couldn't resist that one...



haha


----------



## gopro (Jan 14, 2006)

I prefer dumbbells for this movement, but have also used the barbell extensively. If I had the choice for only one though, most definitely it would be dumbbells. Interestingly enough, my personal preference switches to barbell when we are talking about incline pressing.


----------



## mrmark (Jan 15, 2006)

gopro said:
			
		

> I prefer dumbbells for this movement, but have also used the barbell extensively. If I had the choice for only one though, most definitely it would be dumbbells. Interestingly enough, my personal preference switches to barbell when we are talking about incline pressing.



I do that as well. Start with a flat dumbbell press followed by an inclined barbell press. 

Works very nicely in my opinion.


----------



## Pedigree (Jan 16, 2006)

For complete upper body mass building, barbell bench. For hitting mostly the chest, I prefer dumbbells.
I do both.


----------



## carter26 (Jan 17, 2006)

I would have to think you get deeper reps with dumbells, but Barbells can get more weight across the chest.  In my day, I could bench 315, no way would i try to do 160lb dumbells.  Now adays, i use the Hammer Strength Iso-Lateral Bench.  No spoter. plus the range of motion is restricted...no struggling with weight.


----------



## tweeter (Jan 21, 2006)

Is there a conversion that tells you how much you bench if you can do a certain amount in dumbells. I end my dumbbell workout with the 80's doing about 6 reps. Is there anyway I can tell from that how much I bench with a barbell.


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 21, 2006)

tweeter said:
			
		

> Is there a conversion that tells you how much you bench if you can do a certain amount in dumbells. I end my dumbbell workout with the 80's doing about 6 reps. Is there anyway I can tell from that how much I bench with a barbell.



Start with the bar.  Push out a few reps.  Add 20 pounds.  Push out a few reps.  Repeat until it gets difficult enough that you will fail somewhere around 6 repetitions.  There is no way to tell really.


----------



## leg_press (Jan 21, 2006)

I do both flat dumbell and barbell, dont have the balls to do dumbell incline yet. I think dumbells are good cus the isolate each side of the chest. But I too can rack alot more onto a barbell kg for kg.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 21, 2006)

DB benches rule. That is all.


----------



## zapedy (Jan 21, 2006)

squaggle can u db bench more than u can bb bench? coz i only use db's for benching and i cant seem to pack more weight onto the bb wen i do try it like you should be able to. So basicaly im asking should you always be able to bench more wiv the bb even if u only use db's in ur normal routine?


----------



## swordfish (Jan 21, 2006)

flat barbell bench press, hands down. the barbell is still the single most valuable tool in a weight training program. with a barbell you can use more weight and imo get bigger for that reason alone. just think about it though, you can use a barbell for back squats, front squats, barbell rows, clean and presses, barbell curls, close grip bench ( floor press if you dont have a bench), stiff legged deads, deadlifts- conventional and sumo, high pulls, upright rows, power shrugs, lunges, step ups, military press, and many more exercises.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 21, 2006)

You can use a DB for all those exercises as well.

I hate the argument that because you can use more weight, a BB is superior. Using that logic, the leg press is far superior to the free weight squat because you can use more weight for the leg press. Think about it...


----------



## swordfish (Jan 21, 2006)

except the fact that a leg press is a machine. 

if you had one person perform the exercises that i listed with dumbells, and assuming that diet is the same, their weight is the same, and everything else is equal, and another person using a barbell for each of the exercises, then the person with the barbell would be significantly bigger, hands down.....


----------



## largepkg (Jan 21, 2006)

swordfish said:
			
		

> except the fact that a leg press is a machine.
> 
> if you had one person perform the exercises that i listed with dumbells, and assuming that diet is the same, their weight is the same, and everything else is equal, and another person using a barbell for each of the exercises, then the person with the barbell would be significantly bigger, hands down.....


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 21, 2006)

leg_press said:
			
		

> I do both flat dumbell and barbell, dont have the balls to do dumbell incline yet. I think dumbells are good cus the isolate each side of the chest. But I too can rack alot more onto a barbell kg for kg.


Hey...just 'grip 'em and rip 'em'...
inc. DB Press is my favorite exercise...what is the 'fear' that u don't have the 'balls' to do them?


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 21, 2006)

swordfish said:
			
		

> except the fact that a leg press is a machine.
> 
> if you had one person perform the exercises that i listed with dumbells, and assuming that diet is the same, their weight is the same, and everything else is equal, and another person using a barbell for each of the exercises, then the person with the barbell would be significantly bigger, hands down.....



It may possibly be true, none of us can say for sure.  Without analyzing it closely I can see how you would say it's true because less force is dissipated from the prime movers to the ancillary musculature involved in the lift.  Of course, the same is true about machines.  The less stabilization involved, the more tension can be placed on the prime movers, and the greater the hypertrophic response.

This, however, doesn't take into account that fact that the nervous system is less excited in situations where afferent/input neurons receive less stimulation.  As we all know, the nervous system certainly plays an important role.  Not to mention, the hormonal response might differ in cases where a larger amount of muscle mass is stimulated with the same exercise.

My point is that we can debate this all day, but admit it, you're kind of talking out of your ass...


----------



## swordfish (Jan 21, 2006)

yea i am, but it makes sense to me for some reason.


----------



## largepkg (Jan 22, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> My point is that we can debate this all day, but admit it, you're kind of talking out of your ass...


----------



## gopro (Jan 22, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> It may possibly be true, none of us can say for sure.  Without analyzing it closely I can see how you would say it's true because less force is dissipated from the prime movers to the ancillary musculature involved in the lift.  Of course, the same is true about machines.  The less stabilization involved, the more tension can be placed on the prime movers, and the greater the hypertrophic response.
> 
> This, however, doesn't take into account that fact that the nervous system is less excited in situations where afferent/input neurons receive less stimulation.  As we all know, the nervous system certainly plays an important role.  Not to mention, the hormonal response might differ in cases where a larger amount of muscle mass is stimulated with the same exercise.
> 
> My point is that we can debate this all day, but admit it, you're kind of talking out of your ass...



Wow CP, I can't believe you chose to give such a detailed response here. You are a better man than me because I would have just said, "Your statement is right up there with the assertion that high reps build definition," and moved on, LOL.


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 22, 2006)

gopro said:
			
		

> Wow CP, I can't believe you chose to give such a detailed response here. You are a better man than me because I would have just said, "Your statement is right up there with the assertion that high reps build definition," and moved on, LOL.



Haha, what can I say, I like talking about this stuff.


----------



## swordfish (Jan 22, 2006)

i figured id get guys jumping all over me for that comment......

but even after all that-
BB BENCH >DB BENCH


----------



## gopro (Jan 22, 2006)

swordfish said:
			
		

> i figured id get guys jumping all over me for that comment......
> 
> but even after all that-
> BB BENCH >DB BENCH



Hey bro, if you want to believe that, that is up to you my friend.


----------



## swordfish (Jan 22, 2006)

my weight training coach told me that bars are the way to go for mass. hes 270 lbs and 5'10, benched 455x1 raw, squatted 585x6 parallel raw, and deadlifted 605 raw at the age of 23, all natural..... 

not saying he is right but i believed him then and i still do now.


----------



## gopro (Jan 23, 2006)

swordfish said:
			
		

> my weight training coach told me that bars are the way to go for mass. hes 270 lbs and 5'10, benched 455x1 raw, squatted 585x6 parallel raw, and deadlifted 605 raw at the age of 23, all natural.....
> 
> not saying he is right but i believed him then and i still do now.



As long as you are not saying he is right, because he is not. And by the way, I benched 500 raw in my twenties, and benched once per month. The rest of the time I did flat dumbells.

That said, it is still good that you have found a mentor and that you have confidence in him. I am sure that he is an excellent advisor overall and is truly helpful to you.


----------



## HardToSquat (Jan 23, 2006)

Which is better, hard to say; however, I will give you a comparison of what I use for dumbbells and what I can use for the barbell bench.  I currently use 110 pound dumbbells (per arm) for several reps.  My current bench press for the same number of reps is 315 pounds.  I switched over to dumbbells about a year ago and have honestly seen much better progress and mass gain than when I was barbell benching. Comparing dumbbell press weight versus barbell press weight for me is a 95 pound difference and I get the added advantage of stabilizer growth, no spotters and no shoulder pain.


----------



## jakeluvspunk (Jan 23, 2006)

I do both.  For me it seems barbell brings more strength and dumbell brings more size and shape.


----------



## Skate67 (Jan 23, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> it's true because less force is dissipated from the prime movers to the ancillary musculature involved in the lift.  Of course, the same is true about machines.  The less stabilization involved, the more tension can be placed on the prime movers, and the greater the hypertrophic response.



So machines are more effective at improving one's physique?


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 23, 2006)

ST240 said:
			
		

> So machines are more effective at improving one's physique?



Not really. They can be more effective at isolating and improving certain muscles of one's physique, but in an unbalanced way that can easily result in injury. In short, they can improve part of one's physique, but the negative far outweighs the positive when it comes to machines for most uses IMO.


----------



## DOMS (Jan 23, 2006)

There needs to be enough repetition and frequency of a given drill to allow for adaptation, but one also needs to begin to push variety as soon as possible ??? especially with athletes. Exercise variety will not only improve overall function in athletes and bodybuilders alike, but also markedly reduce the risk of injury due to pattern overload, muscle imbalances, and movement dysfunction.

By the way, for those coaches who want to know where machines fit into this discussion, the answer is: "Stop eating paint chips."

- Eric Cressey


----------



## GFR (Jan 23, 2006)

gopro said:
			
		

> Wow CP, I can't believe you chose to give such a detailed response here. You are a better man than me because I would have just said, "Your statement is right up there with the assertion that high reps build definition," and moved on, LOL.


He has great well researched answers, I'm surprised they didn't make him a training mod.....or at least offer it to him.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 23, 2006)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> He has great well researched answers, I'm surprised they didn't make him a training mod.....or at least offer it to him.



(High-pitched voice.) Wow, Mr. Foreman, I didn't know you thought that highly of me! (Eyes sparkle.)

Oh. Um, yeah, CowPimp definitely knows his stuff. I love it when someone can rip apart a self-proclaimed expert based on his own research, reasoning and knowledge. Definitely glad to have him around.


----------



## swordfish (Jan 23, 2006)

gopro said:
			
		

> As long as you are not saying he is right, because he is not. And by the way, I benched 500 raw in my twenties, and benched once per month. The rest of the time I did flat dumbells.
> 
> That said, it is still good that you have found a mentor and that you have confidence in him. I am sure that he is an excellent advisor overall and is truly helpful to you.



Congratulations on that 500 lb bench, VERY impressive. He was a great mentor in high school and he taught me a lot of what I know today.

Here is a couple of links of his lifts in competition, 

his name is Travis Osborne, maybe I was mistaken on his numbers, I think he did more than I originally posted. 

http://www.wabdl.org/oregon_dead_lift.htm

http://www.wabdl.org/oregon_bench_press.htm

he is in the 20-25 age class


----------



## Burner02 (Jan 24, 2006)

ST240 said:
			
		

> So machines are more effective at improving one's physique?


 
....especially the Bowflex....30 mins. a day...3X a week....


----------



## gopro (Jan 24, 2006)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> He has great well researched answers, I'm surprised they didn't make him a training mod.....or at least offer it to him.



Well, I was being fecetious when I said that to CP really. When someone says something really stupid I often will not take the time to give them a truly scientific/reasonable answer, but will just make my point by letting them know they are a moron, LOL. I think this happens to many personal trainers/strength coaches once they've been in the game long enough, hehehe.

But anyway, yes, CP could easily be a training mod.


----------



## ALBOB (Jan 25, 2006)

gopro said:
			
		

> But anyway, yes, CP could easily be a training mod.



I wish they'd hurry up and make him one so they could get rid of that longwinded blowhard gopro.


----------



## gopro (Jan 25, 2006)

ALBOB said:
			
		

> I wish they'd hurry up and make him one so they could get rid of that longwinded blowhard gopro.



I sooooooo agree with you!


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 27, 2006)

ST240 said:
			
		

> So machines are more effective at improving one's physique?



Don't take things out of context, it changes the meaning.  What I was saying is that using the logic swordfish is presenting it would be true.  However, it is not necessarily so.  My point is that there is no one who can definitively declare one method better than another for hypertrophy.

As far as DOMS' comment... I agree.  Athletes do not need to bother with machines, except perhaps some machines for special injury prevention movements or sport-specific applicaitons.  An example would be a soccer playing training hip adduction with a cable attached around his ankle, as it closely mimics the way you are supposed to kick in soccer, with the inside of your foot.

Furthermore, I feel that freeweights should be the base of any exercise routine simply because it develops stabilizer muscles that help prevent injury to a joint.  Using machines all the time will not do this to the extent that using freeweights will.  This is also why I advocate unilateral movements; not to mention their functionality in sport.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 27, 2006)

All strength atheletes should use sandbags.


----------



## bulldogge (Jan 28, 2006)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> All strength atheletes should use sandbags.





why?does it increase my bench,deadlift,squat?? or is because i have the need to get on the dino training bandwagon?Do you know any top strength atheletes who use sandbags in there training for a meet.

to get better at your chosen strength sport you need to practice your competitve lifts and train your assistance excercises that have a good carryover to your lifts.Instead of wasting your time on excercise that don`t have a direct carryover.


----------



## CowPimp (Jan 29, 2006)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> All strength atheletes should use sandbags.



I'm not so sure about that either, although it couldn't hurt once in a while.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Jan 29, 2006)

bulldogge said:
			
		

> why?does it increase my bench,deadlift,squat?? or is because i have the need to get on the dino training bandwagon?Do you know any top strength atheletes who use sandbags in there training for a meet.
> 
> to get better at your chosen strength sport you need to practice your competitve lifts and train your assistance excercises that have a good carryover to your lifts.Instead of wasting your time on excercise that don`t have a direct carryover.


Give me a reason why strength athletes shouldn't build their stabilizer muscles.

Yes, Brooks Kubik used them in his training and he is (or was) the holder of numerous records. Many of the old school strongmen used them to great effect. Feats such as lifting a 300 pound bag over one's head can hardly be accomplished with the squat, deadlift and bench.

Consider the fact that, for some people, their strength sport is to become stronger. Are you telling me that bag work has no direct carryover to a strongman competitor? Obviously you're thinking of just one or two sports, and even then bag work can have a tremendous effect.

Of course, if you're a competitive lifter, you're going to stay very specific with your movements for obvious reasons for the most part. For the recreational lifter of any kind, however, there's no reason not to give them a try. Saying they have no carryover, however, is pretty ridiculous. They build enormous functional strength in the form of increased grip, round back lifting, awkward object lifting, stabilizer use, etc. All of these things are useful for a strength athlete.

Oh, and if you could explain to me what's wrong with a training philosophy based on hard work and basic, compound exercises, that would be great.


----------



## jehoverall (Jul 14, 2009)

i've found that dumbbells give me more direct chest stimulation because of the greater range of motion. you have to control the dbs very carefully or they'll get too far out to the sides and the movement turns into a db fly instead of a bench press. 

since the weights i use with dbs are way less than BBs, i can really concentrate on the movement and thus stimulate the targeted muscle (chest); with BBs too often i find that a) i have to cheat in some way to move the weight up on the last reps or b) the bodybuilder-style bench press (elbows flared out, wider grip, lots of shoulder involvement, no lats, no legs) is just not as friendly to my body and joints as the powerlifting style (elbows tucked, closer grip, less shoulder/more tricep, lats, legs). so DBs have the advantage when it comes to training pure chest. 

that said i have had great results overall after using BBs exclusively on bench press for the last year or so. BB bench press builds your entire upper body as a unit, giving you good shoulder and tricep development in addition to chest.

what people forget though is that shoulder and tricep are more functional muscles than chest I think. you use your pecs to mainly squeeze a weight in place, but not to actually move it anywhere (right? it's the "bear hugging muscle") whereas you use shoulder for everything, and triceps for all pushing movements (pushing things away from you, punching). as long as your pecs are at the same level of development as your triceps and shoulders, and your upper body can move as a unit, then i think you should be fine from a functional standpoint, because there aren't really benefits to having a conspicuously strong chest alone. 

that's why i use and will continue to use BB bench as my main training movement, and only use DBs to switch things up every once in a while or as a secondary movement. 

sorry to resurrect a years-old thread but i've had this sitting on my mind for a while and wanted to express it clearly in writing.


----------



## stephenpaul6557 (Jul 17, 2009)

I would have to say DB as well. I think it all depends on the person and their personal preference but either should be fine.


----------



## jasoncscs (Feb 9, 2010)

If you had to pick between the two, there is actually no question. The exercise leaking load up the heaviest will always add more size and strength. Barbell bench wins hands down.


----------



## gopro (Feb 10, 2010)

Whether you stimulate hypertrophy more efficiently through the use of a BB or DB's is an individual matter...not one set in stone by any means.


----------



## jasoncscs (Feb 11, 2010)

Interesting. Are you saying this from personal experience your do you have some science to back it up? 

You can add more weight to a bar then you can with a dumbell so there is no question as to which is more effective.

That is if you did all the same exercises, reps, and sets but one group used DB and the other used BB, the BB group would always see more gains.




gopro said:


> Whether you stimulate hypertrophy more efficiently through the use of a BB or DB's is an individual matter...not one set in stone by any means.


----------



## AKIRA (Feb 11, 2010)

AKIRA said:


> Alright then shit, back to the topic.
> 
> I used to just do barbell.  We are talking from 15 years old to 21 years old.  Barbell was always an ego thing to me.  And you know something?  It sucked.  So one day this lil fat kid got me doing dumbells.  I was weak at first, but since no one bugged me on "max," I kinda stuck to it.
> 
> ...



This.


----------



## gtbmed (Feb 11, 2010)

Just do both IMO.  Good benchers know how to make use of benching with a barbell and with dumbells.


----------



## gopro (Feb 12, 2010)

jasoncscs said:


> Interesting. Are you saying this from personal experience your do you have some science to back it up?
> 
> You can add more weight to a bar then you can with a dumbell so there is no question as to which is more effective.
> 
> That is if you did all the same exercises, reps, and sets but one group used DB and the other used BB, the BB group would always see more gains.



Weight on a bar or DB is not the only parameter by which hypertrophy occurs. If it was then the strongest guys would be the biggest, which is far from the case. And if YOU believe that all BB exercises are superior to DB exercises you would be sadly mistaken, as that is a very misguided thought process.


----------



## Curt James (Feb 12, 2010)

When my right shoulder was bothering me, dumbbells allowed me to rotate my hands. That variation hit the shoulder differently, provided relief from the pain, and allowed me to work my chest.


----------



## Captn'stabbin (Feb 13, 2010)

mix of both.


----------



## bigdavetom (May 25, 2010)

barbell on flat and big dumbells on incline


----------



## georgepetrou (Jul 21, 2010)

Both are required. However dumbbell's are more favourable!

Dumbbell's equal more muscle contraction, creating better shape and size.
You go to the gym and do weights. When your doing your excersis it's all about muscle contraction to get muscle, is it not? If you not contracting then your notting working out!

Therefore dumbbell's create a wider range of muscle contraction creating more muscle growth.
HOWEVER
Barbell is an easier excersis. Because of the less range of movement and the fact that your stronger arm can support your weaker arm!

With Barbell your able to do more weight. Which means more muscle fibres required to work harder and under more stress!
It is also said the more stress your muscle endure the more they are stimulated to grow!
Finally you need machine! everyone's forgotten machines!
Cables and machine press to finish off! for that extra pump, which en-courageous the area to become bigger for the more blood being pumped into the muscle region! Also machines are a more concentrated muscle contraction excersis but on fewer muscle fibres. So it will equal good isolation. but only for a degree and amount of muscle fibres!
To Conclude. I would do a 40% dumbbell and 30% barbell and 
30% machine/cables

If also you're like me and have shoulder problems (dislocated my shoulder 7times in the last 3-4years) dumbbells are less stressful of my shoulder! 

My routine for lower chest is:
decline dumbbell      3x8-12
flat-bench dumbbell  3x6-12
decline dumbbell      2x6-10  I don't always do this! But generally!
Flatbench barbell      2x6-10
decline wide-grip      2x6-10
machine benchpress  2x8-12
upward cables flys    2x6-12


----------



## georgepetrou (Jul 21, 2010)

Both are required. However dumbbell's are more favourable!

Dumbbell's equal more muscle contraction, creating better shape and size.
You go to the gym and do weights. When your doing your excersis it's all about muscle contraction to get muscle, is it not? If you not contracting then your notting working out!

Therefore dumbbell's create a wider range of muscle contraction creating more muscle growth.
HOWEVER
Barbell is an easier excersis. Because of the less range of movement and the fact that your stronger arm can support your weaker arm!

With Barbell your able to do more weight. Which means more muscle fibres required to work harder and under more stress!
It is also said the more stress your muscle endure the more they are stimulated to grow!
Finally you need machine! everyone's forgotten machines!
Cables and machine press to finish off! for that extra pump, which en-courageous the area to become bigger for the more blood being pumped into the muscle region! Also machines are a more concentrated muscle contraction excersis but on fewer muscle fibres. So it will equal good isolation. but only for a degree and amount of muscle fibres!
To Conclude. I would do a 40% dumbbell and 30% barbell and 
30% machine/cables

If also you're like me and have shoulder problems (dislocated my shoulder 7times in the last 3-4years) dumbbells are less stressful of my shoulder! 

My routine for lower chest is:
decline dumbbell 3x8-12
flat-bench dumbbell 3x6-12
decline dumbbell 2x6-10 I don't always do this! But generally!
Flatbench barbell 2x6-10
decline wide-grip 2x6-10
machine benchpress 2x8-12
upward cables flys 2x6-12


----------



## KelJu (Jul 21, 2010)

georgepetrou said:


> Both are required. However dumbbell's are more favourable!
> 
> Dumbbell's equal more muscle contraction, creating better shape and size.
> You go to the gym and do weights. When your doing your excersis it's all about muscle contraction to get muscle, is it not? If you not contracting then your notting working out!
> ...




You are either on a shit ton of gear or mildly retarded. That is 3 times more chest volume than you need on a single day.


----------



## georgepetrou (Jul 21, 2010)

what would yu recommend!
and yes i'm not just on the normal protein shakes consumer 
what if i did a routine like this for lower chest:

decline DB 2x8-12
flat-bench DB 2x8-12
decline wide grip BB 2x6-10
flat bench BB 2x6-10
upward cable flyes 2x6-12
or machine press

that's 10sets down from what i find a reasonable 16set workout routine


----------



## unclem (Jul 22, 2010)

do bb until your used to a pressing movement then go to db every 3 months because you need bb movements to strength the whole girdle of the chest muscles and delts. in db you have to have the stabilizers to even start to do them correctly. i use 405 for 6 reps then work my way down after a good warmup with 135 then 225. bb i mean. in db i use the 150 for 8-12 then drop set it. but warm up with the 90s first. but always make sure u warm up thourghly, spelling fucking again. but bb is the best for true mass, no question. the stuff like hammer strength equip. is not going to do it unless u have trained a yr with bb and db then are preparing for a show then it helps. but if you dont do bb or db work and jump into hammer stuff, your wasting your fucking time. ive tried it just to see. my chest got flat looking. and you see young skinny pencilneckers doing all hammer stuff. boy if they only knew how fucking stupid expieienced bbers and wat they were thinking . bb thats the ticket.


----------



## unclem (Jul 22, 2010)

georgepetrou said:


> Both are required. However dumbbell's are more favourable!
> 
> Dumbbell's equal more muscle contraction, creating better shape and size.
> You go to the gym and do weights. When your doing your excersis it's all about muscle contraction to get muscle, is it not? If you not contracting then your notting working out!
> ...


 
 you can get your contraction movements from db flys, cable flys, i use them as my contraction muscle exercises. but i do, to a degree, contract with bb and db presses.in 32 yrs i have never had a serious injury except overuse injury but it did not side line me. so i must be doing something right brother.


----------



## ryan92 (Jul 29, 2010)

id have to say, both, i know this is kind of sitting on the fence, but usually i do barbell for a few months till i hit a plataeu, then do dumbbell bench for about 4-6 weeks, still pushing to the limit, and then i find when i go back to barbell i can lift more then i plateaued on


----------



## Phineas (Aug 15, 2010)

mykolous1 said:


> thanks



Stop posting useless shit just to get your post count up.


----------



## pats (Sep 25, 2010)

db by far is the way to go. In college when i was playing football I did a lot of BB and had to deal with the shoulder pain. It was a piss off and I decided to switch over to DB's. I was 190 and 5ft 11 then and putting up 275 in set of 2. Nothing to brag about I know but i'm not a power lifter i was a corner and im going for more of an athletic look.

I switched over to DB about a year ago though and can do the same weight and more without any pain. Also I noticed that they really work your stabilizers. 

You got to think of it this way. In what situation will your arms be locked in the same position? when your playing any type of sport or anything each arm is going to be at a different angle at the point of contact unless your pushing a flat wall. So personally I say DB are way better and will get you a better look then BB because they also fire up those other muscles that tend to be ignored with the bigger lifts like the BB


----------



## MDR (Sep 25, 2010)

5 year old thread.


----------



## assassin (Sep 29, 2010)

TheCurse said:


> its gotta be barbells, im afraid.  i suppose we can have an arguement over the shape part, but for mass, barbells.



Mass is shape ... and I'd also go for barbell...


----------



## superbigjohnson (May 8, 2011)

Dumbell bench press = Greater range of motion, use of more stabalizer muscles, and will correct muscular imbalance.  Muscles used: Anconeus, Tricep Brachi, Anterior Deltiod and the Pectoralis major.

barbell press=  Anterior Deltiod, Pectoralis major, and two of the three heads of the tricep: medial and  long head

on a close grip barbell press= the muscles recruited are Anconeus, Tricep brachi, and primarily the part closest to the sternum of the Peectoralis major


----------



## CaptainNapalm (May 8, 2011)

Both have their place.


----------



## OttoRocket11 (May 9, 2011)

I think it's best to do both.. Like 1 week I'll do DB flat bench and Incline BB bench and then thow a hammer strength in there also. Then the next week it's vice versa. DB Incline and BB flat with a Hammer Strength chest press... For chest I usually do 3 presses; DB/BB incline, DB/BB Flat, and a Hammer Strength. 

Best IMO


----------



## MissionHockey (May 10, 2011)

I used to always only use DBs when I trained but I realized after a while that my low pectorals were lagging behind big time. I have since switched over to BB and it has helped bring my lower pectorals up significantly. Now I incorporate both into my work I just switch them up every so often.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk


----------



## buddhaluv (May 10, 2011)

Dumbells - that way you can stretch your chest fibres all the way


----------



## N_I_C_K (May 11, 2011)

To be honest this is kind of an unintelligent question. I chose barbell though for the hell of it.


----------



## MegaTron (May 11, 2011)

Both are very similar, work the same muscles, etc.

Dumbbells are 'harder' because each arm must work independently, as well as all the stabilizing muscles. Dumbells also allow more range of motion, particularly in the shoulders and scapula. 

You should really do some of each, say one workout a week with the barbell, the rest with dumbbells. also do both flat and inclined bench.


----------



## dima (Jun 6, 2011)

From personal experience DB presses have increased my BB press quite a bit. I used to only use BB, but once I started using the DBs my BB press shot up! I'm sure everyone is different and what worked for me won't necessarily work for you, but that's what I noticed and I'm glad I mix it up now. Every other chest day I switch emphasis between DB and BB. I still do both almost each day, just not as much weight on one and more weight on the other.


----------



## andreaus (Jun 8, 2011)

as jaybee said i think you need both. although i do love DB better. i f..kin hate chest day any way   !!!


----------



## amonroe (Jun 10, 2011)

Dumbbells because the work on stabilization (just my opinion - I'm no expert)!


----------



## pwloiacano (Jun 12, 2011)

Barbell works best for me.  I have twaeky shoulders and dumbells sometimes cause me more pain.
On another note, I was at the Rochester Bodybuilding Championships on Saturday night.  Before the competition started, they had a bench press contest.  Not for one rep max, but bodyweight reps.  180 lb class:  winner performed 36 reps. ; 220 weight class: winner performed 28 reps. ; 240 lb weight class: winner performed 28 (yes 28) reps.  that was very impressive!!!


----------



## southpaw (Jun 15, 2011)

Great thread...interesting stuff.  For me, db it better bang for my buck because of all the stabilizers that are engaged.  I feel like mass and strength gains come faster from db training.  But I mix it up, 50/50 anyway.


----------



## tropical2011 (Jun 15, 2011)

DB I think.  You have more of a range that can be worked.


----------



## Ace5high (Jun 15, 2011)

Haha, an oldie but a goodie...

Both is the correct answer ;-)


----------



## IRONATHLETE (Jun 15, 2011)

Both are good but personally I like barbell


----------



## gopro (Jun 15, 2011)

Universally neither is better or worse, but as an individual you must find which is more effective for YOU!


----------



## 6th Gear (Jun 21, 2011)

i had always used barbell press and never even attempted a dumbell press until i was in college. i made the switch because of a bad shoulder and i started lifting alone more often because my friends werent still as dedicated as i was. i was able to bench press 320 lbs during my senior year of high school, yet i had trouble with the 100 lb dumbells. when i started to use only dumbells i was able to press the 130s (biggest in my gym) for ten reps throughout each set. my shoulders chest and arms all grew substantially bigger. so from my experience i will use barbells to see how strong i am but as far as my workouts go i stick with dumbells.


----------



## Wiseguy. (Jun 21, 2011)

Barbells FTW.


----------



## Buffalo Blitz (Mar 14, 2013)

I would say barbell is better because if I were to only do barbell bench press I think my numbers would continue to go up on BOTH the barbell and the dumbell bench press.  BUT if for some amount of time I did only DUMBELL bench press I think that my BARBELL bench press would go down or not improve at the same rate.


I usually do bench press twice per week and I am now going to switch one of those sessions to dumbells for four weeks and see what happens.


----------



## benjianderson32 (Mar 22, 2013)

Smith machine, a good one, is the best tool for bench press. It helps your form. you will get stronger but change it up. one month warm up then do 10 sets of 3 on smith. the next month warm up and do 5 sets of ten on db. always do two levels of incline see how stronger you get.


----------



## westb51 (Mar 25, 2013)

I've thought about this for almost 8 years and I have to say that just as some prefer jelly and others syrup, I like both, and turtles


----------



## bjg (Mar 25, 2013)

Barbell bench press is an overrated exercise, it is a good exercise but it is not exceptional for building muscles, it is popular because it is a basic power lifting exercise. When it comes to build muscle size i don't see why barbell bench is any better than dumbbell. i use both to add some variation. with dumbbell you can go down well and do a full range of motion.


----------



## Anibalyeah (Mar 27, 2013)

Barbell>


----------

