First, and foremost, not all machines are created equal. Just as there are slight nuances and ‘feel’ among barbell and dumbbell manufacturers, there is an even greater variance among machines. Some fitness equipment companies can produce elite equipment, whereas others merely steal their ideas and make poor copies at best. Even the quality of machine stations from the same manufacturer can range from mediocre (compared to a different brand’s station) to excellent (surpassing a different brand’s station). With that in mind, it can be concluded that there are both good machines and bad machines. Bear that in mind next time you train on a rusty, friction-based, dilapidated hunk-of-junk. Some of the premier exercise equipment manufacturers include MedX, Nautilus, and Hammer Strength.

The usual argument is that free weights are better at building strength since they involve more than one muscle group, working the balancing and stabilizing muscles, whereas machines guide the resistance for you and often only target few muscle groups. Such a barren argument does not take into account that free weights increase the possibility of injury due to the balancing factor. As you fatigue, there is greater risk of free weights leaving an ideal path of movement as the smaller balancing muscles fatigue.

Also, there is nothing stating that you cannot train the balancing muscles independently, safely, and in greater isolation, and with machines. Think about it. The balancing muscles during the bench press include the lats, rotator cuffs, and even the obliques, hips and thighs to a certain extent. Are these not trained during movements such as pulldowns, external rotation exercises, ab machine crunches, and leg presses? What benefit would these muscles receive in performing additional, low intensity work via non-direct exercise? Which brings up the next point.

Although the thighs, low back, deltoids, etc. help to balance a barbell during a biceps curl, for example, the degree of inroading is ineffective to elicit a strength or growth response in those balancing muscles. After all, they are used to hundreds of pounds of resistance through a full range-of-motion.

The balancing of free weight training can provide an illusion that overall strength increases better than with machines, due to a high degree of adaptive coordination among several muscle groups. Consequently, the more energy necessitated by the balancing muscles the less energy available for the target muscles. Hence, balancing promotes premature fatigue. Due to the overall feeling of fatigue, among several muscle groups, the prime muscle never really feels that inroaded. This may be the basis of multiple-set training, that free weights necessitate greater volume to adequately exhaust a muscle. But step into a top of the line chest press machine and train one set to muscular failure, and it will feel as though you just completed 2-3 sets of barbell bench presses. Why? Primarily, you did not waste energy in balancing and coordinating unnecessary musculature, while pushing the target muscle to the max!

Another argument is that machines are designed to train muscles, not movement; that barbells and dumbbells better simulate real life and athletic movements. First, it is the practice of sporting skills that develops agility, balance, and coordination. Whether using barbells or machines the goal is strength training. The goal is not balance training, agility training, or coordination training. And when you push your quads to the upper limits with a squat machine, with half the low back fatigue you experience from traditional barbell squats, you will optimize your thigh strength in half the time.

Remember, the goal of muscular development and strength is based on hard work, concentration, and working the target muscles as hard as possible with as much isolation as possible. This cannot be done, to the same extent, with free weights.