Your thoughts about leg extensions?

[Meso_z]

Do you give 100% one these or just for warming up the knees?

At the start of the workout or in the end?

Personaly i always gave 100% and did it first in my workout but i was wondering if that was counterproductive for the next heavy and most important exercises (squats, leg presses)

[windsor88]

I always did them after squats to just burn them out good.  Still went heavy but just pyramid down

[Bluto]

I do them first as a warm up then as one of the last exercises for quads after the more important ones.

[JasonH]

I always do them as a muscular warm-up for squatting after I've given my whole body a warm-up on the stationary bike prior to starting legs. I used to do them at the end of a workout too but now I don't bother - squatting and hacks are good enough for me now and I don't feel like I need to do anything else. They're still a good exercise though and I rate them higher than leg presses which I think are one of the most overrated leg exercises there is.

[Overload]

I like to do them after squats, i never go heavy on these as i value my knees these days.

[Bobby]

I like to do them after squats, i never go heavy on these as i value my knees these days.

+1 i also superset them with hacksquats to get away with using even less weight.

[jpm101]

As a general warm-up: Leg extensions starting at the beginning of a leg workout, by all means. Try not going up to a lockout position (and or holding it there for a few seconds), that is because too much stress is placed on the knee joints. Might also consider doing a few sets of leg curls, either with the extensions (SS) or after. Again, general warm-up for the heavier stuff to follow. Can also do "LIGHT" Bulgarian Dl's, SLDL or GM'ings as warm-ups with the LegX's. Probably little more than the Olympic style bar of 20 to 30 reps.

Leg extensions themselves can build muscle when heavier weight is applied (again...try not  locking out). Though I would not think of it as a prime  mass builder by it's self. Certainly can be added to any leg program. Another school of though is leg extensions should be avoided because the main resistance factor is out and away from the body, causing unnatural stress on the joints. This can apply to other extensions movements like lateral and front raise. Some rehab center use light versions of leg extensions for rebuilding strength and normal functions.

Every six months, or so, sport medicine reports come out saying that leg X's are OK. The next six months reports come out saying do not do them (the folly of government grants). Anyway, pick your own poison when it comes to working out.You be the judge. Good Luck.

[triple_pickle]

have not done them in the last 4 years

[ATHEIST]

stopped doing them, subbed two sets of another press or lundges for them. dont think they benefited from extensions much

[YoungBlood]

I usually do one drawn out set at the beginning of my workout for legs. I'll do something really light, say 30lbs, for 8 reps with one leg, switch legs for 8 more and then do both legs for 8 reps. Then up the weight to a whopping 45lbs and repeat. Then I move to my first exercise and do something similar there prior to my working sets.
Overall, doing heavy leg extension is worse on your knees. Leg Extensions have probably killed more knees-silently where the people don't even realize it- than squats ever have. There are a few articles out there that talk about how the kneecap opens up at a 90* angle...and on leg extensions, the hardest part of the movement with the most stress on the kneecap is.....at a 90* angle!!! This is also one reason why it's best to go below parallel while squatting too.

[pumpster]

Years of doing them, would now say they're a waste of time for most purposes especially for growth. Shorten the workout and stick to various versions of squats and leg presses.

For warm up there are more effective, less stressful ways such as stationary bike and light moves on the other leg exercises.

[candidizzle]

i like leg extensions as a waarm up and also as a end of workout burn out movement

[mass 04]

Years of doing them, would now say they're a waste of time for most purposes especially for growth. Shorten the workout and stick to various versions of squats and leg presses.

For warm up there are more effective, less stressful ways such as stationary bike and light moves on the other leg exercises.

exactly what i was going to post.

[haider]

Try sissy squats on a hack squat or smith machine instead if you want to isolate your quads. You'll curse at me thank me for them 

[Cap]

Do you give 100% one these or just for warming up the knees?

At the start of the workout or in the end?

Personaly i always gave 100% and did it first in my workout but i was wondering if that was counterproductive for the next heavy and most important exercises (squats, leg presses)

Probably not horrible for warming up the knees although, as others stated, there are other ways to do it.  Other than that they are pretty pointless.  You can get cuts from being lean and mass from other exercises.

[chaos]

I dunno, I use them at the beginning to warm up sometimes, but almost always at the end, I tend to feel them in my lower quad more around the knee.

[Geo]

I actually never thought about using them to warm up...


they're right next to each other (in the sissy section at my gym) so I always finish off legs supper setting extentions and curls to end the workout

[Bluto]

they bring out the teardrop !!!

[candidizzle]

i dontbelieve any exercise is useless. if it involves a muscle contraction, then it can stimulate growth. its as plain and as simple as that.   

its like when guys say cable cross overs wont put any size on you; so they do them high rep pump exercises. well, no movement will put size on you when your doing 50 rep sets (bar maybe leg workouts), so of course it wont build your chest when your doing it that way. but use alot of weight keep good form and crank the intensity uip for 8-12 reps per set and ANY exercise is now a "mass movement"

[YoungBlood]

its like when guys say cable cross overs wont put any size on you; so they do them high rep pump exercises. well, no movement will put size on you when your doing 50 rep sets (bar maybe leg workouts), so of course it wont build your chest when your doing it that way. but use alot of weight keep good form and crank the intensity uip for 8-12 reps per set and ANY exercise is now a "mass movement"

Bad example there Candi...(ass).

The reason most people say Crossovers aren't that effective, is because you only see people with 24" chests doing them. These guys need more muscle in order to even look like they have a chest in the first place.
Can "any movement" be a "mass builder?" I'm going to go with NO on that one. How did Arnold build his chest? Or Haney, Coleman, Flex or even Dorian Yates? It surely wasn't by doing Crossovers to build mass!!! It was hard and heavy compound movements. Can you build "mass" with Crossovers? Sure, but it's minuscule compared to something more effective. Look at it as a "more bang for your buck" issue. 

[candidizzle]

 muscle doesnt KNOW what its feeling. it only feels what its feeling. so if you can train with equal intensity and reach total failure in equal rep range on one exercise, the same as another; then youll grow just as fast from one as you do the other.

its not like the pectroalis say "hmm...i just contracted a total of 6 times and on the seventh i tried to contract but failed...i guess i need to stimulate some growth within myself so next time i dont fail...    how much should i grow ?  ...hmm...   well if that was the bench press i am gonna grow x amount !! while if that was only the crossovers im gonna grow (Xunits - 5units) amount because its common sense that i cant grow as much from crossovers as i do from bench press. "

 

it doesnt work like that

   

[chaos]

Bad example there Candi...(ass).

The reason most people say Crossovers aren't that effective, is because you only see people with 24" chests doing them. These guys need more muscle in order to even look like they have a chest in the first place.
Can "any movement" be a "mass builder?" I'm going to go with NO on that one. How did Arnold build his chest? Or Haney, Coleman, Flex or even Dorian Yates? It surely wasn't by doing Crossovers to build mass!!! It was hard and heavy compound movements. Can you build "mass" with Crossovers? Sure, but it's minuscule compared to something more effective. Look at it as a "more bang for your buck" issue. 

You may want to take a look at what you're sayin there. Candi didn't say it was best for building mass, or even all that good, just that it can happen.

Personally, I agree with his point, any exercise, done properly and heavy, becomes a mass builder. Great mass builder? maybe not, but still.........

[candidizzle]

You may want to take a look at what you're sayin there. Candi didn't say it was best for building mass, or even all that good, just that it can happen.

Personally, I agree with his point, any exercise, done properly and heavy, becomes a mass builder. Great mass builder? maybe not, but still.........

i dont think that any exercise is any better than any other exercise for "mass". you can use more total weight on compound movements, but thats only becaue your using more muscles.  the bench press will build a better upper body than the crossovers, because it works more muscles. and squats will build a better lower body than extensions because it recruits more muscles.    BUT, will becnh press build a better CHEST than crossovers, will squats build a better QUADRACEP than extensions....   intensity and rep range being equal.....    ??   i think not.   

[YoungBlood]

You may want to take a look at what you're sayin there. Candi didn't say it was best for building mass, or even all that good, just that it can happen.

Personally, I agree with his point, any exercise, done properly and heavy, becomes a mass builder. Great mass builder? maybe not, but still.........

I see your point, and how I contradicted myself. Overall, I mean you can build muscle. But for the best bang for your buck, it's still best to go with other movements.
You can do bench presses in a progressive fashion for 20yrs.....and compare that for doing crossovers for 20 years using the same linear progression, and tell me what will yield better results.

[chaos]

I see your point, and how I contradicted myself. Overall, I mean you can build muscle. But for the best bang for your buck, it's still best to go with other movements.
You can do bench presses in a progressive fashion for 20yrs.....and compare that for doing crossovers for 20 years using the same linear progression, and tell me what will yield better results.

I understand what you are saying, I just don't discount the benefit of using different techniques to build muscle.

i dont think that any exercise is any better than any other exercise for "mass".


   BUT, will becnh press build a better CHEST than crossovers, will squats build a better QUADRACEP than extensions....   intensity and rep range being equal.....    ??   i think not.  

OK, the first part...........c'mon, are you serious? Take Youngbloods example and think about it. Bench only vs crossovers only, you think your chest would be better doing only crossovers?


Second part.......same as the first basically the same. There is a difference between a compound movement vs an isolation movement, and that is what you are comparing here.


Tell you what candi, I'm a "real life" kind of guy, I don't care what a book says or what is said in magazines, so I'll make you a deal.........prove me wrong.

Take a picture of your chest right now, with no shirt on, and for the next 8 weeks only use crossovers for your chest workout, that's it, nothing else.......then in 8 weeks take another pic of your chest and compare the two. If you've made improvements in MASS, I'll believe your every word, if not, admit you were wrong and you have a lot to learn........deal?