Pull Up vs Machine Assisted Pull up
FR : Tractions ↔ Tractions assistées
Swapping Pull Up (Bodyweight) for Machine Assisted Pull up (Machine) retains 100% overlap; expect externally braced cam track. Compare exact 17-muscle fractional recruitment before swapping equipment mid-session.
Weighted Muscle Overlap
100%
Sum of min(coef A, coef B)
Primary Equipment
Bodyweight → Machine
Same rep/load measurement family
Load Transfer Protocol
Target RPE 7.5–8.5
Never assume 1:1 kg across leverages
Side-by-Side 17-Muscle Recruitment Delta
How primary mover (1.0× set) and synergist (0.5× set) allocation changes when swapping Pull Up for Machine Assisted Pull up.
| Muscle Group | Pull Up | Machine Assisted Pull up | Leverage Shift |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lats (Latissimus Dorsi) | Primary (45%) | Primary (45%) | Matched |
| Upper Back (Rhomboids / Mid-Traps) | Secondary (25%) | Secondary (25%) | Matched |
| Biceps Brachii & Brachialis | Secondary (20%) | Secondary (20%) | Matched |
| Forearms & Grip | Secondary (10%) | Secondary (10%) | Matched |
Load & Volume Conversion: Pull Up → Machine Assisted Pull up
Worked weight heuristic: a 70 kg set on Pull Up (Bodyweight) maps roughly to 105 kg on Machine Assisted Pull up (Machine; 5 kg jumps, curve: cam-matched resistance across sticking points). Calibrate set 1 at RPE 8 so e1RM history for Pull Up remains unskewed. Zero anatomical muscles are dropped between Pull Up and Machine Assisted Pull up; 1:1 weekly set volume carries straight across.
Supporting Sports-Science Literature
| Study Title | Lead Author & Year | Verified Link |
|---|---|---|
| Variations in muscle activation levels during traditional latissimus dorsi weight training exercises: An experimental study. | Lehman (2004) | PubMed 15228624 ↗ |
| Effects of grip width on muscle strength and activation in the lat pull-down. | Andersen (2014) | PubMed 24662157 ↗ |
| Grip width and forearm orientation effects on muscle activity during the lat pull-down. | Lusk (2010) | PubMed 20543740 ↗ |