MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Nautilus Upright Squat Machine Picture
1 | 2 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

TOM C

I was cleaning out some old papers the other week and came across a photocopy of an ad for the Nautilus Upright Squat machine, which I thought those who have an interest in Nautilus history and haven't seen this picture would enjoy.

The price: $2890.00

In the ad it stated that while Casey used various leg machines during the Colorado Experiment, this was the only leg machine he used in every workout.

This brings up some intriguing questions:

1. How many of these were produced and where did they go?

2. Is there anyone out there who actually used this machine and if yes, how did it compare to a BB squat?

3. Regarding the Colorado Experiment, while I have read the results numerous times, I have never seen detailed information of what exercises, sets, reps, rep speed etc. were done and was wondering if anyone had this information.

I remember I was enthused where I saw this ad (1975 ?) and thought finally a Nautilus squat machine, but this ad was the last I ever heard of it. The rumour at the time was it was so intense people were passing out from using it.

Regards - Tom C
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

I used this single-platform, double-leg version of the Nautilus squat machine many times in 1973. The cam was wrong and it applied a lot of force on your shoulders, so it was very uncomfortable. It was a prototype and only one was made. Seems to me like Arthur loaned it to someone in California in 1974 and I never saw again.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

TOM C

Ellington Darden wrote:
I used this single-platform, double-leg version of the Nautilus squat machine many times in 1973. The cam was wrong and it applied a lot of force on your shoulders, so it was very uncomfortable.

It was a prototype and only one was made. Seems to me like Arthur loaned it to someone in California in 1974 and I never saw again.

Ellington

Thanks for the information. I always wondered what happened and why it never seemed to go into production and now I know.

Tom C
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

I recalled having seen it in the "Total Conditioning - A case Study" put out by Nautilus years ago. Here is a picture of the page this one is pictured on. Dr. Darden, this one looks like it is the split platform one I was trying to take a picture of that was in the garage out back of the elephant enclosure at Jumbolair before my film mysteriously disappeared.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v205/chasbari/Nautiluslegandbackmachine001.jpg[/IMG]
It was referred to in the case study as a leg and back machine as noted on this page of exercises used and is the machine used for squats, I believe.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v205/chasbari/NautilusexercisetableCFAP001.jpg[/IMG]
Hopefully I have linked these pictures correctly as this is how I am accustomed to doing on other boards. I will give it another try if I went about this incorrectly.
Chuck
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

Chuck,

The squat machine at West Point was slightly different than the 1973 version. The West Point machine had a split platform and was easier to get into.

Both machines were prototypes and were never manufactured.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

TOM C

Chuck,

I tried to follow your link but it didn't work.

I attached a copy of the actual ad which is interesting to read. Although you may have to save it and re-open it to actual read it.

I believe the man in the picture is Don Shula.

I think the Dolphins were one of first teams to use Nautilus equipment and this was right around the time of their two SuperBowl wins, but I could be wrong (being that I am a Canadian, eh!).

Tom C
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

Dr. Darden,

I would imagine you could have used the split platform in a Duo-Poly manner thus making it much easier than the single platform which must have required either a team of volunteers to open it up or some sort of assist mechanism.

Tom,

The first link was to the attached picture in my first post and the second was the page giving the breakdown of exercises used in the West Point Study. I will attach it here as I haven't mastered the fine art of posting with pictures yet.

Oh, It was around the time the Dolphins went 17-0 winning the Superbowl.

Chuck
Open User Options Menu

DownUnderLifter

TOM C wrote:
3. Regarding the Colorado Experiment, while I have read the results numerous times, I have never seen detailed information of what exercises, sets, reps, rep speed etc. were done and was wondering if anyone had this information.


Hey Tom

I remember reading somewhere on this site that for Casey's legs tri-set he performed 60 reps in total in just under 3 minutes, which works out to be around 3 seconds per rep.

Cheers

DUL
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

DownUnderLifter wrote:
TOM C wrote:
3. Regarding the Colorado Experiment, while I have read the results numerous times, I have never seen detailed information of what exercises, sets, reps, rep speed etc. were done and was wondering if anyone had this information.


Hey Tom

I remember reading somewhere on this site that for Casey's legs tri-set he performed 60 reps in total in just under 3 minutes, which works out to be around 3 seconds per rep.

Cheers

DUL


I believe that was the quonsett hut(spell?) workout (1970-71?), not the later colorado experiment, which supposedly contained lots of NO.

Franco


Open User Options Menu

Robert Francis

New York, USA

I used the split foot stage version of this machine in 2002 at the Nautilus reconditioning plant in Independance. The spring mechanisms for governing the four bar were like-new stiff and had the tendancy to pitch your car-cass right up and out of the machine if you weren't paying attention. Although it was an interesting piece and a real kick to see one in the flesh, it's function was just OK. At the same time I tried a duo-poly (split MA)Pullover. THAT was a helluva ride!

I don't know what happened to them following the HQ move to Vancouver. They might belong to Wes Brown. He's a very private guy and word is that he has quite a collection of vintage, rare and prototype Nautilus.

zand.
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

Ellington Darden wrote:
The cam was wrong and it applied a lot of force on your shoulders, so it was very uncomfortable.


Wow, that must have really been bad if you said it was uncomfortable and the Duo-squat wasn't for you.

The Duo-squat was impossible for me to use. It was never a challenge on my legs because it was a test of how much pain I could endure in my shoulders and neck. This was my biggest Nautilus disappointment as I wanted to use one so bad after reading so much about it.
Open User Options Menu

DownUnderLifter

Hey TomC

Just wondering how your high rep training is going at the moment?

Cheers

DUL
Open User Options Menu

TOM C

DownUnderLifter wrote:
Hey TomC

Just wondering how your high rep training is going at the moment?

Cheers

DUL


DownUnderLifter

Going good so far! I'm doing hi-rep OME breathing hip belt squats (I hold on to the overhead chinning bar frame which allows me to keep my back straight and also to use my arm strength to complete reps when my legs are no longer quite strong enough to reach the top position.

Regards - Tom C
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

We had a split MA Pullover where I worked years ago. In fact, I think they probably still have it. No one but me knew what the heck to do with it anyway so they always kept the collar in place to keep it functional the "regular way. Maybe I should go check and see if it's still there.
CS
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

TOM C wrote:
DownUnderLifter wrote:
Hey TomC

Just wondering how your high rep training is going at the moment?

Cheers

DUL

DownUnderLifter

Going good so far! I'm doing hi-rep OME breathing hip belt squats (I hold on to the overhead chinning bar frame which allows me to keep my back straight and also to use my arm strength to complete reps when my legs are no longer quite strong enough to reach the top position.

Regards - Tom C


Hey Tom,

so you did start with the squat only for now? Or do you already incoperate other exercises?
Frequency 2 x week?

Regards,

Franco


Open User Options Menu

JimBryan

Florida, USA

Arthur had me use one in the 70's. The floor of the machine moved. I believe this is also the one that shot Doc Ken across the room. I don't remember if I liked it but do Remember Arthur was proud of it until Ken had his mishap.
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Speaking of old Nautilus machines, I am courious as to what happened to the old machines ( or the idea) that had a foot peddle to assist with doing more reps like the tricep machine which was pictured in early Iron Man magazines with Casey Viator woking on it. Having that peddle to help with negatives or forced reps seemed like a good idea? Too expensive to make for the general public or what?

Scott
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

Those were the Omni Machines. Reconditioned a few way back for bicep and tricep. I think that for the regular club set-up they were way over the head of the typical gym user and thus grossly underutilized. As it was, you could sort of use the foot pedal on the bench press portion of the double chest to force some reps as well as using the foot pedal on the super pullover to get some partial assistance on pullover.

Otherwise you would just scream "negatives" at the old Nautilus of Canton and a barrage of assistance would descend on you to help out with negatives and forced reps. No wonder we were so concerned about over-training. Back to the Omnis. The concept was really only feasible for upper body exercises. The pedals were almost like a mini leg press because of the ratio if I remember correctly.
Chuck
Open User Options Menu

Spidercam

chasbari wrote:
We had a split MA Pullover where I worked years ago. In fact, I think they probably still have it. No one but me knew what the heck to do with it anyway so they always kept the collar in place to keep it functional the "regular way. Maybe I should go check and see if it's still there.
CS



I have never even seen a picture of this rare machine, i can only remember David Landau saying it was one to look out for.

Can you explain the training methods you used with it and what benefits you experienced compared to the fixed arm machines?

I imagine one of these being setup with an infimetric bar. This would be interesting don't you think?

Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

Actually, now that you mention it I think it does have an infimetric bar. I am going to stop by there tomorrow morning with my camera to see if I can take a picture. You could use it to do pullovers duo poly like the hip and back where the arm in the lower contracted position was under constant tension while the active arm was doing a regular repetition.

This was a necessary adjustment for the hip and back as the early hip and back had a single coupled movement arm that required a bit of maneuvering to get in and out of. While it might seem like a good way to train we ended up over-riding the duo poly function of the hip and back and would manually hold one arm down so that you could do a much fuller range single leg hip and back... much better results. I think, with my personal experience with midline infimetric difficulties that infimetric pullover caused too much twisting and torque from side to side to be real effective. I already had thoracic compressive back damage from infimetric duo squats. The pullover would just trigger a lot of pain when done infimetrically and I was always pretty form conscious.
Chuck
Open User Options Menu

TOM C

so you did start with the squat only for now? Or do you already incoperate other exercises?
Frequency 2 x week?

Regards,

Franco

Greetings,


Steve Reeves demonstrating the finger tip dead lift.

I started off with hi-rep squat twice per week (tues/fri) and a more extensive upper body routine on Sundays (Neg. dip/PO/shrug/CR/abs etc) which worked fine for the first 2-3 weeks, then I felt overtrained, which could be because; a: it was simply too much; b: I wasn't in good enough condition for a such an extensive routine & should have worked my way up; c: too old (which I don't think is the case as my body grew at about the same pace initially as when I was much younger). At any rate, I cut the squats back to one set once per week (for now) and reduced the upper body workout. So the training is progressing fairly well, but it's hard on the old body (hell, it was hard on the young body).

Having said that, I still think there has to be a better method of training, as the inconsistent results observable in progressive-resistance training don't make sense. The only thing that is consistent is the "inconsistencies." A number of people appear to be training "correctly" but their gains are often poor. It should be possible to consistently stimulate rapid muscular growth for virtually everyone but this is not the case. Also, if after training intensely, it takes a week to recover, this would tend to indicate to me that the body was not intended to be worked in this way, although it is the way I train (for lack of a better system).

I have been doing some research into the role tendons play in weight training and have come across some interesting data. Previously, I had thought that tendons simply attached the muscle, but now, I have come across a number of references that refer to the tendons stretching like a spring & storing energy (loading) on the negative part of the movement and releasing this stored energy on the positive portion of the movement (muscles AND tendons actually lifting the weight, not just the muscles). The faster the movement the more the tendons come into play and assist the movement.

I have studied the training system of Steve Reeves (who I don't believe ever used steroids), he was a master at whipping himself into shape in a short period of time, and he stated that using too heavy a weight and moving the weight too fast were the biggest mistakes trainees made as this brought the tendons heavily into play and reduced the direct muscular growth stimulation significantly. It was Reeves' observation that people who trained in this heavy fast fashion had heavy tendon & ligament development but much less muscular development (which could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on what one's goals are). Reeves referred to this type of training as "demonstrating strength" rather than stimulating muscular growth.

Reeves also, believed in establishing a "brain to muscle connection" that allowed him to focus on contracting only the targeted muscle (thereby requiring a lighter weight) and recommended doing individual muscular contractions away from the gym to build up this "brain to muscle connection." Reeves used a 2/3 cadence, took every set to failure and rested only 45 seconds between sets (usually lowering the weight after each set). These factors again would reduce the weight used. I have read that other trainees were puzzled that they were using heavier weights than Reeves but had much less muscular development. Even though Reeves was strictly a Body Builder (not a power lifter) & usually trained with lighter weights, he was not weak (especially considering the time period: late 1940's - early 1950's) and routinely used a pair of 110 lb DBs for incline presses, a pair of 70 lb DBs for incline curls and when someone questioned his strength he promptly dead lifted 405 lbs gripping only the edges of the plates (example picture attached). He, also, could clean 215 lbs from a kneeing position.

While Reeves had exceptional genetics, I don't think that invalidates his training methods which seemingly allowed him to cause a large degree of muscular growth stimulation while not impinging too greatly on his body's energy system (or CNS, if you prefer) due to the lighter weights used and the focused contractions. Also, his training allowed for both sarcoplasmic and sarcomere hypertrophy at the same time.

At any rate, the question becomes: will using too heavy a weight and/or training too fast cause too much tendon involvement thereby reducing the level of muscular growth stimulation possible? Could this tendon "interference" if too great actually prevent sufficient muscular growth stimulation from taking place resulting in poor or no growth?

Regards - Tom C
Open User Options Menu

Ciccio

Interesting, Tom, you may remember that I was skeptical(concerned?) of your fast reps in the other thread. Needless to say I agree with what you (and obviously Mr.Reeves) have to say here about tendons and stored energy. And it even goes further. Not only acts the tendon as a sort of spring (aka "serial element" in biomechanics) but the titine filaments inside the muscle do too (aka "parallel element").

That's why I prefer slow, controlled reps from a deadstop at bottom, starting with a squeeze of the target muscles. But I do so with heavy weights, it's possible if you don't mind slow (slowed by the weight) reps and only few of them.

Regards,

Franco
Open User Options Menu

chasbari

Ohio, USA

Just got back from my old haunts only to have found that the split movement arm pullover was sold about 8 years ago. Got to visit with some friends... haven't been back there for quite some time.

They still had the Duo Squat with the infimetric bar. I remember when we got ours new at Nautilus. I wouldn't let any high school kids on it because I was concerned about skeletal maturity and epiphysial growth plate closure and all that. We would screen carefully before putting anyone on it. The local Y, on the other hand, was pushing young kids on it so it was no surprise that the brother of a local banned olympian ended up with a stress fracture of the spine shortly after they go theirs. May be entirely coincidental but not to me.

The Duo squat was never a very effective exercise for me. In fact any squat or leg press exercise was never very effective for me regardless of how I changed rep schemes, etc. I always responded best with lower body isolation exercises which never messed up my back.
Chuck
Open User Options Menu

southbeach

bumping this because it's a darn interesting thread!
Open User Options Menu

kurtvf

So for the upright squat machine does the shoulder harness part move up or does the foot platform thing move down? It looks like a hack squat machine to me.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy