Fan bikes are great, but they're not that great.

Strength training requires force production at >80% of maximum. Almost nobody is going to be able to produce that high a percentage of their maximum force when moving fast. But you need to move fast on an Airdyne in order to generate a lot of force.

also, I don't think an Airdyne would train a sufficient range of motion. And the requirement to switch directions fast (push to pull, pressure on the pedal to no pressure on the pedal) is going to make it harder yet to produce anything close to max force.

On the other hand, you could probably get some pretty decent strength training with an appropriately loaded prowler. Especially if you had a rope you could pull it hand-over-hand with.

>>37956036
>Almost nobody is going to be able to produce that high a percentage of their maximum force when moving fast
Because it uses wind resistance, trying to, "go faster" actually slows you down a lot. And then it becomes extremely difficult to pedal, push and pull the harder you go. So I'm not sure what you mean by this. The only thing inhibiting you is your strength and heart.

>>37956106
>and heart
*your cardiovascular fitness level i mean
i see this as another extreme positive as well

>>37956106
Not exactly. Resistance at 110rpm is higher than at 90rpm, yes, but you need to pedal at 110rpm in order to get that higher level of resistance. That means you'll be moving faster than you would be at 90rpm. If you want to push harder, you need to go faster.

On the other hand, with a barbell (or a sled), if you want to push harder, you can add weight and move at the same speed. See what I mean?

(great, great conditioning tools, though.).

>>37956155
But you don't exceed the speed at which you're capable of pedaling before the resistance kicks the shit out of you so no, I still don't see your point. Unless your max MPH on a regular bicycle is like 5 MPG or something retarded. You will never reach a point where speed is inhibiting you.

>>37956234
>MPG
*mph

>>37956234
>But you don't exceed the speed at which you're capable of pedaling before the resistance kicks the shit out of you so no
I don't think that's actually true, though. If it were, you'd expect Airdyne work to increase your 1rm in the lifts, which as a matter of empirical observation it doesn't. Maybe if your strength curve were such that you could push on an Airdyne at 85% of Fmax, it would work, and the world is sufficiently large that there might actually be someone like that out there. But it's certainly not me and it's most likely not you. On the other hand, try it if you want, and let us know how it goes if you do.

>I’ve gathered data on peak force production values in each of the three powerlifts by measuring force with a tendo unit as well as using motion analysis software on videos of the three powerlifts. Peak force production with highly sub maximal weights (defined above) does not approach peak force production values generated by heavier weights REGARDLESS OF INTENT TO ACCELERATE. Sure, trying to accelerate produces more force than NOT trying to accelerate. But it still doesn’t produce as much force as using a heavy weight. Measurements of peak force production using 75% of 1RM were approximately 85% of the peak force that was measured when using 90% of 1RM for the same number of reps. In other words, lighter weights produced about 85% of the peak force value that the heavy weights did.
http://www.jtsstrength.com/articles/2013/03/28/speed-work-not-this-again/

>>37956348
>If it were, you'd expect Airdyne work to increase your 1rm in the lifts
The best way to increase your 1rm in any given lift is to do said lift. That's not an argument against the efficacy of a tool to train your whole body at once.

The article you linked is about speed work which isn't relevant to my post, either. As you actually go slower/receive harder resistance the harder you exert yourself. Speed lifting, there's no equal mechanism.

>>37955901

It's tv-shop bullshit tier, get a rower/ERG

In fact, let's do the math. From the same article:
>studies have shown it only takes .15 seconds and .25 seconds to reach Fmax in pulls.

I can spike an Airdyne at about 120rpm going full tilt boogie. So one full revolution of the pedals lasts 0.5 second.

Let's focus on my right foot for simplicity's sake. Since a full revolution of the pedals takes 0.5 second, a half revolution will take 0.25 seconds. So my right foot will travel from 12:00 to 6:00 in 0.25 seconds.

At 12:00, downward force is much less than Fmax (I'm bringing my foot over the top of the revolution.). similarly, at 6:00, downward force is much less than Fmax.

So I need to go from much less than Fmax to Fmax and back to much less than Fmax in 0.25 seconds with the maximum resistance I can get out of an Airdyne.

So how long does it take to go from Fmax to zero? I don't know--but if I'm slow, it'll take me the entire downward stroke to get to Fmax in the first place. And the faster you pedal (the higher the resistance) the worse this problem gets. So it's maybe not completely infeasible, but it's not the way I'd bet.

>>37956572
You also have to consider how damn convenient it is to get your pushing, pulling, legs and cardio all in one machine that could fit in any situation. Not trying to suggest this as "the way" for competitive lifters by any means but possibly a damn good alternative for everybody else.

>>37956689
This is exactly why so many people like the rowing machine. Realistically, though it may be good for overall health you would never look very well proprtioned.