Bowflex shatters under load

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 09:03:20 -0400, willbrink.DeleteThis@comcast.net (Will Brink)
wrote:

>In article <45ff1a25.16127132.DeleteThis@news.telus.net>, lohsea.DeleteThis@3web.nettax (Achim
>Nolcken Lohse) wrote:
>
>> My Bowflex PowerPro with Lat Tower failed dangerously this weekend as
>> I started my workout. The plastic rod box holding the flex rods broke
>> loose from the machine's vertical shaft and both ends of the box
>> shattered, scattering jagged shards of plastic in all directions. I
>> found pieces scattered as far as 15 feet away.
>
>
>Hmmm, plastic rods. No chance of problems there....
>
Correction: the rod holder box (the part that shattered) is plastic,
the rods are some sort of proprietary composite material.

FWIW, I own two rifles with plastic stocks, and they are pretty tough
- much tougher than wood, and a lot lighter than steel (I DID manage
to break one in two by dropping myself and my motorbike on it in
subzero temperature - but Steyr replaced it at no charge).

I've always felt the rod box was the weakest part of the Bowflex (I've
got five of them in various states of deterioration in my parts
collection). But, like many of the Bowflex's features, this may be
more a problem of shoddy implementation than a flaw in the conceptual
design.

Such an expensive apparatus (I paid CAD$1600 for a demo unit six years
ago, and shelled out another couple of hundred for the lat tower and
accessories two years later) should come with bolts instead of screws,
and exact torquing specs for all fasteners. Hell, I've got a $300 roof
rack for my VW Golf that comes with its own torque wrench!

One simple enhancement that I've undertaken is to replace all the
stock phillips-head screws that hold the rods in the rod box, and the
rod box to the frame, with socket-and-slot cap-head screws of the same
size and thread. This is the best one can do with fastener holes that
should have been threaded for bolts but weren't. The socket and cap
head allows one to better insure the screws are centered and not
overtightened. They also make later removal a lot easier.

I'm still waiting to find out how many removal-insertion cycles the
rod bases will sustain before reaming out. I found out a few years ago
that Bowflex was aware of this problem, because they have two sizes of
screws for the rod bases. They start with #8's, and then transition to
#10's. I found that loosening was a major problem with the #8's,
resulting in damage to both the screw hole and the grooves in the rod
bases that prevent them from rotating. I therefore replaced all of
these screws with the composite thread (ie. wider gap between cutting
edges) cap-head #10's, and have not had any loosening since, despite
the fact that there's already been considerable wear on the
positioning grooves from the initial use period.

The problem is that the 5# and 10# rods are pretty narrow, and may not
take a larger diameter screw without cracking.



--

Achim
_____/)
axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

On 21 Mar 2007 10:31:26 -0700, "Ken" <Omaha8_Beach.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Mar 20, 12:56 pm, loh....RemoveThis@3web.nettax (Achim Nolcken Lohse) wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:01:31 +1000, "David" <forgot....RemoveThis@yahoo.com.au>
>
>> The fact is that the Bowflex was strongly endorsed by Ellington
>> Darden, who has some serious professional credentials in the fitness
>> community, and quite a few owners have reported that this apparatus
>> worked satisfactorily for them. For many people, the Bowflex PowerPro
>> was the ONLY serious workout apparatus they could fit into their
>> living space.
>>
>
>I have a lot of respect for Ellington Darden, but if he has been
>promoting Bowflex as a good way to subsantially increase muscle mass,
>you need to consider his ties to Arthur Jones and the Nautilus
>company.
>
>
>Ken


Just to clarify - Darden reported in one of his books (the title
escapes me at the moment) on success in using the Bowflex, together
with a diet and hydration regimen, as a tool for achieving and
maintaining fitness and leanness. This, together with his early
association with the development of HIT and later SuperSlow, persuaded
me to try the Bowflex as a solution to my space problems.

The Bowflex PowerPro User's Manual, copyright 1997, that I received
with my PowerPro in 2001 also contained as an addendum "Dr. Ellington
Darden's 6 Week Fast Fat Loss - Body Leanness Program" - a 23-page
guide, consisting of PowerPro workout routines, guidelines for
hydration, diet advice and meal plans, and instructions for fat
measurement and record keeping.

The addendum is prefaced by "A Personal Guarantee From Dr. Ellington
Darden" which guarantees significant weight reduction (about 28 lbs
for men, 17 for women) in six weeks using the Bowflex three times a
week while following his dietary and hydration regime.

So Darden did not endorse the Bowflex as a superior apparatus for
building muscle mass, but as a tool, combined with diet, for producing
leanness.

Since I had already been a practicioner of HIT/SuperSlow technique for
some years, and also had my own well-developed ideas on nutrition, I
followed neither the workout plan, nor the dietary program, except for
an early nod to the hydration program (which I believe makes sense and
works, if you can stick to it). Even so, I achieved satisfactory
fitness results until I ran into the limitations of the PowerPro.
After that, all I could manage was to maintain my musculature, but not
build it further.

I did contact Darden by e-mail a couple of years on, and asked him for
his suggestions on better implementing SuperSlow protocol on the
Bowflex. The progressive resistance of the rods poses a serious
technical difficulty in integrating the Bowflex into standard SS
technique, particularly in achieving good timing, smooth turnarounds,
and especially in avoiding unloading at the bottom turnarounds.

I'm sorry to report that his response seemed unenthusiastic and less
than helpful. Still, I don't think that in any way invalidates his
earlier work.

While he may have benefitted financially from his endorsement of the
Bowflex, I believe he reported his results honestly, and that his
endorsement fo the Bowflex likely helped many thousands of people who
would otherwise not have done so attain and maintain a good level of
fitness. I'm quite certain I would never have spent close to $2000 on
this apparatus without his endorsement.

And while it didn't help me become another Arnold Schwarzenegger, it
did help me to stay reasonably fit and muscular for half a decade. And
that made the investment worthwhile for me, even though I've been
looking for something better (that I can afford!) for several years
now.


--

Achim
_____/)
axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

On 21 Mar 2007 11:33:50 -0700, nickmorabito.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com wrote:

....
>
>Achim - The bowflex is total and complete junk, I've never seen a
>worst product on the market, it really is a piece of garbage.

>I wouldn't take one for free, in fact if you paid me to have a brand new
>one I'd decline.

Have you READ my posts? I've been using it for six years. What is your
expertise based on?

>
> Also, you only get resistance one way which is ridiculous.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's news to me. Please explain...
>
>For $300 you can get yourself a Weider Home Gym 9635 (I believe thats
>the model) THey are bottom of the line however they are FAR supriour
>than Bowflex.

Over two years ago I paid $1000 down on a $3500 leg press machine
optimized for SuperSlow.

The only reason I'm still using my Bowflex exclusively is that the
vendor/designer/builder of the ordered leg press machine has tied up
my money by stringing me along for 18 months past the promised
delivery date, and refuses to refund my advance payment (a refund I
demanded four months ago, when he missed his second delivery extension
by four months).

So trust me, I'm not in the market for Weider Home Gyms of any grade.



--

Achim
_____/)
axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

<nickmorabito.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174502210.883624.219540@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 21, 4:52 am, "David" <forgot....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>> But if you like Bowflex, that is the bottom line.
>> I guess 2 million users can't be wrong- Hide quoted text -
>
> David - they are wrong, its garbage

I totally agree - but if Achim is happy with his machine . . . . what can I
say . . . .I mean we if all chased the same girl . . . .

>
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

Achim Nolcken Lohse wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:39:22 +1000, "David" <forgotwhy DeleteThis @yahoo.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> ...
>>>
>>> And, uh, double up on your sweats if you don't get the body armor. A
>>> nice bicycle helmet might not be a bad idea either. Do they make
>>> those with a visor?
>>>
>>
>> Achim - don't pay any attention to that Curt guy - he is upset
>> because the janitor that used to run the bldg where he works quit
>> and as a parting gesture he stole Curt's hat and relieved himself in
>> it - then stole Curt's calculator. Of course he is Chairman of the
>> Humour Committee and what that really means is that we 'humour' him.
>>
>>> --
> No problem. Good, clean humour always spices things up a bit.
>
> I try to do my homework, so although I haven't posted here for six
> years, I did download and look through some 11,000 headers IIRC in
> misc.fitness.weights (my ISP's news server co-ordinators must think
> highly of this group, because they keep three months' worth of
> messages) before posting again. So I've already had a taste of the
> Humour Committee's servings.
>
> But thanks for the heads up.

Heads up? Up who.....
>
> Achim
> _____/)
> axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

"Curt" <curtjames DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1174508956.527842.241950@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> David wrote:
> [...]
>
>> Achim - don't pay any attention to
>> that Curt guy -
>
> Probably good advice there, actually. ;o)
>
>> he is upset because the janitor that used
>> to run the bldg where he works
>
> And that David and Charles own.

Curt, we own the *business* (such as it is we had 3 customers all year and 2
of them were just trying to get out of the rain) - not the building!
>
>> quit
>
> However, that's NO reflection on the extremely generous financial
> package offered by D & C Inc., of course.

Like I said, we are doing a review at the end of Dec and if warranted, we
will give you a suitable increase in your remuneration package. I am sorry
we can't do it in Oct as originally planned as Charles will still be on that
world cruise where he will be trying very hard to network so we can be more
successful and afford that pay hike that you have been bugging us about for
the last 3 years. (As you know the membership to that swanky golf club
($33000 annual) is just a little higher in priority for networking purposes
as you can appreciate!)

>
>> and as a parting gesture he stole Curt's
>> hat and relieved himself in it - then
>
> Yes, THEN! As if the "relieved himself in it" wasn't gesture enough.
> Hmph!
>
>> stole Curt's calculator.
>
> To his credit, he left the abacus and the sundial.

The sundial? You have a sundial? Where did you get that from? I don't
remember authorizing that acquisition. You know, it's hard to get good help
these days.
>
>> Of course he is Chairman of the Humour
>> Committee
>
> Yes, the Humour Committee, hereafter to be referred to as the "Device
> Used to Offer Mean-Spirited Comments About People I Don't Like Because
> That's What That Goof JWM (Whatever) Says, Right?" Committee, David.
>
> You can use the acronym, uh, the DUTOM-SCAPIDLBTWTGJ(W)S,R? Committee.
> It's simpler that way. Thanks.

Well, what did you expect? Some kind of medal? You need to count your
blessings - (let's see you've got a stable and secure job, a bright future
with prospects, perks of a stool, sundial, abacus etc and at least 2 good
friends)

>
>> and what that really means is that
>> we 'humour' him.
>
> Like the janitor humoured me? Because that case is pending.

Truth be known I never trusted that guy. Just a little too smug.

>
> --
> Curt
>
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

"Achim Nolcken Lohse" <lohsea DeleteThis @3web.nettax> wrote in message
news:45ff1a25.16127132@news.telus.net...
> My Bowflex PowerPro with Lat Tower failed dangerously this weekend as
> I started my workout.

I was hoping it happened halfway through your workout. That would explain
the shaking in the preceding thread.
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 05:15:24 +1000, "David" <forgotwhy.RemoveThis@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:

>
><nickmorabito.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1174502210.883624.219540@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> On Mar 21, 4:52 am, "David" <forgot....RemoveThis@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> But if you like Bowflex, that is the bottom line.
>>> I guess 2 million users can't be wrong- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> David - they are wrong, its garbage
>
>I totally agree - but if Achim is happy with his machine . . . . what can I
>say . . . .I mean we if all chased the same girl . . . .
>
Did I say "happy" at any time?

Actually, I went on at great length about its numerous defects and
shortcomings.

OTOH, to suggest that it's unusable for its designed purpose - getting
and staying fit, is just nonsense. Unless, of course, you've had two
rods in a row snap on you. That would definitely send me ballistic.

Still, two users out of two million (I'll assume that figure is
reasonable, just for sake of argument) reporting broken rods is more
indicative of a bad production lot of rods combined with a lapse in
quality control than design and materials failure across the board.

The trouble is that government makes it so damn hard to report these
problems. I don't know what it's like in the USA, but here in Canada,
I've tried to report an extremely dangerous automotive confusion to
Transport Canada staff, and been told to buzz off because the
manufacturer, General Motors, provided the same misinformation to the
commercial database Transport Canada uses as their service technicians
receive.

The issue involved the size of the front disk rotors on a 12 valve 95
Geo Tracker, which are listed in the GM manuals as being 10mm thick
from the factory, and needing to be replaced at <8mm. The problem is
that the rotors on this model actually started at 17mm thick and
minimum thickness is 15mm. The result is that three different GM
dealers serviced my Tracker and passed the brakes. My GM service
manual said the same thing. I finally took the car to a Suzuki dealer,
and they told me that my rotors were way past the safety limit, at
just over 10mm (I kept and measured them myself).

Twelve years later, GM still has never sent out a warning bulletin
about the dangerous brake misinformation, and as far as I can tell, GM
service shops still don't know any better. When I tried to buy a new
clutch for this model in November 2000, I learned the same situation
applied there. In fact, I had to persuade Centreforce, which makes
the best premium clutch for the Tracker, that the information they got
from GM was incorrect, even six years later. The nearest GM dealer had
no clue either.

--

Achim
_____/)
axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:09:07 -0500, "ATP*"
<waxwingslain DeleteThis @azurepane.com> wrote:

>
>"Achim Nolcken Lohse" <lohsea DeleteThis @3web.nettax> wrote in message
>news:45ff1a25.16127132@news.telus.net...
>> My Bowflex PowerPro with Lat Tower failed dangerously this weekend as
>> I started my workout.
>
>I was hoping it happened halfway through your workout. That would explain
>the shaking in the preceding thread.
>
No, that's not me reporting in the previous thread - two other Bowflex
users. I seem to have gotten rather better mileage out of mine.

--

Achim
_____/)
axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

"Achim Nolcken Lohse" <lohsea DeleteThis @3web.nettax> wrote in message
news:460220ed.45270171@news.telus.net...
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 05:15:24 +1000, "David" <forgotwhy DeleteThis @yahoo.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>>
>><nickmorabito DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1174502210.883624.219540@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 21, 4:52 am, "David" <forgot... DeleteThis @yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> But if you like Bowflex, that is the bottom line.
>>>> I guess 2 million users can't be wrong- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> David - they are wrong, its garbage
>>
>>I totally agree - but if Achim is happy with his machine . . . . what can
>>I
>>say . . . .I mean we if all chased the same girl . . . .
>>
> Did I say "happy" at any time?
>
> Actually, I went on at great length about its numerous defects and
> shortcomings.
>
> OTOH, to suggest that it's unusable for its designed purpose - getting
> and staying fit, is just nonsense. Unless, of course, you've had two
> rods in a row snap on you. That would definitely send me ballistic.
>
> Still, two users out of two million (I'll assume that figure is
> reasonable, just for sake of argument) reporting broken rods is more
> indicative of a bad production lot of rods combined with a lapse in
> quality control than design and materials failure across the board.

I would say more than 2 users would have had a problem,
Around 2 years ago 420,000 Bowflex machines were recalled due to mechanical
problems. In Nov 2004 there was a recall of around 800,000 Power Pro models
for various problems . Apparently this model was discontinued soon after the
recall.

Will comment about your experience below a little later - sad how consumers
are treated these days. You almost need to threaten a class action to get
any response

>
> The trouble is that government makes it so damn hard to report these
> problems. I don't know what it's like in the USA, but here in Canada,
> I've tried to report an extremely dangerous automotive confusion to
> Transport Canada staff, and been told to buzz off because the
> manufacturer, General Motors, provided the same misinformation to the
> commercial database Transport Canada uses as their service technicians
> receive.
>
> The issue involved the size of the front disk rotors on a 12 valve 95
> Geo Tracker, which are listed in the GM manuals as being 10mm thick
> from the factory, and needing to be replaced at <8mm. The problem is
> that the rotors on this model actually started at 17mm thick and
> minimum thickness is 15mm. The result is that three different GM
> dealers serviced my Tracker and passed the brakes. My GM service
> manual said the same thing. I finally took the car to a Suzuki dealer,
> and they told me that my rotors were way past the safety limit, at
> just over 10mm (I kept and measured them myself).
>
> Twelve years later, GM still has never sent out a warning bulletin
> about the dangerous brake misinformation, and as far as I can tell, GM
> service shops still don't know any better. When I tried to buy a new
> clutch for this model in November 2000, I learned the same situation
> applied there. In fact, I had to persuade Centreforce, which makes
> the best premium clutch for the Tracker, that the information they got
> from GM was incorrect, even six years later. The nearest GM dealer had
> no clue either.
>
> --
>
> Achim
> _____/)
> axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

"Achim Nolcken Lohse" <lohsea RemoveThis @3web.nettax> wrote in message
news:460220ed.45270171@news.telus.net...
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 05:15:24 +1000, "David" <forgotwhy RemoveThis @yahoo.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>>
>><nickmorabito RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1174502210.883624.219540@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 21, 4:52 am, "David" <forgot... RemoveThis @yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> But if you like Bowflex, that is the bottom line.
>>>> I guess 2 million users can't be wrong- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> David - they are wrong, its garbage
>>
>>I totally agree - but if Achim is happy with his machine . . . . what can
>>I
>>say . . . .I mean we if all chased the same girl . . . .
>>
> Did I say "happy" at any time?

Well... I realize you would not have been "happy" to have the service issues
but I meant "happy" with the machine as a fitness product.

>
> Actually, I went on at great length about its numerous defects and
> shortcomings.
>
> OTOH, to suggest that it's unusable for its designed purpose - getting
> and staying fit, is just nonsense. Unless, of course, you've had two
> rods in a row snap on you. That would definitely send me ballistic.

No of course it is not unusable - no one suggested that it was unusable.
However there are a few nutcases around who maintain that Bowflex is sub par
when it comes to evaluating fitness equipment. I have never used a Bowflex
however being in the industry I do get reports and feedback on different
equipment. Bowflex has never taken off in Australia because fitness
specialist stores would not touch it. The method of resistance - the rods
are an abomination. As you start the movement I believe the resistance level
is around 60% and reaches 100% as you complete the movement. Which means
that the first part of the movement is far too light and you are limited to
the resistance you are able to handle at the end of the movement. You
recruit most muscle fibres around the middle of the movement and it tapers
off at the beginning and end. Very similar to the resistance you get from
the rubber bands.
Incrementation which is the primary method of goal setting is impossible
with Bowflex - Show me how you bench press 200 lbs and add 2.5 lbs per week
periodically - you can't do that. That's one of the reasons this system is a
joke for serious weight training.


>
> Still, two users out of two million (I'll assume that figure is
> reasonable, just for sake of argument) reporting broken rods is more
> indicative of a bad production lot of rods combined with a lapse in
> quality control than design and materials failure across the board.
>
> The trouble is that government makes it so damn hard to report these
> problems. I don't know what it's like in the USA, but here in Canada,
> I've tried to report an extremely dangerous automotive confusion to
> Transport Canada staff, and been told to buzz off because the
> manufacturer, General Motors, provided the same misinformation to the
> commercial database Transport Canada uses as their service technicians
> receive.
>
> The issue involved the size of the front disk rotors on a 12 valve 95
> Geo Tracker, which are listed in the GM manuals as being 10mm thick
> from the factory, and needing to be replaced at <8mm. The problem is
> that the rotors on this model actually started at 17mm thick and
> minimum thickness is 15mm. The result is that three different GM
> dealers serviced my Tracker and passed the brakes. My GM service
> manual said the same thing. I finally took the car to a Suzuki dealer,
> and they told me that my rotors were way past the safety limit, at
> just over 10mm (I kept and measured them myself).
>
> Twelve years later, GM still has never sent out a warning bulletin
> about the dangerous brake misinformation, and as far as I can tell, GM
> service shops still don't know any better. When I tried to buy a new
> clutch for this model in November 2000, I learned the same situation
> applied there. In fact, I had to persuade Centreforce, which makes
> the best premium clutch for the Tracker, that the information they got
> from GM was incorrect, even six years later. The nearest GM dealer had
> no clue either.
>
> --
>
> Achim
> _____/)
> axethetax
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

Achim Nolcken Lohse wrote:

> Sure, a Smith machine would work better,

The Smith machine is a dangerous piece of garbage, and the Bowflex is
just garbage.

Join a freaking gym and lift free weights. Hell, even bodyweight
exercises are going to be more beneficial than anything you can do in a
Smith machine or a bowlfex.
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load 

Achim Nolcken Lohse wrote:

> Over two years ago I paid $1000 down on a $3500 leg press machine
> optimized for SuperSlow.

$3500 leg press machine?! Are you joking? If not, you're a fool. Leg
pressing is far inferior to squatting.

The money you wasted on junk like Bowflex and leg presses could have
used as gym fees, and today you'd be much stronger.

But perhaps you're trolling.
 >> Stay informed about: Bowflex shatters under load