lean bulk vs full bulk for muscle mass
Options
kingkam21
Posts: 76 Member
I'm about to enter into my first cut and I am thinking ahead of what I'm going to do after. I am looking to gain muscle mass and I'm wondering if our muscles react the same way during a lean bulk vs full bulk?
The body will obviously gain more fat during a full bulk but I would imagine to gain more muscle mass aswell?
...What is your opinion
The body will obviously gain more fat during a full bulk but I would imagine to gain more muscle mass aswell?
...What is your opinion
0
Replies
-
Men can gain a potential half a pound a week of muscle on average. Since some fat gain is totally unavoidable men usually bulk at between half a pound to a pound a week. Which is 250-500 calories extra a day.
The leaner you are when you start the better the ratio of muscle to fat, and as you go higher into the body fat percentages the higher the fat to muscle ratio.
It's all about finding your accurate maintenance figure before you start, and getting your lifting form fine tuned before you start your progressive program.
This is less my opinion and more well known facts.
A lean bulk is known as a clean bulk, with controlled calories and minimum fat gain. (Not clean foods).
A full bulk is known as a dirty bulk, with too much calorie excess and high fat to muscle ratio.0 -
So would this mean that I'm safe doing a "dirty" bulk at the beginning of my bulk, and switch to a leaner bulk after a month or two???Springfield1970 wrote: »Men can gain a potential half a pound a week of muscle on average. Since some fat gain is totally unavoidable men usually bulk at between half a pound to a pound a week. Which is 250-500 calories extra a day.
The leaner you are when you start the better the ratio of muscle to fat, and as you go higher into the body fat percentages the higher the fat to muscle ratio.
It's all about finding your accurate maintenance figure before you start, and getting your lifting form fine tuned before you start your progressive program.
This is less my opinion and more well known facts.
A lean bulk is known as a clean bulk, with controlled calories and minimum fat gain. (Not clean foods).
A full bulk is known as a dirty bulk, with too much calorie excess and high fat to muscle ratio.
I am new to body building and have only been working out for 9 months, and have also been bulking for 9 months. I started out at a skinny 130lbs so a full bulk was appropriate for me. I did some research and found that it's best to do a 8 month bulk and a 4 month cut. But I personally don't think I have enough body fat to cut for 4 months, I am still pretty lean at About 9-10% body fat (last time I checked i was at 8% but I believe it to be more). I am nervous about my cut because I do not like the fact that I will not make any muscle gains, but I will enjoy the fat loss and start seeing my abs again.0 -
There's no point doing a dirty bulk, as you have a limit to the amount of muscle you can gain per week and the rest will be just pure fat when you could be really controlling that gain and gaining more muscle than fat.
You are going into a small cut now? What's the point of cutting for a while (ps 8 months bulk then 4 months cut, very unspecific, you need to read the stickies in this section) then just over eating and gaining the fat again?
You're body fat counts are possibly wrong.
How do you feel about posting pics up and getting estimates and advice?
That could be your best bet.0 -
You have absolutely no reason to be cutting if you're only 10% body fat. You are at the perfect percentage to start bulking. Bulk until like 14% then cut again. You could go even higher if you'd like, I just personally prefer not to have that much extra weight coming from being overweight through my younger years0
-
You've been bulking for 8 months, and you're only 9-10% bf.
Something is not right here.0 -
Dirty bulk won't benefit anymore muscle gain than a lean bulk would.It's just an excuse to eat like crap and say "it's fine, I'm bulking." Stick to the lean bulk, you won't regret it0
-
I've been skiny my whole life, this is the most fat I've ever had my whole life. I used a hand held monitor at my gym and it clocked me at 7.5% body fat but I know it's not accurate so I'm guessing I'm at 10%. The only true fat that I hold is in my abdominal area. I can flex all my muscles and pinch skin except my abs are not visible. I can have a four pack in the mornings before I begin eating, or if I don't eat after 4 hours, I would like to see a full 6 pack. I believe it to be genetic s because my dad's side of the family all gain weight in the stomach area and skinny everywhere else. I don't mind posting a pic on this post, if I knew how.0
-
Springfield1970 wrote: »Men can gain a potential half a pound a week of muscle on average. Since some fat gain is totally unavoidable men usually bulk at between half a pound to a pound a week. Which is 250-500 calories extra a day.
The leaner you are when you start the better the ratio of muscle to fat, and as you go higher into the body fat percentages the higher the fat to muscle ratio.
It's all about finding your accurate maintenance figure before you start, and getting your lifting form fine tuned before you start your progressive program.
This is less my opinion and more well known facts.
A lean bulk is known as a clean bulk, with controlled calories and minimum fat gain. (Not clean foods).
A full bulk is known as a dirty bulk, with too much calorie excess and high fat to muscle ratio.
Maybe a man that is beginning can gain a 1/2 pound of muscle per week, but not someone who has been training for more than 2 or 3 years and the more you train the harder it is to gain. This is true for natty's at least.
See: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html/0 -
Springfield1970 wrote: »Men can gain a potential half a pound a week of muscle on average. Since some fat gain is totally unavoidable men usually bulk at between half a pound to a pound a week. Which is 250-500 calories extra a day.
The leaner you are when you start the better the ratio of muscle to fat, and as you go higher into the body fat percentages the higher the fat to muscle ratio.
It's all about finding your accurate maintenance figure before you start, and getting your lifting form fine tuned before you start your progressive program.
This is less my opinion and more well known facts.
A lean bulk is known as a clean bulk, with controlled calories and minimum fat gain. (Not clean foods).
A full bulk is known as a dirty bulk, with too much calorie excess and high fat to muscle ratio.
Maybe a man that is beginning can gain a 1/2 pound of muscle per week, but not someone who has been training for more than 2 or 3 years and the more you train the harder it is to gain. This is true for natty's at least.
See: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html/
I believe they are talking about pro/expert lifters but I'd be interested in others experience.
I know as an older experienced and small female I had no problem gaining my quarter of a pound of muscle per week.
0 -
how much have you gained during this nine month bulk??0
-
If this is not your first bulk, I suggest a slower bulk. As a novice, you can put on muscle extremely quickly. As an intermediate, much less so. Bulking too hard will result in lots of fat with the muscle.
If you are doing a bodybuilding program/aesthetic reasons, I think slow bulk is the way to go. If you are doing a hardcore strength program with weekly PRs (i.e. texas method), perhaps a full bulk is appropriate, though you will need to cut and cardio to remove the fat gain.0 -
Just from a numbers standpoint the way you're measuring body fat has to be incorrect.
If you are currently 175 lbs and 10% bodyfat, you would have only 17.5lbs body fat. But at 135lbs with 7.5% bodyfat, you had roughly 10lbs body fat. That would mean out of the 45lbs you gained 37.5lbs of it was pure muscle, which is impossible to do in only nine months.
If possible come back with more accurate numbers, because at the time being it's hard to give you solid advice when we don't really know your stats.0 -
MichelleLei1 wrote: »Just from a numbers standpoint the way you're measuring body fat has to be incorrect.
If you are currently 175 lbs and 10% bodyfat, you would have only 17.5lbs body fat. But at 135lbs with 7.5% bodyfat, you had roughly 10lbs body fat. That would mean out of the 45lbs you gained 37.5lbs of it was pure muscle, which is impossible to do in only nine months.
If possible come back with more accurate numbers, because at the time being it's hard to give you solid advice when we don't really know your stats.
I think you read it wrong. At 175lbs the hand held monitor clocked me at 7.5%.
I didn't mention my body fat before I started
But I did happen to use the hand held monitor before I started and it clocked me at 3%, which I'm guessing I was 4-5%.
0 -
MichelleLei1 wrote: »Just from a numbers standpoint the way you're measuring body fat has to be incorrect.
If you are currently 175 lbs and 10% bodyfat, you would have only 17.5lbs body fat. But at 135lbs with 7.5% bodyfat, you had roughly 10lbs body fat. That would mean out of the 45lbs you gained 37.5lbs of it was pure muscle, which is impossible to do in only nine months.
If possible come back with more accurate numbers, because at the time being it's hard to give you solid advice when we don't really know your stats.
I think you read it wrong. At 175lbs the hand held monitor clocked me at 7.5%.
I didn't mention my body fat before I started
But I did happen to use the hand held monitor before I started and it clocked me at 3%, which I'm guessing I was 4-5%.
You weren't 4-5%
All forms of BF % measurements have massive inaccuracies with the most accurate, DEXA, still having 5% swings or being easily manipulated. I doubt a cheap, handheld impedance measurement is accurate and I doubt you've taken accurate measurements. It's unrealistic that you had 7 lbs of bodyfat or less, outside of being anorexic, and having to worry about possible organ failure issues. There's a reason anorexic people can get hospitalized and many medical issues can occur.
Realistically you're probably around 15%bf, give or take a few percent. Where you're at specifically doesn't matter as you have no realistic way to get an accurate measurement. Bulk to a point where you're happy with your bulk and cut to a point where you're happy with your cut.
If you want to minimize fat then you need to count calories during your bulk. If you just want to have your bulks be a treat for a successful cut then they can be more sloppy or you may want a higher calorie count for strength purposes.0 -
MichelleLei1 wrote: »Just from a numbers standpoint the way you're measuring body fat has to be incorrect.
If you are currently 175 lbs and 10% bodyfat, you would have only 17.5lbs body fat. But at 135lbs with 7.5% bodyfat, you had roughly 10lbs body fat. That would mean out of the 45lbs you gained 37.5lbs of it was pure muscle, which is impossible to do in only nine months.
If possible come back with more accurate numbers, because at the time being it's hard to give you solid advice when we don't really know your stats.
I think you read it wrong. At 175lbs the hand held monitor clocked me at 7.5%.
I didn't mention my body fat before I started
But I did happen to use the hand held monitor before I started and it clocked me at 3%, which I'm guessing I was 4-5%.
My bad, but unless you were ridiculously skinny or ridiculously shredded I doubt you were at 5% body fat. This is a highly inaccurate way to measure body fat (b/c everyone holds muscle and fat differently), but I think this picture gives you a better image of what general body fat percentages look like.
static1.squarespace.com/static/52d356b4e4b02276b3d9b442/t/52d36090e4b0587f97c88377/1389584529524/Men+Fat.jpg?format=1000w0 -
MichelleLei1 wrote: »Just from a numbers standpoint the way you're measuring body fat has to be incorrect.
If you are currently 175 lbs and 10% bodyfat, you would have only 17.5lbs body fat. But at 135lbs with 7.5% bodyfat, you had roughly 10lbs body fat. That would mean out of the 45lbs you gained 37.5lbs of it was pure muscle, which is impossible to do in only nine months.
If possible come back with more accurate numbers, because at the time being it's hard to give you solid advice when we don't really know your stats.
I think you read it wrong. At 175lbs the hand held monitor clocked me at 7.5%.
I didn't mention my body fat before I started
But I did happen to use the hand held monitor before I started and it clocked me at 3%, which I'm guessing I was 4-5%.
You weren't 4-5%
All forms of BF % measurements have massive inaccuracies with the most accurate, DEXA, still having 5% swings or being easily manipulated. I doubt a cheap, handheld impedance measurement is accurate and I doubt you've taken accurate measurements. It's unrealistic that you had 7 lbs of bodyfat or less, outside of being anorexic, and having to worry about possible organ failure issues. There's a reason anorexic people can get hospitalized and many medical issues can occur.
Realistically you're probably around 15%bf, give or take a few percent. Where you're at specifically doesn't matter as you have no realistic way to get an accurate measurement. Bulk to a point where you're happy with your bulk and cut to a point where you're happy with your cut.
If you want to minimize fat then you need to count calories during your bulk. If you just want to have your bulks be a treat for a successful cut then they can be more sloppy or you may want a higher calorie count for strength purposes.
If the profile pic is current, I'd second that estimate (~15%). Not 10% and definitely no way 7.5%.
OP, at 4-5% you would have been shredded to the bone, striations clearly visible everywhere, even in the glutes. That's prime contest-ready bodybuilder BF% levels (or anorexic skeleton-skinny levels if one doesn't have the muscle mass of a bodybuilder).
Look at the pics in the link @MichelleLei1 posted, a visual estimate in the mirror will be far more accurate than those ridiculous hand-held gym BIA devices. Here's an explanation of how (and why) they're so inaccurate: http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/index.php/free-content/free-content/volume-1-issue-4-the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-parts-3-and-4-bod-pod-and-bioelectrical-impedance-bia/the-pitfalls-of-bodyfat-measurement-part-4-bioelectrical-impedance-bia/0 -
MichelleLei1 wrote: »MichelleLei1 wrote: »Just from a numbers standpoint the way you're measuring body fat has to be incorrect.
If you are currently 175 lbs and 10% bodyfat, you would have only 17.5lbs body fat. But at 135lbs with 7.5% bodyfat, you had roughly 10lbs body fat. That would mean out of the 45lbs you gained 37.5lbs of it was pure muscle, which is impossible to do in only nine months.
If possible come back with more accurate numbers, because at the time being it's hard to give you solid advice when we don't really know your stats.
I think you read it wrong. At 175lbs the hand held monitor clocked me at 7.5%.
I didn't mention my body fat before I started
But I did happen to use the hand held monitor before I started and it clocked me at 3%, which I'm guessing I was 4-5%.
My bad, but unless you were ridiculously skinny or ridiculously shredded I doubt you were at 5% body fat. This is a highly inaccurate way to measure body fat (b/c everyone holds muscle and fat differently), but I think this picture gives you a better image of what general body fat percentages look like.
static1.squarespace.com/static/52d356b4e4b02276b3d9b442/t/52d36090e4b0587f97c88377/1389584529524/Men+Fat.jpg?format=1000w
Viewing the photo I believe I am currently at 10-12%. And to begin with I was probably at 6-7%. Before I started working out I had an 8 pack and barely workod out, just staying very active and was very skinny. Being at 12% body fat now, how long would it take me to cut down to 8%??0 -
In my opinion, focus less on the numbers and go by how your body seems to be responding. 8% body fat for you will be different from 8% for someone else, it all depends on how much muscle you have. That being said if you decide to cut you want to go as slow as possible to preserve muscle mass.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions