Measurements after bulk/cut cycle

NRBreit

Since 1 lb of muscle takes less volume than 1 lb fat, then (hypothetically), if you were to bulk and then cut back to your original weight your overall measurements would be smaller even though you carried more muscle mass, correct? I mean you may see a measurement increase somewhere on your body based on your training, but overall, the net result is that you'd be smaller at the same weight. Am I thinking about this correctly?

jwdieter

Your total body volume would be smaller, but you might see an increase in overall measurements. Depends what you're measuring. If you use the MFP default neck, waist, hips, you should definitely see a decrease overall in those.

ottermotorcycle

It depends on what you're measuring, definitely. The areas where you have bulked, you might have higher measurements - I'm thinking mostly upper body (shoulders, arms) but maybe thighs and calves too. But your waist and other high-fat areas will likely go down. The net result would be a smaller body at the same weight, yes.

Yep_imchicbad

at 133 lbs size 6, I was skinny, but after lifting weights I went up to 145 size 3-4, I was smaller in inches everywhere, but slightly bigger in my arms. fat is more "fluffy", so yes, you'd be smaller in inches because you've lost body fat but put on lean muscle, so the scale might go up, while your clothes are falling off lol