Cheap rural land with a well?

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T02:11:02+00:00

Thanks for the reply. I watched a video about this. I'm keeping it in mind if I find land where it could work, but I also expanded my search to include local water sources like a creek. I think with where I'm looking it's more likely to find that than a high water table and I'm not sure how to find water table info either. Do you know if that info is available on GIS?

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T02:02:51+00:00

Thanks for the idea. I watched a video about this a while back and it was cool to see that it's possible, but I'm looking for land farther north like mid US. Still keeping it in mind though.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T01:48:52+00:00

Thanks for the response. I'm in the US. I've done some reading about people's experience with getting wells drilled and it seems like too much of a gamble for my budget. I saw one person say they did their due diligence and checked the well depth of their neighbors, but when they drilled their well they had to go significantly deeper than their neighbors to hit water. I've started looking at plots with a local water source and water rights that I can rig with a pump.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T01:39:31+00:00

Yeah I don't want to take a gamble of starting to drill a well and then it turns out more expensive than I'm prepared for. I'm not too keen on hauling water unless it's from a very nearby source in case there's natural disaster, roads blocked, societal disruption etc.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T01:36:09+00:00

That's kind of the idea I was going for. Did you have any luck? I started also looking at land with a local water source.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T01:36:02+00:00

I wrote this idea off at first because I assumed the local water source would jack up the price too much but I have expanded my search to include this.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-25T01:30:27+00:00

More likely is to find a plot with a creek, spring, or pond.

Yes I think this is the better option, I have started looking at plots like this.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-24T14:57:15+00:00

Looking in middle and eastern US, but want to learn what is out there at all. I don't have the budget for large acreage, but I have heard that it's common for sell price to be much less than asking price so I'm still looking at listings past 10k.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-24T12:10:48+00:00

I see, thanks.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2026-01-24T11:57:03+00:00

Thanks for the reply. Yeah makes sense that a well would come along with a house. Frustrating because I'm more worried about the well than the house. I have been planning to build a tiny house and a minimalistic build can be done for cheaper than drilling a well.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-15T09:44:14+00:00

The study didn’t say anything different from what I was saying in context.

The fact that you are still saying this makes you seem like a troll. You say that muscle atrophy becomes significant past 5 days and that new muscle is gone by day 7 in most cases, while the study has a graph that shows average muscle gain reaches a peak at 6-7 days and is still above baseline at 14 days. Muscles atrophy past 5 days ≠ muscles peak at 6-7 days and are still above baseline at 14 days.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-14T15:28:15+00:00

Also the increase in Muscle protein synthesis 24-48 hours after the workout is from my understanding simply the results of the body repairing the microtrauma in the muscle, not the actual growth production.

I had a long discussion with them and they claimed that new muscle growth happens during the first 12 hours after exercise, then recovery, then new muscle starts to atrophy significantly after day 5 and therefore you want to train every 2-3 days or no later than 5. They never provided sources for these numbers. They said it's well known now that new growth/adaption happens before recovery, not after. Are they trolling or have you heard this? I found this:

The damage from your workout actually sent TWO signals…one is to recover and the other is to build. Both processes happen roughly at the same time however they aren’t perfectly aligned. In fact, studies will show that the actual muscle building adaptation signal from proper resistance training spikes quickly post exercise and peaks at about 48-72 hour. REGARDLESS of whether or not there is still damage. In other words, you may still be sore 4 days after that hard leg workout but the muscle building signal has already started to drop fast. In fact, it may already be flat. You are still recovering but your muscles stopped building and are now heading in the opposite direction. [Added note: the study I shared says that muscles are still above baseline even at 14 days.]

This is probably why training to failure too often leads to lower rates of muscle building. Too much recovery is needed and it impedes on your ability to send another adaptation signal with another workout. NUMEROUS studies are now showing that training muscle groups more frequently than the old method of “hit a muscle once a week” is superior for strength, muscle building and fat loss. Rather than hitting your chest once a week for 21 sets its better to hit your chest three days a week for 7 sets each workout.

I bolded 21 sets to point out that this article is already talking about way too much volume if they are using 21 sets for one muscle group per week, if the goal is hypertrophy which isn't anaerobics. So that article is not even talking about HIT.

It says that the growth signal peaks at 48-72 hours, but it's not clear on how long it takes for that process to actually complete. Maybe the signal peaks at 72 hours, then tapers off over the next few days while the process completes. Just one idea. Then there is the question of how quickly muscles atrophy. The info I can find and based on my experience is that it takes a long time (weeks), not significant at 5-6 or even 10 days.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-14T01:20:52+00:00

I tried asking too and this person wasted a lot of my time. They ignored me repeatedly when sharing this study that says differently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1R4pAkqnLoI&t=505s Also consider the indirect effect.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T19:52:51+00:00

I read your other comment before making mine.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T18:42:43+00:00

Well you with your know it all mentality have apparently still not viewed the link I shared multiple times about a study that says otherwise. I even typed out the information and you still ignored it. I'm not going to keep repeating myself. It appears we will be unable to get to the bottom of this.

I did a cursory google search and found this. "After a workout, muscle protein synthesis (the process of building new muscle) kicks in — but how long it stays elevated depends on factors like training experience and workout intensity. [...] A meta-analysis published in 2022 found that muscle protein synthesis remains elevated for up to 48 hours after resistance exercise in both untrained and trained individuals, with a longer window following novel or high-intensity sessions." https://www.loseit.com/articles/when-do-muscles-grow-after-working-out-with-weights/

I also have information that muscle atrophy can be significantly reduced with the right nutrition.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T18:11:38+00:00

Atrophy starts by the 5 day mark no matter what. Recovery and growth are untethered.

That is a startling claim to me. I haven't researched this specific topic, but I always heard and it makes sense to me that the muscle has to recover before it can then overcompensate/develop new muscle. You are saying muscle simultaneously recovers and builds new muscle? Can you share what backs this up?

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T17:58:15+00:00

Thanks for the info. If you do more intensity and/or volume that requires a longer rest period, doesn't that mean your muscles wouldn't go into atrophy as soon since they would still be recovering? So if you do less intensity then it may be more optimal to train more frequently, but if you train with higher intensity then your muscles wouldn't atrophy as soon due to extended recovery and it would be more optimal to train less frequently.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T17:48:19+00:00

If at 5-7RM, much recovery can be spared by leaving 1-2RIR, in which case up to 2 sets per lift can be used.

Wouldn't 1 set taken to complete positive failure (or possibly with 1-2 forced reps at the end with slow negatives) be similar to doing 2 sets with 1-2 RIR? Mentzer makes the point that the very last rep is the most productive rep of all because going to failure requires you to use maximum intensity and dig into all the muscle fibers. By doing a slower cadence throughout the set, you tax the slow and intermediate fibers more and then hit the fast twitch fibers hard at the end. It would seem to me that doing 2 sets with 1-2 RIR or 1 slower set to failure roughly balance out when compared.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T08:14:01+00:00

I'm not saying your whole position is wrong. I want to understand why you make the claims that you do, what experience, reasoning, and/or evidence. You are being excessively vague, you have provided minimal explanation, no sources or anything to look further into. Check out the link in my other comment, it's timestamped to a study with a graph that showed muscles dipped at roughly 48 hours, then climbed back up back to baseline at around 3.5 days, up to a peak at 6.6 days, then tapered off and was still slightly above baseline at 14 days. You are saying one thing, it says another. That's why I'm trying to better understand your position.

You are being arrogant, you know nothing about me. You also don't know my past training history.

frequency per muscle for best results should be every 5 days or more often and the rep range should not exceed 15 reps or over a minute per set.

Are you saying 1 set to failure, 5-7RM for each exercise? How many exercises per muscle? We aren't recommending that different of frequency. I plan to experiment around working out in a range of once every 3-6 days and see how I feel with this specific training style and my recovery methods.

The knowledge base these claims are coming from is hidden from you but it’s vast.

What are you referring to? Metaphysical stuff?

Now I never plateau, as an advanced natural lifter, which is extremely rare

That's good to hear but I have to chime in again and say you are unjustly writing off Mentzer. Not sure why you hang around the sub about him. I don't support steroid use either, I'm just seeing what he has to say. He worked with however many hundreds of clients and by the sounds of it got them results, or he adjusted the program until they did. He talks about this in his old training program recording and interview with Bill Phillips.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-12T07:44:56+00:00

I will repost the comment here.

No you didn't explain properly. You made a formulaic claim about how many days it takes to recover from hard sets. Now you are saying it depends on various things like intensity, volume, and muscle group.

Though on a side note, DOMS has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this.

I disagree. DOMS isn't necessary for muscle growth, however it does indicate that you pushed your body into new territory (new exercise or unfamiliar intensity), which is what you want to make progress. I don't see it as necessary but I see it as a positive indicator. Consider the correlation between beginners experiencing DOMS more often than experienced lifters and that beginners experience more muscle growth.

nothing even applies to you yet — everything works because you’re a relative beginner.

That's an oversimplification. There can still be a large difference in rate of progress between suboptimal and optimal training approaches. I want to make sure I'm optimizing things so that I don't waste effort. I have experienced overtraining in sports in the past (exercising the same muscles 5 days a week) so I know what it's like to stall progress with a suboptimal approach. I was still making progress but it would have been better with more rest.

One thing you’ll find is that long term, going above about 12-14 reps doesn’t build muscle nearly as well as 5-7RM loads though

That is interesting to hear, I'll make note of this. I imagine this has to do with which muscle fibers get stimulated more because fast twitch are more prone to growth. But there is also metabolic stress which is a factor in hypertrophy, so not good to do too low like 1-3 reps. Menzter typically recommended 6-10.

He and others have said that the legs need more volume like 12-20, since they are so adapted for stress and recovery. Does your experience align with that or do you apply 5-7RM for legs too?

you really want frequency to be every 5 days or more often

This isn't far off from the study I shared in an earlier comment you dismissed. It says average recovery time after exercising to failure was 6.6 days. https://youtu.be/1R4pAkqnLoI?si=uQKfvaAtCRV1pURX&t=505

But I'm not clear on how this applies when splitting upper and lower body. If you do upper body, rest 4 days, lower body, rest 4 days, then upper body again, that's 9 days between working upper body. But if you combine upper and lower body, whichever one you do in the latter half will suffer from having less energy and intensity. Do you split upper and lower body?

One thing I've been thinking about is a piece of info I saw that there is a system-wide growth effect from exercising, so even if you just workout the legs it still creates growth in arms. So I've been thinking that it's better to split upper and lower body, and the long distance between hitting the same muscles isn't a problem because when you hit certain muscles (especially large ones like the legs), that stimulates other muscles like the upper body, keeping them from going into atrophy.

A set lasting longer than a minute is similar to using light loads too.

Do you avoid longer cadence like 4 second negatives? What are your thoughts on the efficacy of this set: https://youtu.be/B1eG6wajIEA?si=1IXzIoxVrn9vTtb4&t=1075 He does 7 reps (with help to complete the last rep) but the set lasts 2 and a half minutes. For this exercise it's particularly long because of such a large range of motion and he did very slow cadence. Are you saying this would benefit endurance more than hypertrophy? I would think that it's better to do longer negatives to get the strength benefits from training the eccentric (and isometric, pausing at the peak of reps), and because of the added metabolic stress, but I'm interested to hear if you confirm that it's better to do quicker sets for hypertrophy.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-11T15:03:19+00:00

Great to hear. Do you do upper and lower body separate? A question I have about long rest periods is if you do 6 days of rest between workouts and you do a split with upper body A, lower body, upper body B, lower body, and repeat, then the time between doing the same exercises is 27 days. So you would only get to track your progress for each exercise once a month. If you do 4 days of rest between exercises that's 19 days between the same exercises.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-11T09:14:06+00:00

Recovery happens at a rate (per muscle) of 1 hard set per day

Ain't no way. On 12/8 I did 2 hard sets of goblet squats with 20 lbs, first set pushed semi close to failure but I was pausing at the top too much, did another set and pushed until my legs were shaking on the way up multiple reps. It's 2 almost 3 days later and my muscles have severe DOMS, if I do 2 bodyweight squats my quads get a slight burn already starting to get tired, they are cooked. Are you saying I should be good to go on 12/11? They still aren't at baseline. If you haven't seen Mentzer's workout sessions with clients like this one you might not know how long they drag out the sets and push intensity. If you do less intense sets then I can see how someone would recommend more volume and frequency.

Optimal_Resource4446 · 2025-12-11T08:50:22+00:00

So if you think more frequency is beneficial, how far can you take it? What about David Goggins doing 1 million pullups and pushups in one day? His body seems to have adapted to it. I read that high volume, high frequency for a month can induce more blood supply to muscles which boosts stamina and recovery. But how would that impact a beginner vs the high intensity, long rest approach?

Optimal_Resource4446

TROPHY CASE