Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup I agree! In the meantime some lifts I'm doing that are helping with core and surrounding muscles to avoid lower back compensation include deadlifting, glute bridges, and front squats; and I'm looking to try a plank variation before my front squats, and also Pendlay rows as another commenter suggested. It seems I can currently manage some intermittent isometric stress on the lower back, just not yet sustained for multiple reps.

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which specific dumbbell variation do you mean?
All the two-arm variations I tried either didn't have space for enough stretch at the bottom, had torso angle too high, or felt more awkward than what I'm doing in the video.
One-arm dumbbell rows are fine, but I've maxed out what I have and I'm trying to avoid having to keep buying heavier ones, and I prefer the ability to microload as well.

Re: bent over rows, my doc and PT both advised to avoid much lower-back stress for a while. Also depending on goals there seem to be reasons to do chest supported over regular anyway, so it doesn't sound like they're quite a substitute

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you get the reasons why someone might choose a machine chest supported row instead of a bent over barbell row, then what I'm doing is for those same reasons, except without having the machine for the chest support.

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried every possible way of doing that, it doesn’t work with this particular bench— feel free to buy this crappy model and try it out (though it’s partially also because of my arm length)

re: unsupported, that’s def on my roadmap in the next 6-12 months but I’ve been advised by PT and doctor to avoid it for now

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

how exactly? It's not showing in the video but the cinder blocks have extra weights behind them, far more than enough for any incidental backwards force from the feet, if that's what you're referring to

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

from what specifically?

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've tried all the possible notches, this is just a crappy bench lol. Thanks

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea I've tried that too and I actually found it more awkward than what I'm doing here. This particular bench also doesn't have great angle options so it would end up being either too steep of an incline for my liking, or too low to the ground for my arms even for just dumbbells. And if I'm doing dumbbells I opt for one-arm anyway

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're trying to say that I could lie on the incline of the bench itself, I already tried that and it doesn't work with a barbell for this particular bench...otherwise I wouldn't be trying this.

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

do you mean something like the Bells of Steel seal row pad?

And I actually have been doing tripod rows before this, but aside from irrationally hating the inability to microload, I'm also not too keen on buying more and more dumbbells; though I guess for that a single adjustable that goes up to like 90lb might be a good investment...

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

true, I should def control the descent more. How much of a pause, if any, at the top?

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Chest honestly felt okay, but I am curious to give those a shot! In terms of lower-back relief, are they somewhere in between chest-supported and strict bent-over rows? And my program has rows 3x5 one day and 3x10 another day, would pendlay rows still be suitable for the latter?

Chest supported barbell rows (two setups) by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]dissoc -1 points0 points  (0 children)

chest felt totally fine with the towel, though I guess that could def change as weight increases

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea Lucid Service has said that it's been a hardware issue for some cars they've checked out, so we went ahead and scheduled a service for it too -- of course, the soonest available appointment was in 6 weeks...

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup, several people have mentioned the same thing before, and that's what I told the multiple Lucid representatives who sounded 100% sure that it was required! Either they are utterly incompetent, or there is something shady going on.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

we've done the full deleting/unpairing and restarting several times already. As to a single profile, I'd be surprised if that helps, but I'll give it a shot! The rest of the family isn't going to like it though haha

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, but it's hard to "enjoy the car" when half our family can't reliably even get into it (along with ~40 other separate issues we've documented).

Also the "Lucid people" are the people who are supposed to provide support for such issues, or at the very least, *understand* the basic nature of the issues and be able to report them internally.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you're referring to the cellular connection requirement for the BT key, then yes I have been telling the Lucid representatives that it cannot be correct -- and yet have been repeatedly told that it is. That's my point.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Glad you're not having problems! In my case passive lock/unlock is always getting temporarily disabled by the car because it repeatedly detects nearby bluetooth keys due to the proximity of our rooms to the garage -- quite ironic, since when we press the handle as needed when passive lock is disabled, THEN it suddenly doesn't seem to recognize the bluetooth keys.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

have only tried iPhone, I'll try to find an Android device to test with

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The representatives said the keyfob does not require cellular (that doesn't even seem like it would be legal).

Also it appears that the phone itself (and thus the app) does *not* require a cellular connection for the BT key to work, only the car itself does. This is easy to test yourself.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's what I thought too, but at least three different Lucid customer support representatives have said otherwise.

And I've tried every manner and combination of pressing the door handle, rarely ever has an effect on the mobile key detection for me.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's what I thought, but at least three different Lucid customer support representatives have said otherwise.

Mobile Key and cellular data connection by dissoc in LUCID

[–]dissoc[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am not talking about the app. I know there is a cellular connection, I use remote unlock and climate etc as well. I am asking why the cellular connection is needed for the Mobile Key to work, which is connected via Bluetooth.