View Single Post
Old July 8th 08, 11:23 AM posted to,,,uk.rec.walking,rec.running
external usenet poster
Posts: 114
Default Treadmill advice needed

"Steve Freides" wrote in message
"DrollTroll" wrote in message

"Steve Freides" wrote in message
wrote in message

I am thinking about buying my first treadmill. My family and I are on
a very, very tight budget and we are counting every penny so this is a
huge decision for us and I need some help in deciding which one to

I am 6 foot 3 (189cm) for 252 pounds (115kgs) and I need to walk for
about 30min on a daily basis to loose weight. The climate where I
live makes outdoor walking impossible most of the year and, besides, I
need to stay at home to watch for the kids. I do not plan to run on
the treadmill, only walk, initially slowly (I am very much out of
shape), but eventually at a brisk pace to get a good aerobic exercise.

I have been initially tempted to buy the NordicTrack C2155 ( )

But the newer NordicTrack A2350 looks even better to me (

My questions to you a

1) Do NordicTrack treadmills have a good reputation?
2) What do you think of the two models I am considering?
3) Can you think of a better (as in value for the money) deal than
these NordicTrack treadmills?

Many thanks for any pointers!


Google the phrase strength-endurance, and don't settle for just a
treadmill. Google also "ross budget training" and read his web site.
There are a ton of things one can do, at home, for little or no money,
to build both strength and conditioning, and certainly for well less
than the cost of a treadmill of any sort.

My choice would be a kettlebell plus the book "Enter The Kettlebell" by
Pavel Tsatsouline - the combination will cost you about $200 and is
widely available. Or buy yourself a screw-on dumbbell set at the local
mega-mart plus a jump rope - that combination will cost you $50. Or any
of a thousand other things. Just say no to the dishonor of dieting and
aerobics and get stronger _and_ well-conditioned instead - and lose
weight while doing it.

As usual, Friedes is partially right in his obs/recs, but has so far to
go as yet in trying to get over himself, that the correct stuff is often
unrecognizable, buried beneath his sundry personal issues and

Personal attacks serve no purpose, so stick to the issues at hand.

Dude, I thought I was oh-ficially kill-filed by you, as you most often
completely ignore what I say in a given thread, and blindly post yer own
stuff, often just repeating what I said--further evidence of your
But since you ARE apparently reading my stuff, I'll tone down the
insults--at least the gratuitous ones.

He is right that walking is perhaps a middling approach to complete
fitness, but it is an excellent beginning, certainly a very convenient
tool, and actually capable of burning a lot of calories. And possibly a
requisite beginning for many people.
I myself walk 2-4 hours/week, brisk and up-hill (both ways!), in
preference to running in summers. In winter, the emphasis is more on

I walk quite a bit as well, e.g., I walked about 4 miles yesterday with my
wife in two outings, the first a mile each way to a local farmers market
and home with produce, the second an evening visit to a friend a mile each
way. It is a lovely thing to do, and sufficient for many purposes, e.g.,
the elderly, but I assume our original poster is middle aged or younger
because he/she did not indicate otherwise.

But clearly not ready for Ross training--re-read his post.

Nothing wrong with aerobics, nothing wrong with dieting, when done
intelligently and in context.
As a culture, we just eat too goddammuch anyway, and the zeitgeist of
"revving up our metabolisms" so's we can eat even *more* is just effing
ludicrous, profligate, and reprobate. And immoral.

I am a big believer in weights and HIT, but everything in time.
The site Friedes refers to is, and it is indeed an
excellent site--altho pretty intense stuff, but which you can always
tailor for yourself.

If you look at the cultures renowned for their longevity and health,
walking/hiking/carrying/herding is likely the full extent of their
"exercise"--they just do lots of it.

Also, if you are going to go the eventual weight-route, forget about
Friedes and his obsession with effing kettlebells.
KBs certainly aren't bad, but *nary a person on this planet* can
rationally explain why KBs are *at all* better than dumbbells, save for
one or two possible moves.

Whilst there are a litany of people who can cogently argue why dumbbells
are FAR better than KBs.
DBs serve the same basic function--resistance-- but are *far* more
versatile, more economical, more ergonomic, more use-able..... you get
the idea.
But Friedes doesn't. And never will.

You miss the point entirely. No one says kettlebells are better or worse.
Read my reply again - it begins with the words "my choice would be"

And why would that be your choice, *if you didn't believe KBs were
Are you now adding disingenuousness to your repertoire?

I will say *flat out* that dumbbells are superior to kettlebells, for most

The difference between you and me is

1. I'm not wrapped up in fukn mystical Medievil Russia fantasyland, and all
its kettlebell soldier trappings, like some child playing with toy trains;
2. I can defend my statements in some detail, and
3. I'm not selling either dumbbells or kettlebells.

and I assume the original poster doesn't need your help to figure out that
he/she may have a different opinion. I shared mine and I'm not bashful
about doing that.

But, the OP DOES need YOUR help, right?? please.......

That you seem to feel my opinion carries the weight of some religious

It DOES! See (1) above.

is your problem, I'm afraid.

It takes time and experience to figger out the context and "hierarchy" of
all the fitness options available, and altho I don't really like
treadmills myself, they can be a very good option/place to start. And
for some people, indispensable.

There are many better ways to exercise. Working up to doing
strength/endurance training is, in my opinion, a better choice for most
people most of the time.

I agree, but probably not this time, AT this time, for this OP.
AND, I *already* quite alluded to this, but you, as usual, choose to
re-invent the wheel.

I will say one thing, tho:

You are absolutely correct in the very last line of your previous post:
Get stronger/well-conditioned AND lose weight while doing it.

A subtle, but very profound point, that escapes most of Merka, as they chase
the holy grails of effing abs, weight loss, and long lean effing muscles as
they morph into a dancer's body.

Many of your insights are legitimate, so it's too bad you choose to view the
world through Steve Freides binoculars, and think your KB workout routines
should be fresco-ed in a Systine Chapel.

When you sell your kettlebells, do you autograph them?