Do Pullups Build More Back Mass Than Lat Pulldowns

I have been having a debate with a friend at the gym about pullups versus lat pulldowns. He says that pullups are superior for building back mass because they are a closed chain movement and engage more muscles.

I personally find it easier to get a good mind muscle connection with the lat pulldown because I can control the weight better. I am not very strong at pullups yet and I can only do about 5 or 6 with good form. Am I missing out by not doing them?

I am training in Glasgow and I want to get as wide as possible. Do you think I should prioritize getting better at pullups or stick with the pulldowns where I can really feel the stretch and squeeze? I would love to hear some opinions on this.

Pullups definitely feel more 'functional' and hit the stabilizers harder, but for pure mass, it's hard to beat the constant tension of a pulldown. I've seen more growth since I started prioritizing the cable machine.

I'm with your mate on this one, @GlasgowGuy. There is something about moving your entire bodyweight through space that triggers more growth. Weighted pullups changed my back game completely.

Totally agree with LondonLad! Once you can do sets of 10-12 bodyweight reps, strap on a plate. The thick 'V-taper' look comes from heavy pullups in my experience.

Y'all are sleeping on pulldowns for volume though. I can't do 4 sets of 15 pullups with good form, but I can definitely pump that out on a lat machine to get that insane stretch and squeeze.

Fair point TXguy. It's much easier to control the eccentric on a pulldown. I usually lead with pullups while I'm fresh then finish with pulldowns to really torch the lats.

I find pullups much harder on the elbows. In my home gym in Leeds, I only have a bar so I'm stuck with them, but I'd kill for a decent cable stack some days just to save my joints.

@NorthernLass have you tried using neutral grip? Using a parallel grip on pullups usually saves my elbows and I feel the lats more anyway.

Neutral grip is the way forward! Still, for pure mass, you need to be moving heavy weight. Most people I see doing pulldowns are just using momentum and swinging their torsos like a pendulum.

Cheers for the replies lads. My friend's argument is that the closed-chain nature of the pullup recruits more motor units. Is there any actual science to that or is it just 'bro-science'?

There's some truth to it. EMG studies usually show slightly higher activation in the lats and traps for pullups, but the difference isn't massive. Consistency matters more than the specific movement.

I just hate how people act like pulldowns are 'cheating.' If I'm pulling 250lbs on a cable, my back is going to grow. Period.

Depends on the machine too. Some of those old school Plate-loaded ISO machines feel better than any pullup bar I've ever used.

Exactly. My local leisure centre has a Hammer Strength pulldown and the pump is unreal. Much better than struggling through 5 dodgy reps on a bar.

I think the 'mass' argument comes from the fact that it's harder to cheat a pullup. You either get your chin over the bar or you don't. Pulldowns invite too much ego lifting.

Spot on @MidwestMike. Plus, if you're a big lad, pullups are inherently high-intensity. A 100kg guy doing 10 reps is moving a lot of load.

I'm about 85kg so pullups are definitely a challenge for me. Might try a 4-week block of just weighted pullups and see if the 'mass' actually appears.

Go for it! Just don't neglect your rows. People forget that back thickness comes from rowing, not just vertical pulling.

Real talk. Pullups for the width, Rows for the meat. That's the Canadian way eh? lol.

Classic bodybuilding logic right there. Though scientifically the lats contribute to both. But yeah, pullups give that 'barn door' width.