Can you stimulate growth by doing 48 reps per muscle group?

IDK

yes lifting weights stimulates growth

>>41140738
proof?

probably not that much, if you really want those buffed up muscles it is better to lift heavy in the 4-6 rep range

>>41140687
High Total reps completed = size
High % of max lifted = strength

File: legs-from-legpress.jpg (83KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 720x480px

>>41140687
I do 5 sets of 20 leg press as my primary leg exercise.

>>41140750

fuck off do your own research

>>41140687
yes but that is fucking pointless.

>>41140768
And what are the secondary exercises

>>41140738
nice broscience

>>41140758
Exactly. I do 3 sets of 3-6 heavy reps until failure. I'm big as fuck naturally. Strong too. Chest press 450 and back squat 720

>>41140840
How lol

>>41140768
Post hamstrings

>>41140687
"high rep=hypertrophy" and "low reps=strength" are giant fucking memes

regardless of your goals you should be using a variety of rep ranges

>>41141159
You mean if I want 4 sets I do like 1x12, 1x4, 1x8, 1x3?

>>41142430
kek I forgot to take my trip off after shitposting

anyway. for a beginner (which I assume you are if thats your leg in op) you should stick to what your novice program prescribes. eg. 5x5, 3x5 or 1x5 for compounds and 10-20 reps on accessories. but more advanced programming uses all sorts of set/rep ranges for very specific reasons

for instance, you might do 10x2 @ x% one day, then 5x5 on another, or drop down sets of 15 after you working sets etc

the approach of "only do 3x12 @ low weight to get big, or 2x3 to get strong" is stupid and spread by people who dont know what theyre talking about

hope this helps f a m