Fitness equipment guides

Lifting tempo, the speed at which each repetition is performed, is often presented as a secret: slow the lowering phase, pause at the bottom, count to three on the way up. What does the research say? This article summarises a 2015 systematic review and meta-analysis by Schoenfeld, Ogborn and Krieger, and a 2021 controlled study by Lacerda and colleagues, and reports each at the strength it supports.

What “repetition duration” means

The 2015 review defines repetition duration as the sum total of the concentric (lifting), eccentric (lowering) and isometric (pause) components of a repetition, determined by the tempo at which it is performed. The authors describe it as an often overlooked variable compared with exercise selection, exercise order, rest intervals, load and training volume, and they asked whether changing it can amplify the muscle-growth response to resistance training.

The 2015 meta-analysis

Studies were eligible if they were experimental trials in English-language refereed journals that directly compared different training tempos in dynamic exercise using both concentric and eccentric repetitions, measured changes in muscle by biopsy, imaging or densitometry, lasted at least six weeks, trained to muscle failure, and used human participants without chronic disease or injury. Eight studies met those criteria. The results indicate that hypertrophic outcomes are similar when repetition durations range from 0.5 to 8 seconds. The authors conclude that, for maximising muscle growth, a fairly wide range of repetition durations can be used. They add that training at volitionally very slow durations, over 10 seconds per repetition, appears inferior from a hypertrophy standpoint, but that a lack of controlled studies makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions.

A 2021 controlled study

Lacerda and colleagues, writing in PeerJ, compared two 14-week protocols in ten untrained men. Each participant’s legs were assigned to different protocols using unilateral knee extension, one with 2-second repetitions and one with 6-second repetitions. Both used 3 to 4 sets at 50 to 60 per cent of one-repetition maximum, with 3 minutes of rest, and were performed to muscle failure. The researchers measured muscle cross-sectional area, isometric strength at two knee angles, and one-repetition maximum. They found that:

• gains in one-repetition maximum and in the cross-sectional area of the rectus femoris and vastus lateralis were not significantly different between the two protocols;
• the 6-second protocol produced larger gains in isometric strength at a knee angle of 30 degrees;
• gains in isometric strength at 90 degrees did not differ significantly.

The authors conclude that longer repetition duration could suit those seeking greater isometric strength gains in shortened knee positions, but that similar dynamic strength and muscle growth would be obtained from either.

Why both tempos can work

The 2021 authors offer an explanation, framed as a possibility rather than a proven mechanism. The 6-second protocol had an average time under tension about 25 per cent longer than the 2-second protocol (43 seconds against 30 seconds), while the 2-second protocol involved twice the number of repetitions per set (14 against 7) and showed higher muscle electrical activity. They suggest that the higher volume and activation of the faster protocol may have counterbalanced the longer time under tension of the slower one.

How strong is this evidence?

• The 2015 review included eight studies, and its authors stress a lack of controlled studies at very slow durations.
• The 2021 study involved ten untrained men and one exercise, the knee extension, so it cannot be generalised to women, trained lifters or other exercises.
• The meta-analysis included only trials in which sets were taken to muscle failure, defined as the inability to complete another concentric repetition with proper form, so its conclusions apply to sets performed that way rather than to sets stopped well short of failure.
• Both sources concern muscle growth and strength measures in healthy adults training to failure; neither examines injury risk, cardio machines or specific equipment products.

Practical points when comparing equipment

Neither source studied tempo-counting consoles, apps or attachments, so the research cannot show that such features improve results. Because the reviewed range of 0.5 to 8 seconds produced similar hypertrophic outcomes, the evidence gives no reason to treat a tempo counter as essential for muscle growth. A buyer who wants to vary repetition speed can simply check, on a demonstration, that a machine or cable stack moves smoothly at both faster and slower speeds.

Frequently asked questions

Is slower always better?

No. The meta-analysis found similar hypertrophy across 0.5 to 8 seconds per repetition, and very slow repetitions over 10 seconds appeared inferior, with caveats.

Does tempo change strength gains?

In the 2021 study, dynamic strength gains were similar between 2-second and 6-second protocols, while isometric strength at 30 degrees improved more with the slower protocol.

The bottom line

Current evidence from a meta-analysis of eight studies suggests that a wide range of repetition durations, from 0.5 to 8 seconds, produces similar muscle growth when training to failure, and a small 2021 trial found similar strength and size gains at 2 and 6 seconds. Neither source tested tempo-counting features, and the conclusions come with clear limits on sample size and population.

Sources

• Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn DI, Krieger JW, “Effect of repetition duration during resistance training on muscle hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, Sports Medicine, 2015 (PubMed)
• Lacerda LT et al., “Resistance training with different repetition duration to failure: effect on hypertrophy, strength and muscle activation”, PeerJ, 2021 (PubMed Central)

“Full range of motion” is one of the most repeated instructions in strength training, and one of the least examined. It matters for equipment as well as technique, because racks, machines and cable stacks all set limits on how far a joint can travel. A 2020 systematic review by Schoenfeld and Grgic, published in SAGE Open Medicine, looked directly at the question of whether full or partial range of motion (ROM) produces greater muscle growth. This article summarises what that review found, at the strength the evidence supports.

What the review examined

The authors set out to review studies comparing exercise performed through a full range of motion against a partial range in dynamic, longitudinal resistance training programmes, with muscle hypertrophy (growth in muscle size) as the outcome. Six studies met the criteria: four involved the lower limbs and two the upper limbs. The combined sample was 135 participants, of whom 127 were men and 8 were women, and the methodological quality of all six studies was rated “excellent” on the modified PEDro scale. The review’s introduction adds that a majority of research shows strength gains to be specific to the joint angle trained, which is a separate question from muscle size.

Lower body: full range looked favourable

The authors concluded that training through a full range of motion appears to confer beneficial effects on hypertrophy of the lower body musculature compared with a partial range. Three of the four lower-body studies favoured full range. Of the studies using free-weight exercises, two reported that full-range training may produce greater growth in the quadriceps. However, two studies that measured muscle volume with MRI found similar quadriceps results between conditions, and gluteal and adductor growth was greater with full range in a single study, so the authors urge caution about drawing inferences from that finding.

A possible threshold

The authors interpret the data as implying that the benefit applies up to a certain range-of-motion threshold, beyond which the advantage attenuates. They point out that in the study finding no difference for the quadriceps with free weights, the “partial” condition (0 to 90 degrees of knee flexion) was already large compared with the partial conditions in other studies. This is a hypothesis from the authors’ interpretation, not a demonstrated fact.

Upper body: no clear answer

For the upper limbs, the picture was mixed. One study found that partial range produced greater growth in the elbow extensors, while another found modest advantages for full range in the biceps that did not reach the conventional significance threshold. The authors describe the evidence as limited and conflicting, which precludes strong practical inferences, and state that no compelling rationale can be made for a given range in the upper-body muscles. No study to date had examined trunk muscles.

Machines and accommodating resistance

One study in the review used isokinetic leg extension, a form of accommodating resistance in which resistance is maximal throughout the range. Muscle volume changes were similar between full and partial range, and the authors suggest range may matter less with this kind of resistance, provided effort is also maximal. The finding comes from a single study of 11 untrained men, so it cannot be generalised to selectorised machines or cable stacks.

Limits of the evidence

• About 94 per cent of participants across the studies were young men, so results may not generalise to youth, women or older people.
• Only one study included participants with previous resistance training experience.
• The review compared larger ranges against shorter ones; it did not test combining both, though the authors note it is conceivable that combining variations could have synergistic effects, and label this a research gap.

What this means when comparing equipment

The review concerns how exercises are performed, not any particular product, and it says nothing about which brand of rack or machine is better. It does give buyers one practical question to ask of any specification: how far can the joint travel in the exercises intended? Where a listing gives seat, pad and lever adjustment ranges, or the height range of a rack’s pins and safety arms, those figures indicate whether a user of a given height and limb length can train through a large range. Equipment that forces a shortened range on some users would have that effect for reasons of design rather than by choice.

Frequently asked questions

Does full range always build more muscle?

Not according to the review. Lower-body evidence leaned towards full range, while upper-body evidence was mixed, and the authors saw benefits attenuating beyond a threshold.

Is partial range wrong?

The review does not say so. It notes that some upper-body results favoured partial range and that combining range variations remains unstudied.

The bottom line

A 2020 systematic review of six high-quality studies found that training the lower body through a full range of motion appeared to support muscle growth better than a partial range, while upper-body findings were limited and conflicting. The sample was largely young men, few had training experience and the number of studies was small, so the conclusions are provisional. For buyers, the useful takeaway is to check the adjustment ranges that determine how much movement a piece of equipment allows.

Sources

• Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, “Effects of range of motion on muscle development during resistance training interventions: A systematic review”, SAGE Open Medicine, 2020 (PubMed Central)
• Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, “Effects of range of motion on muscle development during resistance training interventions: A systematic review” (PubMed abstract)

Anyone buying treadmills, racks, dumbbells or bikes for a gym, studio or personal training business faces a question that has little to do with specification sheets: how the purchase is treated for tax. HMRC’s capital allowances let businesses deduct some or all of the cost of qualifying equipment from profits. This article summarises the GOV.UK guidance on capital allowances for plant and machinery as it stands in September 2026. It describes the guidance for UK businesses in general terms and is not tax advice; the rules turn on the type of business and the item, and an accountant or HMRC can confirm how they apply.

What capital allowances are

GOV.UK describes capital allowances as a type of tax relief for businesses that lets you deduct some or all of the value of an item from your profits before you pay tax. It says you can claim on equipment, machinery and business vehicles, known collectively as “plant and machinery”. Whether a specific piece of fitness equipment counts depends on HMRC’s definition of plant and machinery, so a business should check rather than assume. In most cases, the value used is what was paid for the item. Where the business owned the item before using it, or received it as a gift, the market value is used instead.

A first check: the cash basis

GOV.UK states that a sole trader or partnership using the cash basis can only claim capital allowances on business cars. Someone who runs a personal training business as a sole trader on the cash basis therefore should not expect to claim allowances on a rack or treadmill through this route, and should check how equipment purchases are treated under the cash basis instead. Limited companies, and sole traders or partnerships not using the cash basis, can claim on equipment.

The main allowances compared

• Annual investment allowance (AIA): GOV.UK says you can claim up to £1 million on certain plant and machinery, and the AIA amount has been £1 million from 1 January 2019 for sole traders, partnerships and limited companies. It lets you deduct the full value of a qualifying item from profits before tax. It applies to most plant and machinery up to the AIA amount, but not to business cars, items owned for another reason before being used in the business, or gifts.
• Full expensing and 50% first-year allowance: only companies can claim these. The equipment must have been bought from 1 April 2023, must be new and unused, and must not be a car. Full expensing deducts 100% of the cost in the year of purchase; the 50% first-year allowance deducts 50%. A business cannot claim both against the same expenditure.
• 40% first-year allowance: GOV.UK lists this for qualifying plant and machinery purchased after 1 January 2026.
• Writing down allowances: these apply if plant and machinery does not qualify for another allowance, or if value remains after claiming the maximum amount of another one.

Where an item qualifies for more than one allowance, GOV.UK says you can choose which to use.

Second-hand and mixed-use equipment

The new-and-unused condition for full expensing means used equipment is outside that allowance. The AIA guidance excludes only items already owned for another reason, gifts, and cars, which suggests that second-hand equipment bought from a third party is not excluded, though a business should confirm this for its own situation. For sole traders and partnerships, GOV.UK says items also used outside the business cannot be claimed in full: the allowance is reduced by the proportion of outside use, so an item used half the time outside the business is reduced by 50%.

When and how a purchase counts

Allowances such as AIA and the first-year allowances must be claimed in the accounting period in which the item was bought. GOV.UK sets the purchase date as the date the contract was signed, if payment is due in less than four months, or the date payment is due, if it is due more than four months later. Under a hire purchase contract, the date is when you start using the item, and you can claim for all payments you will make under the contract, though not for the interest. Claims are made on a Self Assessment return for sole traders, a partnership tax return, or a Company Tax Return, which must include a separate capital allowances calculation.

What is not equipment

GOV.UK separates capital allowances from other costs. Day-to-day running costs, items a business trades in and interest or finance costs are claimed differently: as business expenses for sole traders and partnerships, or deducted as a business cost for limited companies. In fitness terms, a bike bought to use in classes is equipment, while a bike bought to resell is stock. Servicing and consumables such as lubricant are running costs.

If the full cost is not claimed

A business that does not want to claim the full cost, for example because profits are low, can claim part as AIA and part through writing down allowances, or use writing down allowances instead. GOV.UK says that if a business spends more than the AIA amount, it can claim first-year allowances or writing down allowances on the excess.

Frequently asked questions

Can a limited company claim full expensing on a treadmill?

According to GOV.UK, a company can claim full expensing on qualifying plant and machinery bought from 1 April 2023 that is new and unused and not a car. Whether a particular treadmill qualifies is for the company and its adviser to confirm.

Does buying on finance change the claim?

Under hire purchase, GOV.UK says you can claim for all payments you will make under the contract from when you start using the item, but not for the interest.

The bottom line

For a fitness business, the key GOV.UK points are that the AIA is £1 million, full expensing is limited to companies buying new and unused equipment, cash-basis sole traders and partnerships can only claim on cars, mixed private use reduces claims, and the timing of purchase decides the accounting period. Because eligibility depends on the item and the business structure, checking with an accountant or HMRC before buying is sensible.

Sources

• GOV.UK, “Capital allowances: Overview”
• GOV.UK, “Capital allowances: Annual investment allowance”
• GOV.UK, “Capital allowances: Full expensing and 50% first-year allowance”
• GOV.UK, “Capital allowances: How to claim”

Lifting belts, knee sleeves and wrist wraps are sold with a great deal of marketing language and very few numbers. The International Powerlifting Federation (IPF) is unusual in publishing exact dimensions and construction rules for them. Those figures do not say which product is better for training, but they do give a shopper a factual specification against which to read product descriptions such as “competition legal” or “IPF approved”. This article summarises the personal-equipment section of the IPF Technical Rulebook effective 1 March 2026. These are competition rules for IPF events; other federations set their own, and anyone entering a different event should check that federation’s rulebook.

What “approved” means for personal equipment

The rulebook states that only belts, and only knee sleeves, from manufacturers accepted onto the IPF’s “Approved List of Apparel and Equipment for Use at IPF Competitions” are permitted in competition. Supportive wraps must also come from commercial manufacturers registered and approved by the Technical Committee. A product that merely matches the dimensions below is therefore not automatically usable at an IPF event; the manufacturer must be on the list.

Belts: construction rules

A competitor may wear a belt, and it must be worn on the outside of the lifting suit. The main body must be made of leather, vinyl or other similar non-stretch material in one or more laminations, which may be glued or stitched together. The rulebook forbids additional padding, bracing or supports of any material, whether on the surface or concealed within the laminations. The buckle must be attached at one end of the belt by studs or stitching, and it may have one or two prongs or a quick-release type, which the rulebook defines as a lever. A tongue loop must be attached close to the buckle.

Belts: maximum dimensions

• width of belt: maximum 10 cm;
• thickness: maximum 13 mm along the main length;
• inside width of buckle: maximum 11 cm;
• outside width of buckle: maximum 13 cm;
• tongue loop: maximum width 5 cm;
• distance between the end of the belt and the far end of the tongue loop: maximum 25 cm.

The practical reading for a buyer is that a 10 cm wide, 13 mm thick belt sits at the top of the permitted size, and that prong and lever fastenings are both allowed. The rulebook does not rank them.

Knee sleeves

The rulebook defines sleeves as cylinders of neoprene worn only on the knees. They must be constructed entirely of a single ply of neoprene, or predominantly of a single ply plus a non-supportive single layer of fabric over the neoprene, and must not provide any appreciable support or rebound to the knees. The specifications are:

• maximum thickness of 7 mm;
• maximum length of 30 cm;
• no additional strapping, Velcro, drawstrings, padding or similar supportive devices;
• continuous cylinders, without holes in the neoprene or any covering material;
• centred over the knee joint and not in contact with the suit, other than a long-legged suit, or with socks.

Knee sleeves cannot be worn together with knee wraps. They may be worn over a long-sleeved singlet but not under it.

Wraps

Wraps must be of one ply of commercially woven elastic covered with polyester, cotton or a combination of both, or medical crepe. Supportive wraps require Technical Committee approval; wraps made of medical crepe or bandage do not. For the wrist, the rulebook sets these limits:

• wrist wraps must not exceed 1 m in length and 8 cm in width, with any sleeves or Velcro tabs included within the one-metre length;
• a loop may be attached as an aid to securing but must not remain over the thumb or fingers during the actual lift;
• a combination of wrist wraps and sweat bands is not allowed;
• a wrist covering must not extend beyond 10 cm above and 2 cm below the centre of the wrist joint, or exceed a covering width of 12 cm.

Knee wraps may not exceed 2 m in length and 8 cm in width and may be worn only in competitions designated as Equipped. They must not extend beyond 15 cm above and 15 cm below the centre of the knee joint or exceed a total covering width of 30 cm, and wraps and sleeves cannot be combined.

Shoes and socks

The rulebook says shoes or boots must be worn. They are defined as indoor sports shoes or boots, weightlifting or powerlifting boots, or deadlift slippers, and it states that hiking boots do not qualify. Sole thickness must not exceed 5 cm at any point, the underside must be flat without projections or modification, loose inner soles that are not part of the manufactured shoe are limited to 1 cm thickness, and shoes must be properly fastened on the platform. Socks with a rubber outside sole lining are not allowed in the squat, bench press or deadlift. Shin-length socks must be worn to cover and protect the shins during the deadlift.

Reading product listings with these figures

1. Check the width and thickness against 10 cm and 13 mm for belts.
2. Check sleeve thickness against 7 mm and length against 30 cm, and whether any strapping or holes are present.
3. For wraps, note whether the product is elastic or medical crepe, and its length and width.
4. If the goal is to compete, confirm that the manufacturer is on the current approved list rather than relying on a product description.

Frequently asked questions

Does the rulebook say which belt fastening is better?

No. It permits a buckle with one or two prongs or a lever type and sets no ranking.

Can sleeves and wraps be combined?

Not at IPF events. The rulebook forbids wearing knee sleeves together with knee wraps.

The bottom line

The IPF Technical Rulebook effective 1 March 2026 sets maximum figures for belts (10 cm wide, 13 mm thick), knee sleeves (7 mm thick, 30 cm long), wrist wraps (1 m by 8 cm) and shoe soles (5 cm). Those numbers describe what is permitted at IPF competitions, not what performs best, but they let buyers compare specification sheets objectively and check that a manufacturer is on the approved list if competing.

Sources

• International Powerlifting Federation, “Technical Rulebook 2026” (effective 1 March 2026), section 3, “Personal equipment”
• International Powerlifting Federation, “Approved List”

Most fitness equipment listings describe products in marketing terms. Competition rulebooks do the opposite: they state dimensions and tolerances in numbers. The International Powerlifting Federation (IPF) publishes such figures for the bars, discs, racks and benches used at its championships, and they give buyers a precise benchmark for reading any manufacturer’s specification sheet. This article summarises the equipment section of the IPF Technical Rulebook effective 1 March 2026. These are competition rules for IPF events, not consumer safety standards, and other federations publish their own rulebooks.

How the rulebook treats approved equipment

The IPF’s Approved List page states that bars and plates, squat racks, bench racks and benches from commercial manufacturers registered and approved by its Technical Committee are permitted at World, Regional and Continental Championships, and that the list published there is valid through 31 December 2026. The rulebook itself adds that only approved bars and discs may be used at IPF World Championships or for setting world records, and that bars used at IPF championships must not be chromed on the knurling.

The bar

The 2026 rulebook requires a straight, well-knurled and grooved bar that conforms to these dimensions:

• total overall length not exceeding 2.2 m;
• distance between the collar faces not exceeding 1.32 m or less than 1.31 m;
• shaft diameter not exceeding 29 mm or less than 28 mm;
• combined weight of bar and collars of 25 kg;
• sleeve diameter not exceeding 52 mm or less than 50 mm;
• machined diameter markings spaced 81 cm apart.

The discs

Disc rules are where competition equipment differs most from typical consumer plates. The rulebook requires that:

• every disc weighs within 0.25 per cent or 10 grams of its face value, so a 20 kg disc must weigh between 19.95 kg and 20.05 kg, and a 1.25 kg disc between 1.24 kg and 1.26 kg;
• the centre hole is between 52 mm and 53 mm;
• discs come from a permitted range of 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 kg;
• discs of 20 kg and over are no more than 6 cm thick, and discs of 15 kg and under no more than 3 cm thick;
• the largest discs are no more than 45 cm in diameter;
• colours follow a code: 15 kg yellow, 20 kg blue, 25 kg red, with any colour for 10 kg and under.

The rulebook also specifies collars, which must always be used and must weigh 2.5 kg each.

Scales and the lifting platform

The rulebook sets equipment beyond the bar. Scales must be electronic, register to two decimal places, weigh up to 180 kg and have a calibration certificate valid within one year of the competition. The platform must measure between 2.5 m by 2.5 m and 4.0 m by 4.0 m, be no more than 10 cm high, and be flat, firm, level and covered with non-slip smooth carpet. Rubber matting or similar sheeting is not permitted on the competition platform.

Squat racks

Squat racks must come from approved commercial manufacturers, adjust from a minimum height of 1.00 m at the lowest position to at least 1.70 m in 2.5 cm increments, and be capable of being secured at the required height by pins.

Benches and bench racks

The bench specification is the most detailed and the most transferable to consumer comparison. The rulebook requires:

• bench length not less than 1.22 m, flat and level;
• width of at least 29 cm and no more than 32 cm;
• height of at least 42 cm and no more than 45 cm from floor to the top of the uncompressed pad;
• adjustable uprights with a bar rest height between 75 cm and 110 cm;
• a minimum width of 1.10 m between the insides of the bar rests;
• a bench head extending 22 cm beyond the centre of the uprights, with a tolerance of 5 cm either way;
• attached safety stands in all events, at least 50 cm high, with ten holes in 2.5 cm increments and 50 cm in length.

Using the figures as a buying benchmark

A buyer comparing home benches and racks can hold a product’s published dimensions against these numbers: pad width and height, upright range, width between bar rests and safety-stand height and adjustability. A rack that adjusts in wider steps than 2.5 cm, or a bench whose pad is well outside the 29 to 32 cm width, is not wrong for home use, but it differs from the competition specification. Products described as “competition” or “calibrated” should state the tolerance they meet.

Frequently asked questions

Do these figures apply to home gym equipment?

They apply to equipment used at IPF championships. They are useful as a benchmark, but a home product is not required to meet them.

Why are disc tolerances so tight?

The rulebook requires that discs weigh within 0.25 per cent or 10 grams of face value, so that loaded weights are accurate for records.

The bottom line

The IPF rulebook effective 1 March 2026 supplies concrete numbers for bars, discs, collars, racks and benches, including a 28 to 29 mm shaft, 50 to 52 mm sleeves, disc tolerances of 0.25 per cent or 10 grams, and a bench 29 to 32 cm wide and 42 to 45 cm high. These do not certify any home product, but they give buyers a factual yardstick for comparing specification sheets.

Sources

• International Powerlifting Federation, “Technical Rulebook 2026” (effective 1 March 2026), section 2, “Equipment and specifications”
• International Powerlifting Federation, “Approved List”

Many of the reviews, roundups and videos you find while comparing fitness equipment are commercially connected to the products they cover, through affiliate links, free products or payment. That does not make them wrong, but it does affect how you should read them. This article summarises what the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) say about labelling in their UK advertising guidance. It is separate from the rules on customer reviews on retailer listings, which we cover elsewhere.

When content counts as advertising

The ASA’s guidance on recognising ads says content must be identified as advertising when a brand gives an influencer a payment or any other incentive, requested or unsolicited, or when the influencer is otherwise personally or commercially connected to the brand. It states that this applies even to gifted items, and that the requirement stems from consumer protection law enforced by the Competition and Markets Authority and Trading Standards Services.

Affiliate marketing is covered too. According to CAP’s affiliate marketing guidance, the CAP Code applies to affiliate marketing where it is directly connected with the supply or transfer of goods, services, opportunities and gifts. Content that is entirely about affiliate products triggers full application of the Code, whereas mixed editorial and affiliate content may allow partial application. The guidance adds that a social media post may count as an affiliate ad even without an attributable affiliate link, as long as it was created in reference to the affiliate agreement.

What a proper label looks like

The ASA’s preferred label is “Ad”. Other acceptable options listed in the recognising ads guidance include “Advert”, “Advertising”, “Ad Feature” and “Advertisement Feature”. The label must be prominent and upfront, appearing at the beginning before the audience engages, and it should be clear across mobile, desktop and in-app views. The guidance says relying on a bio or previous posts is insufficient, because a post can appear in search results and be viewed in isolation.

For longer-form content, the affiliate guidance says a blog needs an identifier in the title if it is wholly affiliate-focused, or before each affiliate reference otherwise. Vlogs should carry it in the title or thumbnail, or on screen during affiliate product mentions. Voucher sites should make it clearly visible on the site generally, not buried in terms or FAQs.

What does not count as a proper label

• Disclaimers saying that affiliates “may” receive a commission, which the guidance calls too ambiguous.
• A standalone “#affiliate”, because ASA research shows consumers do not understand the term.
• Labels placed after hashtags or in areas that are cut off from view.
• Generic disclaimers placed only at the bottom of a page.
• According to the recognising ads page, wording such as “Sponsored”, “Supported by”, “Gifted” and “Thanks to”, and abbreviations such as “aff”, “sp” and “spon”.

The guidance also says both the business and the affiliate marketer are responsible under the Code, even if the ad was created solely by the affiliate without input from the business.

Reviews with affiliate links

The affiliate guidance does not single out reviews as a separate category. Affiliate-linked reviews fall under the general rules for blogs and videos, so where the content centres on promoted products, it needs obvious ad identification. In practice, this means an equipment review that earns a commission on click-through should carry a clear label near the top, not a note in the footer.

How to read a labelled or unlabelled review

• A label is information, not a verdict. “Ad” tells you there is a commercial connection. It does not tell you whether the review is fair.
• Check where the label sits. If you had to scroll or click to find a disclosure, that is not what the guidance describes as upfront.
• Look for evidence of use. Reviews that describe assembly, sizes, noise, measured specifications and drawbacks tell you more than praise for features listed on the manufacturer’s page.
• Notice what is absent. Content that never mentions a weakness, a limitation or a cheaper alternative deserves more caution.
• Cross-check. Compare a single review with what customers say on retailer listings, keeping in mind the separate UK rules on fake and incentivised customer reviews.

What if there is no label?

The absence of a label does not prove there is no commercial relationship, and the sources read do not say how to check. What they do say is that the responsibility to label lies with the marketer and the affiliate, not the reader. The pages read here do not set out a complaints process, so if you think content that should be labelled as an ad is not, check the ASA’s own site for how to raise it.

The bottom line

Under the UK advertising rules described by the ASA and CAP, content connected to a brand by payment, incentive, gifting or affiliate commission must be identified as advertising, with a clear upfront label such as “Ad” rather than “sponsored”, “#affiliate” or a footer disclaimer. Both the business and the affiliate are responsible. For buyers, a label is a prompt to look for evidence of real use, balanced drawbacks and confirmation from independent sources before spending money on equipment.

Sources

• ASA | CAP, “Online Affiliate Marketing”
• ASA | CAP, “Recognising ads: Social media and influencer marketing”

Product listings for treadmills, rowers and bikes sometimes quote a noise level in decibels, and buyers naturally treat a lower number as a quieter machine. That is broadly true, but the decibel scale behaves in ways that make small numerical gaps bigger than they look and make some claims impossible to compare. This article draws on guidance from the US National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), Great Britain’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to explain what a dB figure means. The physics is the same everywhere, but the sources are American and British, and the article does not cover the law on neighbour noise.

Why the scale is not linear

The NIDCD explains that the decibel scale is logarithmic, which it says better represents how changes in sound intensity feel to our ears. Adding 10 decibels makes a sound ten times more intense and, according to the NIDCD, it will seem about twice as loud. The HSE makes a related point in its noise guidance, noting that because decibels work on a logarithmic scale, a 3 dB increase will double the noise.

These two statements describe different things, sound energy and perceived loudness, and they are consistent. For a buyer the practical message is that a machine advertised at 65 dB is not “a bit louder” than one advertised at 60 dB in the way that 65 miles is a little further than 60. The gap is meaningful, and a claim of a difference of a few decibels is worth taking seriously, provided the two figures were measured the same way.

What “dB(A)” means

You will often see the figure written as dB(A) or dBA. The NIDCD says A-weighted decibels differ from standard measurements because the dBA scale is based on both intensity and how the human ear responds. The HSE says an A-weighting is used to measure average noise levels, while a C-weighting, dB(C), is used to measure peak, impact or explosive noises.

That distinction matters for equipment. A listing quoting a single dB(A) figure is describing an average level. The HSE’s description of C-weighting for peak and impact noises suggests why a steady average figure is not designed to describe a sudden impact, such as a weight being set down. A machine described as quiet in average terms can still produce impacts that a headline figure does not capture, so check the listing for what was actually measured.

What the numbers sound like

The NIDCD gives everyday reference points in dBA: whispering is about 30 dBA, normal conversation 60 to 70 dBA, headphones and sporting events 94 to 110 dBA, and a jet taking off 140 dBA. These help put a claim in context: a figure in the range of conversation is not silent, and a figure well above it is not something you would ignore in a shared flat. The same source says sound can damage hearing at 85 dBA over eight hours or more, at 100 dBA for 14 minutes or more and at 110 dBA for two minutes or more. Those are hearing-risk thresholds from a US institute rather than a benchmark for domestic comfort.

Questions to ask about any noise claim

• Is the unit stated? Look for dB(A) rather than an unspecified dB.
• Is there a stated measuring method? The sources read do not set out how equipment manufacturers should measure noise, so a listing that says nothing about how, where or at what setting the figure was measured cannot be compared reliably with another.
• At what speed or resistance? A figure for a walking pace or the lowest resistance setting does not describe use at the top of the range.
• Which noise is being described? Motor hum, belt noise, resistance mechanism and impact are different things, and one figure cannot describe them all.
• Is it the same model? Figures taken from a different model or room do not transfer.

Measuring it yourself

If you can hear a machine in a showroom, you can also measure it, but the tool matters. NIOSH says its Sound Level Meter app for iOS is accurate within plus or minus 2 dBA when tested with a calibrated external microphone, and that it meets Type 2 requirements of the IEC 61672 sound level meter standard, having been tested in a reverberant chamber at its acoustics laboratory. It is available only on iOS devices because NIOSH says Android’s hardware is fragmented among many manufacturers with different requirements, and so laboratory verification of Android apps’ accuracy is not currently possible. NIOSH therefore cannot verify the accuracy of Android-based sound measurement applications.

Two cautions follow. A phone measurement made without the external microphone that NIOSH used in its testing may not match the stated accuracy, and any reading is only meaningful if you note the position, the machine setting and the room, so that you can repeat it. Treat a phone reading as a rough comparison between machines in the same room, not as a certified value.

Connecting the figure to your home

A decibel figure is one input. Whether a machine is acceptable in your home depends on the room, the time of day and who else lives nearby. Our guides on treadmill noise and vibration in upstairs rooms and exercise bike noise and resistance faults look at those wider questions.

The bottom line

The decibel scale is logarithmic: 3 dB doubles sound energy according to the HSE, and 10 dB is ten times the intensity and seems about twice as loud according to the NIDCD. A dB(A) figure describes an average level, not necessarily an impact, and it is only comparable between machines when the unit, speed and measuring method match. Treat unexplained noise claims cautiously, and if you measure for yourself, remember that NIOSH can verify its iOS app’s accuracy but not Android apps.

Sources

• NIDCD (US National Institutes of Health), “How is Sound Measured?”
• Health and Safety Executive, “Noise” (woodworking)
• Health and Safety Executive, “Noise” (event safety)
• NIOSH (CDC), “Sound Level Meter App”

Comparison pages usually list price, footprint and specifications, but the electricity a powered machine uses is rarely stated in pounds. The good news is that the sum is simple and uses two numbers you can find yourself: the machine’s power rating and your electricity unit rate. This article shows the method, uses the latest Ofgem price-cap average rates as an example, and is clear about what the calculation cannot tell you. All figures below labelled as examples are illustrations of the method, not measurements of any product.

The formula

National Energy Action gives the calculation as: appliance running cost in pence per hour equals the power rating in watts, multiplied by the electricity unit rate in pence per kWh, divided by 1,000. To find the cost per minute, divide the hourly figure by 60. Citizens Advice describes the same method in words: multiply the appliance’s power rating by how long it is used, then apply your electricity rate. It defines the unit rate as the price you pay per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity.

Where to find the two numbers

• Power rating. National Energy Action says the wattage can be found on the appliances themselves. For a machine you are considering buying, look at the specification sheet or the manual, and if the listing does not state a figure, ask the seller in writing.
• Unit rate. National Energy Action says your current electricity unit price is on your energy bill, or you can contact your supplier. Citizens Advice’s worked examples use 25p per kWh, but it notes that your actual rate may differ.

Ofgem publishes average price-cap unit rates for direct debit customers. Its page gives 26.11p per kWh for electricity from 1 July to 30 September 2026 and 26.32p per kWh from 1 October to 31 December 2026. Those are averages for England, Scotland and Wales, and Ofgem notes that standing charges vary by region. Use them as a guide only; your own tariff, payment method and region determine your real rate.

Worked illustrations

These use the 26.32p figure and hypothetical power ratings chosen to show the method.

• An assumed 1,500W rating, used for one hour: 1,500 x 26.32 / 1,000 = 39.5p per hour.
• An assumed 1,000W rating, used for 30 minutes: 1,000 x 26.32 / 1,000 = 26.3p per hour, so about 13.2p per half-hour session. Four sessions a week for 52 weeks is 208 sessions, or roughly £27 a year.
• An assumed 300W rating, used for 20 minutes: 300 x 26.32 / 1,000 = 7.9p per hour, or about 2.6p per session.

The point of these sums is the shape of the answer. For a modest rating and regular short sessions, electricity is unlikely to be the main cost of owning a machine, but a high rating used daily adds up. Purchase price, servicing and floor protection matter as well, which is why our comparison of cardio machines by space, noise and cost per session covers those separately.

What the rating does not tell you

A single power rating is one number. Citizens Advice says that plug-in energy monitors show actual consumption and can calculate costs if you enter your electricity rate. If you already own a machine, or can borrow one, a monitor gives you a measured figure rather than an estimate from the label. If you cannot measure, treat the rating-based sum as an estimate and remember that the number of minutes you actually use the machine matters as much as the rating.

Citizens Advice also puts standby in context, saying that standby costs make up only a small amount of a household’s electricity bill and estimating that a typical UK household spends around £45 a year on standby. That is for a whole household, so it is not a figure for one machine, but it suggests that a machine sitting idle is not usually where the money goes.

Comparing two machines fairly

1. Note each machine’s stated power rating and confirm what the figure represents in the listing, for example whether it refers to the motor or to the whole machine.
2. Decide a realistic weekly usage in minutes and use the same figure for both.
3. Apply the same unit rate to both, so the comparison depends only on the machines.
4. Add the result to the other running costs, such as maintenance and any subscription, rather than treating electricity as the whole picture.

If a machine has no mains connection, there is no mains running cost to calculate. Check the specification to see what powers the console and any resistance system before assuming a cost either way.

The bottom line

Running cost equals power rating in watts multiplied by the unit rate in pence per kWh, divided by 1,000, then scaled to the hours you use the machine. Ofgem’s average price-cap rate for electricity is 26.32p per kWh from 1 October 2026, though your own rate will vary and should come from your bill. Use the rating to compare machines, use a plug-in monitor to measure one you own, and remember that the rating is only one input alongside how often you train.

Sources

• National Energy Action, “How much do your electrical items cost to run?”
• Citizens Advice, “Save money using your electrical appliances”
• Ofgem, “Energy price cap unit rates and standing charges”

A treadmill, rack or exercise bike listed by an overseas seller can look like a bargain, particularly when the price is quoted in another currency. Before ordering, it is worth working out what else you may owe and whether the machine will even run safely at home. This article covers the UK rules on VAT and customs duty for goods sent from abroad, a safety point about voltage, and what help exists if something goes wrong. It distinguishes Great Britain from Northern Ireland where the government guidance does.

VAT on goods sent from abroad

According to GOV.UK, all goods sent from outside the UK to Great Britain are subject to VAT. You pay the VAT when you buy the goods or to the delivery company before you receive them, and the delivery company, such as Royal Mail, Parcelforce or a courier, collects it if it has not already been paid. The VAT is calculated on the value of the goods, plus postage, packaging and insurance, plus any duty you owe.

The separate guidance on overseas goods sold directly to UK customers explains that the £135 threshold decides who collects the VAT. For consignments of £135 or less, the overseas seller must register for UK VAT and charge it at the point of sale, so you see it at checkout. Above £135, normal VAT and customs rules apply on importation, so the tax is collected when the goods arrive. The same guidance says it excludes online marketplace sales, to which different rules apply, and that for goods sold directly to customers in Northern Ireland, import VAT applies instead.

Customs duty

For Great Britain, GOV.UK says non-excise goods worth £135 or less attract no customs duty. Goods above £135 attract duty, with the rate depending on the type of goods and where they come from. Northern Ireland has its own variations at the £135 level, so a Northern Ireland buyer should read the GOV.UK page for that nation rather than assume the Great Britain position applies. Most home gym machines and racks will sit well above £135, so for larger items you should expect to deal with import VAT and possibly duty.

Two practical points from the same page: delivery companies hold parcels for approximately three weeks awaiting payment, and refund requests require specific forms, BOR 286 for Royal Mail and Parcelforce or C285 for other couriers.

A landed-cost checklist before you order

• Is the seller charging UK VAT at checkout, which suggests a consignment of £135 or less, or will VAT and possible duty be collected on arrival?
• What are the shipping, packaging and insurance charges, since VAT is calculated on these as well?
• Who pays for return shipping if the item is faulty, and how would you request a refund of any tax or duty you paid?
• Is the goods classification likely to attract duty, given that duty depends on the type of goods and their origin?

Compare an overseas price with a UK price only after adding all of these.

Voltage and plugs: a safety issue, not a detail

Electrical Safety First states that the UK mains supply is 230V at 50Hz. Its guidance on adaptors is blunt about the limits: a travel adaptor simply lets you plug an appliance into a different socket, but it does not convert the voltage or frequency. The charity warns that it can be extremely dangerous to use an electrical appliance rated at a voltage different from the supply, and notes that electricity supplies worldwide vary from around 100V to 240V. For American appliances, it says a voltage converter or transformer would be required, and that a travel adaptor alone is not enough. It also says that where the frequency differs, the normal operation of an appliance may be affected, and that any converter or transformer must not be overloaded beyond its power rating.

That guidance is written for travellers, but the electrical principle is the same for an appliance bought overseas and used at home. For a motorised machine, check the rating label or specification for the input voltage and frequency and confirm that they match a UK 230V, 50Hz supply before you buy. If the listing does not state them, ask the seller in writing. Equipment with no mains connection is not affected.

If something goes wrong with an overseas seller

The UK International Consumer Centre (UKICC) states that it provides free advice and assistance for cross-border consumer disputes, and it says it can guide consumers on whether their situation qualifies for support. Its resources section offers downloadable email and letter templates for complaints on popular queries, along with contact details for UK and European organisations that provide consumer advice. The pages read for this article indicate that UKICC operates under the Chartered Trading Standards Institute.

The UKICC page on buying goods is candid about its limits. It focuses mainly on purchases under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which requires goods to be of satisfactory quality, as described and fit for purpose, and it does not address customs charges, return procedures for international purchases, how rights differ for non-EU sellers, warranty coverage by location or how to verify an overseas seller. That gap is itself a warning, so settle returns, warranty and servicing questions before you pay, and ask UKICC whether your seller’s country is one it can help with.

The bottom line

An overseas price is not the price you will pay. For Great Britain, VAT applies to goods sent from abroad, with the seller charging it at checkout for consignments of £135 or less and collection on importation above that, and customs duty can apply above £135. Northern Ireland has different arrangements. Confirm that motorised equipment is rated for 230V and 50Hz, because an adaptor does not change voltage, and know that UKICC offers free advice on cross-border disputes.

Sources

• GOV.UK, “Tax and customs for goods sent from abroad: Tax and duty”
• GOV.UK, “VAT and overseas goods sold directly to customers in the UK”
• Electrical Safety First, “Travel adaptor for the United Kingdom”
• UK International Consumer Centre, “Buying goods”
• UK International Consumer Centre, “Consumer Resources”

When you compare treadmills, racks or exercise bikes, star ratings and customer reviews often decide the shortlist. Since 2025, UK consumer law has treated certain review practices as banned outright. This article summarises what the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) guidance says, what sellers who publish reviews are expected to do, and how a buyer can use that knowledge when reading a listing. The guidance is issued by the CMA, the UK consumer regulator, and appears to apply UK-wide. It concerns reviews on retailer and marketplace listings, not editorial or sponsored content, which is a separate issue.

What is now banned

The CMA’s short guide for businesses publishing consumer reviews identifies three prohibited categories:

1. Fake reviews: reviews that look or claim to be genuine but are actually fake.
2. Concealed incentivised reviews: reviews that fail to disclose an incentive, such as money or another benefit, for example a free stay at a hotel.
3. False or misleading review information: for example, aggregated ratings based on fake reviews, or misrepresented review data.

The government’s announcement of the new regime says the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 includes an explicit ban on posting and commissioning fake reviews, added to the list of banned practices. It came into force in April 2025.

What sellers who publish reviews must do

The guide says businesses that publish reviews must implement a set of controls:

• Published policies that clearly prohibit fake reviews and state the business’s position on incentivised reviews.
• Risk assessments that regularly evaluate how likely it is that banned content could appear.
• Detection processes to identify suspicious reviews before publication.
• Investigation procedures for flagged content.
• Authority to remove content and impose consequences, such as putting clear warnings on pages or banning users.

Responsibility sits with the trader. The guide states that each individual trader who publishes reviews and review information is responsible for preventing and taking steps to remove banned content, and that businesses remain accountable even when they use third-party monitoring services. Measures must be “reasonable and proportionate”, judged by factors such as the type of platform, the volume of reviews, whether users can submit reviews and risks specific to the market.

What the CMA can do

According to the government announcement, the CMA can decide for itself whether consumer protection law has been infringed rather than going through the courts, and can act directly, including through consumer redress and fines. It can fine up to 10% of a company’s global turnover for infringements. The announcement lists fake reviews and drip pricing among areas the CMA had already targeted with enforcement markers.

What this means when you read a listing

The rules do not make every review trustworthy, and they do not promise that a fake review will be caught before you read it. What they do is give you clearer questions to ask:

• Does the retailer say how it handles reviews? Published policies are part of what the guide expects, so a site that says nothing about fake or incentivised reviews is worth noting.
• Are incentivised reviews labelled? Undisclosed incentives are banned, so a review that was written in exchange for a free product should make that clear.
• Is the overall score built on a healthy spread of reviews? The ban on misleading review information covers ratings that rely on fake reviews or misrepresented data, so a score is only as good as the reviews behind it.
• Do the reviews describe the equipment itself? For a machine you will use for years, detail on assembly, noise, stability and how it holds up is more useful than a one-line verdict. Treat generic praise with caution.

Cross-checking beyond the listing

Because a single review source can be manipulated or skewed, compare what buyers say on the retailer’s page with what appears on independent forums and in reviews on other retailers’ sites. Look for the same points being made in the same detail across sources. When two or three unconnected sources agree about, say, a wobbly frame or a fault in the console, that carries more weight than any star average. The reverse also applies: if the only praise appears on a single page, and the specifications elsewhere do not match what is claimed, that gap is a reason to keep looking.

Also separate complaints about delivery, courier damage or customer service from complaints about the product itself. A low rating caused by a delivery problem says little about how a treadmill or rack performs once assembled, while a run of complaints about the same component points to something about the product.

Reporting suspected fake reviews

The government pages read for this article describe the obligations and enforcement powers but do not set out a step-by-step consumer complaints route. If you believe a listing carries fake reviews, the sensible first step is to use the retailer’s own reporting tool for reviews, since the guide says traders must have processes to investigate flagged content. Keep a note of the listing and the reviews you are concerned about in case you want to raise it further.

The bottom line

Since April 2025, UK consumer law bans fake reviews, concealed incentivised reviews and misleading presentation of review information, and traders who publish reviews must take reasonable and proportionate steps to prevent and remove them. The CMA can fine up to 10% of global turnover. For buyers, that supports a cautious approach: check whether the seller explains its review policy, look for labelled incentives, favour detailed reviews and confirm claims across independent sources before paying for expensive equipment.

Sources

• GOV.UK (CMA), “Short guide for businesses: publishing consumer reviews and complying with consumer protection law”
• GOV.UK, “CMA to boost consumer and business confidence as new consumer protection regime comes into force”
• GOV.UK (CMA), “Fake reviews”