Barbell row one rep max calculator
Estimate your one rep max on the barbell row from a set you have already done. All five published equations are shown, because they agree at low repetitions and diverge above ten.
Enter your set
Result
These are estimates from population-level equations, not a measurement of you and not medical advice. Individual results vary widely. Talk to a doctor or a registered dietitian before making significant changes to how you eat or train.
The barbell row specifically
The bent-over barbell row is a horizontal pull, usually trained in moderate repetition ranges.
A caution specific to this movement: estimates are unreliable, because form degrades predictably under fatigue. Torso angle rises as the set continues, which changes the lift rather than ending it.
- A true one-rep maximum is rarely tested on this lift, and the estimate is mostly useful for setting working loads.
- Strictness is the main variable. A strict row and a row with hip drive can differ by twenty per cent.
- Because the standard drifts within a set, estimates from sets above eight repetitions are close to meaningless here.
- Typical reps
- 6 to 12
- Category
- Pulling
Estimated barbell row max by weight and reps
Epley estimates in kilograms. Read across from the weight you lifted and down from the repetitions you managed. Columns beyond ten repetitions are shown but are the least reliable.
| Weight | 1 reps | 2 reps | 3 reps | 5 reps | 8 reps | 10 reps | 12 reps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 kg | 41.3 | 42.7 | 44 | 46.7 | 50.7 | 53.3 | 56 |
| 60 kg | 62 | 64 | 66 | 70 | 76 | 80 | 84 |
| 80 kg | 82.7 | 85.3 | 88 | 93.3 | 101.3 | 106.7 | 112 |
| 100 kg | 103.3 | 106.7 | 110 | 116.7 | 126.7 | 133.3 | 140 |
| 120 kg | 124 | 128 | 132 | 140 | 152 | 160 | 168 |
| 140 kg | 144.7 | 149.3 | 154 | 163.3 | 177.3 | 186.7 | 196 |
| 160 kg | 165.3 | 170.7 | 176 | 186.7 | 202.7 | 213.3 | 224 |
Percentage table
Training loads as a share of a 100 kg maximum, with the repetitions each percentage typically allows. Scale proportionally to your own estimate.
| Percentage | Load from 100 kg | Approximate reps |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | 50 kg | 30 |
| 55% | 55 kg | 25 |
| 60% | 60 kg | 20 |
| 65% | 65 kg | 16 |
| 70% | 70 kg | 13 |
| 75% | 75 kg | 10 |
| 80% | 80 kg | 8 |
| 85% | 85 kg | 5 |
| 90% | 90 kg | 3 |
| 95% | 95 kg | 2 |
Rep-max conversion
What a 100 kg estimated maximum corresponds to at each repetition count, and how the five equations compare for a 100 kg set of five.
| Repetitions | Load for a 100 kg max |
|---|---|
| 1 | 96.8 kg |
| 2 | 93.8 kg |
| 3 | 90.9 kg |
| 5 | 85.7 kg |
| 8 | 78.9 kg |
| 10 | 75 kg |
| 12 | 71.4 kg |
| Formula | 100 kg × 5 reps |
|---|---|
| epley | 116.7 kg |
| brzycki | 112.5 kg |
| lombardi | 117.5 kg |
| oconner | 112.5 kg |
| wathan | 116.6 kg |
Questions
- How do I estimate my barbell row max?
- Take a set to or near failure, enter the weight and the repetitions, and the equations do the rest. A heavy triple gives a far more reliable estimate than a set of twelve, because all five equations were validated in the two to ten repetition range.
- Are 1RM estimates accurate for the barbell row?
- Estimates are unreliable, because form degrades predictably under fatigue. Torso angle rises as the set continues, which changes the lift rather than ending it.
- Which formula should I use?
- Wathan and Epley track measured data across the widest range; Brzycki is the most conservative and is exact at a single repetition. The average of all five is a more defensible single number than any one of them, and the spread between them tells you how much confidence the estimate deserves.
- What repetition range suits the barbell row?
- This lift is usually trained in the 6 to 12 repetition range. Estimates taken from within that range are the most trustworthy, because they sit closest to where the equations were fitted.
- Should I test a true maximum instead?
- Only if you need the number for competition, and then with a spotter and a full warm-up. For programming, an estimate from a heavy triple is nearly as useful and costs far less recovery and risk.