u/GymLog

I have been trying to work out a sensible way to represent overall training volume, rather than volume for one exercise or one muscle group.

The usual approaches both seem limited.

Counting sets is simple, but it treats four sets of leg curls and four sets of deadlifts as the same amount of whole-body training. Traditional volume load, sets × reps × weight, has the opposite problem. Heavily loaded exercises dominate the number, and comparisons become difficult across machines, bodyweight exercises, different ranges of motion, and exercises that are simply loaded on very different scales.

The approach I am experimenting with is based on hard-set contributions to muscles.

A set only counts if it is completed and sufficiently close to failure. It contributes a full set to the exercise’s primary muscles and a fractional set to meaningful secondary muscles. The contributions are then combined across muscle groups to produce one overall weekly value.

A deliberately simplified example, assuming secondary muscles receive half credit:

A hard set of leg curls might contribute:

• Hamstrings: 1.0

Total contribution: 1.0

A hard set of deadlifts might contribute:

• Glutes: 1.0
• Hamstrings: 1.0
• Lower back: 0.5
• Upper back or traps: 0.5

Total contribution: 3.0

The exact muscle assignments and fractions are obviously debatable, but the basic idea is that the deadlift set contributes more to overall training volume because it meaningfully trains more of the body.

I already track the distribution separately by muscle group, so this single number is not supposed to show whether training is balanced. It would only show whether total body-wide training volume is generally increasing, decreasing, or staying stable over time.

I also would not treat it as a direct measure of systemic fatigue. A set at RPE 8 and a set at RPE 10 might count the same once they pass the hard-set threshold, despite having different recovery costs. The intention is to keep it closer to a volume measure than to create an elaborate fatigue score.

My main concern is whether weighting exercises by muscular coverage is genuinely more informative than simply counting hard sets, or whether it introduces too much subjectivity through exercise-to-muscle assignments.

Does this seem like a useful way to summarize whole-body training volume? How would you approach it?

A small rant.

I used to think that if I built a better tool and made it free, that would matter.

I’m not so sure anymore.

I built a workout app because I wanted one for myself. I lift, I code, and I spent about two years refining it on and off into something that feels complete enough for my own training.

For a while I had this slightly ridiculous dream that maybe it could become one of those apps people recommend by default. Not because I had some grand startup plan, but because a lot of fitness app functionality is not technically magical. Much of it can be built, improved, or exceeded by one stubborn developer with enough time.

But I underestimated the real moat.

It is not always the product. It is distribution. Momentum. Existing recommendations. Marketing budgets. The fact that people have already heard of something. The fact that every new app sounds like spam before anyone even sees it.

That part has been harder to accept than I expected.

I do not want to monetize this. I thought about it, disliked the direction it would push me in, and dropped it. I want to give the app away for free.

But “free” does not automatically create trust. Sometimes it creates suspicion.

So now I’m stuck with a thing I built, a thing I care about, and the very unromantic problem of trying to get anyone to believe there is no catch.

I’ve been lifting for a while and got tired of paying rent to write down what I did last time. About two years ago I built my own iOS-native logger. It works well for me, but it was built entirely around how I train for strength and hypertrophy: percentage-based sets, RPE, rest timers, progress graphs, and tracking volume load across different muscle groups. So I have no idea if it holds up for people who train differently.

I also care about privacy, so there are no accounts, no analytics, no ads, and no tracking. Training history should not need to live on someone else’s dashboard just so you can log a set.

Why I’m doing this: honestly, because I can, and because it bugs me that something this basic became something people subscribe to. No grand mission, no plan to turn it into a company. I don’t need to monetize anyone’s training history to feel like this was worth building.

I’m planning to share it, and what I’m trying to figure out now is whether this can feel like a complete experience for people other than me. I’m not looking for compliments. I’m looking for the bar.

So I’d like to hear from people who actually log their training:

• What does your current app get right that you’d miss?
• What do you wish workout apps remembered or inferred automatically, without becoming too “smart”?
• What kind of progress tracking is actually useful to you, and what kind is just noise?
• When you’re mid-workout, what information do you actually want visible without tapping around?
• What would make you delete it after one workout?

Help me figure out what a free workout logger has to get right before paying for one starts to feel ridiculous.

I built a free, private iOS app. Finding users is harder than building it.

I’m building a native iOS workout logger with a fairly deliberate model: no ads, no subscriptions, no account, no analytics, and local data storage.

That part matters to me because the app is meant to be a tool, not a service. I did not want basic workout logging to require a login, recurring payment, or giving training data to yet another platform.

But now that I’m looking for beta testers, I’m realizing that “I made something free and privacy-friendly” does not automatically make distribution easier.

I have been reaching out to fitness-related subreddit mods to ask whether I can share the beta, and some have turned it down. I understand why, because communities get spammed by app promotion constantly, but it is still a strange problem: the app is free, private, and made for people like them, yet it is hard to even get permission to show it.

For other indie iOS developers, what actually worked for getting your first useful beta testers?

Not just downloads, but people who tried the app seriously and gave feedback. Did you find them through TestFlight communities, Reddit, small creators, newsletters, personal networks, App Store communities, or something else?

I built Gym Log, a native iOS workout logger for weight training.

My view is that logging sets, reps, weight, rest times, previous performance, and progress should not require an account or a monthly subscription. Those features are valuable, but they should feel like a good tool, not another service to manage.

Gym Log is free, has no ads, no subscriptions, no account, and stores data locally on device.

It is designed for people who train from their own programs and want a practical way to plan workouts, log sets quickly, use rest timers, check previous performance, and review progress over time.

The app is currently in beta. I’m looking for feedback from people who actually log their training, especially around what feels fast, confusing, missing, or useful during a real workout.

Website: https://gymlog.info
TestFlight: https://testflight.apple.com/join/qUE5x4Um

I built Gym Log because I could not find the workout tracker I wanted.

The capable apps I tried often required an account, used subscriptions, or placed useful progress analysis behind a paid tier. Many of the private and free alternatives were much simpler than what I needed for my own training.

So I built a full workout planner and logger rather than a minimal set-and-rep tracker.

Gym Log is designed around the practical parts of training:

• seeing planned sets and previous performance together
• quickly recording weight, repetitions, and RPE
• automatic rest timers and Live Activity controls
• percentages, rep ranges, supersets, and reusable set schemes
• exercise history, personal records, and estimated 1RM graphs
• muscle-group volume tracking with fractional contributions

There is no account, subscription, advertising, analytics SDK, or paid feature tier. Workout data is stored locally on the iPhone.

I use Gym Log for every workout, which has helped me refine it around real training rather than hypothetical workflows.

However, that is also the limitation: it currently fits my own program better than anyone else’s.

I am looking for testers who already follow their own strength or hypertrophy programs and are willing to use Gym Log during a few real workouts.

The most useful feedback would be:

• what feels confusing when setting up your training
• what takes too long between sets
• which parts of your program are awkward or impossible to represent
• whether the progress information is genuinely useful
• what made you stop using the app or return to your previous logger

A screenshot and a short explanation through TestFlight is ideal. Even “I stopped after one workout because…” is also a useful feedback.

Requires iOS 26.1 or later

Website: gymlog.info