2007-07-03 09:39:36 · 5 answers · asked by ? 1 in Health ➔ Diet & Fitness
OUCH and ouch......lol Sit-Ups you lay flat and bring yourself all the way up over and over again. Crunches you never really lay down or come all the way up. Sit-ups are said to be worse on your back. Me, i'm lazy, so i don't do either ö¿ö Notice the name...lol
2007-07-03 09:45:12 · answer #1 · answered by ? 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sit ups are where your feet are on the ground and you have your back on the ground. then sit up. crunches are bretty much the same, except your legs are in the air, and you don't go up as far. plus crunches are a little harder.
2007-07-03 09:49:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your back mainly!
LoL.
Crunches are less abrasive then a full sit.
Full sit up really targets the bottom abdomen while the cruches focus on the middle.
2007-07-03 09:48:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think they target slightly different muscles, situps are worse on your back compared to crunches, and tend to make the lower part of your stomach BIGGER instead of smaller. crunches are considered to be better for you overall. just cuz the military does situps doesn't make them ok! they are the traditional hardcore method of getting in shape, and the DO WORK, but again, crunches are considered better for you.
2007-07-03 09:48:01 · answer #4 · answered by KJC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sit down united statesare complete, lifting your head on your knees, crunches are small, lifting your shoulders slightly off the floor and backpedal lower back. i'm hoping it relatively is wise. you could google the version and it will practice you.
2016-10-03 12:22:09 · answer #5 · answered by poehlein 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋