What would you change about the APFT?

2014-02-13T01:39:01-05:00

The Army Times top story tonight reports the Army is or will soon be making another attempt to redesign the APFT.  There may be an MOS specific APFT in addition to an APFT for everyone in the Army.  My question regards the latter... What would you change about the current APFT or is it fine the way it is?  

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 13 at 2014 1:46 AM

2014-02-13T01:46:35-05:00

Drop the time for the P/U & S/U to 1 min; Add a 100 Meter Sprint; and a Standing Broad Jump; & 1 1/2 Mile Run.

Response by SSG Christopher Freeman made Feb 13 at 2014 10:28 PM

2014-02-13T22:28:39-05:00

If anyone here took the APFT and ACRT when they were changing it, that was a great test of physical fitness. It measured more areas of fitness and gave a better assessment. I made a joke about MOS specific PT tests for my CMF (Public Affairs). One of our events would be doing up-down drills with a camera or holding it at the up position and clicking the shutter for time.

Response by SSG Zachery Mitchell made Feb 13 at 2014 10:44 PM

2014-02-13T22:44:17-05:00

The system in place now seems to be working just fine. If it ain't broke don't fix it right? I don't understand why the Army keeps throwing money into exploring new pt test options yet nothing ever gets changed and the money ends up being a waste.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2014 5:26 AM

2014-02-14T05:26:21-05:00

SGT Garber,

I would add 7 Pull Ups for females and males at the end of the APFT!

V/R

1SG Haro

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2014 11:49 AM

2014-02-14T11:49:35-05:00

SGT Garber,<div><br></div><div>I think the APFT should include the 60-yard shuttle run that was part of the proposed new APFT a couple of years ago.  We were tested using the new APFT format (long jump, shuttle run, rower, 1.5 mile run, pushups) when I was in BCT, and the shuttle run was a good indicator of our fitness level.</div>

Response by SGT(P) Troy Escomiendo, MBA made Feb 14 at 2014 5:55 PM

2014-02-14T17:55:25-05:00

If I had to change the APFT..I would run first then do the situps then pushups in that order.

Response by LTC Monte Anderson made Feb 15 at 2014 1:46 AM

2014-02-15T01:46:47-05:00

I think one problem with the test is the maximum and minimum scores. It encourages soldiers to either do the minimum required to pass or stop at the maximum even though they can do more. I think the requirement should be to do as many as possible with the time allotted. The passing scores could be adjusted on an annual basis. Also consider an expert badge for those who max all events.

Response by LTC Richard Zimmerman made Feb 17 at 2014 10:35 AM

2014-02-17T10:35:52-05:00

I agree that the APFT works fine. However, the standards for each event could be customized depending on the unit mission, e.g. combat, combat service support.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2014 7:49 PM

2014-04-13T19:49:06-04:00

I would like to see the sit- ups changed to crunches. I hear so many in the medical field and sports medicine field say there is no reason to require a foot- supported sit-up, when a crunch is better for you and still tests the abs and core. Many say the sit-up causes more injuries to the back and neck. I also know many who can do crunches, but cannot do sit-ups because of different injuries that have healed in every aspect, except for the traditional sit up. They can ruck, run, shoot, do whatever, but the motion of the sit-up (past the point of the crunch) causes physical problems. Again, these are guys who are highly- motivated, but may be forced on a permanent profile because of not being able to perform a sit- up. If, however, we are determined to keep the sit- up, maybe we could offer an alternate of crunches in its place (obviously raising the number needed to adjust the difficulty/ fairness).

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Jun 17 at 2014 10:44 AM

2014-06-17T10:44:30-04:00

Here is my take on the PT test:

Pushups for number performed without "resting" as in putting knees down, etc and not for time. Encourages form and more muscular strain instead of moving quickly, letting momentum do the work, and increasing risk of injury.

Pullups for number performed (see above). Stay under a constant state of motion to still be "doing a pull up" and no leg kicking.

Run: 1.5 miles as its fast enough to require leg power and speed but also short enough to not just be pure endurance.

Remove sit ups altogether. The muscles it "tests" are small and mostly unimportant or can be trained in other exercises (see run). Done improperly, which is common, it can cause back injuries (as I have unfortunately found out).

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 17 at 2014 11:54 AM

2014-06-17T11:54:36-04:00

Pull-ups instead of push-ups.

Response by CPT Jacob Swartout made Aug 4 at 2014 9:29 PM

2014-08-04T21:29:14-04:00

My CC/FSC at Ft Jackson discussed the sit up event. Questions like: Why doesn't the Army just make Soldiers cross their arms across their chests instead of having hands behind the head? Wouldn't it stop the neck injuries from Soldiers cranking their neck when they are struggling to make the last few reps count? These were just a few questions that brought up much discussion on what changes could possibly be made if approved by DA. Pull-ups were also discussed and mostly everyone agreed to add that event but with mixed results on how it would be graded for points.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2014 2:23 PM

2014-09-27T14:23:44-04:00

The APFT is outdated, irrelevant and proves nothing about the combat readiness of the soldier. I never had to run 2 miles in shorts and running shoes in combat. I did however, have to sprint in full kit and walk for long distances under a load. The APFT has no metric to test strength, speed or agility. It's all endurance. (push-ups ARE NOT a strength metric). Endurance is the most important aspect of combat readiness. No doubt. But I believe other aspects should be tested as well. Because if they are tested, they will be trained and consequently increased. Making the solider a more complete, well rounded warrior.

1. 6 mile road march with body armor, rifle and 35 lb pack
2. 400 m sprint with body armor and rifle
3. Body weight bench press for reps
4. Strict form pullups for reps
4. A standardized obstacle course that involves, sprinting, climbing, low crawling, quickly changing directions and some sort of balance stress. (agility)

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 5 at 2014 6:16 PM

2014-12-05T18:16:19-05:00

The length of the run only measures endurance, so perhaps agility or shorter runs would be more appropriate. The only time we're going to run/walk that far is with a ruck on our back...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 19 at 2015 9:23 PM

2015-01-19T21:23:48-05:00

They should changed it from 80/80/80 not 60/60/60 period.

Response by SFC William Adamek made Apr 28 at 2015 1:09 PM

2015-04-28T13:09:24-04:00

Sorry but old school here (late 70's) from when we did the APFT in boots and fatigues. Most of us couldnt understand the reasoning when they changed to the tennis shoes and shorts. Why is it we train and test everything else to how we go to war but not physical fitness. It doesnt pass the common sense test. " Hold on enemy... I have to put my tennie runners on!"

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 17 at 2015 4:33 PM

2015-10-17T16:33:55-04:00

I would love a healthy balance of both or even better simply to add to.

Hold the standard 2/2/2 APFT assessment as a general overall look of a persons physical fitness level and ability.

Another thing that could benefit the force is implementing a injury prone assessment that is currently being used on IET soldiers. This could help identify soldiers that may need conditioning to prevent serious injury just from our day to day garrison lifestyle.

Follow up 2/2/2 (not the same day) with a MOS specific physical assessment.
I'll example medics because I am one, but the assessment could go with loading up (wearing of kit and aid bag) with a short distance sprint to a simulated casualty, I believe the simulated casualty should weight at a minimum of 200lbs to allow realism to the common actual weight of a soldier fully loaded down (even though it probably far exceeds the 200 mark) following that a the medic would do a quick visual assessment and preform a buddy carry/drag for 25/50m. preform a full casualty assessment with interventions and evacuate the casualty. to medics reading this it may all seem very AIT like standard but doing so bi annually I think would boost proficiency skills across the board for the MOS as well as identify those who need retraining and those who cannot successfully complete need to be MOS DQd and to either reclass or separate.

Similar things could be established per MOS.

Unrealistic idea though as implementing this per MOS across the army would end up costing a lot of money. .

Response by PFC Cedric Powell made Aug 29 at 2017 11:07 PM

2017-08-29T23:07:51-04:00

APFT needs retooling, should be 5 events. I say 100 yard sprints till the last one falls out, Pullups, Crunches, drag a dummy, I would do a vertical jump

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2017 11:38 PM

2017-10-15T23:38:56-04:00

I would get rid of the sit ups altogether. I've seen people destroy push-ups, run and sit-ups but couldn't carry me 100 yards and I weigh maybe 190 with full gear on. I'd like the test to be 4 minutes long. A certain amount of push-ups (25 female 40 male) a 100M sprint with a 200 pound dummy on your back or dragged (all in full battle gear). That's just my take. I think it should be MOS Specific. Combat MOS such as infantry or cav should do something like that. Other non combat should stick with the current APFT or maybe integrate something that proves they can pull their weight and their battles weight.

Response by CW4 Craig Urban made Feb 7 at 2019 7:01 PM

2019-02-07T19:01:13-05:00

200 meter run. 30 k force march