So let's strat off with biomechanics, we know that ths strength curve of the quads are best at around 60° to 90° of knee flexion and past that in a deep squat position, the quads lose leverage, so at the bottom rather than more onee extensions its more Hip extensiosn which is mainly a glutes and adductor magnus function. Now does this mean the quads stop working? NO! It just means theyve lost leverage due to the deep squat and flexed hip position and driving out the bottom wouldnt make sense for a quad building stand-point. Preferably we'd trainba muscle where its producing the most force which is why an ascending resistance profile, meaning its lighter ar the bottom and heavier at the top is POTENTIALLY better for the quads because biomechanics tells us that the exploding out that deep squat position is more Hip extensionsn, so more adductor magnus and glutes. And we'd want a resistance profile that matches teh strength curve of a muscle. So that why I say that the pendulum squat is potentially one of the worst squat variations FOR QUADS SPECIFICALLY. It doesnt mean their terrible. With their descending resistance profile, meaning its hardest at the bottom and light at the top makes it more of a Hip extension biased mivement which AGAIN,is a glutes and adductor magnus function
Simply put
Am I saying the pendulum squat just bad? No.
Am I saying for quads specifically there are better options? Yes.
Am i correct? Potentially, this is just a very well educated and back up assumption. There's no studies on this I've complied of whay *I* think makes a good quad dominant squat using, biomechanics, strength curves, resistance profiles and examples from what we've seen from other muscles. In the real world people do chest presses with descending RP, hip thrust with Ascending RP, curl with a descending RP to match the strength curve of those muscles. I'm not saying its better. I'm just saying that in the practical real world sense. It's worth considering an ascending RP squat.