REP Ares 2.0 Review
My verdict after 6 months
A UK REP Ares 2.0 review after six months of regular use. The pros, problems, best rack depth, 80 vs 93-inch height, Smith compatibility and who should buy it.
Quick verdict
The REP Ares 2.0 is one of the best pieces of equipment I've added to my home gym.
After six months of regular use, the cable system is smooth, versatile and has allowed me to combine a power rack, functional trainer, lat pulldown and low row into a footprint that would otherwise require several pieces of equipment.
But I would not buy my exact configuration again.
My decision to squeeze it into the most compact 80-inch, 16+16-inch PR-5000 configuration introduces compromises that buyers with a little more space can avoid.
At the time of writing, the Ares 2.0 Builder starts at £2,749.99 in the UK before the cost of the compatible rack and any additional rack accessories.
My setup
I deliberately tried to create one of the smallest fully integrated Ares setups possible.
REP PR-5000
80-inch uprights
16-inch front bay
16-inch rear bay
Ares 2.0
REP Smith Machine attachment
stainless-steel front uprights, metallic black on the rest
The gym itself is roughly 4m × 3m.
My goal was simple:
get as much training functionality as possible into 12 square metres.
And on that measure, the Ares has been extremely successful.
What exactly is the Ares 2.0?
The Ares integrates two adjustable front cable trolleys, dual selectorised weight stacks, lat pulldown and low row.
The current Ares 2.0 uses two 260lb stacks, which can be upgraded to 310lb each. Because the standard trolley system operates at a 2:1 pulley ratio, the effective resistance is half the selected stack weight on each individual side.
Before owning the Ares, I had a rack plus a separate cable tower. and the Ares effectively reclaimed the floor space occupied by that second machine.
The best thing about it: it doesn't feel like a “home gym cable”
This is probably the biggest compliment I can give it. My previous pulley tower worked but the Ares feels like a proper cable machine.
It's smoother, quieter, faster to adjust and all round a more enjoyable experience
After six months, I've had no meaningful cable-twisting issue, unlike some users. That was one concern raised by viewers when I first installed it.
My advice during assembly is to lay the cables out beforehand, let them relax, and make sure you're not feeding twists into the routing.
Once installed properly, mine has been extremely reliable in this regard.
The trolleys are good - but not magically smooth
I paid extra for stainless-steel front uprights, partly because they look fantastic and partly because I had seen the suggestion that the cable trolleys would glide more freely over stainless.
After testing other finishes at REP's showroom and living with mine, I don't think the difference is meaningful. If you want stainless because you love the finish and durability, I completely understand it. If you're paying the premium purely because you expect dramatically smoother trolley adjustment, I wouldn't.
The upside is that my stainless uprights have held up very well. Small marks are much less visually offensive than scratches through a dark coating.
The lat pulldown is excellent; with one major caveat
One reason I specifically chose the Ares rather than two independent Athena stacks was the integrated centre lat pulldown. At 5'9", the 80-inch Ares gives me enough range of motion with the standard lat bar. But I wouldn't call the 80-inch version ideal. Some shorter attachments work fine, but some longer attachment combinations reduce the available stretch (e.g. the REP x Kleva attachments don’t work well on the 80”).
80-inch versus 93-inch: this is a bigger decision than it looks
This is particularly relevant for UK buyers. Lots of garages, sheds and garden rooms sit awkwardly between REP's height options.
The nominal 80-inch configuration has a total Ares height of around 82.1 inches, while the 93-inch version reaches around 93.9 inches according to REP's current technical specifications. And you need to think about assembly as well as the finished height.
A rack that has 5mm of clearance from your ceiling on paper may become impossible to assemble in the intended order. My ideal rack would historically have been somewhere in the mid-80-inch region.
With the 80-inch setup:
pull-ups require bent legs
some cable movements are more constrained
the large logo crossmember feels visually oversized
If you're buying 80-inch, I would seriously consider REP's more compact upper-crossmember options rather than filling an already low room with the biggest possible logo plate.
The low row: useful, good range, imperfect footplate
The pulling position makes sense in a small room and the cable feel is excellent but my ongoing criticism is the footplate. When I extend it to the position I prefer for a deeper stretch, there is noticeable movement. I can tighten the adjustment as much as possible and some play remains.
It's completely usable. It's just one of those details that feels slightly out of place on a premium system.
I'd love to see a second locking point or another way to brace it.
The original leg roller: skip it
It’s woeful.
REP has subsequently produced an updated version with tighter mounting tolerances.
If you're shopping now, buy the newer version rather than hunting down the old one.
This is a good example of why I'm updating the review rather than simply leaving my first-impressions article frozen in time.
Small quality issues after six months
My guide rod arrived slightly bent
At low stack weights I occasionally noticed contact. It wasn't bad enough that I wanted to dismantle the entire machine and return it.
If you're installing an Ares, I'd roll the guide rods across a genuinely flat surface before they disappear into a huge assembled rack.
The stack shrouds can scratch
If you release cable attachments carelessly into them, dark shrouds will show marks. Not performance-changing, but irritating on expensive equipment.
The huge top logo plate is still huge
Looks fantastic in a giant US basement. In my 80-inch garden gym, it dominates the rack more than I'd choose today.
The big question: 16+16, 30+16 or larger?
If you remember one practical buying recommendation from this review, make it this:
If you have room for a 30-inch working bay, buy it.
I chose 16+16 because I was obsessed with minimising footprint, and it works. but it’s a tight squeeze.
For example, you can move the Ares trolleys to manipulate spotter-arm clearance, but cables can then interfere with the bar.
Technically possible is not the same as pleasant to do three times a week.
For a buyer with the floor area, 30 inches gives you a much less compromised rack.
What about the Smith Machine?
This is where my opinion after six months gets interesting because I bought the Ares knowing I wanted REP's Smith attachment. And the Smith has become the thing that completes the setup for me.
But the two products do interact.
On my shallow configuration:
Smith position affects lat-pulldown space
pulley position affects some free-bar setup
trolley handles can affect where the Smith can sit
incline pressing becomes more sensitive to bench and Smith placement
With a 30- or 41-inch bay, many of those problems become much smaller. REP's own current Smith compatibility guidance confirms that rack depth materially changes how safeties and other functions can coexist.
So if your plan is:
Ares + Smith from day one
do not design the rack as though those systems live independently. They don't.
Would I buy the Ares or Athena?
The Athena is simpler. You get side-mounted functional-trainer capability without the Ares central lat/row routing. That can make rack integration cleaner but the Ares wins for me because the central lat pulldown and seated row are exactly the movements I wanted without needing more space in front.
The decision I'd use is:
Buy Ares if:
You place high value on a conventional-feeling central lat pulldown and low/seated row.
Buy Athena if:
You primarily want adjustable functional-trainer pulleys and favour simpler rack integration.
The Athena builder currently starts materially below the Ares in the UK, so there is also a meaningful budget difference.
What about the REP Summit?
REP launched the Summit after I had already built my compact Ares/Smith setup.
The Summit integrates the system in a way that addresses some of the compromises I've learned to live with. In particular, the cable/lat-pulldown arrangement and overall structure make more sense when the Smith machine is part of the plan from day one.
Would I rip my current gym apart to change? Probably not.
Would I compare the Summit very seriously if I were placing the order today? Absolutely.
There is a catch.
The Summit with Ares 2.0 currently starts around £5,914.77 in the UK, so it is not a cheap alternative. Also, REP says you can’t angle the smith.
My setup was purchased under launch discounts that no longer make a fair direct comparison. So the decision should be made on current complete-system pricing, not what I happened to pay.
Final verdict
Six months later, I have less buyer's remorse about the Ares and more buyer's remorse about parts of my configuration.
The cable performance is excellent, the exercise range is enormous and the central lat/row works brilliantly for small spaces.
And it has allowed me to build an absurdly capable gym into 12m².
But of you have the room take the deeper bay and if you have the ceiling height take the taller rack.
If you're buying an Ares plus Smith from scratch:
compare the Summit before ordering every individual component.
FAQs
Is the REP Ares 2.0 worth it?
For a regular cable user who wants to consolidate a rack, functional trainer, lat pulldown and row into one footprint, I think it can be. If cables are secondary to your training, there are significantly cheaper ways to add them.
Is the 80-inch Ares too short?
Not necessarily. I'm 5'9" and can use the lat pulldown effectively, but the 80-inch setup creates compromises with pull-ups and some attachment combinations. Taller users should examine their required range of motion carefully.
Does the Ares 2.0 cable twist?
Mine hasn't developed a meaningful twisting problem after six months. I would pay close attention to cable preparation and routing during installation.
Is 16+16 deep enough for Ares 2.0?
It works but I would choose a 30-inch working bay if I had the space. The shallow setup becomes particularly compromised when adding the REP Smith machine and doing free-bar work.
Ares 2.0 or Athena?
Ares if the dedicated central lat pulldown and seated row matter. Athena if you mainly want functional-trainer pulleys and prefer simpler integration or lower cost.