94 lb works out to 1x25 per side plus the bar — call it 95 lb in practice, since gyms rarely stock the odd change. At 8 reps the formulas are starting to drift apart — 6 lb between the lowest and highest here — which is the method telling you the estimate is getting soft. Treat the lower end as the safer number. Your 75 lb set represents about 80% of the estimated max.
Why 8 reps widens the answer
Eight reps is where this method starts costing you accuracy. 90 to 96 lb is a 6.4% band, and a set of eight tests how long you can hold a brace as much as how much force you can produce. Wathan and Mayhew were built on bench-press data containing long sets and read high here; Brzycki reads low. The median, 94 lb, is a compromise between two genuinely different claims rather than a consensus.
Training loads from a 94 lb max
Programmes are written as percentages of the max, not as absolute weights. From 94 lb, to the nearest pound, because 5 lb steps collapse into each other at this load:
| Percentage | Load | Typical set |
|---|---|---|
| 95% | 89 lb | Heavy single |
| 90% | 85 lb | Doubles and triples |
| 85% | 80 lb | Sets of four to five |
| 80% | 75 lb | Sets of six |
| 75% | 70 lb | Sets of eight |
| 70% | 66 lb | Volume work, ten or more |
At this end of the rack almost none of those percentages lands on a plate you own. 94 lb itself builds as 1x25 per side plus the bar, which is 95 lb — near enough, and the miss is smaller than the 6 lb the seven formulas disagree by. This is the weight range where a pair of 2.5 lb or 1.25 lb plates genuinely earns its place, because a 10 lb jump here is a much larger proportional step than it is at 300.
The formulas behind this answer, and their limitations
The table above the fold is Epley (1985), Brzycki (1993), Lombardi (1989), O'Conner (1989), Wathan (1994), Lander (1985) and Mayhew (1992), each applied to 75 lb for 8 reps; the headline figure is their median. All seven assume a set taken close to failure with clean technique. At 8 reps you are at the top of the band these equations were fitted on, and beyond it they diverge fast, so 94 lb is a ceiling rather than a target. They also under-rate strong, experienced lifters, who hold a higher percentage of max at any rep count than the regression average. The full account — the populations behind each equation, what a bounced rep does to it, and why we stop at ten reps — is set out on the methodology page. Warm up thoroughly and use safety bars or a spotter before going anywhere near 94 lb. This is a training estimate, not medical advice.