The recovery from exercise leads to ‘post-exercise hypotension’ (PEH) which can persist for some hours, thus providing potential benefits for managing hypertension. Most PEH research has used lower body cycling, however in some populations this may not be a viable mode of exercise and greater knowledge about the comparative responses between exercise modes may provide insight into the mechanisms underpinning PEH. The few studies which have compared PEH in upper and lower body activities have either used activities unsuited for training (maximal tests)1 or have failed to control for the relative exercise intensity (i.e., %VO2max) between the two modes of exercise.2 Therefore the aim of this study was to examine the blood pressure response after arm crank (ARM) ergometry and conventional leg cycling (LEG). In keeping with the developing interest in high-intensity interval exercise, the LEG-ARM comparison was made using the interval training model of Wisloff et al. (3). After ethical approval, nine young, recreationally active, normotensive participants (6 male, 3 female; age 20.2 ± 1.2 years; maximal oxygen consumption 46 ± 12 ml/kg/min; baseline blood pressure (systolic / diastolic) 129 ± 12mmHg / 80 ± 10 mmHg) volunteered for the study. Maximal exercise tests were carried out each using ARM and LEG ergometry. Subsequently, intensities were derived for interval sessions of 4 x (4min at 90-95% HRpeak: 3 min at 70% HRpeak) based on the mode-specific peak heart rate. Manual blood pressure, obtained pre-exercise (baseline) and then for 60-min during recovery (15 min intervals), was the primary outcome and statistical comparisons were made using 2-way repeated measures ANOVA. Mean VO2 (2.34 ± 0.57 vs. 1.70 ± 0.42 l/min; P<0.001) and power (237 ± 68 vs. 115 ± 37W; P<0.001) were higher during LEG than ARM intervals, while blood lactate (5.6 ± 1.8 vs 4.7± 0.9 mM; P=0.132) was not different. Mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) was reduced in recovery (P=0.019) by 10 ± 1 mmHg (LEG) and 7 ± 1 mmHg (ARM) with no difference between exercise modes (P=0.423) and no (time*mode interaction) (Figure 1). Diastolic blood pressure was not reduced post-exercise following either mode of exercise. With the current procedures, both exercise modes reduce SBP during the 60-min recovery, highlighting the efficacy of interval exercise using either ARM or LEG as a potential stimulus for blood pressure management. The similar PEH, in the face of significantly different power and VO2, may support the likely importance of local factors in the regulation of PEH.