The purpose of this study was to compare four methods of body composition measurements. All subjects were volunteers at a university health fair, 20 males and 36 females. The four methods used in the study were: 1) Step on scale and fat analyzer (TBF – 621 Body Monitor/Scale), 2) Hand-held body fat analyzer, (Body Logic Pro Hand Held Fat Analyzer, 3) Skinfold measurements using the triceps and subscapular sites, and 4) Body mass index. The subjects recorded age, height in inches and weight in pounds using the scale provided. Using the step on scale test, the means for men and women were 18.7 and 28.6 with standard deviations of 5.5 and 6.6. Using the hand held analyzer, the means for men and women were 11.5 and 21.4 with standard deviations of 6.0 and 6.7. Skinfold measurements were taken at two sites, triceps and sub scapular. The means for men and women were 13.6 and 21.2 with standard deviations of 5.6 and 5.9. Body Mass Index (BMI) was computed based on the height and weight of each subject. The means for men and women were 25.3 and 22.9 with standard deviations of 4.6 and 5.1. The data was analyzed using SPSS for windows, Version 10. Pearson correlations were computed between variables. One-way ANOVA was used to determine differences between the means of the three body composition measures. Body Mass Index is on a different measurement scale and was not entered into the ANOVA. For both males and females the step on scale body fat mean was significantly higher than the handgrip analyzer and Skinfold means. There was no significant difference between the hand held analyzer and the Skinfold measurements for both males and females. Although, the BMI for men correlated significantly with all three measurements (Scale - .875, handgrip - .787 and skin folds - .546) the mean was not consistent with the Handgrip analyzer and Skinfold means. The BMI for women however, was consistent with the hand held analyzer and the Skinfold means. The following conclusions were derived from this study: The scale measurement was not consistent with other body fat measurements. The body mass index did not appear to be appropriate for college men in this study. The handgrip analyzer appears to be accurate. It should receive greater consideration for use in college level activity courses because of the issues of privacy and accuracy.