I am looking to buy my first set of snowshoes. I have decided more or less on the MSR lightning ascents. What I am wondering about is size. I would rather go with the 25" in lieu of the 30" and add tails if necessary. I weigh 215 lbs. now, but with even a small daypack I will be over the 225lbs that the 25" shoes are rated for. I am thinking that the shorter shoe a person could get by with the better for ease of walking. Do the tails really help or are they just a gimmick? Would there be a noticeable difference in trying to manuever with a 25" shoe vs. a 30"?

the bigger the better in deep crud snow. snowshoes are not easy. you work your ass off. basically in bad snow all you are doing is punching a big enough hole to take the next step without having to walk like a stork.

I have the MSR shoe you are interested in, in the 25", my weight is also a bit over the rated 225 lbs. If I had to do it over again, I think I would go with the 30" variety.

the crampons need to be kept sharp and they need to be strong so that they don't get bent up on the rocks and stumps under the snow.

I have the MSR shoe you are interested in, in the 25", my weight is also a bit over the rated 225 lbs. If I had to do it over again, I think I would go with the 30" variety. [/quote]

Have you seen or tried these?

http://www.ems.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4085829

Have you seen or tried these?

http://www.ems.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4085829 [/quote]

Foxtrot,
I didn't realize that they made tails for my particular shoe.

Thank you!


BTW, I really like the Ascents. Just like the name suggests, they climb like crazy, I was working my way up an ~40 degree slope just yesterday, and they did very well. I have been running them for three seasons now, and they are holding up well, also.

In my opinion and experience if a 25" shoe isn't floating you in the conditions, a 30" won't either. I'd go with a smaller shoe for maneuverability and lighter weight. Just my opinion.

You may very well be correct, SM, as I am not highly experienced where shoeing is concerned-I have only 3 seasons on snowshoes, total,and the vast majority of that on my 25" MSRs.

The option of adding/dropping tails is a pretty nice feature.

I've ran Sherpa's for over 30 years. I dont know if they are even in business anymore. I've replaced the bindings(rotted off) three times and finally made my own out of leather. The crampon teeth are worn flat but the frame part is still looking pretty good. I've put thousands of hard miles on them and they still work. Maybe a guy could find some on ebay...

Have you snowshoed a bit and now are buying or are you going to buy and start for the first time or only tried them a few times? if the latter, go someplace that rents them and try different sizes and types to see what works best or at all, in different conditions etc.

What you would use to hike down a groomed snowmobile or otherwise packed trail is going to be totally different then if you are going to try to carry gear to camp or hunt back into virgin snow in the woods, etc.

Also scope out what fits best on the boots you want to wear and that differs if you are going to be moving all the time or going somewhere and sitting or remaining still in a hunt.

Sherpas are good stuff... from the 70's. Most current stuff is all Chinese made... maybe a bit better, but not much.

My current shoes are Atlas made in the USA ala 1990's...

I have the MSR's and don't really care for them that much. I don't think the tails work very well, and for your size I think you will be disappointed. They are good for mountaineering stuff when you might not need them that much. Lots of powder I grab something with more float. I'm 170 ish, so I'm a bit lighter. There are some Tubbs ones that are kinda MSR copies but nicer IMO and no tails. The tails don't work.

Last June in Wyoming, packing out(8 crow miles) a black bear on about 5' of spring snowpack...My azz was severly kicked after that packout!

I'd highly reccomend Northern Lites. The Backcountry model would be a good choice. Unless you are mountaineering, they are all you need for traction.

JB,

First time to try snowshoeing. I can see myself following a trail for a bit then wandering whichever way the wind blows me. I also want to get into winter backpack camping and will use the shoes mostly for this. I will most likely rent whatever REI has to try some out.

Kevin,

I am curious as to why the tails would not work work?
Which model of the Tubbs would you recommend?

Thanks for the replies all, keep them coming. I hope to not end up with a closet full of snowshoes that "didn't work"

I advise getting some poles. falling down is gonna happen, it happens less with pole in hand. I have a 10yo pair of atlas' and a 15-20 yo pair of tubbs.....I am jealous of the new quick bindings, but really, how much can technology change on snowshoes.

You don't want to carry your stuff on your back in the snow, you want to pull it in a sled behind you. In most terrain at least.

Foxtrot

The problem with the tails is that they are not centered at all, so you end up with a lot of snowshoe behind you, not around where your weight is coming down, they cause a bit of a forward tilt because of this.

The TUbbs Flex is similar to the MSR but looks like a better design. Those I've talked to have said they are better as well, better side to side traction, better balance

http://tubbssnowshoes.com/snowshoes/mens/flex-nrg-m

Looks like fun to me!

Ditto on the Atlas Snowshoes. There are lots of snowshoes that work fine on reasonable level ground. Even fair numbers that work OK going up and down. But when it comes to side hilling, those Atlas shoes with their synthetic bindings are ankle stress savers of the first order when spending a day in the mountains. E

That Coyote/scenery shot is a pretty incredible picture Pat.

The bindings are the main reason I have gone to Northern Lites over Atlas. Atlas's bindings are much too stiff and ridgid for my liking. I did wear out a number of pairs of older Atlas 'shoes though.

For serious sidehills in mountaineering type applications, nothing IMO comes close to the MSR Lightning Ascents with the searated edges as well as an agressive crampon.

The old Sherpa's like in Pat's photos were as good as snowshoes ever got. I had Sherpa Bigfoot and Featherweight models and foolishly sold them to get newer snowshoes and actually went backwards in technology.

We like our MSR out here too but we use the tails quite a bit with a pack on. The snow in Western Oregon even on Hood is wetter than Central Oregon. So the tails help keep you up a little more on the flats. I have never had a problem with the tails. But I sure like the crampons on packed snow and ice. Also great for side hilling and climbing. Lot of options like any thing don't think there is one better than the other all personal choice. As along as the bindings fit and are tight.

I do like the Sherpas myself. I've got two pair of 30s and one pair of 36ers. Having a truly good used gear store is a blessing. I passed over a pair of 25s a couple of years ago. I won't make that mistake again.

I'm getting the feeling that buying snowshoes will be no different than other gear and there will be some degree of trial and error involved. Glad I can rent before I buy!

FWIW I have been in contact with MSR/Cascade Design last week. Their shoes are made here in the US. I have a pair of Denali EVO Ascents coming to try out for the season

Our family runs the Denali Evo Ascents. The Ascent feature is really nice for steep uphill climbing. We are happy with them but they are a little noisy when on crusty snow due to the plastic construction.

Following a tip from Ed T a few years back I got a pair of Northern Lites and have nothing but good things to say about them. I've been in some decent terrain with them and think the newer MSR would be better for a seriuos Mnt. shoe, but for everything else, the NL's are awesome. I went with the Tundra model as they are so damn light. They are very easy to walk in and do a decent job of keeping my 210 lbs up in fresh snow.

For serious sidehills in mountaineering type applications, nothing IMO comes close to the MSR Lightning Ascents with the searated edges as well as an agressive crampon.

[/quote]

Ed,

What do you consider serious sidehills? This thread is informative for me....I have very little snowshoe experience, but am considering getting some for use in Idaho backcountry. Cabin fever sucks. I presume your recommendation for the Northern Lites is weight driven, and the MSR's are more durable, better traction, but heavier?

The bigger the better if you go off trail. Rather than go with a certain design I'd follow the deepest discounts.

Steve,

The Northern Lites have been very durable for me. I have used them in some pretty steep country while elk hunting. (I tend to stick to the ridges when I have a choice, when hunting I go where the elk are)

The MSR Lightning Ascents have the aluminium frame with the searated edges and a more argessive crampon so they are better on side hills. Snowshoes in general suck on sidehills, reguardless of how burly the crampon is. The 'shoe wants to pivot to being perpendicular to the fall line. Thats where the searated edges have an advantage.

As fas as what I mean by steep, I say anything steeper than 35 degrees, which may not sound too steep but in fact is getting pretty darn steep. On steep traverses over snow, I have always prefered skis.

Another factor to keep in mind on showshoes is whether the bindings are free pivoting hinge or have a tension bar of sorts. Having used both kinds extensively, I much prefer a torsion bar set up. My reason is the tension bar snaps the 'shoe up as it is unweighted. This allows for more effecient forward motion and allows for much more efficient backing up. If you try to back up in a free pivot 'shoe, the tail drops straight down as you unweight it, making it quits cumbersome. Obviously, one doesn't spend much time backing up, but this can come into play when dragging an animal.

The disadvantage to a torsion bar is it will, in loose snow, throw it up on your back side.

As a matter of refrence, MSR's, and the old Sherpa's are free pivoting. Atlas, Northern Lites, Red Feather & Tubbs use torsion bars, with Atlas IMO being the stiffest.

My prefrence for Northern Lites is both weight driven as well as I prefer the simplicity of their bindings. They easilly adjust for everything from trail runners (which I use most of time year around) to bigger boots.

In mountainess terrain, don't go with too big of a snowshoe. Sherpa actually did a very comprehensive study a number of years ago and their conclusion was that unless you were in fairly level terrain with deep snow, a smaller snowshoe was more efficient because it had less weight and less snow to lift up with each step. The older traditional 'shoes with lacing rather thana solid deck allow the snow to mostly fall through when lifted.

Alright, two pages and noone has said it yet, so I will - you may be better off with backcountry geared XC skis than snowshoes anyway. I certainly prefer skis for traveling in the winter myself.

I'll agree to disagree with Evan. Overall I generally prefer snowshoes to skis but my main reason is that with snowshoes, I am able to wear a boot like my Inov-8 X-Talon 240's that weigh 21 ounces for a pair (and that size 12.5 boots) and my Northern Lites Backcountry snowshoes that are less than 3 lbs.

Plus snow condition doesn't matter. Hard, icy snow that involves survival skiing is ideal for snowshoeing. I do lots of ridge top travel along the Rocky Mountain Front, where in a mile you may alternate between 30' drifts and 50' to 100 yard bare rock a dozen times. With the snowshoes I just keep going, the worst thats going to happen is to remove the paint from the frame. With skis, I have to take them off each time.

Skis also require a greater learning curve if you haven't skied before. That said skiing is LOT of fun!

Skis on a trail are great..even if it's an old skidoo trail. Off trail ski's even wide ones tend to be difficult to use. In the wrong snow conditions they are exhausting. In the right conditions though they are hell for fun and fast.

In Finland you can buy bear hunting skis that are nearly 10 feet long with very flexible tips that float over even spring crust that can make regular back-country ski's instruments of torture.

I love the winter!

I've always wanted to get a pair of these:
http://www.lightningboards.com/

Ed, I hope you're coming to the "Lewis & Clark" Kifaru rondy next month in the Spokane area. I'd really like to reevaluate my bias against snowshoes by watching how well you get around on yours. In all fairness, I do carry snowshoes in the sled for use in camp and in case I run into conditions that skis with skins can't handle.

Evan, I am fairly new here did you set a date for the rondy?
Who is welcome? I might be able to make it.

Thanks, Randy

Randy, this is a Kifaru MB thing, but all are welcome. You can come up to speed Here.

the removable tails are nice in deep snow.
they add weight to the back of the shoe and help the toe pop up when you step.
For flat ground - long and narrow with tails is the ticket.