I just discovered a whole world of snowshoes much larger than those sold by REI, Cabela's, etc. I am tired of postholing with snowshoes in waist deep snow.
I am tempted by some Lure of the North 16x48 wood frames laced with monofilament, but am thinking that a pair of GV Wide Trail 12x42 moderns with claws fit my use better. Advice on most outdoor forums is to go for small snowshoes shorter than 30” that are easier on legs (but IME have too little surface area to keep me on top of light, uncompacted snow.) I discovered a winter trekking site that is hilariously opposite. A 160 lb. man told me that he uses 12x60, and he is the norm on that site where people actually travel a LOT off trail in deep, uncompacted light snow. I am 225 and with a hefty day pack and rifle close to 250.
My snowshoeing is all hunting, all off trail, in all kinds of snow conditions from icy crust to more usually deep powder or deep soft snow, mostly in wind protected forest. A significant factor is that any stirring of snow, by wind, animal tracks, whatever, causes it to "set up" firmer and easier to walk on, or even to cut blocks. Too much of my snow is undisturbed. (Fluff up a pile and wait 20-30 minutes to cut blocks.)
I have some old 11x30 bearpaw wood and rawhide that I've put a lot of miles on and a pair of Yukon Charlie 9x30 aluminum/synthetics with claws. They are great on compacted snow be it groomed trails or following a snow machine or moose track, but both are too small for off trail powder or soft snow, hence my quest for large snowshoes.
12X42 have almost twice the surface area of 9x30's. My use is mostly for short forays into deep snow off of plowed logging roads, seldom more than 500 yards and often only 100 yards of truly miserable snow covered, forest edge deadfall on brushy steep ground.
Added one day later: pardon the rant tone of my post. My frustration at floundering through deadfalls in deep snow is no excuse for letting my annoyance color my comments about snowshoes and I hope my edits today changed my chagrin to clarity.
I am tempted by some Lure of the North 16x48 wood frames laced with monofilament, but am thinking that a pair of GV Wide Trail 12x42 moderns with claws fit my use better. Advice on most outdoor forums is to go for small snowshoes shorter than 30” that are easier on legs (but IME have too little surface area to keep me on top of light, uncompacted snow.) I discovered a winter trekking site that is hilariously opposite. A 160 lb. man told me that he uses 12x60, and he is the norm on that site where people actually travel a LOT off trail in deep, uncompacted light snow. I am 225 and with a hefty day pack and rifle close to 250.
My snowshoeing is all hunting, all off trail, in all kinds of snow conditions from icy crust to more usually deep powder or deep soft snow, mostly in wind protected forest. A significant factor is that any stirring of snow, by wind, animal tracks, whatever, causes it to "set up" firmer and easier to walk on, or even to cut blocks. Too much of my snow is undisturbed. (Fluff up a pile and wait 20-30 minutes to cut blocks.)
I have some old 11x30 bearpaw wood and rawhide that I've put a lot of miles on and a pair of Yukon Charlie 9x30 aluminum/synthetics with claws. They are great on compacted snow be it groomed trails or following a snow machine or moose track, but both are too small for off trail powder or soft snow, hence my quest for large snowshoes.
12X42 have almost twice the surface area of 9x30's. My use is mostly for short forays into deep snow off of plowed logging roads, seldom more than 500 yards and often only 100 yards of truly miserable snow covered, forest edge deadfall on brushy steep ground.
Added one day later: pardon the rant tone of my post. My frustration at floundering through deadfalls in deep snow is no excuse for letting my annoyance color my comments about snowshoes and I hope my edits today changed my chagrin to clarity.