I want snowshoes that can both go on deep soft snow and have crampons for more steep terrain
most modern snowshoes have too small a surface area for soft deep snow, but have good crampons, the best at combining the 2 seems the msr lighting ascent, I'd probably pick the 30in ones because they fare better in deep snow, although they're more annoying to move around, but the environment I'd need them for would be even more annoying without them.
just sucks to shell out so much money but I've seen that snowshoes in general are expensive as frick.
any advice?
Like skis and snowmobiles, high-end snowshoes have become a total waste of money with global warming. I spent $400 on MSR Lightning Ascents a few years ago and have only used them THREE TIMES over two winters. Talk about a shitty ROI.
Just get $50 Amazon snowshoes unless you live right next to the mountains where it snows a lot without melting right away. Otherwise put the saved $$$$ towards a MTB or kayak and you can thank me later. Times have changed and you have to adapt.
in the alps at 2000 to 3000m theres plenty of snow, went this weekend, theres wasnt much snow at the beginning, started at 1600, but when I arrived near the top of the mountain at 2400 I tried going without snowshoes and I sank to my knees
Idk where you live but there is plenty of snow in the PNW.
It depends how much you weigh.
I have the MSR Evo and I can use them easily with a day pack in most snow conditions. I have the extenders if it gets too fluffy (which almost never happens near me) or when I have to add more weight.
This post tells me you're not only an idiot but you're also talking out your ass.
176lbs/80kg
usually I go for multiple days so I have a ruck which is 15/20kg
in the alps there can be a good amount of snow, 2 weeks ago I went and tried without snowshoes and fell more than knee deep, not powder but crust with soft underneath
would it make sense to buy the longer ones or would they be too cumbersome?
guess I have to look up the manufacturer's website
Oh my, you're a big boi.
Not sure if I'd buy MSR if I lived in Europe as I think you've got some euro brands and I'm not sure the markups.
I'd look at something in the 25 inch range AND I'd get the extenders. Chance are you'll mostly hike with the extenders but once you set up camp you'll want to have them shorter... or shorter for day hikes or excursions.
bruh 80kg isnt fat
idk I've seen some of the other ones but the msr accent seem to be the best, otherwise theres some msr surplus from the UK army that's a bit cheaper and similar in design
I never said fat.
Something was lost in translation.
I was more implying that the smallest size adult shoe wouldn't work for you.
I have the MSR EVO 22 inch and I'm 150 lbs. The snow here is heavy and wet and they are perfect for me and a day pack. If I take a bigger pack I have to use the extenders.
im thinking of taking the bigger ones or mid one straight away, the other day I was snowshoeing and some guys had normal small snowshoes with crampons, the cramps work well but once we got on deep snow they fell down, while with my moronic 80s snowshoes I had the opposite problem, good flotation but no crampons so I slid down and fell into snow like a gay
You probably can rent some to try them out. My town is tiny and in the middle of nowhere but the local outdoor store still does snowshoe rentals.
I'm pretty sure you have fluffier snow than I do so maybe bigger better.
>This post tells me you're not only an idiot but you're also talking out your ass
Explain picrel then, you moronic homosexual. This has been the story for the past two years in most of the US.
The east coast doesn't have mountains, of course you don't get deep consistent snow.
Except we did every winter until recent years. This is the snow deficit map from last year and it has only gotten worse since.
northeast nevada here i come
Way to respond to the least idiotic thing she said.
>Like skis and snowmobiles, high-end snowshoes have become a total waste of money with global warming. I spent $400 on MSR Lightning Ascents a few years ago and have only used them THREE TIMES over two winters.
This is true where you live, not where I live, which is why you're an idiot for thinking the east coast pimples count for anything to west coasters or the Swiss.
>not where I live
80% of Americans live in the eastern half of the country where real winters don't happen anymore. Ergo, snowshoes and snowmobiles have become a waste of money for most Americans. Of course there are rare exceptions. I'm talking about the vast majority of Americans including people in formerly cold states like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, etc.
It was 70 degrees in Wisconsin yesterday, in February. How often has that happened in the past?
>Most Americans
80% of people in America live east of the Mississippi
Most of them I don't consider Americans--I consider them bioweapons.
>Climate change in america
That's what happens when you clear almost all of the old growth and never let it grow back than drain all the wetlands in the mid-west and south west and west and east and .. fricking all of them..
>What is the great black swamp
Anyways, OP is swiss and I live in the PNW so your comments are you b***hing about living on the east coast--which is shit--and not understanding your environment at all.
Also: We are almost at solar maximum of solar cycle 25 which has been the lowest max in recorded history. After solar maximum it's going to get cold as frick kido.
>After solar maximum it's going to get cold as frick kido.
I sincerely fricking hope so. I've been missing winter so badly the past few years and I want it back.
The price for it is going to be significantly higher exposure to cosmic radiation.
The sun powers earths magnetosphere and plasmasphere so paradoxically the weaker the sun the weaker earths defenses are against cosmic radiation.
We're already in the extreme fluctuation phase because most of the north American climate buffers were destroyed (old growth and wetlands) but the grand solar minimum will be something truly unique in our lifetime.
El'nino also fricked shit up pretty hard and we probably will get some crazy storms this month from the El'nino recoil and the polar vortex backfill. Winter ain't over yet.
this is only going to make less auroras not have any effect on the temperatures
>GSM won't impact the global climate cycle or temperature averages
Your public education is showing.
its just common sense, the ISES also has nothing to do with climatology.
>common sense
Yeah, thanks for verifying you have no idea what you're talking about.
Tell me how you got the data Pre 1940
>Popcorn
And "total global average"
are you really this stupid?
not my source but id rather take nasa sources (good globohomo) over this shit (moron globohomo)
Dude, I study physics and consult cosmologists.
Nasa can't even admit the sun is liquid metallic hydrogen in the face of overwhelming evidence because it absolutely fricks everything they've been saying about how the sun functions at a fundamental level.
Don't straw man me with this trash.
>Dude, I study physics and consult cosmologists.
you are another nu-PrepHole LARPer
>nu out
oh, it's you
I guess I should have known I was talking to a midwit the second you white knighted for NASA.
Thanks for demonstrating your complete inability to discuss a star at a technical level.
>Much to my extreme disappointment
NTA, but I live in northwest Ohio where it's completely flat and when I was growing up we would have deep snow on the ground from November through April, going out to shovel the driveway every few days during that time. These days we don't even have a winter. It's been in the 50s and 60s the last few days in fricking FEBRUARY (what we used to know as the coldest month of the entire year) and we've had snow on the ground a total of like 5 times and each time it melted within a day and didn't even need to be shoveled or salted.
Just get whatever cheap brand Costco sells. They work fine.
This sounds like a personal problem.
>This sounds like a personal problem
Yes, let me magically create several feet of snow out of thin air. Fricking moron.
>any advice?
Learnt to ski and buy AT gear
id get a smaller pair and compensate by using tails. However with 2 years of snowshoeing in technical colorado winter summits, it been more apparent this winter that it just really isnt worth it. Its not about the climate like that one anon said but the energy savings in a backcountry ski setup is immense. I had snowshoed 30 miles for mount of the holy cross in january last year and it was brutal and can only look back on it now in disgust that I just didnt learn how to ski
How stupid do you have to be to believe that mountains are necessary to get deep consistent snow. Ever heard of Michigan's Upper Peninsula where 200 inches of annual snowfall wasn't uncommon in the past?
yeah but the UP is full.
>crampons
>snowshoes
Pick one out-let. The purpose of snowshoes is to distribute your weight over a large area so you can not sink into snow. the purpose of crampons is to distribute your weight over a super tiny area, specifically the tines of the crampon so they can dig into icey slopes. you can't have both. the tines on snowshoes are always going to be dull, and not trustworthy when on steep icy inclines.
Most snowshoes have crampons. Traditional american snowshoes are unusable on mountains. But of course you are right on the fact the ones on snowhoes aren't usable in technical progression.
Not the terrone di merda of an OP would have a clue.
i have these exact snowshoes and they are trash on ice. they're not really crampons either, they are just metal pieces that give the impression of being crampons. They have too much surface area, they don't work. they just make the snowshoes heavier.
Yes, those round tips look pretty bad even with the knives on the sides.
if you haven't used snowshoes before try them out
they suck after the novelty wears off
i have very snowy and long winters so i carry milsurp msrs as backup on my snowmachine but i dread the rare occasions i have to use them
this depends on the snow depth and quality of course, but that is another reason to give snowshoes a try in your area before you buy some for recreation
This just tells me you're out of shape.
I've been using snowshoes for years and they're amazing for where I live.
You don't ever need snowshoes for the majority of the east coast.
>ever
Only in the past two years have snowshoes NOT been needed frequently in the wintertime. This is a recent phenomenon where I live.
>the msr lighting ascent
i have been told that aldi sells a clone for like 50 bucks. but never seen one in my local store
I've seen clones for sub 100.
I'd rather pay the extra 80 bucks to know it will last a few seasons or MSR will replace them AND I know I can get repair parts for them.
the guy that has them lives in switzerland and has used it for 5 or 6 years, so i guess they are resistant enough. its not like the construction or materials are rockets science
but i really have no idea, i never used ones
I was literally just about to write a review for the lightning ascent shoes.
I took them out last week in the subalpine.
I think they were the 25" model, I'm 180 lbs, snow was about 2 feet of powder.
They were absolutely useless. Couldn't support me at all. I was post holing over a foot into the powder with each step and eventually just took them off and pushed through in my boots.
I think you can get an extension for them that improves floatation, but unless you are walking packed trails, snow with a thick crust, or only a foot or so deep, they are not going to support you.
I also weigh 180, not including gear or anything else and I have the 30in pair, they work fine for me, that being said I live in WI and haven't been able to use them this year at all.
Maybe you should have looked at the little table they have for weight ranges before buying a pair that puts you within 20lbs of the upper weight limit.
Two 2x4's on a plywood plank with rubber tied owns.
Let me guess, you sneed more?