|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
reubenstump 
Los Cuernos
Group: Members
Posts: 919
Joined: Sep. 2011
|
 |
Posted on: Jan. 11 2013, 3:33 pm |
|
   |
I'm still hoping for something resembling snow, and I'm getting itchy. So I'm contemplating snowshoes to go with the boots I haven't bought. The MSR Denali is on sale at REI, and they seem to be pretty well respected.
The main difference between the Denali and the Evo seems to be load, correct?
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
EastieTrekker
Group: Members
Posts: 1467
Joined: Mar. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 11 2013, 3:50 pm |
|
 |
Check out SectionHiker's website - he's giving away a pair of MSR Lightening Axis 'shoes. I won a Platypus Gravity Filter in his last raffle!
http://sectionhiker.com/gear-cl....owshoes
FWIW - the load does appear to be the biggest difference. One thing I noticed is the straps on the Denali. I've seen folks struggle with that particular system (especially while trying to maintain "gloved" hands). A 125lb load limit seems REALLY low though. Maybe they're geared towards kids?
--------------
I request all the possible consumer protection organizations, and fight with their injustice. 
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
hikerjer
Group: Members
Posts: 9129
Joined: Apr. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 11 2013, 6:31 pm |
|
|
25 lbs really is low especially if you're carrying any kind of winter pack.
--------------
"Too often I have met men who speak only of how many miles they've traveled and not of what they've seen." - Louis L'Amour
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
leadbelly2550
Group: Members
Posts: 1042
Joined: Apr. 2009
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 13 2013, 4:30 pm |
|
|
float = you with winter gear + backpack. unless you are pretty small and don't plan to carry much, you might want a shoe with more float than the Denali. the EVO has the advantage of being able to add a 'tail' that increases the surface area, hence the flotation.
both of those snowshoes have a molded plastic frame and deck. consider how much you plan to use them & the conditions. the more you tend to use them off-trail, where you may encounter hidden obstacles, and the more use you plan, the more you may want a sturdier design with an aluminum frame & nylon decking - like on the lightning ascent or most of the Atlas snowshoes.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
QCHIKER
Group: Members
Posts: 1728
Joined: Oct. 2009
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 13 2013, 7:34 pm |
|
|
My wife and I both have the 10 series of Atlas Snowshoes and they work great for us. They provide plenty of traction especially when traversing a slope. Plus they are easy ot get in and out of, and they don't loosen up.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
reubenstump
Los Cuernos
Group: Members
Posts: 919
Joined: Sep. 2011
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 14 2013, 6:44 pm |
|
|
Thanks everyone. I think I've narrowed it down. Does a heel lift make much of a difference? I could find some short steep hills around here, but nothing too long, so I'm thinking I won't miss it.
Now all I need is cold and precipitation. 50 and rain for a few days, then cold but no precip over the weekend. Grrr...
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
Fatpacking
Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: Nov. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 14 2013, 9:25 pm |
|
|
I want to get into snow shoeing too. I live in an area that sees not much snow...when we get it we tend to get a lot, but these days, those days are few and far between. Fortunately a little over an hour away I have access to all the snow I could ever want. I've been looking really hard at the Atlas 10 series but I'll probably rent a time or two to make sure it's an investment I want to make. In addition to the shoes...I'll need new boots too which increases the total cost since I don't really have snow shoeing appropriate boots at the moment.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
big_load
Group: Members
Posts: 21819
Joined: Jun. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 14 2013, 9:54 pm |
|
|
I can't let this pass without suggesting that anyone interested in snowshoes should try out XC skiing. On any terrain where you can use them, XC skis are much faster and generally require far less effort per mile than snowshoes.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
overthehillwalker
Group: Members
Posts: 580
Joined: Apr. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 14 2013, 11:01 pm |
|
|
Big Load is very accurate. XC skiing is way more efficient.
This is my trail going up an obscure canyon. It's the decent that makes the difference. This low elevation, easy tour takes 4 hours going up breaking trail. The upside is that it takes less than an hour going down, thus saving 3 hours vs. snowshoes. Gliding back through the trees in peace and quiet is awesome.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
LongsPeak
Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: Nov. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 15 2013, 12:54 am |
|
|
Snowshoeing requires more calories and the speed is slower. It is the ability to move off the trail with a 60# backpack on powder the reach a high glacier, or traverse steep hills filled with trees to make camp. It cannot be compared. A little daytime run with snowshoes never hurts also!  praying for snow..........
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
Fatpacking
Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: Nov. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 15 2013, 7:49 pm |
|
|
I've never been skiing but I know how to walk. I figure snow shoeing would be my best intro into "snow sports". That, and I need the exercise. Maybe someday I'll try XC skiing. Up around Canaan Valley, WV, they have loads of dedicated XC skiing trails, so there's no issue finding a place to go play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
