Snowshoe Facts Wanted

[Clam]

I am looking for info regarding snowshoes for off the beaten path, deep woods use. If possible, I would appreciate actual experiences not just anecdotal or hypothetical musings.

I know it is not quite the right time of year yet but I like to do lots of research early.

[greybark]

:smile:Hey Clam , I don`t recomend any of the semi round ones . I like the Cree Style with the "beaver" tail drag . The tail makes for more of a natural and relaxed stride .

REMEMBER -- Keep Your Fingertab On --

[moosinaround]

I've used both wood frame and aluminium, and I would go with the metal frame. I would also make sure that the deck is strung with webbing and not riveted. Riveted snow shoes are ok when the snow is fluffy and the terrain is flat. Any off camber trekking especially with a bit of a crust and the riveted ones act like a ski, where as the webbed shoe holds and grabbes with every string. The webbing is easy to repair in the field if you have some clips and a multi tool, but it is very rugged and if you are not working in extreme blow down or such you should not need to repair them. I am not sure if Scarpa makes shoes any more, but IRL graphics and signs makes their own brand called "snow trekkers" and they are modelled after the sherpa, and they are good stuff. I'm not a small guy and their shoes are awesome. I've tried tubbs and all the "clicky" brands, and for their price the "snow trekkers" from IRL are the best IMO> They come with different types of claws and heel claws, and the bindings on these shoes are really good. You couldn't go wrong with them. Good luck ! Moosin.

[Mr. Dean]

The only ones that I've ever used were of the beaver-tail design. They worked excellent but I can't compare too the smaller/round style's.

[Ian F.]

The military surplus ones are phenomenal, getting harder to find. the newwer tube and hypalon are great, but I find their load ratings on the low side, I'm 6'2" and 250lbs and have the biggest ones atlas makes and still sink more then I like. Keep in mind that any snowshoe is hard work in most conditions.

Avoid wood and rawhide if you can, yes they work, but they also require lots of maintence!

Very best,

Ian

[One Shot]

I Have done a lot of snowshoeing in the past. Modern design/materials versus older design have pros and cons too much for one post. The new age shoes require less maint. and are more agile and pack better. and very slick on ice. The old age shoes require more maint. but the larger sizes ( I have seen to 6' long) can carry a bigger payload work in deeper snow with less effort. I suggest that you research them on the net and rent or borrow some to try out to see what suits you the best for the type of activity and terrain you want them for. There is nothing better than first hand experience. personnaly, in harder or shallow snow I prefer the new age shoes but in deep fresh powder snow I prefer a pair of large old age shoes.Good luck.:smile:

[moosinaround]

:oops: Clam those were sherpa's not scarpa's. They were excellent shoes and the snow trekkers from IRL are good too. Moosin

[Monashee]

I've used three types, wood + rawhide good for flatter ground, all eventually break usually at the toe spreader mortise.

The military surplus ones are very good the pair I have has a magnesium frame with plastic coated wire webbing , they should last till the apocalypse.

The various aluminum frame with synthetic web are pretty good . I used a pair of Sherpas one winter doing road layout . They had climbing crampons which worked well, snow was 2- 2 1/2 feet deep , at the end of the day we would take the shortest way down the mountains , meant jumping off rock faces. They withstood such abu... uh ...activity , we were lean 150 # or so.

At 32F and above the Sherpas clogged up with snow the least , the wood and rawhide were the worst.

[Clam]

8-)Excellent stuff!!! Just the sort of info I am looking for!!
But what of Faber (another Canadian)? And Atlas?