MSR Lightning snowshoe recommendations

[HockeyPuck]

The bearded dude with the red suit will be bringing me some MSR's this year and is torn with the decision between the 25" and 30".

I'd really prefer the 25's but the weight limit tops at 175 (my no pack average pre-holiday daily weight). With pack I'm a bit over 200 lbs and wonder if I'd be pushing the limits of the snowshoe.

The 30's fit my weight range but I'm afraid I would be tripping over my feet with the extra 10" span (2 shoes)..

Is anyone over 175 Lbs using the Lightning 25"? What are your thoughs and recommendations?

 

[Oldmanwinter]

I Use the MSR evos which are 22 inches and I weigh more than you and always carry a pack with way more than I need. I own the tails (which aren't an option with the lightnings) but have never used them. The only times I regret having such short shoes are when breaking trail in very deep snow. CM usually goes first on those occasions, followed by Cinder. If I were buying lightnings I would opt for the 25's because I am mostly on broken trails. Heading for the sugarloafs today so will probably be following CM

You still have those big shoes? Save them for when the conditions call for BIG shoes and use the 25's all those other times.

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

I also am around 175 without a pack, and bought 30" snowshoes based on the silly charts. They hang nicely on my wall; when going out I always take the 25" ones.

Sure, for really deep unpacked snow the 30" would be excellent, but how often do we get deep unpacked snow?

 

[HockeyPuck]

Joe,

I still have the bulky clown feet but last winter they were more of a hinderance and useless due to their width being greater than most of the MSR packed trails.

 

[snowsusie]

the snowshoes were hung by the chimney with care

well, it looks like Santa will be doing quite a bit of business with MSR since I think I'm getting the Evo's. They will fit down the chimney just fine. In just 2 short weeks, my already gear packed garage will have some nice new additions.

I was also concerned about the size since the weight charts indicate that I am too heavy for them. I checked with some of my friends who have them and they all said that they are fine except in deep snow.

 

[Oldmanwinter]

Joe,

I still have the bulky clown feet but last winter they were more of a hinderance and useless due to their width being greater than most of the MSR packed trails.

That's when you'll be happy with 25's.

 

[Tuco]

I also am around 175 without a pack, and bought 30" snowshoes based on the silly charts. They hang nicely on my wall; when going out I always take the 25" ones.

Sure, for really deep unpacked snow the 30" would be excellent, but how often do we get deep unpacked snow?

My 30's get used in the yard when we get a big snow.....IMO forget the charts and go smaller for White Mountain use....

 

[SteveHiker]

I weight about 220 without the pack. I have been using the Lightning 25s without any problems for the past couple winters. I would think that being 45 lbs lighter you wouldn't have any trouble either.

 

[Neil]

I wouldn't get the Lightnings. I have them and I don't know why they are so popular. I greatly much prefer my Evo Ascents. (Also, you can add the extender tails onto the Evo's, not that I ever have....)

 

[marty]

Agree with the other posters. I am exactly the same weight as you. The Lightning Ascent 25's are more than sufficient for most hiking. I have broken trail in waist to chest deep snow with them and they worked ok for that, too.

Marty

 

[bobandgeri]

Have used the 25" ones for the last 3 years, but did pick up a pair of the 30" one for days when we expect deep unbroken snow. If you have to choose - go with the smaller ones.

 

[Little Rickie]

I greatly much prefer my Evo Ascents. (Also, you can add the extender tails onto the Evo's, not that I ever have....)

I am signifcantly heaver than you folks and have never used my tails. I have never ascended while breaking deep, 18-24 in+, snow but have walked on top of deeper level snow with no problem. I'm good on any kind of packed snow or broken trail, steep or flat. Evos rock! Great shoes.

 

[Oldmanwinter]

It's not the width, it's the length

Joe,

I still have the bulky clown feet but last winter they were more of a hinderance and useless due to their width being greater than most of the MSR packed trails.

I believe those broken out trails that are too narrow for bigger shoes have more to do with the length than the width of the the shoes. Short snowshoes are never beside each other, in your normal stride the forward shoe is always clear of your after shoe. So, your shoes can step right in front of each other and walk in a tire track if you have to. The reason you are seeing narrower tracks is because people are ignoring the manufactorer's weight limits and using the shoes that are more comfortable to walk in, shorter shoes equal a more normal stride. After I hung up my 36" shoes I stopped walking like I had a load in my pants.

We hiked Middle Sugarloaf today with 1 to 2 feet of fresh powder, Nancy's shoes are 21" and mine are 22", we never wished we had on bigger ones. BTW, I did go first for some of it.

 

[naturegirl]

MSR Lightning Ascents

I've been happy with the Lightning Ascents...have mostly used them in the Whites. I find the Denali Evo Ascents to be loud on the trail.

 

[Daniel Eagan]

Pretty good price for women't Lightning Ascents at EMS right now, $207 and free shipping: http://www.ems.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3664412&cp=3677351.3701108.3701091

Do I get the 22s or the 25 inch for my wife? She's about 125 pounds and 5'11".

 

[naturegirl]

I got the 22 inch...but I'm short at 5'2" and light.