MSR model of the year - No more Evo or Pros

[JCarter]

Next time I'm in Seattle I'm gonna go over and whup those MSR/Cascade Designs folks upside the head ...

Yeah, I might have to see if my company will send me for some training at HQ so I can go deliver a dopeslap down the block at Cascade Designs. The engineer in me sees lots of annoying stress points in this new rendition that weren't in the old hard deck Classics/Denali/Evo

 

[KPMMBM]

just picked up a pair of the Revo ascents while on vacation in Virginia. Interesting that the REI stores down here had them already but not at EMS or Beans at home in Maine yet. Bonus, they were 25% off at REI. Seem a little longer than Evo ascents and maybe a little narrower?

 

[MichaelJ]

Anyone have any data points on the Tubbs Flex Alp vs the Flex Trk?

 

[PETCH]

I have a first year pair of the Flex Alps (4+yrs old?). I popped a rivot on the bindings, used a tie-wrap to repair, been fine since. A couple years ago I picked up a pair of the Flex Trk's for $80 at SunnySports. I would have been loosing money, if I didn't buy them . They have become my go-to snowshoe. The traction is less aggressive, and the televator is not as tall (oddly enough), but they are lighter and for most trails except the the real steep stuff they work great. No probs the last 2 yrs.

fyi
Petch

 

[summitseeker]

Hi all

Campmor is selling the original Denalis for 99.97.

I had to force myself from buying a second pair.

Z

 

[Peakbagr]

Anyone know where to find EVO Ascents? I like smaller snowshoes. I'd try the Flex Alps but was told the 22" women's model won't take a large 11 winter boot. And the men's Flex Alp is a 24" shoe. Spoke to their customer service and marketing people and they are completely uninterested in even considering a smaller men's model.

 

[KPMMBM]

Anyone know where to find EVO Ascents? I like smaller snowshoes. I'd try the Flex Alps but was told the 22" women's model won't take a large 11 winter boot. And the men's Flex Alp is a 24" shoe. Spoke to their customer service and marketing people and they are completely uninterested in even considering a smaller men's model.

before buying the new REVOs, I tried to find some old stock EVOs but couldn't. the new REVOs come in a 22" model, I got the 25s. If you have an REI near by, try them

 

[alexmtn]

Got my first hands-on look at the REVO. I was impressed. It looks and feels rugged enough to do well in the terrain in which the EVO excels - snow, but with lots of irregularities, rocks, broken stumps and roots, etc. - but with two big design changes, IMO for the better. First, it handles side traction a la Lightning rather than with the crude rails riveted under the bottom of the EVO - but different from the lightning in that they're done in sturdy looking SS instead of aluminum in a flimsy gauge. And second, a fun, very ergonomic ratcheting binding system. I didn't verify this in the numbers, but it felt as though it's shed some weight vs. the EVO as well. And in the EVO tradition, the primary crampon remains sturdy and nasty. No Lightning-like fragile aluminum beak.

Unless my current 2pr of EVOs meet with calamity or fair sale, I likely won't actually own these for a while - but I'm impressed and look forward to a field trial sometime.

Alex

 

[JoeCedar]

I keep an eye on eBay for used (sometimes new) evo ascents, but I have acquired three pairs so I am set for a while. I also have some spare bindings, but they seldom break.

With them being discontinued, I am surprised there are not more being offered on eBay.

 

[Trail Boss]

Got my first hands-on look at the REVO. I was impressed. It looks and feels rugged enough to do well in the terrain in which the EVO excels - snow, but with lots of irregularities, rocks, broken stumps and roots, etc. - but with two big design changes, IMO for the better. First, it handles side traction a la Lightning rather than with the crude rails riveted under the bottom of the EVO - but different from the lightning in that they're done in sturdy looking SS instead of aluminum in a flimsy gauge. And second, a fun, very ergonomic ratcheting binding system. I didn't verify this in the numbers, but it felt as though it's shed some weight vs. the EVO as well. And in the EVO tradition, the primary crampon remains sturdy and nasty. No Lightning-like fragile aluminum beak.

Unless my current 2pr of EVOs meet with calamity or fair sale, I likely won't actually own these for a while - but I'm impressed and look forward to a field trial sometime.

Alex

I haven't seen the new models yet but what you described didn't jibe with what I remember from the photos. So I had a another look.

• The Revo Ascent uses the same binding as the Evo Ascent (three foot-straps with pin-buckles).
• The Revo Explore uses a ratcheting binding (one foot-strap).
• The "EVO tradition" crampon was a serrated claw with four teeth. The Revo Ascent crampon uses two independent fangs (as does the new Lightning Ascent).
• The "Lightning Explore" and "Revo Explore" use the same crampon (which looks likes last year's Lightning), namely a tapered two-tooth design.

You mentioned "aluminum". I may be wrong but it's been my understanding that MSR uses steel for all metal components. I own MSR Evo Ascent snowshoes and the rust stains tells me the metal isn't aluminum.

I honestly don't see a major difference between the Evo's "crude rails riveted under the bottom" to the Revo's frame (riveted to the plastic deck). I don't recall reading anyone's experience that the Lightning Ascent, with its serrated frame, had noticeably better traction than the Evo Ascent.

I look forward to reading about what folks who switch from Evo Ascent to Revo Ascent snowshoes will have to say.

 

[Ed'n Lauky]

Got my first hands-on look at the REVO. I was impressed. It looks and feels rugged enough to do well in the terrain in which the EVO excels - snow, but with lots of irregularities, rocks, broken stumps and roots, etc. - but with two big design changes, IMO for the better. First, it handles side traction a la Lightning rather than with the crude rails riveted under the bottom of the EVO - but different from the lightning in that they're done in sturdy looking SS instead of aluminum in a flimsy gauge. And second, a fun, very ergonomic ratcheting binding system. I didn't verify this in the numbers, but it felt as though it's shed some weight vs. the EVO as well. And in the EVO tradition, the primary crampon remains sturdy and nasty. No Lightning-like fragile aluminum beak.

Unless my current 2pr of EVOs meet with calamity or fair sale, I likely won't actually own these for a while - but I'm impressed and look forward to a field trial sometime.

Alex

For those who hike with a dog, especially if he's at close quarters as he would be if on a leash, the EVO style rails provide a better margin of safety for the dog as they are inset a bit and less likely to pierce the dog's foot if it happened to get under foot.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

For those who hike with a dog, especially if he's at close quarters as he would be if on a leash, the EVO style rails provide a better margin of safety for the dog as they are inset a bit and less likely to pierce the dog's foot if it happened to get under foot.

A very good point! I am working with Gryffin to learn not to step on the snowshoes. With the Flex Alp or MSR Evo design, there is a bit of a perimeter of safety.

Tim

 

[TJsName]

FWIW, I took my size 14W Merrel Moab's to EMS to try out the REVO Explore. The heel strap was probably and inch or two too short for my boot. I'd be surprised if size 13's work either, but a narrower foot might be able to scoot up further on the plate.

 

[TJsName]

Anyone have any data points on the Tubbs Flex Alp vs the Flex Trk?

I just grabbed a pair of Tubbs Flex VRT XLs that I am hoping to get some data points on soon. After last seasons frame failure with the tubing I opted for what appears to be a more rigid shoe. Two $50 coupons at EMS made the price a lot easier to swallow at least.

 

[JCarter]

Anyone have any data points on the Tubbs Flex Alp vs the Flex Trk?

So, I can't compare the Flex ALP vs the Flex TRK, but I can give a first-impression of the TRK vs the MSR Evo Ascents.

At first glance, the designs are similar -- plastic deck, metal rails riveted underneath, similar pivots. Toe crampons appear similar, though the Tubbs design looks like it might hold better to cross-wise pressure (it is more u-shaped, to MSRs straight-across). The TRK narrows midway, rather than the MSR nearly-rectangular shape.

The TRK bindings might be easier to get into (sadly, I didn't get to actually stomp around this weekend). One thing that is different is that the MSR binding is real easy to "squish flat", so I normally stack my EVOs facing the same way, crampons out, on the pack. The TRK binding is more rigid, it doesn't look that arrangement is viable.

I may get to stomp around over x-mas, then I'll have more info.

 

[Peakbagr]

Quick sidebar to the discussion - For those who like short shoes (22"), the women's Flex Alps are 22". Shortest men's is 24". So get the women's model? I was told by Tubbs that if your winter boot size is 11, you'll have difficulty getting into the binding for the 22" model. Can't tell whether that is accurate or not.

I spoke to both the customer service dept and their Mktg Dept - offered to test the 22" shoes if they put a men's binding on them, and write up a report when I returned the shoes. Absolutely inflexible - the marketing person who seemed to know little about showshoes said they see no need for a men's 22" shoe or consider it. I can certainly understand that they may not want to lend out a freebee, but what struck was the rigidity of opinion that men would not be interested in a shorter shoe.

 

[Gremlin]

Tubbs and Atlas were bought by K2 and they shut down the facilities and moved offshore (China) and still charge the same price. MSR and Redfeather are still made in the US, I believe. Faber (www.fabersnowshoes.com) and GV (gvsnowshoes.com) are made in Quebec, Canada. I still have US made Atlas, but I'm off the boat when they shut down home-made poducts, put people out of work to make bigger bucks. As Vermont Socks Company say, 'No-one goes off shore for quality.'

 

[bikehikeskifish]

The MSR Evo Ascent measures, along the plane of the work bench, 22.5", while the Flex Alp "24" is 23.5 and the Flex Alp XL "28" is "26.5".

Tim

 

[BISCUT]

Quick sidebar to the discussion - For those who like short shoes (22"), the women's Flex Alps are 22". Shortest men's is 24". So get the women's model? I was told by Tubbs that if your winter boot size is 11, you'll have difficulty getting into the binding for the 22" model. Can't tell whether that is accurate or not.

I spoke to both the customer service dept and their Mktg Dept - offered to test the 22" shoes if they put a men's binding on them, and write up a report when I returned the shoes. Absolutely inflexible - the marketing person who seemed to know little about showshoes said they see no need for a men's 22" shoe or consider it. I can certainly understand that they may not want to lend out a freebee, but what struck was the rigidity of opinion that men would not be interested in a shorter shoe.

That is surprising. Especially when considering the "tail" option on the MSR's. The tail option and weight savings but with the ability to have a 30" snow show was why I picked up a pair of MSR's to begin with.

 

[summitseeker]

Yes, it's true. I simply can't stop talking about MSR snowshoes

Not to bring this thread back to life but I had to pull the trigger on these Evos from EMS ($109). They are not the Evo Ascents, which I find far better. The last pair of Evo Ascents I was able to find online was on eBay (over $400).

http://www.ems.com/product/index.js...e=&network=g&gclid=CIKKxZe97sICFewF7AodAFMA-w

Be well,

Z