Sharpening microspikes

[sierra]

Can someone enlighten me about why they prefer Hillsounds over Katoolas? I've been happy w my microspikes but want to stay relevant.

I switched to Hillshound trail crampons last year. They are basically microspikes on steroids. They bite much better then microspikes which to me are very overrated for icy trails. I also have a pair of Petzel 10 point full spike crampons for routes like the Ammou or above treeline on Washington or the Northern Peaks, where microspikes are not really enough imo. Anywhere there is fall potential, I'm in crampons.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I'm an oddball. I like snowshoes I have:

28" Tubbs Flex Alps - for I AM BREAKING TRAIL and there is over a foot of new snow for the day and little chance of it being bony.
24" Tubbs Flex Alps - for I LIKELY AM BREAKING TRAIL, less than a foot, or packed trails where I am likely to wear them all day.
22" MSR EVOs (with optional 6" tails) - for when there is a good chance I'll be carrying them, or I am likely to be walking on rock (mainly because they are my oldest pair)

Then I have

Grivel G10 crampons for the Presidential Range and Katahdin (rarely do these get used)
Hillsounds
Microspikes

24" Flex Alp and Microspikes are what I will most often have with me. Unlike Peakbagger, I find the Hillsounds roll around more than the Microspikes, but it could be sizing/my boots rather than the device(s).

Tim

 

[iAmKrzys]

The bench grinding method usually destroys the temper of the metal. So if you step on rocks they will wear down even more quickly.

Since I was not getting much progress with a file I thought that my choice was either to use bench grinder or to replace the microspikes altogether as they got dull to the point that is was really easy to curved tooth edges on "grip side". I tried to be gentle as to no heat the teeth up in grinding process. I'm pretty sure that the new surfaces I made are far from perfect but still look relatively straight and appear sharp although this may wear off pretty quickly.

Last year I bought some cheap no-name mircrospikes but they are heavier then Kahtoolas, so I put them in the car, pretty much just like I always keep a pair of older hiking boots in the trunk in case something fun comes up accidentally along the way!

 

[JoshandBaron]

I'm an oddball. I like snowshoes

Amen. My microspikes have lasted nearly 8 years because I prefer shoes. I own 4 pairs and use all of them. When most people are spiking it, I'm rocking my 22's. I like the stability they provide vs my ankles rolling around in a chewed up spike track.

 

[DayTrip]

I'm an oddball. I like snowshoes I have:

28" Tubbs Flex Alps - for I AM BREAKING TRAIL and there is over a foot of new snow for the day and little chance of it being bony.
24" Tubbs Flex Alps - for I LIKELY AM BREAKING TRAIL, less than a foot, or packed trails where I am likely to wear them all day.
22" MSR EVOs (with optional 6" tails) - for when there is a good chance I'll be carrying them, or I am likely to be walking on rock (mainly because they are my oldest pair)

Then I have

Grivel G10 crampons for the Presidential Range and Katahdin (rarely do these get used)
Hillsounds
Microspikes

24" Flex Alp and Microspikes are what I will most often have with me. Unlike Peakbagger, I find the Hillsounds roll around more than the Microspikes, but it could be sizing/my boots rather than the device(s).

Tim

Drifting off topic but I am curious on two things:

1) Why do so many people not like crampons on steep trails? And not just the obvious Presi/Franconia ridges. Examples would be the steep climb of Ammo from Gem Pool to the Hut, the steep climb up either leg of the Hancock Loop, the steep climb up to North Tripyramid via Pine Brook, Osceola from the Kanc, etc, etc? Is it just the inconvenience factor of getting on/off? The weight? Cost of having all these options? I find microspikes unreliable on grades like this unless it is absolutely trampled into a firm sidewalk and snowshoes, particularly descending, are super awkward on terrain like that. The float of the deck frequently robs you of a lot of the traction from all the steep and awkward angles. I take falls all the time in semi-glissade "maneuvers". To me crampons are a no-brainer for that stuff yet I am commonly the only one, or one of a few people, I see in crampons in those circumstances.

2) Several times on trail I've seen people wearing "mini" snow shoes, maybe 12-15" long. Those seem like a fantastic option versus spikes for the reasons Joshandbaron mentioned - rolling ankles from no float, etc plus bigger teeth for superior grip, etc. Do they still make such a thing? I don't recall seeing them when I've shopped snowshoes in the past. I feel like these would make a nice all-in-one "spike/crampon/shoe" option for a lot of conditions.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I thought I answered on my part... let me repeat I'm an oddball. I like snowshoes . I think the larger answer is the evolution of technology. Note I have only been hiking since 2005, but I think it roughly goes like this:

* In the beginning you wore crampons for traction (steep) even if you postholed to your crotch.
* You wore big snowshoes for floation on the flats but they had little to no traction and minimal manueverability.
* Along came the MSRs and other plastic deck, narrow snowshoes with a crampon under foot and other bars/rails/etc. for additional traction AND heel lifts for steeps! Game changer. These are my personal preference. These made true crampons less necessary. True crampons have an increased trip and rip hazard.
* Along came the Microspike "culture" (YakTrax, Stabilicers, Microspikes, Hillsounds, ...) It's like having a 8, 12, 16, and 20oz hammer at your disposal. 20oz is a great framing hammer but the 8 oz will hang a picture on a brad just fine.
* Trails are mostly packed these days, and there is a growing ultralight movement which favors microspikes. The pioneers (Tim Seaver comes to mind) would create their own "screw boots".

Also I like the snowshoe skiing as an "option".

It is a rare combination of conditions where I feel the need for snowshoes, microspikes and crampons. I didn't even get into the ice axe

Tim

 

[DayTrip]

I thought I answered on my part... let me repeat I'm an oddball. I like snowshoes . I think the larger answer is the evolution of technology. Note I have only been hiking since 2005, but I think it roughly goes like this:

* In the beginning you wore crampons for traction (steep) even if you postholed to your crotch.
* You wore big snowshoes for floation on the flats but they had little to no traction and minimal manueverability.
* Along came the MSRs and other plastic deck, narrow snowshoes with a crampon under foot and other bars/rails/etc. for additional traction AND heel lifts for steeps! Game changer. These are my personal preference. These made true crampons less necessary. True crampons have an increased trip and rip hazard.
* Along came the Microspike "culture" (YakTrax, Stabilicers, Microspikes, Hillsounds, ...) It's like having a 8, 12, 16, and 20oz hammer at your disposal. 20oz is a great framing hammer but the 8 oz will hang a picture on a brad just fine.
* Trails are mostly packed these days, and there is a growing ultralight movement which favors microspikes. The pioneers (Tim Seaver comes to mind) would create their own "screw boots".

Also I like the snowshoe skiing as an "option".

It is a rare combination of conditions where I feel the need for snowshoes, microspikes and crampons. I didn't even get into the ice axe

Tim

Yes you were clear. I wasn't specifically asking you. I just copied your comments because you outlined the choices in detail. Should have been more clear as usual....

I also agree that rarely are snowshoes, spikes and crampons required but I generally have all 3 anyway. Spikes weigh so little there isn't much point not having them and they're a reasonable back up to a failed crampon. And having crampons is a back up to a snapped micro spike strap in the event you can't repair too. And I've encountered ice even on easy trails that was micro spike proof. I forget the Winter awhile back (maybe 2013 or 2015?) that was a bad snow year. I did several hikes where I couldn't even scratch the ice at the lower elevations with spikes. It was truly bullet proof and a nightmare staying on your feet even at near flat grades. Not common for sure but possible. Secure footing is mandatory for me so I always prepare for all possibilities. I usually have an ice axe too even though I almost never use it....

And snowshoe skiing is a nice option on the more moderate grades where taking a spill doesn't involve going over a steep drop , eating razor sharp pine tree branches or faceplanting on some boulders.

 

[peakbagger]

I thought I answered on my part... let me repeat I'm an oddball. I like snowshoes . I think the larger answer is the evolution of technology. Note I have only been hiking since 2005, but I think it roughly goes like this:

* In the beginning you wore crampons for traction (steep) even if you postholed to your crotch.
* You wore big snowshoes for floation on the flats but they had little to no traction and minimal manueverability.
* Along came the MSRs and other plastic deck, narrow snowshoes with a crampon under foot and other bars/rails/etc. for additional traction AND heel lifts for steeps! Game changer. These are my personal preference. These made true crampons less necessary. True crampons have an increased trip and rip hazard.
* Along came the Microspike "culture" (YakTrax, Stabilicers, Microspikes, Hillsounds, ...) It's like having a 8, 12, 16, and 20oz hammer at your disposal. 20oz is a great framing hammer but the 8 oz will hang a picture on a brad just fine.
* Trails are mostly packed these days, and there is a growing ultralight movement which favors microspikes. The pioneers (Tim Seaver comes to mind) would create their own "screw boots".

Also I like the snowshoe skiing as an "option".

It is a rare combination of conditions where I feel the need for snowshoes, microspikes and crampons. I didn't even get into the ice axe

Tim

One edit to your observation, it was Sherpa Snowshoes with the Tucker Claw that changed the paradigm for years. If you were a serious winter hiker in eighties in the whites you wore Sherpas with the Tucker Claw. Read Dickerman's book and he references Sherpas. If you rented snowshoes there was no choice, it was Sherpa or nothing. Many folks bought rentals at the end of the season. Many people I know had Sherpas with EMS in faded marker on them. Sherpa owned the woods and the key patents and charged appropriately for the privilege. The AMC winter school basically required them for a couple of years. Tubbs was waiting in the wings until the Sherpa key patent ran out and came out with the Katahdin series with the TD 91 binding at a significant cost break to Sherpas and after an early production flaw causing failures they owned the market for a few years. The TD 91 binding was such an improvement that I saw several pairs of Sherpas with TD91s as the TD91s had far more rotational stiffness. The weak point with both Sherpas and Tubbs was the original design claws were designed for going up hill perpendicular with the slope, traverse a switchback on a steep crusty side slope that had not been broken out and the back of the snowshoes would rotate down slope. It was mean on the ankles. MSR then came in a few years later with their radical design injection molded snowshoes, they were far better on a side slope having sharp traction ridges along their length and were superior on side slopes compared to their predecessors. Both Sherpa and Tubbs introduced heel crampons but there were inferior to the MSR design. MSR has the patents so most of the other shoes were derivatives of the prior Tubbs design with every company racing to the bottom on price or trying to get into the high end market. MSR also inadvertently introduced short showshoes. Both Tubbs and Sherpa offered small "ladies" size shoes but they were worthless for breaking trails but fine for a broken track. Sherpa offered the biggest range in lengths and NH Fish and Game and many rescue folks still use the extra long version. MSRs came with optional tails to add length but I think many folks figured out that for most conditions they could leave the tails home.

I have acquired many tools in my gear over the years and ultimately it always comes down to do I carry everything and weigh myself down to the point where I am slowed down even more than my slow pace to the point that I cant get to where I want to go or do I pick my gear for current conditions and risk having to turn around?. I have gone up Ammo multiple times in winter with only Hillsound microspikes and felt quite confident. I inadvertently did Washington and Jefferson one day with Big Earl and Sue in the winter when I accidentally left my crampons at home. Yes there were a few short dicey spots without full crampons but they could safely be traversed, it just required a bit of thinking. I had my MSRs and expect if I had switched to them it would have been a non issue. When I roam my woods in Randolph breaking trail I have my trusty army surplus Huron style snowshoes, they are far better breaking trail and fairly good uphill without traction but would be useless on most trails as the track is so much wider. It I wanted more traction I could search the antique shops for the old method of snowshoe traction which were strap on claws. I think AMC listed conventional snowshoes with strap on claws as acceptable for winter school in addition to Sherpa's but expect few current hikers have even seen them let alone used them.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I almost included a "if I am mistaken, peakbagger will correct me" disclaimer

Tim

 

[peakbagger]

Gotta keep the young'uns straight

 

[DougPaul]

If you were a serious winter hiker in eighties in the whites you wore Sherpas with the Tucker Claw.

And in the 70s, we would lash a crampon half (from a crampon with a broken hinge) or an instep crampon to the bottom of our flat bearpaw snowshoes. EMS sold a bolt on version.

That was back in the days when you expected to have to break the trail out.

Gotta keep you young'uns straight...

Doug

 

[ChrisB]

Gotta keep the young'uns straight

What a great thread!

Bottom line is people have been trekking up our Winter New England hills for decades using a great variety of tools and techniques.

Just do it!

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Interestingly enough, I actually used Grivel G10s from Lake of the Clouds to Monroe and up to George today, and while I could have made do with sharp Hillsounds, the ice was probably too much for Microspikes. Then again, one could have gone around the ice, at no real extra danger, but conditions were good for easy cramponing and it never hurts to practice.

Tim

 

[maineguy]

If the spikes are worn to the point of not being useful any more, it's likely something else is about to fail as well: chain links or the rubber binding. When mine get dull enough to need sharpening i buy a new pair (actually switched to Hillsound) and relegate the old ones to lawn-mowing detail (we have a very steep lawn!).

Yikes!! I thought my lawn had steep parts. Do you have spikes on the lawnmower wheels? Just kidding. I suppose that you also aerate the lawn somewhat using them.

 

[sierra]

Drifting off topic but I am curious on two things:

1) Why do so many people not like crampons on steep trails? And not just the obvious Presi/Franconia ridges. Examples would be the steep climb of Ammo from Gem Pool to the Hut, the steep climb up either leg of the Hancock Loop, the steep climb up to North Tripyramid via Pine Brook, Osceola from the Kanc, etc, etc? Is it just the inconvenience factor of getting on/off? The weight? Cost of having all these options? I find microspikes unreliable on grades like this unless it is absolutely trampled into a firm sidewalk and snowshoes, particularly descending, are super awkward on terrain like that. The float of the deck frequently robs you of a lot of the traction from all the steep and awkward angles. I take falls all the time in semi-glissade "maneuvers". To me crampons are a no-brainer for that stuff yet I am commonly the only one, or one of a few people, I see in crampons in those circumstances.

2) Several times on trail I've seen people wearing "mini" snow shoes, maybe 12-15" long. Those seem like a fantastic option versus spikes for the reasons Joshandbaron mentioned - rolling ankles from no float, etc plus bigger teeth for superior grip, etc. Do they still make such a thing? I don't recall seeing them when I've shopped snowshoes in the past. I feel like these would make a nice all-in-one "spike/crampon/shoe" option for a lot of conditions.

Crampons are not in vouge because of the invention of two things, microspikes and the modern snowshoe. These two inventions can cover 98% of winter terrain in the Whites. When I started winter hiking in the early 80's, we bought two things. Rawhide snowshoes and full crampons. When I got my Sherpa snowshoes, it was like getting your first automobile. A major upgrade from the wooden snowshoe.

 

[briarpatch]

Sharped my Kahtoola KTS this weekend. Started on one point and hand filed to sharpen but the time to sharpen was too long. When to the bench grinder to removed the majority of material. Finished with the hand file in hopes to maintain the metallurgy. I had not inspected the KTS closely until reading through this thread and was surprised with the wear down on the points. I believe I have 6, maybe 8 years on them.

 

[Mike P.]

Drifting off topic but I am curious on two things:

1) Why do so many people not like crampons on steep trails? And not just the obvious Presi/Franconia ridges. Examples would be the steep climb of Ammo from Gem Pool to the Hut, the steep climb up either leg of the Hancock Loop, the steep climb up to North Tripyramid via Pine Brook, Osceola from the Kanc, etc, etc? Is it just the inconvenience factor of getting on/off? The weight? Cost of having all these options? I find microspikes unreliable on grades like this unless it is absolutely trampled into a firm sidewalk and snowshoes, particularly descending, are super awkward on terrain like that. The float of the deck frequently robs you of a lot of the traction from all the steep and awkward angles. I take falls all the time in semi-glissade "maneuvers". To me crampons are a no-brainer for that stuff yet I am commonly the only one, or one of a few people, I see in crampons in those circumstances.

2) Several times on trail I've seen people wearing "mini" snow shoes, maybe 12-15" long. Those seem like a fantastic option versus spikes for the reasons Joshandbaron mentioned - rolling ankles from no float, etc plus bigger teeth for superior grip, etc. Do they still make such a thing? I don't recall seeing them when I've shopped snowshoes in the past. I feel like these would make a nice all-in-one "spike/crampon/shoe" option for a lot of conditions.

On #1, I think it depends on what people have for gear and where they go. The other thing you rarely seen are people on steep slopes with an axe. Lions Head winter would be a place to use on, however, generally if you don't know how to use one, you probably are better without it. (or learn how to use and practice)

My personal preference would be to not bring crampons and Micro's (I have G-12's - sometimes I do) Destination, conditions and who I am hiking with determine what I bring. If hiking with my kids who have micros, I'll use micros as I don't want to just go through something they struggle with. Since I'm making group situations I want to be thinking like the group. On Ammo, I've changed in that steep section before the side trail to the falls, above the falls where the trail goes up over a rock (was very icy that year) and wanted the 12's and not too far before the hut where you have some ledges that in warmer seasons are wet but they ice up nicely in winter. In years with more snow, those upper ledges aren't that bad though.

I know if conditions are thin in the beginning of the season, I'm more apt to just bring the Micro's as they are priced to be replaced or end up with a second pair and keep the old ones like a pair of early season "rock skis" (In fact my son's micros are really by second pair as I am between L and XL. For two pair of winter boot, I need to XL, the L's work with the other two and my lighter summer boots in case I bring the micro's for just in case & they are needed.

Winter tends to be different from week to week and year to year. I've