Snowshoes!

[jefnvk]

OK, need some help on snowshoes.  I'm looking for a piar, gonna be used for hunting, ice fishing and just general hiking in the woods.  The only thing I am dead set on right now is taht they are going to be traditional style, meaning no new-fangled aluminum things.

I have used a pair before, I believe tehy were the Michigan style.  They were a bit wide for me, so I am thinking the skinnier and longer ones.  But then I run itno the problem of maneuvering in the woods.

So, anyone have any reccomendations?  Short and fat, long and skinny?  Pointy at both ends, pointy nowhere?

They are most likely going to be Iverson made, I like the local stuff.

[280plus]

I tried the traditional style and then traded them in for aluminum ones. Cabelas sells them. I had a problem with the long ones crossing in the back and tripping me up. I also had a problem with them getting tangled in brush. Try the short fat ones? I also liked the extra serrated grabbers on the Al ones. The conventional did not provide very good traction up and down inclines. Then there's the bindings...

[stevelyn]

Having used the military, traditional and modern style, the modern aluminum framed shoes really are better and less troublesome to use.
The military snowshows are just downright worthless. The only useful thing about them is that the frames are magnesium and can be used to start a fire.
Traditionals are high maintenance and prone to breakage. Most of the binding are problematic and they are the least ideal for hilly or mountainous terrain. You have to make repairs to the lacings and of course they have to be revarnished every year to preserve the wood frames and lacings.
The modern snowshows are pretty much maintenance free. They keep you on top of the snow better. They're lighter. The bindings are secure and easily adjustable and varied terrain is no problem since most have a pivoting claw for traction on ice and inclines.

[Jamisjockey]

I've got a pair of modern snowshoes.  Lightweight, no maintenece required, I just don't see why you'd want the old fangled kind.....

[MillCreek]

I have had many pairs of snowshoes over the years.  I currently have a pair of Atlas 1033 and the MSR Classic snowshoes.  Far and away the pair I use most commonly is the MSR Classic with a set of flotation tails.  Our snow up here is heavy and wet and we have much steep terrain.  Flotation is not so much important as is hill-climbing and braking, and that is where the MSR snowshoes excel.  They are also handier to maneuver in thick underbrush and trees.  If I lived in largely flat open terrain with dry fluffy snow, as I am told exists in many parts of New England, the Midwest, and the like, the traditional wood/rawhide snowshoes may work well there.

[Tallpine]

"So, anyone have any reccomendations?"

Yes ... cross-country skis  ;-)

Though I'm not sure you can find new ones suitable for just breaking trails through the woods.  It's been years now since I've been on skis, but some years ago we used them for daily transportation as we lived six miles beyond the end of the plowed road.  I had (and still do) an old wooden pair which were shorter and wider than racing skis, equiped with what would now be considered "antique" cable bindings, in which you could use most any sturdy boot.

With a little bit of practice, you can do a 180 deg standing turn by lifting one leg foot high in the air and reversing the heel and toe of that ski.  The you can just step around with the other leg/ski.  Maybe you could do that on snowshoes as well, especially if you had a pair of x-country ski poles.

I never had much success with snowshoes the few times I tried them.  Maybe they would work well on crusted snow, but I always found myself with more snow on top of the snowshoes than underneath them.  Then you have lift that weight everytime you take a step.  But my experience was in powder snow in Colorado.  They might work better in wetter snow

Back country skiing is a blast.  It works best if you have more than one person so you can take turns breaking trail.

[280plus]

I found with the traditionals a small sharp incline was enough to force me to remove them to make the climb and the put them back on at the top. Then add trying to redo the bindings well with cold fingers. I would agree that traditionals would probably be fine on light open terrain but less so in more challenging areas.

[jefnvk]

Cross-coutry skis are already covered.  No need for a new pair of them.

Like I said, I'm pretty set on traditionals.  I'll take a look at the aluminum ones, though.  I should ahve made it more clear in my post, the only problem with the ones I use right now is thewdith, I dunno if going longer to fix that problem will cause manevering problems.  Hills wern't a problem.

[thebaldguy]

The new snowshoes are, in my opinion, much better than the old wood ones. They require much less care (varnishing) and are more durable. I find them much less awkward to use as well due to their size. If you can, try both types and see what you think. My friends have RedFeather snow shoes and like them.

[jefnvk]

OK, just got back from one place looking at them.  

Many of the modern ones, at over double the traditional ones, are no longer being considered.  I did like the Redfeather ones somewhat, but at $250 a pair they are a bit steep for me.

My biggest problem with modern ones:

1) I have been using the traditionals, and I know they work for me.  Plus, I have relatives using the same pair for many, many, years now, so I know with a little care they last.

2) I tired a buddies set of modern ones, and they didn't stay afloat as well as the traditionals.  But as I cannot remember the make of them, I don't want to use that strictly as an excuse for going traditional.

3) I just like traditional stuff.  My buddies got Gore-Tex Thinsulate skiing caps, I have a wool Stormy Kromer.  They got #200 columbia jackets, I have flannel and wool.

4) I do like the point on the end. Haven't seen that on many modern ones, except for the ones out of my price range.

5) I don't want any buckles or lacing on the bindings.  If I end up with the traditionals, they are going to have the inner-tube bindings.

But I am still looking.  And thanks for the replies, even if they wern't what I was really looking for.  The simple fact that so many peopple came ou tin the affirmative for modern ones, at least has me looking to see if they may be better.

[Jamisjockey]

As far as not enough float, you need to make sure that you get shoes that are big enough for you.  They will be weight rated, usually meaning they are smaller/bigger depending on weight.  Go big to account for gear and clothing.

[stevelyn]

Cabela's and the Sportsman's Guide have the modern snowshows for a lot less than $250.00.

[280plus]

We (or at least I) didn't know you had previous snowshoe experience. Admittedly my traditionals were not what you would call top shelf. That may have made a difference.

As far as Cabelas, I paid IIRC $149 for my aluminum ones but they were in the season close outs catalog.

[jefnvk]

Yeah, I should have mentioned that earlier.  Last year I used a pair of traditionals all season.  Like I said, the only real problem was they were a bit wide.  I went back and looked, the ones I had were 15" wide, the two I am looking at right now are 10" and 12".

Honestly, the couple places I have looked are saying the exact opposite, they are all recommending traditionals.  I may see if I can't get my hands on some modern ones to try in the next couple of days.