Best Snowshoes when Crampons would be better

If I find myself in a situation where all I have is snowshoes but crampons would be better suited for the terrain, what is the best pair of snowshoes for that situation?

I want to buy a pair of snowshoes, not a pair of snowshoes AND a pair of crampons. I know that I will be in some situations this winter where crampons might be better suited, but all I will have is the pair of snowshoes I am going to buy this weekend.

What do you think?

Thanks in advance

I don't know if I will be in the minority here, but I say, don't even try. When you need crampons, you need crampons. When you need snowshoes, you need snowshoes.

Others with wider snowshoe experience could answer which snowshoe model has the best traction cleat. I use the Atlas 1030, which I think grips great, but it is not a true crampon, and I would never substitute it for a real 10 or 12 point crampon.

Snowshoes are designed to keep you from sinking deep into the snow. The traction is a secondary function. If you buy small, spike-endowed snowshoes, you might discover you have both a poor snowshoe and a poor crampon. You may one day regret it when you are faced with an inviting trail (or bushwhack) covered in deep, fresh powder. Or, you may regret it when you are faced with a steep icy trail that no snowshoe cleat can dig into.

On a side note, the way this winter is (not) going, you might consider buying the crampons first. Check out the ~$100 Grivel G-10 New Classic, among many other good options.

I have used my Sherpa snow claw snowshoes for 25 years in all types of conditions, including steep, slippery slopes with absolutely no traction probems whatsoever. They have huge steel teeth, just like using oversized insteps.

dms said:

I have used my Sherpa snow claw snowshoes for 25 years in all types of conditions, including steep, slippery slopes with absolutely no traction probems whatsoever. They have huge steel teeth, just like using oversized insteps.

Click to expand...

seconded. i wouldnt climb a frozen waterfall in them, but i woudlnt do that in crampons either.

From my Sherpa posting:

Yesterday I gave the Sherpified Tubbs their first real workout, using them on the Hancock Loop Trail. All my companions wore crampons, I climbed the extremely steep north branch of the loop with my snowshoes. Being wider than crampons I had a few minor problems in tight spots, and it is impossible to use French technique on the steepest pitches, but apart from that my snowshoes performed as well as crampons.

Click to expand...

But that was a "proof of concept" experiment. I definitely agree with cushetunk:

When you need crampons, you need crampons. When you need snowshoes, you need snowshoes.

Click to expand...

Right tool for the job and that kind of thing ...

I agree with cushetunk!

Though generally you can get by without crampons most of the time,"...When you need crampons, you need crampons. When you need snowshoes, you need snowshoes."

Key word...NEED

I also agree with cushetunk!

The two tools serve different functions. Use each for its intended purpose. Trying to use snowshoes as crampons can be dangerous.

BTW, crampons and snowshoes are much cheaper than broken bones.

(And I have climbed frozen waterfalls--with crampons.)

Doug


edit: just like to add that there is certainly ground which can certainly be traveled safely with either a snowshoe with an aggressive crampon or crampons. But there is also ground for which the snowshoe is not adequate.

MSR snowshoes have one of the more aggressive crampons.

As far as snowshoes with the best/ most agressive traction; I think Tubbs with the Vipor crampon are probably the most agressive.

As other people said snowshoes can be a liability in steep icy conditions but this is much more true on the way down than the way up due to the meachanics of stepping and the nature of snowshoe crampons. Snowshoe crampons can be pretty affective on the way up because the binding hinges around the ball with a hole in the decking allowing you to get a good purchase on the terrain with the toes and ball of your foot crampon. On the way down you plant with your heel and the snowshoe dispurses the pressure directly to the decking and doesn't allow you to apply as much pressure on the rear fangs of the snowwshoe crampon.

Unless you are doing a lot of super steep, or above treeline terrain, snowshoes may be sufficient 95% of the time.

cantdog said:

MSR```````

Click to expand...

Like she said!

But I agree that there is a time and place for campons, stabilizers, snowshoes and barebooting.

But if you only had 1 choice, MSRs have worked for me in a wide variety of conditions.

I have a set of Atlas 1025's, and their crampons are just under 1". My White Mountain 30's (Tubbs) that are "Viper Equipped" have crampons that are a full 1.5" and 6 teeth on the boot.

My Charlet Moser crampons have 1.25" teeth.

The Atlas are nice because they're light, but for serious traction on a snowshoe, I'll take the Tubbs (or at last those Tubbs, I have 3 other sets of regular Tubbs snowshoes).

alas you can't buy those Sherpa's anymore.

Not only would I say that when you need crampons, you need crampons but if you stick to the more well traveled trails & go out on Sunday after the Saturday hikers but I'd buy crampons first. I use mine more often than the snowshoes.

once outside chamonix i climbed 5.10 in the yellow atlas 'shoes! (HEEHEE ).
but really, i can get up most anything in the whites in the yellow atlas' (i think they are the 12 series). i carry spikes occasionally but have maybe used 'em 5 or 6 times in the past 2 or 3 years. they look cool strapped to your pack though!

bruno said:

once outside chamonix i climbed 5.10 in the yellow atlas 'shoes! (HEEHEE ).
but really, i can get up most anything in the whites in the yellow atlas' (i think they are the 12 series). i carry spikes occasionally but have maybe used 'em 5 or 6 times in the past 2 or 3 years. they look cool strapped to your pack though!

Click to expand...

I agree with Bruno. A lot of the winter hikes are easy walk-ups. I carry snowshoes (MSR's) and Crampone (G-10's) and use them both. However, I think in most cases the crampons are superfluous -- I only wear them because the snowshoes are like big clodhoppers on a narrow trail sometimes. I feel that on a regular to moderately steep trail, traction is the same.

If you don't want to get both, there are a number of hikes (moderately steep) to keep you busy where you can test out yer snowshoes to see if you need the additional traction. It's an individual thing as well; even the range of snowshoes is quite large -- MSR's, Tubbs etc.

-Dr. Wu

If there's one subject everyone has an opinion on its snowshoes!

I've heard that the Viper is one kick-ass set-up! I was wondering though if the 1½ inch downward projecting fangs would be awkward or uncomfortable on a hard packed trail. Also a couple weeks ago, on a bushwhack, my partner had Atlas shoes and noticed that the crampons tended to snag more easily on blowdown as he stepped over it. ie. he would have to lift his leg higher for clearance.
In spite of what many naysayers point out about the flimsy looking MSR's I love the way they make me feel velcroed to the steepest, iciest terrain. As my confidence in them grows I find myself leaving the crampons in the car more and more often. There are situations however where crampons are strictly necessary.

I can think of very few instances where I would need crampons instead of MSR Denali snowshoes. The one that comes to mind would be above treeline where the snow is sparse and the ice and rocks are not. I don't generally bring my crampons unless I go above treeline. The MSR's get unbelievable traction.

Jasonst said:

I can think of very few instances where I would need crampons instead of MSR Denali snowshoes. The one that comes to mind would be above treeline where the snow is sparse and the ice and rocks are not. I don't generally bring my crampons unless I go above treeline. The MSR's get unbelievable traction.

Click to expand...

You mention mixed rock and ice. But also bumpy ice, steep sections of ice/hardpack snow, snow climbs (eg Lions Head).

We did Chocorua by Champney Falls Tr once under conditions of the parking lot being a sheet of ice and the trail being covered with bumpy ice (frozen slush?) essentially all the way up. (Some people used crampons just to get out of the car and someone wearing crampons had to push the car out to the road...) Doable with MSRs? Perhaps, but a lot more comfortable, more efficient, and safer with crampons.

The MSRs have very good traction for a snowshoe, but they are still a snowshoe.

Doug

Agreed. However, I think they are more of a snowshoe / crampon hybrid rather than a "traditional" snowshoe.

I haven't tried all types of snowshoes, but I like the Atlas design that doesn't have the hinge pin binding. For downclimbing and traversing on steep hard slopes, I don't want the heels of the shoes to be dragging when I'm trying to position my feet.

I agree that there are circumstances where snowshoes would not be a good substitute for crampons. If that's the case, you may need to bareboot, look for deeper snow or turn around.

I understand that there are situations that are appropriate for both. My intention is that I want to buy a pair of snowshoes, and can't also afford to buy a pair of crampons.

I have enough experience to know that they co-exist for a reason. I'm going to check out the MSR Lightning Ascent's.

Thanks