Reviews > Snow Gear > Snowshoes > MSR Lightning Ascent 2004 > Steve Nelson > Field Report

Field Report: MSR Lightning Ascent Snowshoes
March 3, 2005

Reviewer's Information

Name: Steve Nelson
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Height: 5' 9" (1.75 m)
Weight: 150 lb (68 kg)
Boot Size: US 11-12
Email address: nazdarovye at y..oo dot com
City, State, Country: San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.

Backpacking Background:

As an interface design and usability consultant by trade, I'm always excited by analyzing and improving designs and processes; backpacking provides a fertile and fun arena for that. I have been backpacking since I was a kid growing up in upstate New York: we backpacked and canoe-camped in all seasons, throughout the Adirondacks and nearby areas, ranging as far as La Verendrye Wildlife Reserve, Quebec. As an adult, I've backpacked and hiked extensively in California, but also have taken trips throughout the West, from New Mexico to British Columbia, and return often to the Adirondacks.

In the past year I made the transition to lightweight and ultralight backpacking. I like moving fast, and lightening the load facilitates that. I also enjoy urban strolls, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, kayaking, and aviation in addition to hiking and backpacking, so my gear gets exposed to a wide variety of uses and conditions.

Product information

Overview

MSR's Lightning Ascent Snowshoes are an intriguing new design combining a toothed aluminum frame and crossbars with toe crampons, flexible synthetic decking and a mitten-friendly binding system. MSR calls the Lightning Ascent a "superlight, maximum traction snowshoe" and claims that it's the "lightest snowshoe in its class."

I provided much additional detail, as well as pictures, in my initial report, which you may wish to view in conjunction with this field report, which focuses on my experiences to date out in the snow.

Field Locations

I've used the snowshoes on several trips so far; two overnights with full packs, and a couple of day snowshoe outings with day packs, plus daytime wandering on the overnights with a hip pack. Three of these trips were at Yosemite National Park and one was at Angora Lakes near Lake Tahoe. Altitudes ranged from approximately 6,000 to 9,000 ft (approx. 1,800 to 2,700 m). Temperatures have ranged from 15° to 50° F (-9° to 10° C), winds have ranged from calm to gale force, and there has been practically no active precipitation (just a light dusting of snow on one occasion).

Trail conditions have been fairly benign—I've stuck mainly to established trails, with only a bit of bushwhacking near Dewey Point and Angora Lakes. On two of the trips, trail conditions were mixed, with icy and consolodated snow interspersed with some slush; on the other two, there had been fresh snowfall within the prior 24 hours. On the first of those, the fresh snow was only a few inches (centimeters) deep, but on the second, my trip to Angora Lakes, the powder varied from 4-12 in (10-30 cm) over a deeper base crust covering consolidated snow (avalanche conditions on that trip were listed as "extreme," so we stuck to safe trails and slopes, though I did do some side traverses, plunge stepping, and a fair amount of bushwhacking in the deeper powder). I've not walked across dirt, pavement or rock with the snowshoes at all to date.

I have worn the snowshoes so far with the same pair of boots on all of these trips: Columbia Ice Crushers. Pack weights have ranged from 10-20 lb (4.5-9 kg) for day hikes, and 25-37 lb (11-17 kg) for the overnights.

Field Experiences

These snowshoes are a relatively novel design, and I must admit that my experiences, while mostly positive, have differed from what I'd initially projected (which was that they'd be quite similar in feel and use to the previous MSR Evo models, despite the use of aluminum instead of plastic for the frame). As it turns out, these snowshoes feel different to me and behave differently than the prior models I've used.

Let me start with the good news, of which there's a lot:

The Lightning Ascents, as I expected, have excellent traction. They have gripped well on ice, snow crusts, packed trails and even in slush. Furthermore, unlike with any other snowshoes I've tried, I've never had snow or ice ball up on the crampons of these snowshoes. On my most recent trip, the day hike at Angora Lakes, a hiking buddy's snowshoes collected considerable balls of snow in their crampons, while the Lightning Ascents had absolutely none, so this is not just a matter of my having lucked out on conditions.

The traction is not so strong as to prevent plunge stepping and "tail surfing," but these snowshoes definitely don't glide as well as others I've used (no shock there, really). I've noticed that even in simply walking down the trail, there's less slip or glide than I'm used to; in mountainous terrain, I've found this comforting, but in safer terrain I kind of miss the ability to skate along a bit. Also, floatation in powder is adequate, but not outstanding. Obviously, different shoes suit different purposes, and I find the Lightning Ascents good for challenging trails and icier, more packed snow conditions.

The new bindings are easy to use, and making donning and doffing the snowshoes a relatively hassle-free experience. I really like the new clips for the two toe straps, which allow the each strap to quickly slip out of the binding, making it easier to get boots in and out. The bindings are easy to snug down, and appear to hold my boots well (no slipping so far). Also, the materials in the bindings have held up well—no cracking, rusting or oxidation anywhere so far.

The Televator bar is far easier to deploy in this model than in the previous ones I've tried—that's a really nice advancement. I've used the Televator bar twice "for real," on particularly steep bushwhack ascents. They, as was my experience with previous models, make the climb much easier on my calves.

The snowshoes are relatively quiet in use—certainly much more so than the previous all-plastic MSR snowshoes I've used. The bindings also fold down fairly flat, and the shoes stack together well, making them reasonably compact for storage in a snowshoe bag or lashing to a pack (which I've done on two occasions, both times with a Granite Gear Stratus FZ Access pack).

Now, a bit of not-so-good news:

First, I've found the shoes somewhat awkward to walk in. I often find the tail of the forward shoe slapping onto the inside front frame of the rearward shoe as I walk; occasionally the forward insides of the shoes overlap as well. Sometimes this even causes me to immediately trip and fall forward; I don't have this experience with any other showshoe!

Here's why I believe this is happening, and why the Lightning Ascents are unique in this regard: though it's not uncommon to overlap snowshoes occasionally in normal use, the design of the Lightning Ascents' aluminum frame and teeth can allow the teeth of the top shoe's frame to lock into the frame of the bottom shoe. Whereas shoes using tubular frames or plastic decking will (in my experience) generally simply slide apart after overlapping, even a small overlap can cause the Lightning Ascents to lock together in a way that brings me to a dead stop (and sometimes a face plant).

Here's what the overlapping contact has done to the forward, inside top of each shoe's frame (note: the teeth on the frame also ripped a horizontal cut into my gaiters on one occasion):

I'm doing my best to adjust my stride so that the shoes never overlap, but this is difficult to guarantee. I've attempted to adjust the bindings so that my feet can splay outward a bit with the snowshoes remaining in line, but the bindings really are set up to best support lashing the boot directly in line with the long axis of the shoes (though I've also noticed that the setup of the bindings causes my foot to rotate over time—the toe and heel clips tighten in opposite directions). I've also noticed more supination and pronation while wearing these snowshoes than I have with others, though I'm still tracking down whether this is due to the Columbia boots or the Lightning Ascents' bindings.

So, I want to note all of this, but say that I'll keep experimenting with both issues in the coming months and hope to come up with solutions (or corrections to my technique).

Second, I've found the durability of the finish and teeth on the "business end" of the aluminum frame to be far less than I'd expected. After only a few, relatively benign uses, the orange paint is chipping off at many points around the frame (as of the date of this report, much worse than shown in these pictures):

Furthermore, the teeth on the frame seem to be wearing down rather more quickly than I'd expected (again, I've only had these out a few times, and only in snow and a tiny bit of ice):

Finally, in the category of "minor annoyances," I've noticed two things:

The translucent plastic material that comprises the footbed and sides of the binding is not particularly flexible and doesn't conform well to my boots. They end up forming "scuppers" that collect snow and ice, as shown (rather poorly, but on the left side of this boot) here:

Also, the right-hand shoe has developed a loud squeak at one of the cotter pin hinge points of the binding—on my last trip, even my hiking buddy noticed the noise (I'll look into using a bit of oil or other lubricant to deal with that.)

Additionally, the rear of each snowshoe ejects ribbons of snow forward and up onto my legs and pack when I stride fast on certain types of snow; I've narrowed down the cause of this and will post pictures and an explanation in my long-term report.

I feel that, other than the durability of the frame, these are minor issues. In balance, I'm enjoying using these snowshoes and do like them especially for the conditions for which they're marketed.

Long-Term Test Locations

I'll be taking the Lightning Ascent Snowshoes out on day hikes and snow camping trips throughout the remainder of the winter and early spring here in California.

Specific trips planned include:

• Snow camping trips in the Mt. Lassen, Donner Pass, Desolation Wilderness, Mt. Shasta, Yosemite and Sequoia National Park areas
• Winter day hikes throughout the Sierra Nevada, including some peak ascents

Altitudes on these trips will range from sea level to over 10,000 ft (3,050 m). Temperatures will likely range from well below freezing to as high as 60° F (16° C). Weather and trail conditions will range from active snowfall to fresh powder to packed trails to consolidated late-season snow and ice, plus the occasional bare spot. I plan to test the Lightning Ascents on steep ascents, glissades and steep controlled descents, side traverses, and every other challenging condition I can come across on- or off-trail.

Long-Term Test Plan

In addition to the already-mentioned issues I plan to explore with the Lightning Ascents, I will be continuing to evaluate:

• General usability and comfort (how easy are the Lightning Ascents to put on, adjust, and remove; do straps bind or chafe; how do the snowshoes feel in use)
• Traction—how well do the Lightning Ascents' traction devices ("360 degrees of traction" serrated frame, crampons, cross-bars) and shape work on various angles of ascent, descent and side traverses, and in various snow and ice conditions?
• Floatation—how well do the Lightning Asents do in powder and other snow conditions; how much weight can I reasonably carry while wearing them (given the weight rating and my weight, I should be able to carry upwards of a 60 lb (27 kg) pack)?
• Suitability for plunge-stepping and tail glissading—does the aggressive traction make it harder to ride these snowshoes down steep slopes?
• Bindings—how well do the "Step-on bindings" work with different sizes and shapes of boots and shoes; how quickly can they be adjusted; how snug do they stay over the course of a hike; do they have any annoying loose or flapping ends?
• Effectiveness and ease of use of the Televator bar
• Overall suitability for moving fast in snow, with and without a pack (a combination of shape, traction, floatation and "feel").
• Noise—MSR's plastic snowshoes have a bit of a reputation for being "noisy," and the Polar Paws also had this trait; how do the Lightning Ascents fare in this regard?
• Packability—how well do the showshoes pack down for strapping to a pack or traveling?
• General durability—how well do the materials and components hold up (especially in areas impacted by fast travel and aggressive terrain)? I note that the frame is a mix of aluminum, steel, and decking
• How amenable are the materials and design to repair in the field, and what tools and materials would be needed?

I also will spend some time more carefully measuring the snowshoes so that I can calculate the surface area of the decking and frame. I'm curious how these snowshoes compare in floatation to others I own or have used, and whether that is simply a matter of relative surface area.

Finally, on each outing with the snowshoes, I'll record information about weather, terrain, boots and gear used with the snowshoes, and photograph the snowshoes in use, the terrain, and any other items of interest where relevant.

Summary

The MSR Lightning Ascents are a thoughtfully-designed, appealing set of snowshoes that look to be suitable for a wide range of conditions and uses. They've proven reliable, trail-hugging companions for .

Things I like so far:

• Looks
• Easy-to-use bindings
• Moderate weight
• Good traction
• Smooth-operating Televator bar

Things I don't like so far:

• Durability of finish and teeth on aluminum frame
• Some awkward overlapping of shoes during normal striding—I'm hoping to discover that this is "user error" and correct it, but will have to report back on this

Thanks to BackpackGearTest and MSR for giving me the opportunity to participate in this test.

Reviews > Snow Gear > Snowshoes > MSR Lightning Ascent 2004 > Steve Nelson > Field Report