Articles (2020)

Introduction

Internal frame backpacks now have “model years” just like cars – there are incremental changes each year, and a makeover every 3-5 years. The popular Osprey Aether 60 was last updated in 2003. It gained some features and weight, to the chagrin of some backpackers who relished its light weight and simplicity. For a while the previous model was sought after because it was a few ounces lighter. The Aether 60 is updated again for 2006, and again it advances in features and weight. This review details how much weight the 2006 Aether 60 gains and whether the new features are worth it.

What’s Good

• Removable Isoform custom molded hipbelt
• 7075 aluminum peripheral frame rods
• Airscape nubbed foam backpanel improves ventilation
• Fitted top pocket
• Internal 3-liter hydration sleeve with two hose ports
• Removing the hipbelt and top pocket creates a lumbar pack for day hikes from camp

What’s Not So Good

• Heavier than the previous model
• Stretch-woven side and front pockets are too tight
• Lacks hipbelt pockets
• No place to attach a case for a digital camera or MP3 player

Specifications

Manufacturer	Osprey Packs
Model	2006 Aether 60
Style	Internal frame, top loading, drawstring closure, floating top lid
Volume	Size M tested: 3700 ci (61 L)
Weight	4 lb 0.1 oz (1.82 kg) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification 3 lb 15 oz (1.79 kg)
Fabrics	Main body is 210d double ripstop and 210d oxford, wear areas are 420d oxford and 500d Kodra, pockets are two-way stretch woven nylon with Lycra, backpanel surface is 840d power mesh
Features	Floating top lid with two connecting straps, 6-inch extension collar with drawstring closure, zippered floating top pocket with key clip, two side and three front compression straps, two stretch-woven side pockets with top and side openings, stretch-woven front pocket, two ice axe loops, two ski loops, two front accessory straps, 3-liter hydration sleeve with two ports, haul loop, load lifters, hipbelt stabilizers, sternum strap
Volume To Weight Ratio	57.7 ci/oz size L (based on 3700 ci and a measured weight of 64.1 oz)
Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity	35 lb (16 kg) estimated comfortable load for an average person carrying the pack all day
Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio	8.73 (based on 35 lb and a measured weight of 4.01 lb)
MSRP	$199

Performance

It’s an understatement to say that the Osprey Aether 60 (and Ariel 60 for women, now the Ariel 55) is a popular lightweight backpack. The beauty of the Aether 60 is that it’s just the right size, loaded with useful features, very comfortable to carry, very durable, and lightweight. When a new model comes out it gets a lot of attention. So, what are the changes, and how do they translate into comfort and convenience on the trail?

In brief, the changes from the previous version are: the top pocket is better fitted, an internal hydration sleeve and hose ports have been added, the peripheral frame rods are now 7075 aluminum instead of delrin composite, the backpanel is a nubbed foam that ventilates better, outside pockets are a stretch-woven fabric instead of mesh, and the hipbelt is custom molded to the user and is removable. It sounds like the Aether 60 just got a lot better. Well, mostly yes, but read on to get the analysis. There is one upgrade that is not necessarily better, I have a few nitpicks, and then there is the issue of added weight…

Frame and suspension changes are by far the nicest upgrades to the Aether 60. The peripheral delrin composite strut has been replaced with a 7075 aluminum alloy rod for more strength and durability. The bottom of the each rod fits into a sleeve connected to the hipbelt stabilizers, and the rigid top loop fits into a tight sleeve. These stiffer peripheral rods combined with an internal HDPE framesheet create a frame that is capable of carrying a substantial load, yet is still flexible enough so the load lifters and shoulder straps effectively pull the top of the pack to your shoulders for a body hugging fit.

Contoured shoulder straps on the new pack are 0.5 inch narrower than the previous version, which is not necessarily an improvement. The underside of the shoulder straps is now spacer mesh for more ventilation. The sternum strap has a sliding adjustment on each end, and incorporates a whistle. The Airscape backpanel is firm closed-cell foam that has projections (nubs) at a 0.5-inch spacing that stick out about 0.25-inch toward your back. It’s faced with 840 denier power mesh for durability. I really liked the improved ventilation and resistance to sliding.

The biggie is the addition of Osprey’s Isoform CM heat-moldable hipbelt to the Aether pack series. While the hipbelt on the previous Aether 60 was sewn-in, the Isoform CM hipbelt is removable, and adjustable with a Velcro attachment behind the backpanel. It has to be removable for the custom bake-to-fit service at your local dealer. The process is to remove the hipbelt, place it in a special Osprey oven (at about 125-150 degrees) for about 10 minutes, put it on your hips and hold it tight for about 10 minutes while it cools, then put it back on the backpack. It’s an outstanding personalized feature, and it really works to increase the hipbelt contact area and make it fit perfectly. Another feature on the hipbelt that I really like is that the tightening straps work on a pulley principle, where each strap doubles back through another buckle. Both straps pull toward the center to provide precise tightening.

Fitting the Aether 60 is easy with Osprey’s Velcro-attached shoulder harness and hipbelt. The pack’s torso length can easily be lengthened or shortened by sliding your hand between the Velcro panels and moving the shoulder harness or hipbelt up or down. Additionally, both the shoulder harness unit and the hipbelt come in sizes, so they can be interchanged to fit the user. For example, a person can get a medium pack with a large shoulder harness and/or hipbelt, or vice versa.

Turning to features on the packbag, the addition of an internal 3-liter hydration sleeve will delight many backpacking enthusiasts. It has a hose port on each side and an elastic hose sleeve on each shoulder strap. The floating top pocket on the new Aether 60 is better fitted than its predecessor, and its zipper now has one slider instead of two. The bottom of the packbag has two ice axe loops and two ski loops.

The pack has two side compression straps plus three front compression straps that combine to provide good load control and volume adjustment, and lots of options for external attachment. The three straps on the frontpanel connect to a flange that can be used to cradle snowshoes, snowboard, tent, sleeping pad, or tall stuff sack of gear mounted vertically. In addition, there are two accessory straps near the bottom for attaching even more gear to the outside of the pack.

Since the hipbelt is now removable, one can remove both the hipbelt and top pocket and combine them to create a lumbar pack for day hikes from camp. It takes a few minutes to assemble and disassemble, but is worth the effort. (Tip: the Velcro hook panel under the backpanel snags the fabric on the inside of the hipbelt, so protect it with your hand as you pull the hipbelt out.)

One item that is missing is hipbelt pockets, which are becoming increasingly popular on backpacks. Another thing I missed was a convenient place to mount my digital camera. I resorted to attaching it to the surface of the hipbelt using safety pins. In my opinion, hipbelt pockets and a case for a compact digital camera or MP3 player are very useful features and a good way to impress potential buyers.

Now for the change that I am less excited about. The outside pockets (two on the sides and a larger one on the front) have been changed from a durable mesh to a stretch-woven fabric. When the pack is empty they indeed look impressive compared to the previous old-technology mesh pockets. However, when the pack is stuffed full of gear, the pockets are way too tight. They have half the capacity of the old mesh pockets, and are very difficult to reach into with your hand. The side pockets are especially tight, making it laborious to insert and remove even a slender water bottle. Don’t get me wrong, I like the stretch-woven fabric, the pockets just need to be bellowed out more so they have good capacity when the pack is full.

So, what’s the weight penalty for all of these improvements? By Osprey’s numbers it comes to 7 ounces more weight compared to the 2005 model (7.5 ounces by our scale, based on a size medium). That’s almost a half pound (12%) heavier. I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand I acknowledge that most of the upgrades make it a better pack, but on the other hand I wish the changes were weight-neutral, or close to it. I hate to see the weight of a favorite pack escalate higher and higher. Compared to the previous Aether 60, the volume to weight ratio has dropped 7.3 cubic inches per ounce of pack weight. Strictly speaking, the Osprey Aether 60 no longer makes our list of lightweight internal frame backpacks; at 57.7 ci/oz it is below our cutoff of 60 ci/oz. We opted to review it because of its legendary superb fit, comfort, and weight-carrying capacity (read my comments below). In comparison, the GoLite Galaxy pack recently reviewed by Backpacking Light has a volume to weight ratio of 79 ci/oz and is also a superb internal frame pack.

When I backpack with my wife I morph into a lightweight backpacker, leaving my ultralight backpack at home and carrying about 25 pounds that includes extra luxuries. Being a pack mule and carrying extra weight keeps me from getting out 100 yards ahead, and makes me more humble and sociable. I carried the Aether 60 on numerous mountain and desert trips, on-trail and off-trail, in a variety of weather conditions. Besides family trips, I used it on section hikes where I carried as much as five days of food, and also for cold weather trips where I carried more volume and weight.

The Osprey Aether 60’s claim to fame is its size and comfort. At 3700 cubic inches (size medium) it is a perfect size for lightweight backpacking. Not too big, not too little. It allowed me to conveniently organize my gear. I like to put rainwear in the top pocket and frequently used items in the other outside pockets. Its fit me like putting on a jacket, and the pack weight became part of me. The load levelers really work to pull the top of the pack to my shoulders. With proper adjustment of the suspension system I could easily place most of the weight on my hips. I often didn’t use the sternum strap, except where I needed more lateral stability.

To determine the pack’s maximum comfortable load-carrying capacity (my estimate of the amount of weight an average person can carry in the pack all day) I assessed the pack’s structural load capacity and suspension comfort (see Quantitative Analysis of Backpack Suspension Performance by Ryan Jordan). I tested the Aether 60 with up to 45 pounds and found no pack torso collapse. To evaluate suspension comfort I carried the pack all day with a range of loads. The narrower shoulder straps reduced suspension comfort a little, but this didn’t matter because I carried most of the pack weight on my hips. From these tests, I estimated the Aether 60’s maximum comfortable load carrying capacity to be 35 pounds. For a strong person, this pack will carry 40 pounds or more. For me, it easily carried my normal lightweight backpacking loads of 24-30 pounds, which now includes an extra half pound of weight due to the 2006 Osprey Aether weight gain.

What’s Unique

Osprey has pioneered the heat molded hipbelt for backpacks, and has added that feature to the Aether 60 in the 2006 model. Overall, the upgrades in the Aether 60’s frame and suspension system adjust to achieve a superb fit and make the pack very comfortable to carry.

Let’s not forget value. With all of the improvements to the 2006 Aether 60, Osprey has kept the price at $199, so the value has taken a big jump. The new Aether 60 is an outstanding value!

Recommendations for Improvement

The conundrum is this: the new 2006 Aether 60 is a superb pack that has benefited from another round of improvements, and it is now an outstanding value because the price has not gone up. But, darn it, I just don’t like to see the weight jumping higher and higher. With this upgrade, the Aether 60 has gained 7.5 ounces and weighs over 4 pounds, and its volume to weight ratio has dropped to under 60 ci/oz. I like the upgrades, but what I would like to see even more is for Osprey to keep the changes weight-neutral, or better yet, find ways to reduce pack weight.

Some further refinements I would like to recommend are:

• Bellow the stretch-woven outside pockets more so they are not so tight when the pack is fully loaded
• Add hipbelt pockets for convenient access to small items
• Provide a case or attachment point for a digital camera or MP3 player

Introduction

The Macpac Epic 150 SF sleeping bag has a lightweight Pertex Endurance shell and is fully seam taped. It is functionally a bivy sack and sleeping bag combined. Think of it as an insulated bivy sack. I did some controlled experiments, and also tested it stargazing in a damp meadow and sleeping under a minimal poncho-tarp on a stormy night. So, how waterproof is it?

What’s Good

• Pertex Endurance outer shell is waterproof under normal use conditions
• Allows you to leave the bivy sack at home
• Shoulder and hip girth allow room for wearing clothing inside
• Hood drawcord works smoothly
• Very durable

What’s Not So Good

• Shell fabric transmits water under moderate hydrostatic pressure
• Zipperless design may not provide enough ventilation on warmer nights
• 75% of the bag’s weight is fabric, 25% is down
• Inner shell fabric is not completely down-proof
• Available in only one size

Specifications

Manufacturer	Macpac (New Zealand)
Year/Model	2005 Epic 150 SF
Style	Hooded, waterproof, zipperless mummy bag
Fill	750-fill (US Standard) goose down, 5 oz (150 g) of down
Loft	Measured loft is 2.25 in (6 cm) double layer; manufacturer claimed loft is 2.5 in (6 cm)
Manufacturer Claimed Temperature Rating	54 °F (12 °C)
Weight	Measured weight 20 oz (567 g); manufacturer’s specification 19 oz (540 g); weights include sewn-in stuff sack (0.6 oz / 17 g)
Sizes	One size (Standard); length 79 in, shoulder girth 61.4 in, foot girth 42 in (200 x 78 x 53 cm), fits a person up to 73 in (185 cm) tall
Fabrics	Shell is 30d (2 oz/yd2, 68 g/m2) Pertex Endurance (hydrostatic head pressure 1500 mm/2.1 psi, moisture vapor transmission rate 9000 g/m2/24 h); lining is 30d VapourLite ripstop nylon taffeta with DWR. Note: the 2006 model will have a Reflex LoftPro outer shell (a proprietary PU laminate with nylon face), 2.2 oz/yd2 (63 g/m2), hydrostatic head pressure 10,000 mm/14.2 psi, moisture vapor transpiration rate 15,000 g/m2/24hours
Features	Pertex Endurance outer shell, all seams taped, non-baffled construction, drawcord hood, hang loop, attached waterproof stuff sack
MSRP	$280 USD

A Note on Pertex Endurance

Pertex Endurance is 30-denier ripstop nylon with a highly water-resistant outer coating. It allows moisture to pass freely from the inside, which makes it ideal for a sleeping bag shell fabric because there is minimal moisture trapped inside the bag. Several sleeping bag manufacturers use it as an outer shell fabric because of its exceptional water resistance, but actual waterproofness depends on whether the seams are sealed and how much hydrostatic pressure is placed on the fabric. Endurance will withstand a hydrostatic head pressure of 1500 mm (about 2 psi) before leakage occurs, which is not very high. In comparison, most polyurethane coated tent floors have a rating of 5000 mm or higher. A person side sleeping in an Endurance-shelled sleeping bag would come very close to exerting a 2-psi downward force, especially at the hips, so water under the fabric could potentially come through under pressure.

Performance

My first impression upon receiving this bag for review was “this bag is 75% fabric and only 25% down”! However, if you consider the utility of its Pertex Endurance shell and do the math and testing, you’ll see the Macpac Epic 150 SF in a different light. This bag is targeted to the adventure sports niche, where the intended use is minimalism – grabbing some sleep under the stars and getting back on the trail. For us ultralight and super-ultralight backpacker types, it means we can leave the bivy sack at home, because the Epic bag is functionally a bivy sack and sleeping bag combined. (For clarification, the Macpac Epic sleeping bag only uses the name “Epic;” it does not use the water-repellent Epic fabric by Nextec.)

If you sleep under the stars or use a poncho-tarp or ultralight tarp for shelter, chances are you also take an ultralight bivy to protect your sleeping bag from dew or spindrift. Alternatively, if you use a waterproof sleeping bag you can leave the bivy at home, saving 6 ounces or more. The trade-off is that the Pertex Endurance shell material, at 2 oz/yd², is twice as heavy as Pertex Quantum (0.9 oz/yd²) used on many ultralight bags, and adds about 3.5 ounces to the weight of the bag. The extra weight is partly offset by the bag’s zipperless design.

Macpac uses a proprietary Stitch-Free construction technology to attach the bag’s outer shell to its inner lining, which avoids stitching through the Endurance shell and seals the sewn seams in the lining. It also creates chambers to control the down, which is equivalent to sewn-through construction (no baffles). This unique seam taping technology preserves the integrity of the prized Pertex Endurance shell, eliminating the possibility of leakage through stitched seams. The VapourLite lining has a DWR finish, which causes water to bead up on the surface, but it is not waterproof.

When a manufacturer claims that their sleeping bag is waterproof, it better be, because you are counting on it to keep your butt dry and warm. This is even more important for a down bag, which loses its loft when wet and can be difficult to dry in the field. I took Macpac’s claim as a challenge and put it to the test. Since leakage will most likely occur when a fabric is under pressure, I set up a simple experiment to simulate sleeping in a puddle of water all night. I poured two cups of water on a tray, laid the hip area of the sleeping bag on the tray, put two 5-pound weights on top of the bag, then poured 2 cups of water around the weights and let it stand for 8 hours.

Was the bag truly waterproof? Well, almost. There was no leakage at 4 hours, but after 8 hours one seam on the top side leaked enough to produce some noticeable wetting on the inside. I weighed the bag and found that it had gained 0.35 ounce of water. There was no evidence of leakage on the bottom side. I turned the bag inside out and it dried out quickly.

The amount of leakage was minimal, and only occurred on the top side. In a normal situation I would expect leakage to occur from below, where pressure from my weight caused the leakage, not from above. It was time to scrap weights and put myself in the puddle of water under real sleeping conditions.

I did a second test with me in the bag to determine whether leakage would occur under simulated field conditions and whether it is actually a problem. I placed an open-cell foam pad (which acted like a sponge) in a tray of water, arranged Therm-a-Rest pads on both ends of the tray, and slept in the bag with my hip area on the wet foam pad.

The result was similar to the first test, only this time the water came through from the bottom and was enough to dampen my microfleece pants and underwear. Again, it took about 4 hours for the leakage to be detectable. I stopped the experiment after 6 hours, when my butt felt thoroughly wet. I weighed the bag and clothing before and after drying and found that 0.88 ounce of water passed through. Although the actual amount of water passing through was not high, it was enough to thoroughly wet the compressed area and cause discomfort. Conclusion: concentrated body weight (such as the hips) provides enough pressure to move water through the sleeping bag’s Pertex Endurance shell, and the amount of water transmitted is enough to collapse the down and chill your tail.

The “lab” tests I performed simulated a worst case scenario – sleeping in a puddle of water, so how does that translate to using the sleeping bag in the field? On backpacking trips I slept in the Macpac Epic 150 SF under the stars in an open meadow and under a poncho-tarp on a rainy night. Under Southern Rocky Mountain conditions I had to wear a down jacket and pants inside the bag (which the bag’s girth easily accommodated) to stay warm, but the real issue was whether or not the bag would stay dry inside.

When I slept under the stars there was heavy dew on the bag surface in the morning, but shedding surface moisture was no problem for the Pertex Endurance shell because it was not under pressure. The fabric’s hydrophobic surface shed heavy dew literally like a duck’s back.

Sleeping under a poncho-tarp on a rainy night was basically a similar situation. Some spindrift come in under the poncho-tarp, even with mild wind gusts, and the humidity was very high, but there was not enough moisture to create a puddle of water. The sleeping pad elevated the Macpac Epic 150 SF off the ground, adding further protection from any water that might run in. The bag stayed dry inside in spite of whatever moisture my body gave off and the Macpac being quite damp on the outside. On another occasion I slept in the bag in a single wall tent during an overnight deluge (2 inches of rain overnight); conditions that produced a lot of condensation inside the tent and dampened gear. An ordinary down bag would get pretty damp and lose loft under these conditions, but the Macpac Epic didn’t gain a gram. Conclusion: the Pertex Endurance shell is effectively waterproof; it readily sheds surface moisture, and water does not come through the shell as long as it does not exceed 2 psi of pressure. Avoid sleeping directly on wet ground, in a puddle of water, or with water between your sleeping pad and bag.

I slept in the bag under a variety of conditions and did not detect any clamminess inside from trapped perspiration. The Endurance fabric breathes very well and readily passes moisture from the inside out.

The Epic 150 SF contains 150 grams (5 ounces) of 750 fill-power goose down. As I mentioned, only 25% of the bag’s weight is down, but that may be enough. With a comfortable temperature rating of 54 °F, this bag is suitable for summertime backpacking in many locations. For me, it was a little light for summer backpacking in the Southern Rocky Mountains, where nighttime temperatures can drop a lot lower. By wearing my hiking and camp clothes inside the bag, I was able to stay warm down to about 40 °F.

Although it’s obvious that this bag is too light for mountain backpacking, that’s not really an issue. Instead of the Epic 150 SF, one can get the 300 SF with 300 grams (10.6 ounces) of down, or the 450 SF with 450 grams (16 ounces) of down. With baffled construction and half-length water-resistant zipper, the 300 SF would be a better choice for summertime backpacking in the mountains, and the 450 SF would be a good choice for spring/fall backpacking and sleeping in a snow cave or igloo.

Comparing the Macpac Epic 300 SF (with its Pertex Endurance shell) with the popular Marmot Hydrogen bag (with its Pertex Quantum shell), the Macpac bag comes out approximately 3.7 ounces heavier. Both bags have approximately the same amount of down, baffled construction, and a half zipper, so the weight difference is mostly due to the Pertex Endurance shell and slightly heavier lining material in the Macpac bag (30 denier versus 20 denier). The total weight of a waterproof/breathable bivy plus the Marmot Hydrogen easily exceeds that of the all-in-one Macpac Epic bag.

I did not find the zipperless design to be a problem for mountain backpacking, where the issue is getting enough warmth out of a bag. However, ventilation is likely to be an issue in warmer, more humid climates. One annoyance was that the bag’s nylon taffeta lining is not completely downproof, so there were always a few feathers coming through each time I examined it.

Missing from this review (and for all sleeping bag reviews published here, for that matter) will be an assessment of whether or not the sleeping bag performs adequately at temperatures near its manufacturer-reported temperature rating. Click here for the complete Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings.

At $280 the Macpac Epic 150 SF is a bit pricey. The seam taped Pertex Endurance shell apparently accounts for about half of the bag’s price tag. Performance doesn’t come cheap! However purchasing a comparable sleeping bag and lightweight bivy sack separately does add up to more cost and weight.

As of this writing (December 2005), the future of Perseverance Mills and production of their Pertex Endurance fabric is uncertain. If and when the supply of Endurance runs out, Macpac plans to use their proprietary Reflex LoftPro shell fabric (a polyurethane laminate, see specifications at the top of this review) on their Epic series of sleeping bags. This fabric is slightly heavier, and I predict it will be more waterproof but less breathable than Pertex Endurance when used as a sleeping bag shell.

What’s Unique

The Macpac Epic 150 SF is a functionally waterproof sleeping bag, which gives it extra utility and saves weight for adventure racing or ultralight backpacking. It’s essentially an insulated waterproof/breathable bivy sack.

Recommendations for Improvement

I suggest that the bag’s waterproof stuff sack not be attached to the bag. Many people stuff their sleeping bag into the bottom of their pack, which eliminates the stuff sack to save a little weight and avoids over compressing the down.

The Macpac catalog shows this bag having a “two part multi-adjust closure.” My test sample had one simple drawcord, which worked fine. The two part closure sounds like overkill and would add weight.

Introduction

The Atlas 10 Series All Mountain snowshoes are feature rich and solidly built. Although features add weight, one can make a strong argument that the comfort and performance of the 10 Series snowshoes are worth the weight.

What’s Good

• Unique pivot strap design improves traction and stability
• Binding positions and aligns feet and tightens evenly
• Easily adjustable binding
• Lateral crampons provide good sidehill stability
• Well designed, solidly built, and durable

What’s not so Good

• Heavier than I would like, on my feet or attached to a pack
• The tightening strap on bindings occasionally catches on things
• Bulky to attach to a pack
• Paint on the frame scratches easily

Specifications

Manufacturer	Atlas Snow-Shoe Company
Year/Model	2005-06 Model 1025 (10 Series All Mountain)
Dimensions	8.5 in wide x 25 in long (22 cm x 64 cm)
Surface area	Measured surface area 200 in2 (1290 cm2), manufacturer specification 179 in2 (1155 cm2)
Frame	Anodized 7075-T7 Easton aluminum, ¾-in (19 mm) tubing
Deck	Duratek, a proprietary urethane-coated fabric claimed to have three times the abrasion resistance of Hypalon and lighter weight
Binding	Arch-Flex featuring built-in arch support, padded tongue, and uniform tightening system; left and right foot specific
Crampons	Stainless steel, toe and heel, with two additional 6.5 in (17 cm) long side crampons
Weight	Measured weight 4.01 lb (1.82 kg); manufacturer specification 3.99 pounds (1.81 kg)
Load rating	120-200 lb (54-91 kg)
MSRP	$249

Performance

Based on quality, features, and performance the Atlas 10 Series snowshoes were one of my immediate favorites. These snowshoes really have it together. Just slip your foot into the binding, pull one strap, and it clamps your feet in the right position. They have one of the best bindings in our test group for ease of attachment and release, and the operation is easily handled with gloved hands.

The Arch-Flex binding is indeed a premium binding, and is left and right foot specific. It is not quite a step-in like the Tubbs Elevation or MSR Lightning Ascent, but is nevertheless easy to put on and take off. By pulling on each end of a looped strap, the binding distributes pressure evenly over your foot to hold it securely. One nitpick: the webbing tightening strap creates a sizeable loop when the binding is tightened, and there is no good provision for securing the loop to keep it from catching on things. I had no problems with the webbing strap stretching when wet, or freezing up so I couldn’t release it. The heel strap is exceptionally easy to adjust and has a ratchet tightener. I had no problem adjusting the binding to my size 11.5 boots or my wife’s size 6.5 boots. The binding has a curved plate under the ball of the foot, which is claimed to provide extra arch support, but I didn’t see that it made much difference when wearing winter boots.

The 10 Series have the Atlas “Spring- Loaded Suspension System,” which consists of a flexible pivot strap that wraps around the frame twice, attaching to the binding’s toe plate at both the front and the back. The binding and pivot strap combination attaches your foot securely to the snowshoe and maintains perfect alignment. I particularly liked this design because it kept my pronated feet straight with the centerline of the snowshoe. On other snowshoes with less rigid bindings I had a problem with my feet not being properly aligned.

The “Spring-Loaded Suspension System” also builds some torsion into the pivot strap, so when you put your weight on the snowshoe it transfers extra downward pressure to the heel and lateral crampons, increasing traction and stability. When you unweight and lift the snowshoe the pivot strap system works normally to raise the snowshoe below your foot for improved maneuverability. The pivot strap/binding design also puts your foot closer to the front of the snowshoe for better articulation and climbing ability.

Crampons on the business side of the 10 Series are made of stainless steel. The teeth on the toe crampon are large and spaced out to resist icing. Unlike most of the other snowshoes we tested, the 10 Series have an extra set of linear crampons in the middle of each snowshoe to increase sidehill stability. I had minimal problems with the crampons icing up, even in slushy or sun-snow/shade-snow conditions.

I used these snowshoes weekly over a four-month period on an unusually deep snowpack. It was an awesome experience to walk 10 feet above the ground! The Atlas 10 Series did everything I wanted them to do. They climbed steep slopes to the point where I had to use my hands to hang on. Walking downslope they gripped slopes up to about 40 degrees, then slid on their tails in a controlled slide when I leaned back, which complies with the laws of gravity (and skiing). These snowshoes resisted sliding sideways on sidehills better than the other tubular framed snowshoes we tested (only the MSR Lightning Ascent was better), owing to their extra set of linear crampons in the midsection.

Other notable features of the Atlas 10 Series snowshoes are their durable materials and construction. The frame is made of anodized 7075-T7 Easton aluminum (the good stuff) for strength and light weight. I expected the points where the decking material and spring-loaded suspension wraps around the frame to be wear points, but after four months of hard use there is no sign of wear at all. All of the attachments are made with heavy duty rivets. These snowshoes are really solidly built! One nitpick: the anodized finish on the frame scratches fairly easily.

The downside of the Atlas 10 Series snowshoes is their weight. At 4 pounds they are right at our weight limit for this review series. All of the superb features of these snowshoes add extra weight. In my running test, these snowshoes glided smoothly, but their extra weight was noticeable. When I strapped them on my pack, I was adding almost 2 pounds more to my load compared to the Northern Lites Elite. Their weight and bulky bindings make these snowshoes one of the least packable in the group of snowshoes we reviewed.

What’s Unique

The Atlas 10 Series All Mountain snowshoes (and other high-end Atlas models) sport their “Spring-Loaded Suspension System,” which combined with the Atlas “Arch-Flex” binding and lateral crampons, provides exceptional stability and articulation.

Recommendations for Improvement

Backpacking Light is a strong advocate for lightweight, highly functional outdoor gear, so predictably we would like to see at least one lightweight snowshoe in the Atlas lineup for performance-minded backcountry enthusiasts (and I’m not talking about racers). One obvious place to save weight would be to go to smaller diameter tubing for the frame. Another place would be to use lighter materials in the binding. This may sound like unfair nit-pickery on an already well-refined product, but if Northern Lites can produce a 2.4-pound pair of multi-purpose snowshoes, Atlas should be able to get the weight down to at least 3.5 pounds.

Introduction

The Gossamer Gear NightLight Sleeping Pad (Torso Length) is very lightweight at 3.4 ounces (measured, 96 g) and short at 29 inches (73.7 cm). It features durable closed-cell Evazote foam that has egg-crate contours on one side and is flat on the other. It offers some key advantages over the popular Therm-a-Rest Z-Lite pads.

What’s Good

• More durable than other egg-crate pads such as the Therm-a-Rest Z-Lite
• Very lightweight at 3.4 oz (96 g)
• Folds neatly into thirds
• Provides excellent comfort for the weight

What’s Not So Good

• Not as comfortable as an inflatable pad
• Not very compressible for packing
• A little short for some users

Specifications

Year/Model	2005 Gossamer Gear NightLight Sleeping Pad (Torso Length)
Material	Evazote foam
Weight	3.4 oz (96 g) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification 3.7 oz (105 g)
Shape	Rectangular
Dimensions	Thickness: 3/4 in (1.9 cm); Length: 29 in (73.7 cm); Width: 18 in (45.7 cm)
Folded Size	10 x 18 x 2 in (25 x 46 x 5 cm)
R-Value	2.27
MSRP	$15.95

Performance

The Gossamer Gear NightLight Sleeping Pad (Torso Length) has a short 29-inch length, which is just long enough for my 6 foot 2 inch frame, but can be a little short for other users. It provides 3/4 inch of padding but seems like more due to the inherent give of the egg-crate design. The NightLight does not compress as much as a Therm-a-Rest Z-Lite pad, making it more comfortable with the raised sections down so you don’t feel them when sleeping. Don’t expect the comfort of the NightLight to match an inflatable pad, but it is quite comfortable for a foam pad.

With an R-Value of 2.27, the NightLight has an insulation value that is roughly the same as a Therm-a-Rest Z-Lite (2.2) or ProLite 3 (2.3), but less than a RidgeRest (2.6) or Bozeman Mountain Works TorsoLite (3.5). By design, torso-length pads do not provide insulation for your head or legs. By using my clothing, pack, or natural materials, I hardly miss the extra length of a full 3/4-length pad.

The NightLight is slide resistant. Even when placed on silnylon floors and when used with slippery nylon sleeping bags, this pad hardly slides an inch. This is a big advantage over inflatable pads when using an ultralight tent with a silnylon floor.

The torso-length NightLight folds neatly into thirds because of pre-cut scoring. The folded width fits comfortably into a frameless backpack to make a virtual frame and also fits neatly into Gossamer Gear or Six Moon Designs packs with an outside pad sleeve. The torso-length NightLight is a nice fit even in a very small volume, narrow SuperUltraLight pack such as the Fanatic Fringe Alpine Trail; once inserted against the backpanel, open the two sides to form a triangular enclosure for pack contents. (The 3/4-length NightLight pad does not fold and must be rolled.)

After many nights sleeping on rock and other hard surfaces, the NightLight pad still looks like new. Unlike Z-Lite pads, which tend to lose their cushioning over time due to foam compression, the Gossamer Gear NightLight pad is just as thick and stiff as when it first arrived. It is a tough, durable pad.

At just 3.4 oz, the NightLight is a good balance between warmth, comfort, and light weight. At only $15.95 for a comfortable lightweight pad that is very durable, the Gossamer Gear NightLight Torso-Length pad is an outstanding value.

What’s Unique

The Nightlight sleeping pad is the lightest sleeping pad for the comfort it provides. It is durable, resistant to compression, and at $15.95 is an excellent value.

Recommendations for Improvement

The current NightLight design is excellent, but we’d like to see it a couple of inches longer so it’s easier to stay on it. It also isn’t very compressible for packing. If possible, it would be nice to see a design with contours on both sides that would be able to fold in an interlocking pattern like a Z-Lite.

Introduction

At 2.4 pounds per pair the Northern Lites Elite are the lightest snowshoes on the market. These shoes embody the lightweight backpacking principles of keeping it light, simple, and functional. Obviously we like their weight, but how do the Elites measure up to beefier, toothier, full-featured snowshoes we reviewed?

What’s Good

• Very lightweight, only 2.4 pounds per pair
• Very packable
• Aluminum alloy frame and crampons
• Strong, lightweight deck and binding
• Solidly built and very durable

What’s not so Good

• Crampons are minimal and not very sharp
• Webbing heel strap is too short for easy tightening
• Traction on steeper slopes and hard snow is not as good as other snowshoes we tested

Specifications

Manufacturer	Northern Lites
Year/Model	2005 Elite
Dimensions	8 in wide x 25 in long (20 cm x 64 cm)
Surface area	Measured surface area 185 in2 (1194 cm2), manufacturer specification 163.5 in2 (1055 cm2)
Frame	Aluminum alloy tubing, 5/8 in (16 mm) diameter, powder coated
Deck	Coolthane (polyurethane coated nylon mesh) which is claimed to be 250% tougher than Hypalon
Binding	TruTrak Binding System made of a heavier weight of Coolthane, three hook-and-hole front straps plus one webbing and buckle heel strap; pivot strap is 1.5 in (4 cm) wide Biothane (basically nylon seatbelt webbing in a water resistant, toughened polyurethane shell)
Crampons	Duraluminum toe and heel crampons, claimed to have greater strength and abrasion resistance than many titanium alloys
Weight	Measured weight 2.4 lb (1.1 kg) per pair; manufacturer specification 2.2 pounds (1.0 kg)
Load rating	Less than 175 pounds (79 kg)
MSRP	$199

Performance

The Northern Lites Elite, at 38.4 ounces per pair (Backpacking Light measurement), are by far the lightest snowshoes we reviewed. While most of the other snowshoes we reviewed are well-designed, feature rich, and unquestionably durable, the Elite seems to combine the same attributes in a much lighter package. The light weight of the Elite is very noticeable, akin to hiking in trail runners compared to conventional hiking boots. Those benefits are explained more fully in our upcoming snowshoe Review Summary. In this review I will focus on how the features and performance of the Elite compare to the other snowshoes we reviewed.

The deck on the Elite is Coolthane (polyurethane coated nylon mesh), which is claimed to be 250% tougher than Hypalon. It is also nice and light. In dozens of miles of testing, I was not able to damage this material.

Decking is attached to the frame using 19 toughened nylon clips. Each of these has a 1/4-inch protruding ridge on the underside, which act as perimeter cleats for extra traction.

The binding on the Elite is simple and functional compared to the more elaborate bindings on the high-end snowshoes we reviewed. The Elite binding is made of a heavier weight of the Coolthane decking material that is riveted directly to a flexible Biothane pivot strap (see specifications for a description of these materials). There are three hook-and-hole straps across the toe area, plus a webbing heel strap with a ladder-lock buckle. This type of binding is similar to that found on the MSR snowshoes, and has been proven over time to be durable and reliable. For my size 11.5 boots, I found that the heel strap was too short to provide a good handle for tightening, especially with gloved hands. I would personally prefer another hook-and-hole strap around the heel rather than the webbing strap because it is easier to tighten and loosen.

The crampons are a hardened aluminum alloy with serrated edges that are cut at about a 45 degree angle. The toe crampon is attached to the pivot strap, and the heel crampon is attached to the decking below the heel plate. Each crampon has a plastic “de-icing pad” on it They resisted icing to a large extent, but still iced up in contrasting sun-snow/shade-snow conditions.

In climbing tests, I found the Elites have adequate uphill traction under most snow conditions. Because of the blunt angle of the teeth, the crampons do not perform especially well on steep slopes and on hard icy snow. Other shoes we tested that had longer, thinner, sharper stainless steel or titanium teeth performed much better in the same snow conditions. However, the aluminum alloy crampons held up well, showing little wear after four months of testing.

For downhill walking on firm snow, I found the Elite’s traction to be a little less than the toothy Atlas 10-Series, Tubbs Elevation, and MSR Lightning Ascent with sliding occurring at about 30 degrees. On soft snow, gravity took over at a steeper slope angle, generally around 35 to 40 degrees, resulting in a controlled slide.

On sidehills, the Elite’s performance was average. Lacking lateral crampons like the MSR Lightening Ascent and Atlas S-10, they broke loose and slid sideways more easily.

In running tests the Elites were a standout because of their balance and light weight. The reduced effort was very noticeable. The pivot strap has a medium torsional stiffness, which returned the snowshoes back to a favorable angle without slapping the bottoms of my boots. If I were to enter a local snowshoe race, these are the snowshoes I would want on my feet.

The Northern Lites Elite snowshoes were also the most packable shoes we tested. The bindings lay flat, making the shoes easy to strap to a backpack, and the extra weight was much less noticeable than other snowshoes weighing nearly twice as much.

Overall the Northern Lites Elite came close to the manufacturer’s claim of “combining ultra-light weight with incredible performance and durability.” They provided adequate (but not exceptional) traction under most snow conditions, but lose their grip and slide on steeper hills and sidehills more readily than toothier snowshoes we reviewed.

What’s Unique

Presently the Northern Lites Elite (and other Northern Lites models) are the only truly ultralight snowshoes on the market. They are durable and perform well in a variety of snow conditions and terrains.

Recommendations for Improvement

Although the aluminum alloy crampons seem to be fairly durable, they are not particularly sharp or long. Sharper teeth on the aluminum alloy crampons, or switching to sharp titanium crampons, would improve traction in harder snow and icy conditions. Longer teeth would improve traction in soft snow or on steeper slopes.

Introduction

Crescent Moon Gold Series 9 snowshoes are designed for lightweight, all-around performance. Their dramatically tapered shape stands out among a sea of bean-shaped and back-tapered shoes typifying the market. Crescent Moon also adds a toe cleat and cam locking heel strap to their bindings to improve traction and better secure the foot. The merits of these design innovations for walking in the flats are undeniable, but how well does this snowshoe perform in deeper snow and on steeper slopes?

What’s Good

• Radically tapered shape allows easy walking without tripping over the leading shoe
• Toe box binding facilitates precise foot placement
• Toe cleat provides excellent climbing traction on steep slopes
• Durable materials and stiff frame

What’s Not So Good

• Too heavy – the durability and binding design place the Gold 9s among our heaviest snowshoes tested
• Pop rivets look crude (though they worked flawlessly during testing)

Specifications

Manufacturer	Crescent Moon
Year/Model	2004-2005 Gold Series 9
Dimensions	8 in wide x 27 in long (20 cm x 69 cm)
Surface area	169 in2 (1090 cm2)
Frame	TIG-welded 6063 aluminum alloy tubing, 3/4 in (19 mm) diameter, powder coated
Deck	TGS, a polyester scrim core coated in a blend of PVC and neoprene able to withstand -70 °F temperatures, and more abrasion and tear resistant than Hypalon. 05-06 model will use DuPont Surlyn for the upturned front section
Binding	Foot-glove binding with two toe area straps and one ratcheting heel strap (like those found on high end ski boots)
Crampons	Stainless steel at toe, ball, and heel of the foot
Weight	Measured weight 4.3 lb (1.9 kg) per pair; manufacturer specification 3.9 pounds (1.8 kg)
Load rating	Less than 190 pounds (86 kg)
MSRP	$239

Performance

What really sets the Gold Series 9 apart from other brands of snowshoes is Crescent Moon’s radically tapered frame. Crescent Moon creates their frames from a single 0.75 inch diameter piece of tubular 6063 aluminum, TIG welded at the tail tip. The frame is extremely stiff, more so than riveted designs. They finish the Gold Series 9 frame with a thick powder coat (red in the case of our review sample). The finish looks great, is extremely durable, and sheds snow very well.

The Gold Series 9s were some of the most maneuverable full-sized shoes we tested. The radically tapered shape concentrates most of the snowshoes’ weight near the foot, greatly reducing the swing weight, and allows a more natural walking gait. It is difficult to trip over your other foot with this design, even intentionally. The Crescent Moon Gold Series 9s maneuver like a much smaller, lighter snowshoe.

Crescent Moon’s black TGS (The Good Stuff) decking has a polyester scrim core coated in a blend of PVC and neoprene. This material is claimed to withstand abrasion and tears better than Hypalon, and is tested to be cold tolerant down to -70 °F. In use, I found the material at least as durable as Hypalon. I abused the material on several late season hikes, where snow melt exposed sections of rock and debris, with little damage to the material. The latest Gold Series snowshoes are decked with DuPont’s Surlyn material at the front of the shoe to reduce weight. Surlyn is used to cover golf balls and coat snow plow blades. The material is tough and cold tolerant, and survived our tests of the Crescent Moon Gold Series 12 snowshoes (which use Surlyn for the entire deck).

The decking is held onto the frame with 16 rivets. The rivet work looks rather crude, particularly those attaching the crampons. It looks like Crescent Moon uses rivets that are too long for the application, and crushes them down to secure the decking/crampons together. Concerned this might be a weak point, I attempted to physically remove the crampons with pliers (since snowshoeing hard didn’t seem to have any affect on them). My concern for the rivets turned out to be unfounded; they are plenty secure to handle very rigorous treatment.

The bindings are anatomically designed for either a right or left foot. They are very comfortable and adjust to a variety of foot sizes – they adjusted to fit my wife’s size 6 and daughter’s size 1, as well as my own size men’s 10). The binding wraps over the front of your boot creating a toe box to ensure guess-free, repeatable foot placement and to prevent “heel creep.” Snowshoes without a toe box can allow the foot to slip forward when snowshoeing downhill.

The foot is secured in the binding with three straps. Two run over the toe area and are secured with non-ratcheting cam-lock buckles located on the outside of the foot. The heel strap is secured by a ratcheting cam-lock buckle. There is no nylon webbing on these shoes to stretch with wetting or ice up in the cold. Crescent Moon uses Hypalon for all binding straps, which is resistant to abrasion and UV, and remains supple over a wide range of temperatures. The culmination of these design elements makes for a very secure and comfortable binding. The ratcheting heel strap, in particular, really makes the fit secure. You can adjust to fit different shoe sizes, or dial in just the right fit with ease.

Compared to other tubular frame snowshoes, the Crescent Moon Gold Series 9 snowshoes are competitively outfitted for traction with three sets of stainless steel crampons. All three sets have well designed teeth for traction – sharp enough for ice and long enough for powder. The standout is their addition of a toe crampon. I found the toe crampon very effective on steep icy climbs. Snowshoes lacking the toe crampon can cause you to change your walking style to concentrate weight onto the ball of your foot (where the traction is). With the added toe crampon, I could climb steep slopes more naturally, by rolling from the ball of my foot to the toe as I completed a step. The traction is better than average compared to other tubular framed shoes.

The Gold Series 9 uses a pivot strap that lifts the back of the shoes when hiking or stepping over obstacles. This design requires you to lift nearly the entire snowshoe with every step, but makes it easier to negotiate rougher terrain.

The Gold Series 9s are great climbers in firm snow, performing a little better than average thanks to the toe crampon (slipping at around 35 degrees). The narrower back section improves straight-down descents as the tail tends to sink into the snow better, keeping the foot level.

The 9s are average performers on side hills. The lack of lateral crampons makes it difficult to maintain traction unless the snow is soft enough to allow the snowshoe to sink in and level out. The tapered shape accentuates the performance problems in harder snow. The tail end of the frame does not bite into harder side slopes as well as the front, and can slip downhill in those conditions.

Crescent Moon clearly has some design innovations that improve the performance of their snowshoes. The downside is the weight these innovations add. The Gold Series 9s tipped our scales at 4.3 pounds. While other similarly sized shoes on the market are heavier, Crescent Moon should look into ways to reduce the weight to be more competitive with lighter weight shoes.

What’s Unique

The radically tapered design allows for a natural walking gait and the toe crampon adds a great deal of climbing traction, particularly on steep hard pack.

Recommendations for Improvement

Get the weight down. The maneuverability and binding fit are excellent, and the traction is very good for a tubular snowshoe. But at 4.3 pounds, the Crescent Moon Gold Series 9 snowshoes could be lightened considerably using lighter materials in the frame and binding, without sacrificing durability or performance.

Introduction

I was very impressed with the elegant, simple design and user friendliness of this high-end snowshoe. Its step-in binding, larger surface area, and long toothy crampons make it a good performer in most situations. But in spite of their simplicity, the Tubbs Elevation snowshoes are not lightweight.

What’s Good

• Step-in binding positions and secures feet
• Easy on/off
• Very smooth and durable pivot system
• Anodized 7075-T7 aluminum alloy frame is strong and lightweight
• More surface area and floatation than average for a 25-inch snowshoe
• Stainless steel crampons with long jagged teeth
• Cleverly designed, solidly built, and very durable

What’s not so Good

• Heavy
• Lacks a pivot stop to limit rotation

Specifications

Manufacturer	Tubbs Snowshoes
Year/Model	2004-05 Elevation 25
Dimensions	8 in wide x 25 in long (20 cm x 64 cm)
Surface area	Measured surface area 205 in2 (1323 cm2), manufacturer specification 188 in2 (1213 cm2)
Frame	7075-T7 series aluminum alloy tubing, 5/8 in (16 mm) diameter
Deck	ArcTec (a proprietary plastic material)
Binding	Nexus step-in binding; left and right foot specific
Crampons	Stainless steel with jagged teeth, toe and heel
Weight	Measured weight 4.19 lb (1.9 kg); manufacturer specification 3.93 pounds (1.78 kg)
Load rating	120 to 200 pounds (54 to 91 kg)
MSRP	$249

Performance

The first thing I noticed on the Tubbs Elevation is the Nexus step-in binding, which is left and right foot specific. It works like a clamshell; you simply put your foot in the gap, connect a clip on the top, and pull one webbing strap to secure it. The binding holds the adjustment. I did not have any problems with the top webbing strap icing up and interfering with tightening or loosening. The heel strap is a tried and true hook-and-hole type. The binding effectively secured my feet to the snowshoe with uniform pressure, and kept my feet aligned for tracking in a variety of conditions. Of all the snowshoes we reviewed, the Nexus binding on the Elevation is the easiest to attach and release. It is also remarkably simple and lightweight. One nitpick is that the heel strap lacked enough holes to accommodate smaller boots, but there is a women’s model available with smaller bindings.

The next thing I noticed is the frame and decking. The frame is 7075 T7 aluminum alloy (the best available), which enables a smaller tubing diameter to save weight. Its anodized finish is very durable. The ArcTec deck material is a super strong and pliable plastic that seems indestructible. It does not have an imbedded fabric and is claimed to be puncture and abrasion resistant to -40 °F. The deck on these snowshoes is very tight and looks great, but it is also thicker and heavier than the other snowshoes we tested, adding to the weight.

The Elevation has stainless steel toe and heel crampons with long jagged teeth. They enabled me to climb a slope so steep that I was holding on with my hands so I didn’t fall over backwards. Walking downslope, the long crampons held on about a 40 degree slope (on firm snow), then as I leaned back (and unweighted the front crampons), the rear crampon was not enough to hold on and gravity took over sending me into a controlled slide on the smooth tails. In powdery snow conditions, the Elevations were great fun for “plunging” (sliding) down steep slopes. Side slope stability was average because the Elevation lacks any specific lateral crampons like the Atlas 10-Series or MSR Lightning Ascent.

The Elevation has a hinge type pivot system that will turn 360 degrees. There is no stop on it, so if you lift your foot high the snowshoe will point straight up. Basically, the system depends on your shuffling the snowshoes forward and dragging the tails. It provides good stability and freedom, but it requires more energy and makes it a little harder to step over logs, climb steep icy slopes where you need to kick in the front crampons, and back up in tight places.

With its elegant and simplistic design, the Tubbs Elevation seems like it should be lighter than it is. The extra weight comes from the steel hinge pivot mechanism, steel crampons, and deck material. All are unquestionably durable, but contribute significantly to weight.

What’s Unique

The Elevation is elegant in its design simplicity and user friendliness, and is built to last. In particular the Nexus binding is delightfully simple, yet it effectively positions and clamps your foot in place and tracks well. Also the toe pivot design is very strong and provides free movement.

Recommendations for Improvement

There’s a lot to like about the Tubbs Elevation, I only wish they were lighter. How about providing a lightweight version using the same basic design?

I would also like to see a stop added to the hinge pivot system to limit its rotation. That would make the shoes more maneuverable while retaining their excellent stability.

Introduction

The Virga 2 is an upgrade of the classic Tarptent Virga one-person single wall tent. It’s grown a little in size and weight, and has morphed into a 1+ person shelter. The floored version still comes in under 2 pounds and provides full weather and bug protection, which is pretty darn good. There are a few pros and cons to the design changes – is the Virga 2 resoundingly better than the classic Tarptent Virga, or has something been lost?

What’s Good

• Full weather and bug protection
• 1+ person shelter for less than 2 pounds
• Pitches in less than 2 minutes with only four stakes
• More pitching options for the front
• Sewn-in floor has bathtub sides
• More headroom and elbow room than the previous version
• Lightweight aluminum poles and titanium stakes

What’s Not So Good

• Front strut needs to be removed to stuff the tent
• Front vent is not very functional
• Velcro closure on the front beak is cumbersome

Specifications

Year/Model	2005 Tarptent Virga 2
Style	1+ person three-season single-wall shelter with optional sewn-in floor
Fabrics	1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2) silicone impregnated ripstop nylon, 1 oz/yd2 (34 g/m2) no-see-um netting
Pole Material	Easton 7075 aluminum, 5/16 inch (8 mm) diameter
Weight, Full Package (as supplied by manufacturer with all included items)	1 lb 12.2 oz (799 kg) Shelter 23.3 oz (661 g), rear pole 2.7 oz (77 g), 4 stakes 1.6 oz (45 g), stuff sacks 0.6 oz (17 g) measured weight. Manufacturer’s specification 1 lb 14 oz (850 kg). Front poles are optional
Weight, Manufacturer Minimum (includes minimum number of items needed to erect tent)	1 lb 11.6 oz (782 kg) measured weight (assumes using a trekking pole for the front tent pole)
Weight, Backpacking Light Minimum (same as Manufacturer Minimum but with 0.25 oz Ti stakes and 0.004 oz/ft Spectra guylines)	1 lb 10.8 oz (760 kg) measured weight (assumes using a trekking pole for the front tent pole)
Area	33 ft2 (3.1 m2), sewn in floor area is 23 ft2 (2.1 m2)
Area to Weight Ratio	1.23 ft2/oz
Dimensions	Length 94 in (239 cm), front width 60 in (152 cm), rear width 42 in (107 cm), front height 45 in (114 cm), rear height 17.5 in (45 cm); sewn-in floor measures 46/32 in wide by 86 in long (117/81 x 218 cm)
MSRP	$205 with optional sewn-in floor. Floorless model is $170, front poles are $5 for one or $9 for two

Performance

The new Virga 2 is the little brother of the Squall 2, which won a 2005 Backpacking Light Lightitude Award. The Virga 2 has grown up a little from the previous version, the Virga. The biggest change is the flattened top with two ridge seams and an 18-inch wide aluminum front strut, which combine to provide more headroom and interior space. Notable dimension increases are: headroom 3 inches, front width 6 inches, and rear width 10 inches. Other changes include the addition of bathtub sides to the sewn-in floor option, a 6-inch extension of the floor that zips to the mesh entry door, two inside storage pockets, and an extended front beak that has a Velcro closure in the center.

As the size increases, so does the weight. Compared to its predecessor Tarptent Virga similarly equipped with sewn-in floor and one front pole, the Virga 2 weighs about 4 ounces more. That’s a significant weight increase.

With the upgrades and dimension changes, it’s no surprise that the Virga 2 is now rated as a 1+ person tent. So how roomy is it? It depends a lot on one’s body size and need for space, but I personally (6’ tall, 170 pounds) found it to be luxurious for one person and adequate for two people who like to snuggle. Note that the Squall 2 weighs only 4 ounces more and is 18 inches wider in the front, so it may make more sense to get the Squall 2 if you are going to use it as both a one-person and two-person shelter.

The Virga 2 sets up in less than 2 minutes, which is just as fast as the classic Virga. The process is to insert the rear pole, stake the rear, insert a pole in the center grommet at the front, stake the front, and then stake the two front corners. Four hefty 7-inch titanium stakes are provided. The guylines are 2-mm reflective spectra core cord equivalent to Kelty Triptease Lightline. There are two optional side tieouts; I recommend that you use them to increase interior volume and wind stability. Guylines and stakes are not provided for the sides, so you will need to add them. Front poles are now optional because many people use trekking poles instead, which work perfectly for the front of the Tarptent, and save 2 ounces per pole.

I took the Tarptent Virga 2 on seven backpacking trips, sleeping in it by myself on three trips and sharing it with my wife on four trips. The Tarptent sheltered us from numerous showers, and one all-night deluge. Some people don’t bother to seam seal the ridgeline and front seams, but I feel it’s essential. The process it to thin one part DuPont Silicone II or McNett SilNet with three parts mineral spirits (so it’s the consistency of nail polish), then brush it over the seams. We found the Virga 2 to be storm worthy and wind-resistant, even during 13 hours of continuous rain.

Condensation is a fact of life with single wall tents. The moisture from your breathing inside the tent condenses on the inside of the tent. Since you can’t avoid condensation, the best approach is to manage it by venting the tent as much as the bugs and weather will allow. When there is condensation on the inside of the tent, the trick is to avoid brushing against the inside walls. (Tip: wipe the inside of the tent with a bandana or pack towel to keep the moisture from transferring onto your clothing.) I have packed up a thoroughly wet Tarptent on many occasions and stuffed it into an outside pocket on my pack. When I set it up the following evening it dries out in a matter of minutes.

The upgrades to the new Virga 2 also add some complexity. While the increased headroom is nice, the front strut makes it difficult to stuff the tent. If you’re a stuffer, it’s best to remove the front strut and carry it with the rear pole, which means that you have to re-insert it the next time you set up the tent. If you’re a tent roller, you can leave the strut in.

The split front beak with its Velcro closure is also the source of some consternation. It’s a tedious two-handed job to line up the Velcro to close the beak, especially when there’s impending rain at night and you’re inside the tent trying to do it. (Tip: it helps to loosen the front guyline to take the tension off the beak before you close it.) Also, the small vent at the top of the beak is funky and doesn’t provide much ventilation. After several months of testing the Virga 2, I feel that there’s room for improvement on the design of the front beak. With its wrap-around front beak that attaches to Velcro strips on one side, it just doesn’t have the simplicity and convenience of the classic Tarptent Virga and Squall.

The sewn-in floor is a very nice feature, and weighs about the same as a Tyvek groundsheet, but look at the next photo to see what you give up when you get the sewn-in floor. With a floorless Tarptent, you can pull one corner stake and flip that side over the top, giving you lots of room to sit in your tent and cook. That’s a pretty convenient arrangement! The new Virga 2 without the sewn-in floor allows this too, but not as easily as the original floorless Virga and Squall. Maybe Henry will consider bringing back the classic Tarptent Virga and Squall for those who still want it simple and light.

What’s Unique

For only 28.2 ounces with the optional floor (22.2 ounces without), the Tarptent Virga 2 provides full weather and bug protection for one person, or two people who get along well, or one person and canine friend.

Recommendations for Improvement

Although most of the upgrades to the Virga 2 are definite improvements, the front vent and beak design still need some work. One possibility is eliminating the vent and going back to the extended beak used on the classic Virga, which had a Velcro attachment on one side. Another possibility is extending the beak even more so it can be staked to the ground (creating a vestibule), adding a vent to the top of the vestibule, and adding a zippered entrance. And finally, how about continuing to offer the classic Virga for those who just want light and simple?

Introduction

Dion snowshoes are available in pre-assembled models or as a modular system where you choose the frame, binding, and cleat that you want. So you can easily build your own system and have extra components to interchange in the field for different snow conditions. I tested the Model 168 with the basic binding and Standard Flex Cleat.

What’s Good

• Modular system lets you select frame, binding, and cleat
• Aircraft aluminum alloy frame
• 7075 aluminum alloy crampons are very durable
• Teflon-coated crampons resist icing
• Strong, lightweight deck and harness material
• Solidly built and very durable

What’s not so Good

• Webbing straps on basic binding are cumbersome to tighten and loosen
• Heel strap on size large basic binding is too short for tightening, but an extra long stap is available
• Tails flip snow onto your backside

Specifications

Manufacturer	Dion Snowshoes
Year/Model	2004-05 Model 168 Rec/Fitness
Dimensions	8 in wide x 25 in long (20 cm x 64 cm)
Surface area	Measured surface area 173 in2 (1116 cm2), manufacturer specification 168 in2 (1084 cm2)
Frame	Aircraft aluminum alloy tubing, 3/4 in (2 cm) diameter, powder coated
Deck	Durable, abrasion resistant material
Binding	Durable, abrasion resistant material; two bindings available (basic and quick-fit) in different sizes (basic binding tested in size large)
Crampons	7075 aluminum alloy with Teflon impregnated hardcoat coating; two cleats available (Standard Flex Cleat, Deep Flex Cleat)
Weight	Measured weight 3.3 lb (1.5 kg) per pair; manufacturer specification 3.3 lb (1.5 kg)
Load rating	Up to 200 pounds (91 kg)
MSRP	$197

Performance

Dion snowshoes are available in several different models, or you can build your own system by choosing the frame, binding, and cleat (front crampon) that you want. Bindings are available in different sizes. The binding and cleat (front crampon) are attached to the underside of a flexible pivot strap using two locking screws, so the whole assembly is easy to take apart and interchange components. This allows you to tailor the snowshoes to the person and activity, or change components in the field to adapt to changing snow conditions, potentially eliminating the need for a second or third pair of snowshoes. You can also upgrade to new components as they become available. Dion currently offers five frames, two bindings, and two cleats that are all interchangeable.

The basic binding uses two 1-inch wide webbing straps over the toe area and instep and one around the heel. The webbing is doubled through ladder-lock buckles so it works like a pulley system to tighten the straps. This system basically works fine, but I found it cumbersome for both tightening and loosening, and difficult to do with gloves on. I also had some problems with the heel strap loosening up. The nylon webbing stretches when wet, and required some re-tightening on the trail. It also freezes up in cold weather, making the bindings more difficult to loosen at the end of the day. . The heel strap on the size large binding was too short for tightening around my size 11.5 boots, although it is claimed to fit boots up to size 14. Based on my experience, I would recommend looking into the Dion Quick-Fit binding, which is claimed to be easy on/off and easily adjusted.

The Standard Flex Cleat on the snowshoes tested has an extra toe crampon attached with a flexible band, so it gets a better bite when you pivot your foot and push off. This feature improves the Model 168’s climbing and running abilities, but the crampons are short (1 inch or less) on the Standard Flex Cleat, making this configuration more suited for tracking or climbing on firm snow than in soft snow. A Deep Flex Cleat with longer teeth is now available that should provide good performance in soft snow. The crampons on the tested snowshoes are 7075 aluminum alloy and are very sharp and durable. All of the crampons are Teflon-coated to minimize icing.

I used the Dion 168’s weekly over a four-month period in all types of snow conditions. I found them to give a solid performance on most snow conditions, although they generally did better on firm snow compared to soft snow. They cruised along fine on gentle terrain and climbed steep hills well on firmer snow, but had noticeably less floatation and traction on soft snow, and broke loose more readily on steep downhills and sidehills. Dion snowshoes have 39% of their surface area in the curved front section (look for our measurements and graph in the upcoming review summary), leaving less surface area (61%) for flotation in the rear flat section. This issue can be overcome to a large extent by choosing a longer frame and the Dion Deep Flex Cleat to get more floatation and bite in soft snow. However, with only a minimal heel crampon these longer snowshoes are less stable on sidehills.

One annoyance I found with the Dion snowshoes is the tails flip snow onto your backside when you lift them up (the stiffer pivot strap slaps the snowshoe against the bottom of your heel, flipping snow up). The flipping was especially noticeable in my running test. The flexible toe crampons also tended to catch in crusty snow as I lifted them up, akin to stubbing my toe.

Overall, the Dion Model 168 tested is more at home on firm snow than on soft snow (although a Dion snowshoe can be customized with a longer frame and crampons for soft snow conditions). It has a stiffer pivot strap, which causes the tails to snap back quickly, which flips snow on your backside in soft snow conditions. However, that is not a problem on firm snow, and is a good feature for fitness running and hill climbing.

What’s Unique

The Dion line of snowshoes is modular, so you can choose your frame, binding, and cleat. This allows you to customize them for the person, activity, and snow conditions, which is especially nice if you are a fitness runner or racer. The Flex Cleat is also a nice feature for racing because it provides extra bite when you pivot your foot forward and push off.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Model 168, at 3.3 pounds, is lighter than several of the snowshoes we tested, but it is not lightweight. I would like to see at least one model in the Dion lineup that is designed for lightweight snowshoeing.

Also, I found the nylon webbing straps on the binding tested to be “old technology,” and would like to see straps and a tightening system that are more user friendly.

Introduction

The Jetboil integrated canister stove represents a major technological advance, giving Jetboil a firm foothold in the canister stove market. Now Jetboil is introducing accessories that make the Jetboil Personal Cooking System (PCS) even more versatile. For Jetboil users who take their camp coffee seriously, the new Jetboil French Press delivers freshly brewed java with a nominal increase in carry weight. And for group cooking, the new Jetboil Companion Cup provides a strategy to save a little weight by letting one burner do double (or triple) duty. I evaluated the logistics and efficacy of these new gadgets, and report my findings in this review.

What’s Good

• French Press is lightweight and makes great fresh-brewed coffee
• Companion Cup saves time and weight by sharing a burner

What’s Not So Good

• Cup readily boils over (making a mess) if filled with over 2 cups of liquid
• Coffee grounds are messy to clean up
• Proper disposal of coffee grounds in the backcountry requires a special effort

Specifications

	Jetboil French Press	Jetboil Companion Cup
Model year	2005	2005
Weight oz (g)	Lid 1.2 (35) Press 0.8 (22) Total 2.0 (58)	Lid 1.1 (30) Cup 6.7 (191) Measuring/drinking cup 1.0 (27) Total 8.8 (248)
MSRP	$19.95	$29.95

Performance

In our first look and review of the Jetboil Personal Cooking System we were delighted with its integrated design, wind resistance, and low fuel consumption. I found the Jetboil French Press to be lightweight, increasing the carry weight only 0.8 ounces if you substitute the press’ special cap for the original one. Basically the process is: boil water, turn off stove, add coffee, wait a few minutes, push the press down, enjoy your freshly-brewed coffee. It’s very tempting to fill the Jetboil cup above the 2-cup fill mark in order to brew a bigger batch of coffee. If you do, be advised that it will readily boil over, so you have to watch it carefully. (Note: overheating the fuel canister with boiling liquid is a potentially dangerous situation!) With repeated use I found that the French Press loosened up some, resulting in some coffee grounds in the bottom of my cup.

I know it is hard to tell this to a coffee fanatic, but you pay a price for that special cup of joe. Cleaning up the Press and Cup requires some extra effort, and don’t you dare rinse it out in a nearby stream or lake! The proper Leave No Trace technique is to dig a 4-6 inch deep hole and bury the grounds, or pack them out.

With a Companion Cup or two, cooking is a continuous process with one burner, which saves time and the weight of one burner (6.1 ounces). I found it convenient and relaxing to share a beverage with my spouse (using the cup that attaches to the bottom of the stove), while our dinner or breakfast cooked in the Companion Cup. We use the “boil and set” cooking method, where we boil water (usually about 2-3 cups), add our dehydrated food, bring it back to boiling (watching carefully so it doesn’t spill over), then turn off the stove and let it set for 10 minutes. This system works great with the Jetboil. The cup barely has enough capacity to hold dinner for two, but plenty of capacity for one. This approach utilizes the full capacity of the Jetboil cup without a spillover.

The Jetboil burner (along with a 4-ounce fuel canister) can be stowed in one cup, while the French Press can be stowed in the Companion Cup. A 4-ounce fuel canister fits inside the Jetboil cup, but the larger 8-ounce canister does not. The plastic measuring/drinking cup is difficult to remove from the bottom of the Jetboil pot, so you can save a little grief and weight (1 ounce) by leaving it at home if it is not needed.

Overall, the Companion Cup strategy works. You can share coffee from the Jetboil cup while your oatmeal is cooking in a Companion Cup. Then you can brew another cup of joe when the oatmeal comes off, etc.

Using a Companion Cup with the Jetboil PCS lets you easily cook for two or more people and reduces the weight per person to 10.8 ounces. The extra weight of the French Press (0.8 ounces) is also more justified when it is used for two or more people.

What’s Unique

First, accolades to Jetboil for developing the first integrated canister fuel cooking system. The Jetboil PCS raises the bar for wind resistance and fuel efficiency that traditional canister fuel burners cannot match. These new accessories help expand the utility of the Jetboil PCS.

Recommendations for Improvement

While we praise the Jetboil’s integration, wind resistance, and fuel efficiency, we also note that the system is heavy at 14.9 ounces, compared to a conventional burner and cook pot. One of the major limitations of the Jetboil PCS is its 1-pint safe fill capacity, which basically makes it a solo cooking system. Why not offer another Companion Cup with twice the capacity, so the Jetboil can cook for either one or two people? That would really increase its utility – take the smaller cup to cook for one, take the larger cup (or both) to cook for two, or take multiple larger cups to cook for a group.

Introduction

The Crescent Moon Gold Series 12 snowshoes are svelte trail runners with a radically tapered frame that allow a natural running gait. The 12’s have a smaller diameter tubing (5/8 inch) frame, lightweight bindings, aluminum alloy crampons, and clear Surlyn decking to lighten the weight (3.2 pounds per pair). While there are lighter weight offerings, performance features abound on the Gold Series 12. The question is, do the added features offset the weight?

What’s Good

• The wide front and narrow tails concentrate weight close to the foot, yielding a lighter feel than snowshoes of similar weight
• Tapered shape allows a very natural running gait and makes it difficult to trip over one’s feet
• Toe cleat makes it possible to sprint with excellent traction through a full foot roll
• TIG welded aluminum frame is very stiff
• Binding is light and flexible, and conforms well to lightweight running shoes

What’s Not So Good

• Surlyn decking material is not as abrasion resistant as Hypalon
• Aluminum crampons wear faster than steel or titanium
• Rough looking pop rivet work on crampons (though worked flawlessly during testing)

Specifications

Manufacturer	Crescent Moon
Year/Model	2004-2005 Gold Series 12
Dimensions	8 in wide x 24 in long (20 cm x 61 cm)
Surface area	154 in2 (994 cm2)
Frame	TIG welded 6063 aluminum alloy tubing, 5/8 in (16 mm) diameter, powder coated in gold metal flake
Deck	Translucent Surlyn (tested), Surlyn combined with TGS in 05-06 model
Binding	Foot-glove binding with two front straps and one heel strap, micro-adjustable with cam-lock buckles
Crampons	1/8 in (3.2 mm) thick hardened aluminum at toe, ball, and heel of the foot
Weight	Measured weight 3.2 lb (1.4 kg) per pair; manufacturer specification 2.9 lb (1.3 kg)
Load rating	Not rated
MSRP	$199

Performance

I have not once tripped myself while wearing the Crescent Moon Gold Series 12 snowshoes. The narrow tail of these radically tapered frames allow a near natural running gait. The Gold Series 12s are crafted from a single piece of 5/8 inch tubular 6063 aluminum, TIG welded at the point in the back. The frames are finished with a very thick and durable powder coat.

Crescent Moon will use a combination of TGS (The Good Stuff) and Surlyn in their Gold Series 12 for the 2005-2006 winter season (the review sample from the 2004-2005 season used Surlyn throughout). TGS decking, used for the back half of the new Gold Series 12 has a polyester scrim core coated in a blend of PVC and neoprene. TGS is claimed to withstand abrasion and tears better than Hypalon and is flexible down to minus 70 °F. The TGS decking I tested while reviewing Crescent Moon’s Gold Series 9 performed flawlessly during late season hikes that included stretches of bare rock and ground.

The Gold Series 12 tested were decked entirely with Surlyn material, which in the future will only be used for the transparent front deck. DuPont Surlyn seems an ideal material for racing snowshoes. It is a tough material in cold environments, not as abrasion resistant as Hypalon, but LIGHTER. The Surlyn decking shows more wear and tear after a season of use than the TGS decking under similar treatment. From a durability point of view, the switch to half TGS, half Surlyn decking might make sense. However, I would prefer Crescent Moon keep the full Surlyn decking on the Gold Series 12 to focus on performance rather than durability on these competitive race shoes.

Sixteen rivets hold the decking onto the frame. Some of the rivet work looks crude, but this is only a cosmetic concern. The decking and binding rivets held tight through fairly abusive treatment, like late season running over patches of bare ground.

The Gold Series 12s are complimented with great anatomical bindings. The bindings are very light and conform well to lightweight running shoes. They also adjust to fit insulated pack boots if you prefer them. The binding wraps over the front of your shoes to create a toe box that prevents your feet from slipping forward and ensure repeatable foot placement. Three cam-lock buckles allow incremental adjustment to dial in the fit; two over the top of your shoe and one around the heel. Crescent Moon uses Hypalon for the binding straps for its non-absorbent, cold tolerant, and durability properties.

Three sets of 1/8 inch thick aluminum alloy crampons provide traction on the Gold Series 12. While the back two crampons are well designed for hard pack or powder, the standout is the front toe crampons. These allow you to dig in at the end of your running stride and kick off with traction. The traction would be very good without the toe cleat. With it, the traction is outstanding for a running snowshoe. The aluminum used for the crampons is softer than most types of rock, and as such tends to wear quickly.

The Crescent Moon Gold Series 12 snowshoes use a strap style pivot that does not allow the snowshoes to drag with each step, an important feature for any running snowshoe. This style of strap also makes negotiating rough terrain easier. The downside to this is the amount of snow these snowshoes throw over one’s backside. In deeper, softer snow, the Gold Series 12s warrant the use of waterproof or highly water resistant shell pants; not always the best thing to wear on a highly aerobic run.

Obviously, the smaller surface area limits these snowshoes to harder snow. These are a poor choice for breaking trail in soft powder, but do well hiking backcountry ski trails on firmer snow. The 12s are great climbers; the toe cleat really adds a lot to climbing traction. Descents can be good too if conditions are right. The very narrow back section causes the back of the snowshoes to sink more into the snow on descents, leveling out the foot.

The Gold Series 12s are average performers on side-hills. They are narrow enough in the back that the heel crampon really digs in without the frame getting in the way. However, in hard snow the width at the front can make it difficult to walk with your feet level and straight. Slightly soft snow remedies the problem by allowing the front of the snowshoes to dig into the slope. If only we had that much control over our snow conditions.

What’s Unique

Designed for runners with a narrow running gait, the Gold Series 12 has a radically tapered shape and additional aluminum toe crampons to aid in climbs and sprints.

Recommendations for Improvement

There are lighter offerings in the running snowshoe market, and the Gold Series 12 could be more competitive at a lighter weight. To do this, and retain the great performance features, Crescent Moon might look into using a thinner frame material (like 7000 series aluminum). Other components such as the decking, aluminum crampons, and bindings have sacrificed long-term durability for lighter weight, so why not reduce the frame’s weight to match the durability of the other components? The current frame will almost certainly outlast all other components.

Thin titanium crampons would retain sharp points longer than aluminum in thin snow conditions. The weight difference would be negligible. Cost would be more. However, “titanium” is a familiar material to competitive racers, who are willing to pay more for that additional edge.

Introduction

The Tubbs Catalyst is marketed as a racing snowshoe. We were intrigued by its innovative design and lightweight materials, and tested it as a lightweight multi-purpose snowshoe.

What’s Good

• Solidly built and very durable
• Titanium crampons (all very sharp!)
• Anodized 7000 series aluminum frame
• Asymmetrical shape to minimize tripping
• Lightweight binding with fixed toe to fit running or cross training shoes
• Toe crampons provide a good grip for racing, and climb well too
• Perform very well on packed snow

What’s not so Good

• Heavier than expected for a racing snowshoe
• Not versatile enough for backcountry use

Specifications

Manufacturer	Tubbs Snowshoes
Year/Model	2004-05 Catalyst
Dimensions	8 in wide x 25 in long (20 cm x 64 cm)
Surface area	Measured surface area 158 in2 (1019 cm2), manufacturer specification 146 in2 (942 cm2)
Frame	7000 series aluminum alloy, 5/8 in (16 mm) diameter tubing
Deck	Proprietary ArcTec fabric and Hypalon
Binding	Adjustable toe yoke securely fits running/cross training shoes, two front straps plus one heel strap with quick release buckles
Crampons	Titanium, two independent toe crampons, two heel crampons
Weight	Measured weight 3.1 lb (1.4 kg); manufacturer specification 2.9 pounds (1.3 kg)
Load rating	All weights
MSRP	$249

Performance

I tested the Tubbs Catalyst snowshoes on numerous trips in the Southern Rockies to catch different snow conditions and terrains. My testing ran through the month of May on an unusually heavy snowpack. Mid winter testing was on all sorts of conditions, but late winter testing was on firm snow in the morning and mushy snow in the afternoon.

The Catalyst is designed for racing on packed snow conditions. The first feature that jumps out is their asymmetric shape, designed to accommodate a runner’s stride and minimize crossover, especially when fatigued. On the Catalyst, the snowshoes are left and right foot specific, not the bindings. The next feature that catches the eye is that the deck is attached to the bottom of the frame rather than the top. This design is again specific for packed snow, to improve gliding over the surface.

After four months of testing, I concluded that the Catalyst snowshoes are clearly in their “element” on packed trails, and do not perform particularly well in highly variable backcountry conditions. On soft snow they are laborious to use, lacking floatation and control. On late winter consolidated snow, they got along fine in the morning when the snow was firm, but in mushy afternoon snow ice balls developed under my heels to the extent that I could scarcely go 50 feet without having to stop and remove the clod.

The Catalyst bindings are specialized in that they have a toe yoke to position the foot over a pair of independent toe crampons to push off on while running. The bindings are made of numerous lightweight materials, are fairly easy to attach to boots or trail running shoes, align the feet well, and hold their adjustment. The bindings adjust well to fit different sized feet.

On uphills the Catalysts handled 45 degree slopes with little loss of traction (those toe crampons really grip). On downhills anything steeper then 30 degrees was a controlled slide because of unweighting of the toe crampons as the slope angle increased. The Catalysts have two smaller lateral crampons in the center of the shoe that are minimal in size but very sharp, providing average sidehill performance.

Articulation is controlled by a stiff pivot strap that provides a solid connection between boot and snowshoe. In my running tests the bindings enabled a solid grip and a steady stride with no toe or heel drag.

While I am impressed with the Catalyst’s high tech materials and design innovations, I feel that they are just too specialized for general backcountry use. They perform well on firm snow and climb surprisingly well, but they flounder in soft snow and do not readily handle diverse conditions.

What’s Unique

In the Catalyst, Tubbs really makes a strong effort to innovate. The binding positions and aligns the foot perfectly, and puts two crampons under each toe for extra bite when pushing off.

Recommendations for Improvement

It would be nice if Tubbs incorporated some of the features of the Catalyst into a really lightweight ascent shoe for backcountry skiers and snowboarders. A lightweight version of the Catalyst (the Alpinist?) adapted for climbing up to high alpine basins and ridges in soft and variable snow conditions could be just the ticket – snowshoe up, ski down.