Differences between msr lightning & lightning ascents

Josh- I’ve been using a pair of Lightning Ascents for several years now, and I think they’re just about the best thing since sliced bread. They’ve taken a huge beating, and they’re still very nice. I rarely use the elevator bar that sets the Lightning Ascents apart from the Lightnings, but the few times I did use it, it was very nice. The traction in general with these snowshoes is amazing, and the bindings are pretty easy to deal with as far as I’m concerned.

Over at Views From The Top they seem to get really bad reviews, which kind of surprises me, considering I’ve used my pair since 2005 without problems.

As far as I know, the only difference is the televator heel. You want this. If you are going into terrain where the televator heel is not useful, you probably don't need MSR lightnings to begin with.

I love my 25 Lighning Ascents for here in the PNW, where the Cascade Concrete is probably similar to the Seirra Cement.

Side hilling is not so great. Atlas has a much better sidehill and binding system, IMO. But I just love the traction and weight of the Lightning Ascents.

The difference between the MSR Lightning Ascent and Lightning is not just the televator heel lift but also the binding. On several winter scrambles last year and earlier this year with the Tacoma Mountaineers it was clear that both the Denali Ascent and Lightning Ascent had the edge over the high end Atlas shoes especially on side hills. The one possible caveat could be that the MSR owners were just more experienced.

I own 30" Atlas 'shoes and last year in the last hour of my Avy 1 course I slid over 50' down a steep sidehill I was traversing with them and re-injured my shoulder.

A month ago I posted here that I got a pair of 30" Lightning Ascent 'shoes B/C of their unsurpassed lateral traction due to their PERIMETER traction, not to mention their great forward traction. Trying the plain Lightning last year convinced me of that.

I got the ASCENT version because out west the approaches are far longer than back east and the heel lift helps keep calf muscle strain down.

The lightnings are a little lighter and cheaper. Are the heel supports really that heavy or are the bindings heaver also.

All your information is on the MSR website.

As has been said the diff is that the Ascent has the heel lifter for straight on climbing. It does help take strain off your calves and Achilles tendons.

Please note the "straight on" part. If your path is going to wind around you are just as well off, no, better off with the regular model.

Traversing in a lifted heel snowshoe is asking for trouble. It is much easier to fall when your heel is elevated while walking on a side slope.

I have Lightnings (regular) and love 'em. I also have EVO Ascents and like them too. Each has their place.

Raymond, what do you find is the difference between your MSR Lightning Ascents and Evo Ascents?

Under which conditions do you use each?

I've been with people using the Evo Ascents and the plastic makes an awful lot of noise, though I've heard the Evo Ascents are more durable and possibly better at sidehilling. I've not used either.

Hey EJ,

I have the regular Lightnings and the EVO Ascents.

The EVOs are noisy especially with the tails on.

I usually take the Lightnings as they have better flotation and have excellent traction and work everywhere for me. The EVOs I take when I know I am just on hard pack and have a lot of climbing.

Thanks Raymond, have the Lightnings ever needed a repair, and if so, what kind and in what situation did they break?

I have heard that MSR is great about standing by them and will ship parts and replacement snowshoes.

I'm not Raymond, but I'll say that my Lightning Ascents have never needed any kind of repair, even after mostly walking on rocky/icy trails, and falling into countless spruce traps.

FWIW, I've put thousands (literally) of pretty abusive miles on my Lightning Ascents (LA), and my Evo Ascents (EA). I've never had anything break. [Edit: I broke both pairs of MSRs in January 2010. The bindings broke on both pairs. MSR replaced the bindings free of charge.]

I used the LA for about 4 years while living in CA, and I loved them. When I moved back to New England 3 years ago, I bought the EA. I rarely use the LA anymore. The EA have more traction, and are particularly better on steep icy terrain…the kind of terrain where you normally might wear crampons. In New England, I love them, cause the winter terrain is generally mixed: mostly snow, plenty of ice, and a little rock thrown in here and there. The EA excel in this application, IMO.

I'll also note that I find the perimeter traction in the LA a little annoying when walking on narrow, packed trails…or on early/late season rocky, rutted snow. I tend to catch the inside rail on my pants/gaitors, and I don't like that.

For a repair kit, I carry two basic parts:
1) bolts and wingnuts (to replace any rivet blow-outs)
2) framing nails, pre-bent to about a 30 degree angle, and multi-tool with pliers. These are to replace the pins that hold the binding in place. I tested my ability to replace those pins, and it takes me a long time, even in the warmth of my home. I don't think I could do it reliably in the field. So I went with the nail system. I've never had to do this on my own shoes, but I have replaced a pin on a friend's Denali Ascent. Worked very well.