2013-2014 Atomic Automatic, 193cm

Joe Hanrahan

Boots / Bindings: Lange RS 130 / Atomic NR ffg 12

Mount Location: Factory Recommended Line

Test Locations: Alta Ski Area

Days Skied: 3

My initial thoughts of the 186 vs. 193 were exactly what one would anticipate when comparing the same ski in a longer length. I felt the 193 offered a bit more to stand on when opening up the throttle in chopped-up powder. They felt noticeably more stable to me when I straightened out my turns and let them run down the fall-line. However, they felt a little planky when I tried to squirt them around in tighter tree lines like I had become accustomed to when hunting pow leftovers on my 186 Automatics.

I mounted my 186s at +1, which makes for incredibly quick moves and turn initiation, but I do feel the speed limit of the ski when I want to let them run. The balance point seems fairly precise at speed. Too far forward and it feels like I am going to overwhelm the shovel. Too far back and I find the limit of the rockered tail, and they suddenly want turn way past the fall line and point uphill. I dealt with a bit of learning curve in that regard on my first few days on the 186, as these were also the first fully rockered skis I’d ever really spent time on. There definitely is an awesome sweet spot, it’s just a very centered ski. Sage’s centered stance and style is apparent in the way these skis like to be rallied.

Ultimately, I would still choose the 186 as my daily driver. It is a very fun, playful, and agile ski for rallying around Alta day to day. This is the 38-year-old, slightly more gun-shy Joe talking, a guy who just returned to Alta after a seven-year hiatus in Denver where riding mountain bikes overwhelmed my ski habit. Twenty-nine-year-old Joe would definitely have chosen the 193 for his daily driver, exchanging some nimbleness for power and speed. I was skiing like I had something to prove back then, and I’m definitely making a whole lot more turns nowadays.

That said, the 193 does still turns fairly quickly for a 117mm-waisted ski, maybe on a quarter rather than a dime; it just takes a little more effort. I do feel like I could vary the shape of my turns a bit more on the longer Automatic, employing a bit more tail smear to vary arc and shed speed. The 186 sets into its turn and comes around quickly, though as I mentioned earlier, the tail situation gets a little dicey if you get bumped toward the backseat.

 

NEXT PAGE: ROCKER PROFILE PICS

10 comments on “2013-2014 Atomic Automatic, 193cm”

  1. I got this ski 2 weeks ago and apon toying with the idea I decided to mount it at team. I’m 6’3″ 200 pounds and ever sense I have been staring at them wishing I mounted them +1. Here in the PNW we are waiting for snow and I hope I like them at team but I think they are gonna be hyper sensitive to mounting to the mounting position, any thoughts on how sensitive they are?

  2. My friend just bought the 193 Automatics with Dukes and I had a chance to compare them to my 2011 Bibby Pro’s (190 cm). Side by side the Automatics felt only a tiny bit longer, but when skiing in groomers the shovel felt distinctively longer (both mounted on the line). Could be because the Automatics have a longer and higher tip rocker profile?

    And also I think that the Bibby Pro’s felt more stiffer and stable in high speeds…

  3. I also posted in the original Automatic thread, but this might be helpful for some readers here too. I’m 6ft4, 80kg (180lbs) and have about 20 days on my 193 Automatics now, mounted at +2.5 (the “Team” or “Recommended” line is -10.5 from cord centre, so pretty far back compared to the line on skis like the S7 or JJ). +2.5 is the centre of the camber and the centre of the sidewall section, so this made sense to me and looked right when eyeballing the mount. For me this is a good compromise position for all soft snow conditions; trees, wide-open faces and a little jibbing. If I was spinning more I’d go anywhere up to +5 and I think they’d still ski fine. If I only ever skied high-speed open faces I’d go around +1.5. Mine feel slightly hooky in wide-open spaces which is a little disappointing, but they’re still much nicer here than my old Super 7s. Not as pivoty in tight trees as the Super 7 but still workable, especially if you keep your speed up.

    At my weight I’m pretty sure I could have gotten away with the 186 but I’m tall so short skis just feel weird. I consider myself a strong skier and the 193 is very manageable in tight spots. I consider it an everyday soft snow ski, not an all-out powder ski, and it works well for me all round.

  4. I skied them yesterday in 5 inches of fresh and I too choose not to detune a ski until I have skied it and this ski definitely needs to be detuned. I felt that having it at the team mounting point it was a but hard to find the right balance on the ski, to far back you wash out to far forward it would get pretty hooky so ill be taking them back out tomorrow in what’s forecasted to be another foot at mt hood and have my final verdict on if ill be remounting them to +2 or not.

  5. Just saw some photos of the new Automatic at SIA. Do you know if there are any changes to the ski for next season besides graphics?

  6. I have a set of the 2015 Auto117s in the 193cm length. I started out at +2cm mountings, and went back to the factory line. I think they float and plane up on light snow so much better mounted there I was willing to sacrifice a tiny bit of maneuverability. (As a side note, at 6’1 and 245lbs, I need all the help I can get to stay on top on pow days… )

Leave a Comment