• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Augment SC and some thoughts about ski suspension

Bruno Schull

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
361
Hi,

I recently rented some 2021/22 Augment SC skis, and it was an interesting experience, especially regarding suspension. I've seen Augment skis mentioned here, but there's not so much information, so here are some thoughts.

Th SC is presented as a high-end carving ski oriented toward longer turns. It has a 17.6 m turning radius in 176 cm length.

Link to the ski in question:
https://augment-sports.com/collections/on-piste/products/21-22-sport-carving

(My understanding is that Augment skis are offered in different flex levels. I am based in Switzerland, and this was a rental ski, so I didn't have access to those options. Also, while this is a premium ski, Augment also makes higher-level race skis, which probably don't have the same behavior that I describe below).

The short story is that I found this a natural, intuitive, powerful front-side ski. I felt comfortable right away, and I spent the morning making smooth, precise, medium and long radius turns on wide, open, groomed pistes. The carving sensations were exhilarating, on par with other high-quality skis I have tried, like the Stockli Laser SL, the Atomic Redster S9, and so on.

The deal-breaker for me was the lack of suspension. On any kind of hard, uneven surface, the skis bucked, bounced, rattled, deflected, skittered, and transmitted every shock to my body. To be clear, this was on on fresh, early morning, groomed pistes. If the surface was even slightly soft from the sun, with piles of light snow or small bumps, the skis were great. And if the surface was hard and smooth, with perfect coduroy or buffed and polished snow, they were also great. But if the surface was both hard and uneven, with bumps, tracks, small edges and drops, they were terrible. They had the too-light, too-stiff, carbon-fiber feel of some backcountry touring skis, and they absolutely did not have the silky smooth, composed, damp, feel of skis like Stocklis and others.

So, I would say that these seemed like great carving skis for for all conditions expect hard and rough pistes.

OK, on to suspension.

I know that "suspension" is a somewhat vague term but I actually think that's a good thing. Why? When we talk about ski suspension there are so many different variables: mass, stiffness profile, materials and construction, ski shape, and so on. I think all these things matter. I also think it's very hard to separate one variable from the rest with respect to how skis feel, and so I think it makes sense to gather all of these things together under one umbrella called "suspension," which allows us to easily discuss and compare skis, with the understanding that it's a complex subject. So, for what it's worth, that's my defence of the term suspension.

That said, I think it's interesting and important to try to define what contributes to ski suspension and feel. Below are some ideas.

Mass
The Augment SC, and other skis in their line, like the PC and the al-mountain skis, are on the light side for their intended purpose. I think this contributes to the lack of suspension. Here are some weights of single skis with no plate or binding:
Augment SC 176 --> 1775 grams
Stockli Laser AX 175 --> 1920 grams
Stockli Laser SL 170cm --> 1910 grams
Could a couple of hundred grams make a difference? It's hard to know for sure, but I think it plays a role.

Mass to stiffness
Maybe it's not a question of absolute weight, but the balance of weight and stiffness. I would say that the Augment skis are too light for their stiffness. I think these skis would work well for lighter skiers and slower speeds if they were softer, and I think they would work well for heavier skiers and higher speeds if they were heavier, but the combination of high stiffness and low weight didn't work for me. I think weight and stiffness need to be balanced.

Stiffness profile
The stiffness of a ski obviously plays a role in suspension, and it may be the most important factor. Imagine a perfectly rigid ski compared to a very flexible ski--they would have very different suspension. Also, how the stiffness changes over the length of a ski must be important. Again, imagine a perfectly rigid ski with a single soft flex point, compared to a ski with a gradual decrease in stiuffness as you moved from center to the tip. As above, these skis would have very different suspension.

Ski shape
Think about the differences between a narrow more-pointed tip and a wider more-broad tip, or a tip with abrupt rocker vs a tip with gradual rocker. Even if the mass and stiffness profile were the same, I think that shape would influence the suspension, because the forces would come into the ski differently. It's like the difference between hitting something head on or with a glancing blow. All else being equal, a narrow ski with an abrupt rocker would presumably transmit more forces back to the skier than a wider ski with a gradual rocker.

Material and construction
I think that materials and construction make a difference, independent of mass or stiffness profile. I've posted this video before elsewhere, but note the difference between different material samples with the same weight and stiffness:
https://countervailproducts.com/countervail-technology
One can dive deep down the rabbit hole into damping, isolation, frequencies, sheer forces, and so forth (and I'm happy to go there!) but I think it's obvious that materials and construction make a difference. All those layers of rubber, cork, flax, special carbon layups, the glues and resins used to bond everything together, the compaction and integrity of the whole construction, make a big difference.

Back to specific skis
I think the problem with the Augment SC is that the core construction is not dense enough for the intended purpose, and they are built with too much carbon fiber and not enough fiberglass in the layup. I say this after several long conversations with Mike Macabe, the owner/builder at Folsom skis. I own several pairs of Folsom skis, and, across the board, they have the best suspension of any skis I have tried, and that includes Stocklis. Folsom skis are custom. Because I prioritize good suspension, they are built with a dense core made from maple, poplar, and bamboo, and a 90/10 fiberglass/carbon layup (estimated ratio). They are not overall very heavy--my all mountains skis, one at 88 and the other at 108, are both just about 2000 grams per ski, which is middle-of the road. But the wood and fiberglass make a difference. Folsom can make skis with lighter wood and a full carbon lay up, and you can save 200-300 grams, but the feel is just not the same. I quizzed Mike, and asked him about the feel of skis made from a lighter wood with more fiberglass vs a heavier wood with more carbon, and he basically said that once the carbon goes into the layup, you can't "take away the feel" of the carbon.

So, for me, to make a ski with good suspension, I think you need a dense wood core, an appropriate stiffness and shape, more fiberglass than carbon, and a highly-compressed and uniform layup.

Let the discussion begin....
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,213
Location
Boston Suburbs
I think "suspension" is a good way to think about this.
The ability to ignore small shocks is a big part of the reason I like softer skis.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
You are saying suspension, I am hearing damping of the ski. While I haven't skied the SC, I have skied all of the other Augments and I spend a good amount of time with the AM's that we have in our testing rotation and I haven't felt any of the shortcomings you felt with the SC in the firmer terrain/conditons. I know there are a few here with Augments in their quivers @ScotsSkier and @DocGKR that might want to chime in and @bud heishman, and Augment dealer who I believe has a SC in his demo fleet an skis it regularly.

I did have a SC in my fleet last year but never mounted it and I honestly do not recall it being 200 grams lighter than the other skis that you compared it to. I am not questioning the OP, just the source of that information.
 

mdf

entering the Big Couloir
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,213
Location
Boston Suburbs
+1 except where bounce and deflection is an issue *cough*Sierra Cement*cough*
Well, I like them even there, but I realize that is probably a minority opinion. Yeah, they suck in that if you try to ride them flat.
 
Thread Starter
TS
B

Bruno Schull

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
361
You are saying suspension, I am hearing damping of the ski. While i haven't skied the SC, I have skied all of the other Augments and I spend a good amount of time with the AM's that we have in our testing rotation and I haven't felt any of the shortcomings you felt with the SC in the firmer terrain/conditons. I know there are a few here with Augments in their quivers @ScotsSkier and @DocGKR that might want to chime in and @bud heishman, and Augment dealer who I believe has a SC in his demo fleet an skis it regularly.

I did have a SC in my fleet last year but never mounted it and I honestly do not recall it being 200 grams lighter than the other skis that you compared it to. I am not questioning the OP, just the sourse of that information.
Hi Phil! Hope you're having a good season.

I'd be happy to use the term damping, but then you have the English teachers talking about dampening, and the engineers talking about propagation and isolation, and so on. Also, I think there's much more to it than damping (however we define that). Stiffness, shape, and so on. That's why I prefer suspension--it's broad enough to capture all these things.

I got the weight of the ski from the Augment website linked above. The SC in 176 cm is 1775 g and the PC in 172 shorter radius carving ski) is 1575 g. That seems light! Too much pre-preg carbon me thinks!

Another question if what is available in Europe vs the US. The ski I rented was identical to the ski on the website.

All best, Bruno.
 

tch

What do I know; I'm just some guy on the internet.
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,538
Location
New England
Side note on vocabulary: I've always used "damp" to describe the variable Bruno is calling "suspension". But some folks apparently use "damp" to mean "lacking in pop". Personally, I have found a fair number of skis that are damp but still have pop, and I have sometimes resorted to calling these skis "strong".
Perhaps "suspension" is a better word -- although how would one rank "suspension"? It's a category, not a descriptor.

Relevant to this discussion only in the sense that words only mean something if everyone understands/agrees on the meaning. I'd love more finely-tuned adjectives.
 

cantunamunch

Meh
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
21,883
Location
Behavioral sink
Perhaps "suspension" is a better word -- although how would one rank "suspension"? It's a category, not a descriptor.

"Suspension" includes strict damping (decay of energy within the ski), strict rebound rate (what you call pop) and strict flex (which, if soft enough, can isolate the skier from externalities).

I am 100% for staying with the term "suspension" as @Bruno Schull is using it, since he is talking about at least two separate components of suspension (flex and damping). Specifically, he is saying the skis are too stiff, and not damped enough. He hasn't spoken about rebound rate.
 

Noodler

Sir Turn-a-lot
Skier
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Posts
6,314
Location
Denver, CO
I was expecting some Anton-esque content here. So disappointed.

Mmmm, gliders....

1646767502677.png
 

François Pugh

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
7,614
Location
Great White North (Eastern side currently)
The description given by @Bruno Schull reminded me of some skis I have been on, though at the moment, I can't recall exactly which ones (I've been on a lot of skis). The condition is only apparent on very hard surfaces with abrupt changes in profile, best experienced skiing through frozen groomer tracks at Tremblant after a thaw rain event followed immediately by adeep freeze. It could be a tad too much high speed compression damping, borrowing from other suspension technology terms for suspensions with adjustments (high, medium and low compression damping and high medium and low rebound damping), high speed being sub vibrational, but still fairly high, i.e. the speed that would be relevant of hitting the the groomer track at 35 to 50 mph. (higher impacts would likely overcome the damping).
 

cantunamunch

Meh
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
21,883
Location
Behavioral sink
Mmmm, gliders....

The description given by @Bruno Schull reminded me of some skis I have been on, though at the moment, I can't recall exactly which ones

The description given by @Bruno Schull is spot on for what has been referred to on this forum as "digital" carbon feel - and we've had several dozen skis tarred with that brush.

 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,612
Location
Maine
I say this after several long conversations with Mike Macabe, the owner/builder at Folsom skis. I own several pairs of Folsom skis, and, across the board, they have the best suspension of any skis I have tried, and that includes Stöcklis. Folsom skis are custom. Because I prioritize good suspension, they are built with a dense core made from maple, poplar, and bamboo, and a 90/10 fiberglass/carbon layup (estimated ratio). They are not overall very heavy--my all mountains skis, one at 88 and the other at 108, are both just about 2000 grams per ski, which is middle-of the road. But the wood and fiberglass make a difference. Folsom can make skis with lighter wood and a full carbon lay up, and you can save 200-300 grams, but the feel is just not the same. I quizzed Mike, and asked him about the feel of skis made from a lighter wood with more fiberglass vs a heavier wood with more carbon, and he basically said that once the carbon goes into the layup, you can't "take away the feel" of the carbon.
Thread drift:
At last week's gathering in Aspen I walked into a bike shop in search of as souvenir for my SO. Turned out it was ALSO the Aspen storefront for Folsom. I was aware of the brand but had never had any first hand contact with the skis. They had a few there to fondle. I have to say that they felt and looked really nice. Has anyone here besides Bruno skied on a pair?
 
Thread Starter
TS
B

Bruno Schull

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
361
I was thinking about these skis again, and realized that they reminded me very much of a ski i tried in the past. I looked back through my notes...the 2017/2018 Movment Revo 86. Now, these are very differnt skis. The Revo 86 was presented as an all-mountain ski, although I would argue that it was really more of a wide body front-side carving ski. It has a classic shape, with camber, a flat tail, and a nod to moderniity with some minimal rocker at the top. Anyway, it carved amazing well on piste..smooth and precise, like the proverbial scalpel, or like a ceramic knife. But...it had the characteristic light, stiff, carbony feel. It got bounced around on a slightest hard uneven terrain, trasmitted all shocks to the body, and so on. And that's not a surprise! It weighted 1700 grams in 175 (and that's for an 86 mm underfoot ski), and it comes from a company known for making very light, carbon fiber infused backcountry touring ski.
 
Thread Starter
TS
B

Bruno Schull

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
361
Thread drift:
At last week's gathering in Aspen I walked into a bike shop in search of as souvenir for my SO. Turned out it was ALSO the Aspen storefront for Folsom. I was aware of the brand but had never had any first hand contact with the skis. They had a few there to fondle. I have to say that they felt and looked really nice. Has anyone here besides Bruno skied on a pair?
Folsom skis are amazing, and I encourage folks to try them. Bear in mind that they are custom, so you have to have some understanding of how the ski you are riding was constructed. There are very positive reviews floating around out there in the web.

Tony, knowing you, and your love for powerful Stockli skis, I think that the Folsom Spar series, including the 78, 88, and Turbo, would put a smile on your face, as well as the Primary series, and maybe the Rad Dad, which is advertised with thew words, "break your record from top to bottom."

Choose a build with a dense wood core, a layup biased toward fiberglass (all the layups have some carbon) and medium to stiff flex.

Enjoy-Bruno.
 

slow-line-fast

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2021
Posts
932
Location
snow
Tune also has an effect, jittery skis can become a little less so with some detuning near tip and tail, as a last resort
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Find the right mix of “damp” vs “pop” crucial in skis. Too much or too little of either one limits it’s versatility and appeal. A ski can definitely be too damp to the point of feeling dead and a light, carbon ski can be so lively it’s torture on firm snow.

Suspension on a ski is similar to the suspension on a mountain bike and their ability to track easily over bumpy terrain. It should provide the rider or skier with enough feedback so the ride isn’t boring but should happily absorb the major shocks while not being tossed around.

Their are many skis that are very damp in limiting noise and small groomer imperfections but struggle in really beat up afternoon groomers.
Head Kore skis for example are very damp skis to the point of feeling dead, yet their lack of weight and stiff, unforgiving flex makes them a handful in variable snow. They are a perfect example of damp skis that have very poor suspension.

Skis with great suspensions are usually skis that have solid but not overly stiff flex, heavier weight and a shape that tracks through rough snow easily. If you are making a light ski, making it’s flex a bit more forgiving will improve the suspension.

Find I usually prefer skis in the 2200gr plus range plus in a mid 180s size to ensure it’s on the right track for a good suspension. The “suspension kings” like the Pro Rider/MPro 105, Black Ops 118 and Sender Squad etc all are 2400-2600gr each with not over stiff flex will make variable snow a blast.
 

cantunamunch

Meh
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
21,883
Location
Behavioral sink
Skis with great suspensions are usually skis that have solid but not overly stiff flex, heavier weight and a shape that tracks through rough snow easily. If you are making a light ski, making it’s flex a bit more forgiving will improve the suspension.

Have you tried the '23 Blizz Hustlers?
 

Sponsor

Top