Construction: Sandwich, metal laminates, “Flip-Core Tech”
Dimensions: 135/108/123mm
Radius: 28.5 m @ 185cm
Rocker line: Low profile rocker tip to tail
Skier Type: Advanced
BUY THIS SKI: You like a big mountain ski that wont balk and you getting after it. You probably live in the Pacific Northwest, or Tahoe where your “everyday ski” better be able to handle the pow everyday.
DON’T BUY THIS SKI: You’re a beginner, don’t like to venture off the hard pack much or are looking for a big playful powder ski.
A lot of buzz has been surrounding the 2012 Blizzard Cochise this spring, and after an April powder day at Crystal Mountain I can see why. The Cochise has been an instant shop favorite, we think it’s flat one of the most fun skis available for 2012.
The Blizzard Cochise is the brand new 108mm waisted big mountain ski from their new Freemountain line up. Partially designed by the late Arne Backstrom, the Cochise features their new Flip-Core technology which naturally gives the ski rocker as opposed to forcing or bending it in. It’s constructed as a full sandwich ski with metal laminates and a low profile rocker that goes from tip to tail. Don’t let the full rocker scare you die hards, its subtle and still rips on the groom.
The ski is pretty stiff yet and really excels in new snow and skied out crud. The part that really surprised us was how well it skied on hard snow, impressing some of our harshest big ski critics. The low profile rocker allows the ski to float really well, and the stiff tip just blasts through crud as well as any ski I have ever been on. Making it a prime pick if you live somewhere that gets a lot of snow. As a true big mountain ski the Cochise likes you get after it in the deep stuff but what makes it unique is while you are making turns you can still blow off speed with a big “surfy” pow turn then go back to ripping.
On the hard pack the Cochise continues to surprise. Because the rocker profile is very gradual you don’t have to tip it far to engage the entire edge and once you do it rips like very few 105+ skis out there can. The ski is also pretty lively on the groom for being fully rockered and doesn’t feel “planky” at all like some skis in this category.
The Cochise really makes the perfect Pacific North West go to ski. Where in between big dumps you can take advantage of a few inches here and there or the remains of the last storm. With this ski you will really have the right boards on your feet most of the season. Works awesome as a one ski quiver for the powder hungry or to compliment a hard snow carver in your quiver. We think Blizzard really killed it with this ski so if you get a chance to demo it let us know what you think! If you have an more questions about the ski give Sturte
If you live in the Seattle area Sturtevant’s in Bellevue has the 2012 ready for demo for the rest of this season and all next year! So get out and give it a try.
Blizzard Cochise Graphics at tip
Tip Rocker Profile
Hello! Thanks for the heads up!
As a backcountry skier I’m interested in weight as well as the usual ski info. Any idea of weight?
Hello,
I ordered the Cochise in the 178 cm lenght without testing the ski first. The ski is big and is stiffer than I thought it would be. I’m wondering if I should have bought the women’s model, the black pearl. I went with the Cochise because of the reviews and I wanted a better powder ski than the Blizzard Titan, EOS (173CM) that I have been skiing. My last powder ski I had was the Valant Chubb, 180 cm. I’m thinking I may want to be on a shorter ski like a 173 but I’m not sure. I am a 56 year old women who still loves the trees, powder, and to lay down a perfect carve on the groomers. Did I make a good choice?
The Cochise definitely skis easy for how stiff it feels when you are holding it. Whether or not the 178 is right ski for you would depend more on skiers weight and aggressiveness. The shorter length is going to be a lot quicker in the trees but should still be pretty stable at speed on the hard snow due to the metal laminate and stiffness. And at 108mm underfoot and subtle rocker in the tip its going to be pretty tough to sink it. Sorry for the delayed response!
I have just purchased the Cochise in 193cm. I’m 6’2″ and 210 lbs. Do you have any recommendations for where to set the bindings. Should they be at boot center or back 1-2cm? I’m not going switch (unless by accident).
Thanks!
Greg,
I would mount them right at boot center. That ski at 193 is going to have tons of float and ski in front of the binding as it is and the boot center mounting point will keep them nice and solid in the crud and hard snow. I personally skied the 186 from boot center and loved every second of it. The brilliant engineers at Blizzard who turned those out the Cochise spent really spent a lot of time dialing them in so unless you were doing lots of switch I would mount them right where they recommend it. Enjoy!
Hello! I’m going to order 185 cm Cochise. My weight is about 65-70 kg and i’ve been skiing for a long time, but not too much in powder. Is it the right size for me or should I choose the smaller one?
At 65 – 70 kg I would recommend stepping down to the 177. The Cochise is a pretty stout powerful ski and at your weight you should have more than enough float on the 177 for the deep days. Plus the 177cm length will be a lot more fun in the trees yet still plenty stable at speed on the harder snow.
I was in today and purchased a new pair of Atomic 120 boots. I looked at a few ski’s like the Atomic Theory’s, Solamon Shoguns and of course the Cochise. I feel after reading some reviews the Cochise is more my fit. Here are my specs: 235 lbs, 5′ 11 and a intermediate Plus skier. Not Advanced. But I want to get off the groomed more and try some off trail. So I need a ski that can handle my weight and still fairly easy to turn. And I ski Stevens, Crystal and Whistler. I will hit Mt. Bacholer this yr. But need a ski that can handle our snow and sometimes CRUD. Your thoughts. Thanks, JT
Great review! I’m about to order the Cochise and debating between the 177 and 185. I’m six feet tall and 190 lbs, ex-racer, solid all mountain skier. The only reason I’d consider the shorter length is for extra quickness in the trees. Do you think the 177 would be overpowered, or not have enough float, for my weight? I have the Magnum 8.7 in 181 and love it on the groomers, but want something quicker turning in the trees and with more float overall. With the rocker design of the Cochise, do you think the 185 would be more nimble than the 181cm Magnum in tight quarters? Thanks!
Hi,
What size would you suggest for me, 90 kg, 194 cm height, aggresive skier with lots of experience.
I will have it as a second pair of skies next to tge blizzard gs ski, my playground is europe. Specifically austria, switserland and norway.
Regards Paul
Sorry for the delayed response Jeff. In the Cochise you would probably be a good fit for the 185cm, its has a metal laminate and is pretty stiff yet still pretty easy to ski. Those Atomic Theory’s are great but did you take a look at the Atomic Atlas? Little bit of rocker yet not to wide makes it a great ski for an intermediate who wants to ski off trail but still wants the hard pack performance. And the last one is the K2 Kung Fujas, great Northwest all mountain ski that has a enough width, rocker yet just a whole lot of fun all over the mountain.
Gregory. For an aggressive, ex racer I would suggest the 185. Even though its a pretty burly ski, its really maneuverable in the soft stuff and you will love the power the bigger ski has in the crud. I am slightly shorter and lighter and I felt like I would still step up to the bigger option!
Paul, definitely jealous of your playground! As an really aggressive skier at your height and weight you could easily be on the 193cm. Though if you are skiing a lot of trees the 185 is still going to have plenty of float and more agile. But if you find yourself skiing more open bowls and bigger turns, that 193 would be it.
Thanks for the post and these ski’s look like they rip. I am torn ona couple issues. I have been through several pairs of Volkl Gotamas, each of the previous 3 seasons I hada pair delam or break, Voklkl was good about replacing but it was annoying none the less. My local shop took the new pair of replacements last year and gave me a new pair of this years Moment Belafonte’s @182. I skied them about 6 times last year and I really like the shape but I think I went too short. I am 6′ and was 215-220 last winter, I always felt like I was going ove the tips. I am down to 200 this season so I am going to give them a shot but think they still may be toos short. I may look to replace them with the cochise. Should I get the 185 or 193? I am agressive skier that skies mostly at Squaw and the surrounding Backcountry. I have never had length issues but these Moments have me all paranoid. My other skies are 189 Pontoons and they are supurb for hte deep days.. Any insight would be appreciated.
I have been reading up on the Cochise and considering them as well as the Rosy Super 7 or the Sickle. I am 5’10″ 185 aggressive skier spending most of my time in Utah. I am in the trees and off piste whenever possible but want still be able to lay high speed tracks and snap turns on the side of the trail when necassary.
Do you think the Cochise would be the best fit? if so, at what length?
Thanks
I am a Northeast skier 5’8”, 170 pounds, will ski most days this winter at Sugarloaf in Maine. I currently have and love a pair of Kastle MX-88′s @ 169CM that suit me just fine. Looking for that second ski that can still carve on the hard snow (and ice) and handle the 6 to 10 powder dumps that occur here, and a trip to Sun Valley. Considering the Cochise in 177 length or Line Influence 172. Any suggestions?
Thanks
Both great skis. I skied on the Influence 115 all last season and loved it. Skies the groomers remarkably well for how big it is with tons of float. The Cochise however is a much more manageable ski when the snow does fly and skis the hard snow better when you are a high speeds. If you are referring to the Influence 105 which is also a killer versatile ski but I think it would overlap your Kestles a bit to more than you would like. What it comes down to is the Cochise skis the soft snow a touch better than the Line where line skis medium speed groomers better. A blast either way!
I’m Really Feelin’ Those Ronix Vests
I bought the Cochise 185s after demoing them about 6 weeks ago and have skied on them for 6 days so far. I am 5’10′ and 165lbs. The real surprise to me is how great they are on the groomers. We haven’t had that much snow so far this season in Colorado but these skis are great on thin cover and even ice – whereas I expected them to be powder oriented and to be a bit of a compromise on groomed/thin snow..
They just go over anything like a steamroller – crud and clumped up snow; I think I ski about 30% faster on them before reaching the edge of my control envelope. I previously used 178 Salomon X-Wings and what’s strange is that the Blizzards don’t feel longer because the rocker makes them ski short on the hardpack. I thought I would keep the X-wings as carvers for thin snow but I have already given them away to a friend as I will use the Blizzards all the time.
I have the Cochise in the 185s and ski the Northwest. They are a super ski here. But if you ski Maine and Vermont I’d seriously consider the Bonafide. The Cochise are great if there is any bit of soft snow – even an inch on top of hard pack. But for ice and groomers the Bonafides will give you a bit easier engagement on turns. If you are going to always ski your Kastles in the hard conditions then pop for the Cochise. Blizzard has nailed their new shape. So be ready to go fast.
I appreciate your comments, ended up with the Line Influence 105′s @ 179cm. They connect up fine on the hard (very hard this year) ‘snow’ at the ‘Loaf’, but excel when I can find some soft snow to link up a few turns. I liked the idea of the tighter turn radius of that Line ski offers which was a deciding factor in my final choice. Heading to Sun Valley this week to give them a real test.
I purchased a pair of these…..wow. These things are great. 2 feet of fresh….they rock. Groomers they rip. I am 5 10 and 185lbs and I purchased the 185′s. Love em….
I’m definately planning on buying a pair of Cochise’s this season even though I haven’t skied them yet. I am 51 and have been skiing most of my life (5’10- 190), I still charge hard on most days but am slowing down a bit. With the slight rise in the tip and the tail do the skies, ski short? I am thinking of buying the 177 and hoping the ski isn’t to short- of all the reviews no one has skied on the 177. I am currently skiing on the Dynastar Legend Pro in a 174 and its all I can handle; any feedback would be appreciated.
Peter B,
The Legend Pro is a fun but certainly burly ski at any length, I skied the 185 for a few seasons. The Cochise will be way more forgiving but don’t take that as having gone soft on you. It will blast through the crud with the best of them, including the Legend Pro. If you didn’t feel the legend pro was to short go for the 177 Cochise, at 108 underfoot there is still tons of float even at that length. Plus the new graphics get just a bit of a touch up and i think they look sweet! We are actually getting a pre release of the 2012/13′s here within the next month so keep your eye on the website if you want some this year.
I’m looking to demo/purchase Blizzard skis on my trip to Utah this year. Debating between Cochise and Black Pearl. I am short and relatively light (5’1″, 120 lbs). I am intermediate/advanced and love to spend time in the trees and on non-groomers. I also am forced to join my crazy family into the powder quite often. So, I really need an all-around ski. I am currently on a “beginner” ski, the K2 true love, and am looking to advance my skill and have a better ride. Cochise or Black Pearl? Length? Thanks in advance for any advice!
Sherri,
For a lighter skier the Black Pearl should give you lots of float even at its “narrower” waist width. The Shortest Cochise, 177 is a pretty long ski for your weight even as an advanced skier. The ski that I would look at would be the Blizzard Crush. Wider than the Black Pearl, a lot of fun in the trees but still skis the harder snow well when you want to. Along with the Blizzard Crush, keep your eyes out for the Blizzard Samba, its next years skis and essentially the Blizzard Bonafide (half way between the Cochise and the Black Pearl) for women. 98mm waist and will come in some shorter sizes. Rumor has it that Blizzard is pre-releasing some 2013 really soon!