2012 Blizzard Cochise - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by wasatchback 

I wasn't able to weigh a 180 Bushwacker as they're all out on peoples feet.  I have weights for the 173 Bushwacker as well as the 180 and 187 Bonafide

 

173 Bushwacker   7lbs .5oz  per pair  or 3189 grams

180 Bonafide        9lbs or 4108 grams

187 Bonafide        9lbs 8 oz  or 4309grams

 

All of the Freemountain skis have the same core.  It is a very lightweight core similar to what Dynafit uses with stringers of different woods and hybrid materials.

The Bushwacker differs in that it only has one small sheet of metal under the binding for mounting purposes.  It is very light for an alpine ski.  The Bonafide is

definitely heavier as you add two sheet of metal plus the extra sheet for increased screw retention but for a ski with 2.25 sheets of metal it's relatively light.

They would make great touring skis.  Plus these are not twin tips so it's easier to attach skis to the tail and have them stay on.

 

All of the Freemountain skis are considerably lighter than the Titan series.  The core on all the Titan series skis was a lot heavier and the IQ system adds weight to the ski as well.  I think when it comes to touring it depends on what exactly you're looking for.  If you're really looking for a lightweight setup the bushwacker would not be a bad option and I can pretty much guarantee you'd be hard pressed to find that much hard snow/in bounds performance out of any similar light weight touring ski.   If touring for you is more about the downhill experience the rest of the freemountain line would be great for touring, especially if you like the feeling of metal in your skis.  It would be hard to find comparable skis with two sheets of metal in this weight range.   The fact that the tails are flat on all these skis aids in skin retention as well.

 

Well I stand completely and utterly corrected.   Thanks for the good info.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by wasatchback 

 

I wasn't able to weigh a 180 Bushwacker as they're all out on peoples feet.  I have weights for the 173 Bushwacker as well as the 180 and 187 Bonafide

 

173 Bushwacker   7lbs .5oz  per pair  or 3189 grams

180 Bonafide        9lbs or 4108 grams

187 Bonafide        9lbs 8 oz  or 4309grams

 

All of the Freemountain skis have the same core.  It is a very lightweight core similar to what Dynafit uses with stringers of different woods and hybrid materials.

The Bushwacker differs in that it only has one small sheet of metal under the binding for mounting purposes.  It is very light for an alpine ski.  The Bonafide is

definitely heavier as you add two sheet of metal plus the extra sheet for increased screw retention but for a ski with 2.25 sheets of metal it's relatively light.

They would make great touring skis.  Plus these are not twin tips so it's easier to attach skis to the tail and have them stay on.

 

 

All of the Freemountain skis are considerably lighter than the Titan series.  The core on all the Titan series skis was a lot heavier and the IQ system adds weight to the ski as well.  I think when it comes to touring it depends on what exactly you're looking for.  If you're really looking for a lightweight setup the bushwacker would not be a bad option and I can pretty much guarantee you'd be hard pressed to find that much hard snow/in bounds performance out of any similar light weight touring ski.   If touring for you is more about the downhill experience the rest of the freemountain line would be great for touring, especially if you like the feeling of metal in your skis.  It would be hard to find comparable skis with two sheets of metal in this weight range.   The fact that the tails are flat on all these skis aids in skin retention as well.

 

Thanks for the answer to the question I was about to ask.   Sorry to hear about your tibia.   Speedy recovery.

Would the bonafide work with dynafit or be a better match for a heavier duke/tour due to the metal weight in the ski and downhill perfomance orientation?

Are you at Deep pow house or the Blizzi demo rep?  I will be up at Alta first week of April and would like to try 1 or 2 or the new Blizzis hopefully not on the weekend unless the 9th is the only chance. 

Wasatchback,

The Freemountain skis have a much lighter core than the Titan series, so would the Freemountains with camber tend to flatten out like some older (read Rossi) lightweight cores. I suppose the metal sheet in the binding area is necessary to hold the binder screws for the Freemountains.

Any durability problems with the new cores?

Thanks.

wasatchback,

Sorry about your injury. Thank you for using your unfortunate downtime to provide information on this forum. I hope that you have a quick recovery.

Thanks for providing those weights. That 173 Bushwacker is certainly in the ballpark of other touring skis in that width/length range. Lou Dawson's wildsnow blog has the 174 K2 Wayback at 54.1oz/ski (~6.75lbs/pair). I believe that the Kastle fx84 is close in weight (although I have not found it listed -- the FX94 is supposed to be around 66oz/ski).

Noodler, thanks for the suggestions of DPS and Moment. I have looked at those skis as well and they sound great. DPS says that their Wailer 95 Pure comes in at 6.84lbs/pair and that is an $1100 ski; it sounds like the Bushwacker will be around 60% of that price.

There are certainly lighter weight options out there at these dimensions -- Trab Evo Polvere, Dynafit Mustagha ATA. That said, given the early reviews on the Bushwacker, it sounds like it would be an excellent contender.

I didn't know whether I should post my review of the Cochise in this thread or start a new one.  However, my review is the same as the first guy in the thread: Best ski I've ever skied.

Read my Bodacious review first: http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/102895/review-2012-blizzard-bodacious

Then understand that Cochise basically has all the same strengths, and none of the weaknesses.  Its not quite as stable due to the narrower width, but I was just as confident at speed as on the Bodacious because on Cochise I knew I could turn in a flash if I needed.  Unnaturally stable through cut up and broken snow, this is where it sets itself apart from all the other skis I've skied in its class.  Where my Volkl Katana bounces around the Cochise just drives ahead without flinching.  Lastly...  

 http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/102895/review-2012-blizzard-bodacious#post_1326668

As I said in this post, the Cochise floats WAY better than it has any right to for its width.  That snow in my pictures there is deeper than it looks.  I was skiing fast but I was sitting extremely high in the snow for a 108 waisted ski.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

It turns like an 85mm ski because it has 85mm in the graphics. 

 

 

 

Some early production skis had the wrong graphics. LOL 
 

 

I know a few folks who can pull some interesting factoids from deep off the mental hard drive, but between this and the Bugs Bunny reference, you are approaching the near-fictional (Epic?) levels of recall...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW1qHA5Hqwc&feature=related

Now, does this mean we will have to deal with this on the lift when someone up top catches a tip and brings the thing to a halt? (Riiiiight at about 1:11):  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW1qHA5Hqwc&feature=related  

Cochise really does turn like a narrower ski too.  It doesn't even feel like it's 108 underfoot.  I imagine the Bonafide probably carries those attributes and is even quicker.  

I really think Blizzard leapfrogged the industry next year with their construction.  I imagine we'll see copycats of their construction process very soon from the other big guys because I think it has become pretty obvious there is clearly a right and a wrong way to do rocker.  

+2
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matter 

Cochise really does turn like a narrower ski too.  It doesn't even feel like it's 108 underfoot.  I imagine the Bonafide probably carries those attributes and is even quicker.  

 

I really think Blizzard leapfrogged the industry next year with their construction.  I imagine we'll see copycats of their construction process very soon from the other big guys because I think it has become pretty obvious there is clearly a right and a wrong way to do rocker.  

Anybody know of a  place to demo a Cochise in Vail?

Quote:

Originally Posted by givethepigeye 

Anybody know of a  place to demo a Cochise in Vail?

Funny you should ask. I called over to Gravity Jones, who is a dealer. They had a demo a week or two ago but it's "moved on". I was told none of the Blizzard dealers in town have them, and likely won't until next fall. They informed me the closest demo is in Aspen.

Oh well, was headed out for the close and figured I would try it out. Thanks

Skied the Cochise in 185 again all day at Vail in everything from boiler-plate to 8" of fresh. I have say again how much I liked these skis. This time I did get them into the tress and tighter spots in fresh lines and they are quick and responsive, the lightness of this ski makes them pretty flickable. Its all been said above but yes, this is a fantastic ski. for me I need to decide do I want a Cochise or a Bonafide.  Skiing the DPS 112 today in leftovers......

I skied the 193 for two days this past weekend in a mix of spring slush on Saturday and a 20 inch dump on Sunday and was pretty shocked at how manageable that 193 was.  Keep in mind I'm about 5'9 and weigh 165 lbs at the most....  It's really impressive what Blizzard did with this ski.  I still like the 185 better for my size but I couldn't believe how easily I could ski the 193.  I'm still going to write up a full review of my 185 and 193 demos when I get the time - everyone needs to try this ski!

FDQ report is as follows:  Cochise was very doable on the groomed just keep mind its not a 13m tr ski but its surprisingly fun and decent in the bumps too. I had it in 8" or so of fresh and I loved how light it felt and how quick it was. See Phils full pic report on FB for some pics.  its very capable as a powder ski although I wouldn't say its a powder ski like the rp112. I would love this ski for chalky snow and it was a very stable ride.

RP 122, the 112 is a very different ski, much more powder-centric and has considerably more rocker. The 112 is super stable even in the heavy snow we had today, it was very stable in the chunder, even more quick and turns on a dime. I loved this ski. I also loved it on soft groomers, it wasn't just capable, it rocked, smooth, no chatter. Very easy to roll edge-2-edge with minimal input.  The 190 probably is closer to a 186 and was very easy to ski. at 170ish 6', I wouldn't want it any shorter.  feels super light under foot with a gi-normous sweet spot, i think Phil summed it up best, its what the S7 should be.

SO.... Yeah, I would put both in the FDQ as they are both very different but equally excellent ski's.....  Not sure I will own both, but I thin they are different enough. The Bone is such a great ski and at 98 offers even more versatility over the 108.  but...... 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn 

So... is the FDQ crumbling?   I wonder how the Cochise with flat camber will do on a harder snow.  I am also interested in the comparison of the Cochise and the 112RP, please post your impression. 

The 190 112RP measures 190 along the base and 188 in chord length.

I have tested the Cochise and own the 112RP.  For me I don't need the Cochise and will buy the Bonafide, but for others it really depends on what skiing style you prefer.  As Finndog has stated the Cochise and 112RP are fairly different skis.  If you tend toward the less turny style of skiing then you would want the Cochise.  If you want a more nimble fat ski then the 112RP is sure to please.

I think both skis are fairly "intuitive" - they ski exactly how you would think they would ski in just looking at them.  Probably the biggest difference though for me is the tail rocker on the 112RP.  With it having much more significant rocker it's able to do things in deep snow that I doubt are possible on the Cochise (I never skied the Cochise in anything deep though).  I have learned that I love tail rocker and I love smearing high speed turns in deep snow.  It's like I've discovered a whole new sport.  I'd be really surprised if that move is in the Cochise.

good comments, the tail is definitely different; the 112 releases very easy and makes for easy buttering, the Cochise is basically flat with some rise so its not as easy to slide but that also becomes its advantage depending on where you are skiing it. I will still be looking to a Bone and a 112

I'm looking to replace my Prophet 100s with something a little newer and wider. I ski Castle and Fernie so get lots of powder but don't want a floppy noodle like Super 7, JJ, Obsethed etc. Up until now I had been thinking Prophet 115 or maybe Dynastar Legend Pro 115 (flattish tail, a little early rise/tip rocker,

some metal but not a tank). However the Blizzard reviews caught my eye,

 A couple of questions for Sierra Jim and Matters re; the Cochise

- Does the flat centre section on the Cochise have enough 'guts' to really stand on an edge compared to the P100s?

- Choosing a length is confusing me. Do I go shorter because it's not a twin or longer because of the tail lift/rocker? Also Castle is big bowls and chutes and Fernie is tight trees. I'm 6'2" 190lbs and never had a problem turning the 186 P100s. I'm old and don't ski mach looney but would the 193 be a possiblity for me?  

^^^ I can't help you out with the Cochise, but I am the same size as you and also a p100 186 skier and have a lot of the same questions as you, particularly regarding length.  The P100 skis short for its stated size so the 185 seems a reasonable replacement, but then you add the tip and tail rocker . . .  Again, I would love to have the same question answered by those in the know.  Maybe for the Bonafide thread, but I am also curious if the 180 or 187 Bona would be most similar to the P100 186.

I can add that if you like the P100 and are thinking of the P115, just know that it is a very different ski.  On all soft snow conditions from pow to manky variable conditions the 115 is far superior and a huge upgrade.  It also makes a variety of turn shapes in soft snow. On groomers it is fun but is a one trick pony, all GS all the time.  The 115 is substantially heavier and less "poppy" and just generally less versatile.  I travelled with the 115 (from the east) and enjoyed skiing it everyday out west, but won't touch it for most east coast days.

I can only assume you will find something the size of the Cochise under foot (or the Bonafide) a more well-rounded P100 replacement than the Prophet/Influence 115 will be.

Castle, at 6'2 190 you would probably be fine on the 193.  Both the Cochise and Bodacious have a stiffer tail than almost all of the other new modern boards that are popular.  It takes some management and the tail isn't as easy to use as a brake or throw out and drift like the Volkl ELP skis or fun shapes like the S7.

Cochise is a really great ski but I still wish they had just put a little more rocker in the tail (same with the Bodacious).  The Cochise is more agile than the Bodacious but it still doesn't smear on demand as easily as something like my Volkl Katana.  However, that stiffer tail is what makes the Cochise such a great carving groomer ski and one of the reasons why it tracks so well through broken snow.  It's definitely a give and take situation, you need to decide what type of terrain and turns you like to make.  

I'm excited to see what Blizzard can do with this flipcore construction applied to some other shapes...

Thanks very much for the advice Matter. That stiff tail combined with relatively easy turning is part of what appeals to me about the ski.

Quote:

Originally Posted by givethepigeye 

Quote:

Originally Posted by givethepigeye 

Oh well, was headed out for the close and figured I would try it out. Thanks

Anyone skied both a Nordica Girish and a Cochise? Demo'd the Girish today and loved it on the backside @ Vail - it was good on the front side too! Are they similar?

Hopefully Whiteroom will see this. He owns both.

Yes I own both, I think they are different enough to justify that.

The Girish feels pretty conventional once you have it on edge, the rockered shovel allows you to steer it a bit while flat and adds some float, but the tail is solid. It likes to go fast and is dead-solid at speed in medium to long radius arcs, has a classic metal laminate ski feel, torsionally stiff but not very stiff tip-to-tail. I find it quick enough to ski the woods here really well, but it needs to be skied 'with purpose'. I find I need to accept that I'm in the fall-line more and carrying more speed- it's TRON time. In the open it steam-rolls everything in it's path. It's not a ski to ski passively, it requires skier-input and direction, if you put energy in you get energy back, if you don't they are planky.

The Cochise skis like a rockered ski. It smears great, is extremely nimble and has a nice damp, metal laminate feel. It is very smooth knifing through chop while on edge... but it's really at home in tight places. It is easy to disengage the edges and pivot and smear, speed control is easy and the thing I like best is: the ski doesn't hinge at the rocker point (not all other skis do, the 'flipcore', while a nice design, is pure marketing in my opinion). What the Cochise is not great at is railing turns. I know that's sacrilege to say about the Blizzard skis... but it's true. It likes to be rolled on edge and pressured from the middle, it will carve a nice turn if you tip it and ride it, but it never feels 'hooked-up' and if you try to drive the shovel it will wash a little before engaging (I adjusted the delta on my binding, adding 4mm of toe-cheese, this really helped tone this down). When it engages it's from the rocker point, not the shovel. It's very playful, yet still absolutely solid- a very nice quality. It floats amazingly well (it is 108mm wide after all) I see absolutely no reason for a wider ski ever, no matter what the conditions. This is the ski I would reach for if there was some fresh snow with a little crust.

So in summary-

The Nordica is what I reach for if I want to go fast or the snow is perfect. They love to charge.

The Blizzard is what I reach for if I'm going to be skiing tight trees or the snow is funky. They will let you charge as hard as you want, but you can easily back of and take it easy.

Both skis rip, I own both for a reason- the reason is I really, really like them both... and that's the best reason I know.

I am 6'1" 215Lb and tried the 185 cochise for a couple of runs at the Alta Demo Day on the 9th in Fresh and slightly tracked snow from 12-24".   After being on 195 Motherships for a week the Cochise was very light and nimble, but not enough ski for the conditions.   In Freds Trees and Sunspot so I turned them in for the Bodacious which skied much better in the fresh conditions.  I skied the Bodacious for 3 runs through trees on Wildcat (which was getting tracked out quickly) and one down Stonecrusher.  I was suprised by the Bodacious' quickness and power.  The Bodacious is easy to turn and powerful at pushing heaps of crud out of the way in wetter than avg. Utah snow.   They seemed very light after the Motherships yet still very powerful and easy to finish up the turn and very stable at speed.    I am sure the Cochise would be great fun in the trees and less snow depth, but I found the Bodacious in the 186 length to be quick and fun in the trees and still long enough to be stable at speed for my weight.  If I didn't have the moships I would get the longer Bodacious, but I am seriously considering the186  Bodacious for a Pow/Tree/Crud ski.  It had more float and was less work in the trees than my moships and more powerful and more float than the Cochise.  But I may be still too close to the Moships for a good pow crud ski.    If these were around when I bought the moships, I would have gone Bodacious.

I tried the Iceatlantic Shamans in the same length, but that was a different story - I will say they were real easy to ski.

I'll also add that some kid half my age was at Alta for a couple days blowing up on the Flat-Tailed Cochise - taking off natural hits fakey and doing flips and landing fakey.   He could have probably pulled it off on a lot of rockered skis, but I was surpised to see that on the flat tailed ski with not too much rocker - probably the skier and not the skis.

tatsuno said it best

"they are like ninja sticks"

skied this thing in basically everything from 20 inches of powder, heavy crud, groomers, and bumps. it rips and saved my ass several times at high speeds.

Floats over anything, bust though cruds, holds an edge on hardpack(maybe alittle to good actually, I think it could use more base bevel), and is nimble enough in tight trees and bumps.

Full review coming soon.