EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Cochise Kicked My A$$...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cochise Kicked My A$$... - Page 3

post #61 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

Completley ignore the advice to detune the Cochise to a surboard edge. 

No one said surfboard edge. Detuning with a gummy stone allows you to sharpen them again if you don't like the detune. I never detune with a file any section of a ski with sidecut. The detuning of 8-10" of the tip/tail of the ski with a gummy is how all the Cochise are prepared for Mag tests and Dealer launches. Yes if you're carving boiler plate all the time on your 108mm rockered skis keep them sharp tip to tail. Otherwise a little progressive detuning of the tip and tail will make them more versatile off piste.
Edited by wasatchback - 1/25/13 at 5:44pm
post #62 of 86
I am 5'4" , 155lbs. I ski a 177 cm Cochise and find it a really well behaved ski. Still figuring out how to pivot short turns but carving medium to long turns I never have problems. For me the ski is a good 10cm above my head so I suppose I am skiing them long. Maybe there is something about the 170/177 Cohise/Dakota that makes them less ass-kickers than the longer sizes.
post #63 of 86

Hey, this is a fun thread and this sounds like a fun ski!

 

Anyone know where I can find a pair of 185 Cochise for pretty cheap?

post #64 of 86

^^ lol - maybe with only one or two days of use on them?

post #65 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by wasatchback View Post


No one said surfboard edge. Detuning with a gummy stone allows you to sharpen them again if you don't like the detune. I never detune with a file any section of a ski with sidecut. The detuning of 8-10" of the tip/tail of the ski with a gummy is how all the Cochise are prepared for Mag tests and Dealer launches. Yes if you're carving boiler plate all the time on your 108mm rockered skis keep them sharp tip to tail. Otherwise a little progressive detuning of the tip and tail will make them more versatile off piste.


Sorry,

 

We werent referring to the same article then...the update on that site (at least the one I thought was referrred to (perhaps you, perhaps another), had a reccomendation to run a file (yes file, not stone) at a full 45degress down the entire ski lenght and get rid of the edge entirley.  That was what I was referrring.

post #66 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainy512Day View Post

I am 5'4" , 155lbs. I ski a 177 cm Cochise and find it a really well behaved ski. Still figuring out how to pivot short turns but carving medium to long turns I never have problems. For me the ski is a good 10cm above my head so I suppose I am skiing them long. Maybe there is something about the 170/177 Cohise/Dakota that makes them less ass-kickers than the longer sizes.

It probably has as much to do with your ski ability as it does the length in relation to your size. 

 

It is not an intermediate ski. 

post #67 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreddyG View Post

Great replies, thanks.  Bushwacker, E88 and MX88 all look interesting.  I did like the Cochise in certain situations, but I was clearly over my head when I ran into a big bump field or went through a gate in the trees.  Of course I know this probably says more about me than the skis.  I'm trying to get a feel for whether I should be looking for all wood, twin tip, early-rise, full-rocker.  With the understanding that what works for one person might not work for another.  As I mentioned, I have not been around skis my whole life, so I have much to learn.

That ski is way too much work in tight spaces.  The max I would want to go is high 90's for width.  Plus, it is steep, snow is fast and firm, bumps are present: you need a ski that will allow you to bleed energy and slow down, not put you in the backseat and pick up speed.  It isn't as if you are skiing new snow, where you can work the ski more and keep speed under check.  Hardpack steeps is a whole different ballgame: it takes more skill, energy, and unless you are a superstar, a softer ski preferably. 

 

I recommend something narrower and softer. I was skiing at Squaw the past few days, same conditions and terrain you are describing, and found that my Elan 888 was about perfect.  It is much softer than the Cochise, much friendlier in that terrain where you need to bleed off speed.  Also skied my MX83, it was more playful, probably not better though. 

post #68 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post


Sorry,

We werent referring to the same article then...the update on that site (at least the one I thought was referrred to (perhaps you, perhaps another), had a reccomendation to run a file (yes file, not stone) at a full 45degress down the entire ski lenght and get rid of the edge entirley.  That was what I was referrring.

I was the one that mentioned the Blistergear review and the detune comments - assumed that the actual comments below the article would be read and that anyone that actually paid good $ for skis wasn't going to run a bastard file across the entire edge - tip to tail. Wasatchback gives the most reasonable advice on this particular subject - I did use the file from the widest point in the tip to the tip and did the same on the tail. If the OP doesn't like them - he doesn't like them - I was merely pointing out that they come w/ basically a race tune out of the factory - which ,ay or may not be helpful in his particular circumstance.
post #69 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by givethepigeye View Post


I was the one that mentioned the Blistergear review and the detune comments - assumed that the actual comments below the article would be read and that anyone that actually paid good $ for skis wasn't going to run a bastard file across the entire edge - tip to tail. Wasatchback gives the most reasonable advice on this particular subject - I did use the file from the widest point in the tip to the tip and did the same on the tail. If the OP doesn't like them - he doesn't like them - I was merely pointing out that they come w/ basically a race tune out of the factory - which ,ay or may not be helpful in his particular circumstance.

Had to read some of their reviews of skis I am on, and I conclude that like many websites trying to eek a living out of opinion, this one is just that: the opinion of underqualified, inexperienced people. Don't go there, don't read there, don't let them influence your decision or dampen your bliss.  Talk with your friends who ride the ski. Reality on your mountain.

post #70 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

Had to read some of their reviews of skis I am on, and I conclude that like many websites trying to eek a living out of opinion, this one is just that: the opinion of underqualified, inexperienced people. Don't go there, don't read there, don't let them influence your decision or dampen your bliss.  Talk with your friends who ride the ski. Reality on your mountain.

 

You are talking out of your ass.  As usual.  Just because you don't happen to agree with some of their reviews doesn't make the Blister crew under-qualified or inexperienced.  Their reviews of several skis I've been on have pretty much nailed it and were also very thoughtful and well explained.

post #71 of 86
No trouble with the blister gear reviews... I just bear in mind that most of the reviewers are lighter than I am, and that I haven't seen them ski. It's just one bit of information to help put together the bigger puzzle.
post #72 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

No trouble with the blister gear reviews... I just bear in mind that most of the reviewers are lighter than I am, and that I haven't seen them ski. It's just one bit of information to help put together the bigger puzzle.

 

There is videos on their site.  They are strong technical skiers.

post #73 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

That ski is way too much work in tight spaces.  The max I would want to go is high 90's for width.  Plus, it is steep, snow is fast and firm, bumps are present: you need a ski that will allow you to bleed energy and slow down, not put you in the backseat and pick up speed.  It isn't as if you are skiing new snow, where you can work the ski more and keep speed under check.  Hardpack steeps is a whole different ballgame: it takes more skill, energy, and unless you are a superstar, a softer ski preferably. 

 

I recommend something narrower and softer. I was skiing at Squaw the past few days, same conditions and terrain you are describing, and found that my Elan 888 was about perfect.  It is much softer than the Cochise, much friendlier in that terrain where you need to bleed off speed.  Also skied my MX83, it was more playful, probably not better though. 

 

Thanks, dawg, and all.  Interesting discussion on all counts.  Pivot turning and terrain that requires more "action" out of your feet and ankles, were where I was getting hung up, literally and figuratively.  Skill level is a factor, obviously, as are the dimensions, tune, construction of the ski, and that's holding conditions as a constant!  Argh, so many variables and not enough opportunity to sort it out.

post #74 of 86

Is there a construction difference between the Cochise 185 and 193? I have the 2012/13 185 and am surprised at the rep they sometimes get as a powerful/charger ski, as I do not find that at all (in the 185cm length, have not tried the 193cm). I am 200lbs so maybe that's why, but I have no trouble making the skis do what I want, and sometimes think I should have gone for the 193 as the 185 seems to have a speed limit for me in variable snow. Mounted on the recommended line with STH 916 if it matters.

post #75 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramboh View Post

Is there a construction difference between the Cochise 185 and 193? I have the 2012/13 185 and am surprised at the rep they sometimes get as a powerful/charger ski, as I do not find that at all (in the 185cm length, have not tried the 193cm). I am 200lbs so maybe that's why, but I have no trouble making the skis do what I want, and sometimes think I should have gone for the 193 as the 185 seems to have a speed limit for me in variable snow. Mounted on the recommended line with STH 916 if it matters.

 

For those of us in the 150 - 180 pound range, the 185 is a charger, but I've heard from others weighing 200+ that the 193 is the way to go.

post #76 of 86

I believe you asked for suggestions right?

 

1.  Go shorter in the Cochise

 

or

 

2.  Try the Icelantic Nomad RKR.  I think you will find the ski much more playful on the frontside than the Cochise.

post #77 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayT View Post

 

For those of us in the 150 - 180 pound range, the 185 is a charger, but I've heard from others weighing 200+ that the 193 is the way to go.

 

Yeah, I'd for sure recommend the 193 for anyone 200+ and is expecting a powerful ride. Don't get me wrong, the 185cm is still a great ski for my purposes, as I wanted something easy to manage in all "hard" snow (Whistler) conditions that would still be fun in a foot of powder. I find 190+ stiff skis too much work in hard pack bumps/trees.

 

Also I didn't touch the factory tune on mine, I carried a gummy stone in my pocket but never took it out. They feel great on groomers and haven't had any hookiness in the tips/tails.

post #78 of 86

I don't have time to read every post, but what you say doesn't surprise me. The Cochises are beefy, I'm trying to decide if I like them or not, and I got the 177, and I'm about your size, and would certainly qualify as an "expert" skier.

For what you describe, I think the key to your 105mm or so fat ski is to NOT have metal in it, and try to find one with an easy going flex. The Cochise is dialed for "charging" , not to be a fun, easy going soft snow ski. Try not to listen to the "go long and stiff" crowd, that really only makes sense for straight lining the Palisades and similar run outs. Most "playful" skis are plenty stable for the actual skiing we actually do, and a lot more fun, at least to me.

For firmer conditions, a 90mm or smaller ski is the ticket in my opinion. So many nice skis in the 84-88mm range. The key here is also not to get too stiff of a ski, or too long - many of these in the 178cm range get too stiff, or go shorter, like a 171.

post #79 of 86

The Cochise is a great versatile ski for true experts; advanced intermediates need not appyl. My wife is 5'5" and 105 lbs and loves her 177s so it's not the ski it's the operator for sure.

post #80 of 86

I hate to say it but shorter is better on the Rodeo Bulls for a turnier ride.

 

I have a pair of the Bodacious.  These 185s are a gigantic, magical, tame, sweet mannered bull, they are unbelievably responsive to the subtlest input.  They turn from full left to full right at the snap of a finger and grease a carve into a smear with full control and feel.

 

I'm 240 pounds so they don't straightline the chop as well as I'd like but for the speeds mere mortals go I could not be happier.

 

I did move the demo bindings forward 1 cm, the tails were wagging a bit much and sometimes crack like a whip in the rough. 

 

After backing the Jesters a half cm, they have not been touched since. 

 

Unfortunately the tips do spear the crust if  I'm not careful.

post #81 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle Dave View Post

The Cochise is a great versatile ski for true experts; advanced intermediates need not appyl. My wife is 5'5" and 105 lbs and loves her 177s so it's not the ski it's the operator for sure.

 

I think they're a bit more accessible than that.  I certainly don't consider myself an expert.  But agreed that they'd be too much for most intermediates.

post #82 of 86

Line Pollard Opus 

post #83 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle Dave View Post

The Cochise is a great versatile ski for true experts; advanced intermediates need not appyl. My wife is 5'5" and 105 lbs and loves her 177s so it's not the ski it's the operator for sure.

I'm glad she likes them. I know a woman basically the same size who also has the 177's who skis faster at Squaw than just about anyone and she feels the same way as me, doesn't like them much at all.

Nothing hard to ski in the ski if you don't size up, I just don't find it to be a super fun ski.

post #84 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by squawbomber View Post

who skis faster at Squaw than just about anyone

 

That's quite a statement.  Is it Julia Mancuso?  wink.gif

post #85 of 86

nah, just your typical ex-racer who thinks stopping in the middle of a run is for wussies. we skied with Julia last year, or maybe the year before, it was a blast. she's really small, but obviously ripped. she laid down some killer wc gs arcs on Shirley.

post #86 of 86

Just adding my perspective on this great ski.

 

2013 Chochise 185cm w/ Marker Griffon.

I'm 5'8", 180lbs.

26 seasons of skiing

 

Love this ski, super stable at speed, carves like a dream, handles crud easily.  I felt is was almost as torsionally stiff as my old (retired) metron m:ex's.

 

I can "manage" to make it down a bump field, but it would not be my first choice (I drop down to a pair of cheap 163 Atomic park skis for this).  If you liked the Blizzard flipcore technology, then for glading and bumps, the Bonafide or Bushwacker would clearly have been a better choice.

 

As far as tuning, I would NOT detune or tweak anything.  This ski works great (for me at least) as is.

 

I did plenty of research about mounting position, and the prevailing wisdom was to mount at the recommended center point.  In hindsight, I would have chosen +1cm or even +2cm.  Better yet, I'd have chosen schizo bindings so I could change center point depending on conditions.  Given the length, width and weight of this ski, moving the center point forward would not compromise any of its strengths, but certainly would help make it a bit more responsive in tight conditions.

 

If you bought this ski to primarily ski  "bumps and tighter terrain", then you did buy the wrong ski (as you have already concluded).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Cochise Kicked My A$$...