Blizzard Cochise Ski

185 or 193 would be the correct question!

185 or 193 is the question.

At 200 lbs you'll want the 185

The 177 will be alright.

I'm 6ft 225 lbs, and I love the 185 length. More than happy. Totally solid in crud and chop, and easy to hop into tight carves on the steeps. I'm not missing the 3 more inches, which in looking at the two lengths side by side means a lot more ski that just may take me out of the fun/comfort zone.

Hi Nicholas! Sorry for late respond, I hope it's not too late for you. At the end I got myself 185cm. This week I was in Switzerland and I had the best possible conditions to test them and I must say that I'm completely satisfied with my decision. They are really easy to turn in tight trees, I just couldn't believe the difference from my old Gotamas and hitting the trees was much more fun for me than ever before. Also they float in the powder even easier than 190 gotamas. On the other hand they are a little less stable at really high speed in the open terrain. But this difference is nothing, compared to the maneuverability that I got in the tight places. Of course I still can't tell you if 193 would be better for you (me), but I felt like doing different, much easier sport, when I started skiing with this skis.

@sluzinho - what did you go for in the end? I'm faced with the same choice, i'm 6'2", 180lbs, same skiing profile. Tempted by the fact that they're on sale in 193 size!

I don't have possibility to try them, not even to see them, because it's not possible to buy them in my country. So I have to make choice based on forum advice. But on the web everyone has different opinion, so it's becoming really tough task for me.. I'm a bit sceptical about 193 also because I ski a lot of narrow steep couloirs in high mountains, and with goats I was pretty clumsy in those kind of situations. So I am thinking if it would be good to sacrifice some high speed stability (joy), for more security in the mountains... But on the other hand I'm afraid that I will lose too much performance on best powder days..I don't know, probably I will just flip a coin at the end.

Is there somewhere close by that you can try them out?

193 Cochise is way more maneuverable than the old non rocketed gotama! With the long low rocker you get a running length close to 170 when the bases are flat on the snow. I used to ski the 190 Gotama and it was fun in open spaces but a bitch when it got tight. There are a lot of people out there that wish they got the longer length in the Cochise. They're so easy to ski you can generally go up a size if you're a strong skier.

Thanks for advice, guys! But I still can't decide yet. My old ski is 190 gotama 2009 (not rockered). In the open terrain it's perfect ski for me, but I had a few problems with control, while in the trees (I also felt a lot of pain in the legs, if I was skiing trees few days in a row). Because of that reason I'm leaning towards 185 cochise. Or do yout think that 193 cochise is more manoeuvrable than old gotama?

You're kind of in the middle. Most people have been going longer with the Cochise as the rocker profile makes them ski a little shorter. You will get much better float and stability at speed with the longer length. You might sacrifice a little quickness in the trees but not much. Since you usually are not tipping the skis up at high edge angles when skiing in the trees (the skis are usually under your feet) the rocker profile will make them ski much shorter. When you get the skis out from under you more and tip them up the whole edge will engage so you will get the added length and stability with speed. I've been telling most people over 6 feet tall to go with the 193.

185cm will be plenty long for you.

I'm 6ft 225lb and am totally satisfied with the 185 I have.

Yup... We're about the same size and the 185 was too short for me.

Unless you plan to ski a lot of tight lines or tight trees, that should be the call. The ski tends to ski a little shorter anyway, and at your height and weight, that should be fine.

Do not hesitate to grab the 193s. You've got me by 2" and 20 lbs and to me the 185 just isn't enough ski. I never got to ski the 193 last spring as I busted by leg in February but I had quite a few days on the 185 and I wanted the longer length most of the time. They were fine on groomers but in any sort of variable terrain or wind affected snow I wanted more ski. The rocker profile makes the ski super quick when you need it to be but when you're hauling they'll still feel really stable.

I had 178 Salomon X-wings and then went on a demo day. I wanted to demo the 177s but the only Blizzard's available to demo at the time were the 185s so I went with them and you'd be amazed, they ski a lot shorter than you think. So I bought the 185s and have done about 6 ski days so far on them. I am 5'10' and 165lbs. On hardpack the rocker means they ski shorter than the quoted length as the ends aren't touching the ground. In powder when you need the float they ski long. They aren't heavy either. One caveat, I haven't yet tried them in tight trees but they feel so controllable I am not worried.

177 should be perfect

The flat-under-foot aspect makes for slarvy turns when in crud or powder, but don't think you're sacrificing any power turns on the hard stuff. Lay these over and hold on...they rip!

Yup, same basic rocker profile and flex. The BC description says that the Cochise has traditional camber but it doesn't. They're flat under foot.

185 For sure

Assuming expert, 185. This is a quick ski.

185 without a doubt... If you were heaver, say closer to 200 I would say go with the 193 but at 172 you won't ever overpower the 185.