Clothing

Outdoor Gear

Best Sellers

Average Reviews Community Rating | 7 Reviews

Blizzard Cochise Ski

Available Colors / Styles

One Color
Uploaded By:
Was this helpful?
Flag This Close

Last night the storm dumped two more feet of fluff on your mountain, so this morning you clip into the Blizzard Cochise Ski and everything becomes a blur of high-speed, effortless arcs that all end in fluffy faceshots. Dominating deep, delicious pow is what it's all about. And since late, big-mountain champion Arne Backstrom designed this ski's Flipcore natural rocker technology, you can be sure that it kills it from storm days on through to sketchy spring descents.

  • The Flipcore technology means the ski was built upside down, providing a rockered tip and tail that are naturally stable along with slight camber underfoot for superior control and edge-hold on harder snow
  • A wood core yields great rigidity and rebound for skiers who crush it every day on every mountain
  • Sandwich construction layers the core materials with titanal layers and sidewalls that are joined to provide greater impact strength, handling, and edge grip
  • Fat dimensions and sidecut yield amazing float in powder, easy edge-to-edge turning in choppy trees, and split-second speed control in exposed terrain

Bottom Line: Slay every day and float it when it dumps.

Talk shop with all the gear freaks out there: ask 'em questions, upload/browse photos, and give your 2¢.

Hi, throw your review on the Product Wall to show your Gear-telligence.
Hi, got a question? Ask on the Product Wall.

5'8 200 lbs..would the 177 be alright? aggressive and very

5'8 200 lbs..would the 177 be alright?
aggressive and very advanced skier but not too extreme

By:
February 3, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

185 or 193 would be the correct question!

By:
February 6, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

185 or 193 is the question.

By:
February 6, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

At 200 lbs you'll want the 185

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
February 5, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

The 177 will be alright.

By:
February 3, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 5

Game Changer

By:
February 14, 2012

Ski's on hardpack like a normal, sidecut, cambered, ski. Love's to rip and turn hard. Then, in the deeps fluffly stuff, it ski's like a big powder board. Works in moguls pretty well to. Overall, I am totally in love.

Was this helpful? (3) (0)

Flag

Saddle Up

By: Backcountry.com Sponsored Athlete
December 13, 2011

What can I say? The Cochise rip...they carve on groomers and crud without any adjustment. I love these skis!

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag Zoom

Hi! I will buy these skis, but I really don't know which

Hi! I will buy these skis, but I really don't know which length to take, so I will appreciate your advice. I'm 6'1" 175lbs...I ski off-piste in Switzerland and Austria most of time. I love to go high speed, but I also do a lot of tight trees skiing. So I'm torn between 185 and 193, please help!

By:
February 2, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By: Backcountry.com Employee
March 4, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By:
February 26, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

@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!

By:
February 14, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By:
February 3, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
February 3, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
February 3, 2012

Was this helpful? (2) (0)

Flag

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?

By:
February 3, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
February 2, 2012

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag

185cm will be plenty long for you.

By:
February 2, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 5

All day, Everyday, All Year

By:
February 27, 2012

This is the only ski that needs to be manufactured ever again. Hard Pack, Deep Powder, Moguls, Trees, whatever the conditions are this ski thrives! Flip core makes this ski super stable when you push your limits, but very easy and forgiving when you just want to cruise. Everybody deserves to try pair of Cochise!

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Air.

By: Backcountry.com Sponsored Athlete
November 27, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag Zoom

1 Comment Last Comment: December 1, 2011 by:

By:
December 1, 2011

Hey Tats!
Would you mind taking a side pic of the camber profile of these bad boys? I just won a pair of blizzard skis and am strongly considering the cochise.
thanks dude, hope to see you sometime this winter

Flag

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

2012 Blizzard Cochise

By: Backcountry.com Employee
September 2, 2011

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag

6'2" 200lbs...i'm guessing 193cm?

6'2" 200lbs...i'm guessing 193cm?

By:
January 30, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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

By: Backcountry.com Employee
March 4, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
February 1, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By:
February 1, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 1

I wanted to like these

By:
February 16, 2012

I demo'ed a pair of these skis at Jackson Hole, right after demoing a pair of Gotamas. I got on the 193 Cochises (compared to the 194 Gotamas), then grabbed a tramride to Rendezvous bowl. after a traverse to the far side of Rendezvous bowl I grabbed some turns. Immediately I was surprised!- not by how good they felt, but how they felt like 2x4's attached to my feet. They didn't like to cut and float through the gnar I was on, but I thought maybe I just wasn't used to them. I ran out towards the bowl off Sublette and jumped through some bumps (who does bumps in 194's?), and under a cliff band in search of some fresher untracked stuff. The whole time I was thinking "man these skis don't like to initiate, and have NO feel to them at all. It was like they didn't want to do anything. They had a shorter turn radius than the Goats, but if you turn them over they just kind of wallow... when I got to the groomed runout, I put them on edge, thinking the stiffer, flat tail would help and the earlier rise tip could be fun. I was wrong. These skis don't like to be pushed. You push a Volkl and the skis grin back at you and rip harder. You push these Cochises and the tips wander like record player with a bent needle. (DISCLAIMER: I'm 6'5", 280lbs. I'm not a fatty, and push my skis, my equipment, and myself hard. These skis squirmed under the pressure.) For the rest of my afternoon on the Coshise, I bemoaned switching from the Gotamas to the Cochises- the Gotama is easily twice the ski that the Coshise is. The best part- we spied a TRULY rippin' teleskier bombing down the mountain after the lifts had closed. He stopped to chat with my brother, who is looking to pick up tele'ing in addition to his alpine activities, and asked me about the Cochises when he saw I was on them. Apparently tons of people like the cochise at JacksonHoleMR. I let loose-"they feel like 2x4's, they're stiff longitudinally, but noodles torsionally, they don't like to be pushed hard and don't like an aggressive skier, they hate holding edges, they wander, they don't like to initiate in the deeper stuff, they hate cutting through crud, etc". I did tell him that maybe it was just me and his mileage may vary (of course- everyone's different). He was shocked and said he'd try them out before he bought them, especially after hearing my discourse.
Now here's the best part of it all. On the LAST slope of the LAST run of the LAST day of skiing, I hit some bumps on the left side of the trail before a long runout, and all of the sudden eat shit. I couldn't tell why, it was like I just lost all control and fell over in transition to another bump. And my ski took off down the hill. I said "why isn't the ski stopping?", to which my friend Dave said "the brakes aren't on". I replied "yeah no kidding, why aren't they stopping the ski!?!". To which he replied "the brakes aren't on the ski!", and pushed the back half of the binding over to me in the snow. They had ripped clean out of the ski. My ski rocketed down the hill and barreled into a small tree glade, and I spent the rest of the run limping my way down the hill.
I thoroughly disliked that pair of Cochises...
Picture attached

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

1 Comment Last Comment: April 18, 2012 by:

By:
April 18, 2012

Liar

Flag

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Am 6'4", around 220lbs dressed to ski. I know I should

Am 6'4", around 220lbs dressed to ski. I know I should go 193, but wouldn't that cost me some fun in the trees? Would 185 not also be sufficient for a lad my size?

By:
January 15, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
January 17, 2012

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 5

...And One Ski To Rule Them All

By:
February 13, 2012

I wanted to carry only one pair of skis when I travel and the Cochise is definitely it. Floats in pow, surfs the chop, destroys crud, rails on hardpack, nimble in the trees, bashes moguls, trenches groomers, and amazingly maneuverable on the slow flat sections. I demoed quite a few skis in the same category and the Cochise was head and shoulders above the rest. Blizzard really nailed it with the Flipcore design. I'm stilled astonished how versatile a 108mm waisted ski can be. What's left to say - go get yours.

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag

5'8", 158lbs., technically solid but not wildly aggressive,

5'8", 158lbs., technically solid but not wildly aggressive, no big drops, lots of steeps and tight trees, love pow and crud, bumps when i have to, tolerate groomers. All current skis between 176 and 179cm. I'm wondering whether to go with the 177 or the 185???

By:
December 18, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By:
January 7, 2012

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

177 should be perfect

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
December 18, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 5

BLIZZARD COCHISE

By:
January 8, 2012

Great ski. Most do-all skis have some drawbacks but I have not found any on this one. 5'8" 170 lbs on 185 and happy. I have not skied anything that compares to it to date. Is it the best ski today? I do not know because I have not skied everything out there but I have no complaints (other than price). I would recommend this ski to anyone on the west coast. Contrary to what I have seen on the reviews it floats POW pretty well. Thought about the Bonafide but went with the Cochise and glad I did.

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag

Hot Tub Time Machine

By: Backcountry.com Sponsored Athlete
November 27, 2011

Ok...so not the Cochise, but after training and freeriding on the Cochise all season, I busted out the old Blizzard Thermo 190cms for some hot tub-babe-jumping! Sweet!

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag Zoom

does the cochise have the same rocker profile and flex pattern

does the cochise have the same rocker profile and flex pattern as the bodacious?

By:
November 13, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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!

By: Backcountry.com Sponsored Athlete
November 27, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
November 19, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 5

Sweeeet skis

By:
January 7, 2012

These are the skis ive been waiting for. There not a super floating ski in the deep stuff, but as a 6 foot 220lbs guy they still do an awsome job. On the groomed they dig trenches and hold a great edge, even if you want to make quick short gs turns. If you can only afford one pair of skis i would highly recommend these.

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag

Cochise w/ "Flip" Core

By:
October 12, 2011

Jesse Hoffman on assignment in Portillo, Chile with Sweetgrass Productions flipping out on his Blizzard Cochise.

Was this helpful? (1) (0)

Flag Zoom

1 Comment Last Comment: January 30, 2012 by:

By:
January 30, 2012

From what I'm reading. I'm guessing I should get the 193s? I'm 6'2" 200lbs.

Flag

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

What length do you recommend? 5'10 - 165lbs

What length do you recommend? 5'10 - 165lbs

By:
November 10, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

185 For sure

By:
November 13, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Assuming expert, 185. This is a quick ski.

By:
November 10, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Rating for this product: 5

Definitely a Keeper.

By:
January 21, 2012

Overall, great ski. Really easy to turn. Seems like short and medium radius turns are its forte. The ski does not have a significant side cut, so when you're carving, the turns tend to be fairly long and straight. That can be good or bad, depending on your preference. I personally prefer skis I can make arcing carves on, but again, matter of personal preference. They are very stable and hold its edge well, even on bulletproof groomers. I am definitely riding faster now than ever before. I am 5'10" and weigh 175lbs. I got the 177cm, but these do ski short and could have easily gone with the 185s. I just went with the shorter length for agility in the trees but based on how the 177s feel, I don't think I would have had much issue with the 185s. Definitely a keeper.

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

I am 6' tall and weigh 172. What length should I get?

I am 6' tall and weigh 172. What length should I get?

By:
October 5, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

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.

By: Backcountry.com Vendor Rep
October 10, 2011

Was this helpful? (0) (0)

Flag

Change me.

25%
Reg $749.99
$562.49
Suggested Retail: $900.00 | 25% Off, Regularly: $749.99 | Item: BLZ0041
Size ?

No questions asked unlimited return policy

Free Shipping

Free shipping on orders over $50

1 in Stock
Close This Window

Please choose an option to order this item.

One Color, 193cm (562.49)

Game Changer

5 star rating

By: John N McConnell February 14, 2012

Ski's on hardpack like a normal, sidecut, cambered, ski. Love's to rip and turn hard. Then, in the deeps fluffly stuff, it ski's like a big more...

All day, Everyday, All Year

5 star rating

By: Marcus Caston February 27, 2012

This is the only ski that needs to be manufactured ever again. Hard Pack, Deep Powder, Moguls, Trees, whatever the conditions are this ski thrives! Flip more...

Add this to my Wish List  
This product has been added to XX List
Length:
177 cm, 185 cm, 193 cm 
Dimensions:
135 / 108 / 123 mm 
Turn Radius:
(185cm) 28.5 m 
Profile:
rockered tip & tail, traditional camber underfoot 
Construction:
sandwich 
Core:
wood 
Base:
sintered graphite 
Binding Included:
no 
Weight:
(pair, 177cm) 9 lb 3.2 oz, (pair, 185cm) 9 lb 12.8 oz, (pair, 193cm) 10 lb 6.4 oz 
Recommended Use:
big mountain freeride, powder 
Manufacturer Warranty:
1 year