Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 62
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749
    I spent a few hours on my new Cochise 106 today. Here are some very preliminary thoughts...

    Skier Info: 5' 8"...about 200-lbs right now (yeah for COVID weight!); 47-yo...skiing since age 5; Boots - 2018 Tecnica Cochise 130

    Setup - 2021 Cochise 106 - 185-cm mounted with Salomon Warden 13 MNC Demo and skied on the recommended line.

    Detune - I took a "hard" gummi stone and made several passes along the rockered sections and to about 1 inch beyond the contact points; After my first run, the skis felt a little too grabby under foot, so I took a few passes with a "soft" gummi along the full length of the skis. Problem solved.

    Conditions - Off-Piste: 10-20" of medium density powder on top of a very hard crust; On-Piste: 4-6" of pow that fell after the slopes were groomed. Groomers were a mess when I got to them with Cochise, which was kind of perfect for testing.

    Swing-weight: Even with the demo bindings, they feel lighter and easier to toss around than other vintages of the Cochise I have skied. I current own year 2 and 3 iterations of the heralded OG Cochise in a 185-cm. I also owned the first major re-design model (blue with carbon tips and tails). I skied them 3-days and sold them. Too harsh to ski (for me) and nowhere near as loose and fun as the OG version. Anyhow, they do "feel" a bit lighter to me...whether or not that is good remains to be seen.

    Powder: I spent the morning on my 119-cm in the waist 193 Volkl Shiro, so switching to these I expected a huge difference in float. Up to about 10-12", they float well enough, especially compared to other Cochise variants. Not amazing float, but certainly passable.

    Pivotability: This is the biggest surprise and probably the strongest attribute of the ski...they pivot so easy and ski really loose, especially in soft snow. The rocker profile in the tip is very similar to my OG 185, but the tail on the 106 model has a lot less rocker. I was concerned that the ski would hang up or at a minimum, not pivot as well as the OG variant. Despite the reduced tail rocker, they are really loose in soft bumps and soft snow of any type. Coupled with the 24-m radius, they never, ever felt hooky. They are quite similar to the OG model in this regard. I wouldn't say they ski as loose as the 192 MFree 108, but for a ski with a much flatter tail, they aren't that far off. Most people know I am a fan of the Katana K108. I won't go into a detailed comparison of these two skis since I have such limited time on the Cochise 106, but I'm fairly certain at this point that the Cochise 106 skis looser in deep snow than the Katana K108. Both ski soft snow loose in the tail, but the Cochise 106 seems more natural and easier to break the tail loose and throw the ski sideways.

    Soft crud/cut up powder: They push through this stuff just fine. Maybe not quite as adeptly as the OG Cochise, but very close.

    Soft Groomers: Our recent spring freeze-thaw cycle ice has been covered up by last night's storm (hurray!!), so groomers were very soft and really messy in most spots. They ski groomers well-enough, but compared to my M102's and K108's with a 20-m and 19-m radius under foot for each ski, the 24-m radius made the ski less intuitive to me on groomers. It's easy to get on edge, but just isn't as natural a carver (at least in today's conditions) as the Volkls. I want to get them out in better groomed conditions to see how they really perform as a frontside tool.

    Speed: They seem to like it. On the torn up groomers I felt like I wasn't quite as comfortable on this Cochise 106 as I have been on the OG version. The new ones go just as fast, but seem to pass on more of the terrain feedback to the skier. They just weren't as confidence inspiring to let them run. Again, need more time before making a final decision.

    Final Thoughts: This isn't the OG Cochise. It feels somewhere between the OG Version and the carbon-tipped variant that just wanted to go fast. They are a fun and capable big-mountain ski that excels in soft snow and is above average on shredded groomers. There is definitely a strong resemblance to the OG Cochise off-piste, where that playful charger character shines, but they feel less like that version on packed or groomed snow, where they felt somewhat less damp and at times jarring.

    Still a Cochise...but not quite the OG...for better or worse...it will be up to you to determine that.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    I spent a few hours on my new Cochise 106 today. Here are some very preliminary thoughts....
    Great info here Bandit Man! Thanks for taking the time.

    I'm more interested in these than the Katana 108s, simply because I have some Pro Riders and the Cochise 106 seems a bit easier going than the Katanas. I guess for more quiver diversity, if that makes sense.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    I spent a few hours on my new Cochise 106 today. Here are some very preliminary thoughts...

    Skier Info: 5' 8"...about 200-lbs right now (yeah for COVID weight!); 47-yo...skiing since age 5; Boots - 2018 Tecnica Cochise 130

    Setup - 2021 Cochise 106 - 185-cm mounted with Salomon Warden 13 MNC Demo and skied on the recommended line.

    Detune - I took a "hard" gummi stone and made several passes along the rockered sections and to about 1 inch beyond the contact points; After my first run, the skis felt a little too grabby under foot, so I took a few passes with a "soft" gummi along the full length of the skis. Problem solved.

    Conditions - Off-Piste: 10-20" of medium density powder on top of a very hard crust; On-Piste: 4-6" of pow that fell after the slopes were groomed. Groomers were a mess when I got to them with Cochise, which was kind of perfect for testing.

    Swing-weight: Even with the demo bindings, they feel lighter and easier to toss around than other vintages of the Cochise I have skied. I current own year 2 and 3 iterations of the heralded OG Cochise in a 185-cm. I also owned the first major re-design model (blue with carbon tips and tails). I skied them 3-days and sold them. Too harsh to ski (for me) and nowhere near as loose and fun as the OG version. Anyhow, they do "feel" a bit lighter to me...whether or not that is good remains to be seen.

    Powder: I spent the morning on my 119-cm in the waist 193 Volkl Shiro, so switching to these I expected a huge difference in float. Up to about 10-12", they float well enough, especially compared to other Cochise variants. Not amazing float, but certainly passable.

    Pivotability: This is the biggest surprise and probably the strongest attribute of the ski...they pivot so easy and ski really loose, especially in soft snow. The rocker profile in the tip is very similar to my OG 185, but the tail on the 106 model has a lot less rocker. I was concerned that the ski would hang up or at a minimum, not pivot as well as the OG variant. Despite the reduced tail rocker, they are really loose in soft bumps and soft snow of any type. Coupled with the 24-m radius, they never, ever felt hooky. They are quite similar to the OG model in this regard. I wouldn't say they ski as loose as the 192 MFree 108, but for a ski with a much flatter tail, they aren't that far off. Most people know I am a fan of the Katana K108. I won't go into a detailed comparison of these two skis since I have such limited time on the Cochise 106, but I'm fairly certain at this point that the Cochise 106 skis looser in deep snow than the Katana K108. Both ski soft snow loose in the tail, but the Cochise 106 seems more natural and easier to break the tail loose and throw the ski sideways.

    Soft crud/cut up powder: They push through this stuff just fine. Maybe not quite as adeptly as the OG Cochise, but very close.

    Soft Groomers: Our recent spring freeze-thaw cycle ice has been covered up by last night's storm (hurray!!), so groomers were very soft and really messy in most spots. They ski groomers well-enough, but compared to my M102's and K108's with a 20-m and 19-m radius under foot for each ski, the 24-m radius made the ski less intuitive to me on groomers. It's easy to get on edge, but just isn't as natural a carver (at least in today's conditions) as the Volkls. I want to get them out in better groomed conditions to see how they really perform as a frontside tool.

    Speed: They seem to like it. On the torn up groomers I felt like I wasn't quite as comfortable on this Cochise 106 as I have been on the OG version. The new ones go just as fast, but seem to pass on more of the terrain feedback to the skier. They just weren't as confidence inspiring to let them run. Again, need more time before making a final decision.

    Final Thoughts: This isn't the OG Cochise. It feels somewhere between the OG Version and the carbon-tipped variant that just wanted to go fast. They are a fun and capable big-mountain ski that excels in soft snow and is above average on shredded groomers. There is definitely a strong resemblance to the OG Cochise off-piste, where that playful charger character shines, but they feel less like that version on packed or groomed snow, where they felt somewhat less damp and at times jarring.

    Still a Cochise...but not quite the OG...for better or worse...it will be up to you to determine that.
    Interesting, thank you ! Could those be the skis I wanted to complement the R11 when I bought (and sold) the R10 ? As a bit looser and more lively tool when the tide is lower ? I am 6’2 and 200lbs, on the agressive side. Do you think those skis could be overpowered as the 188R10 was ? Cheers


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    226
    Bandit, Mr P., Fred, Eluder I hear you on the Cochise 106. Skied them first in hero snow and of course loved them, less so in the shit. No frills was a fair assessment Fred. Feeling the OG 193s, skied them for the first time this season.

    Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    81
    Bandit man - thank you for the great initial impressions. Question 1 - say i had a pair of enforcer 104 frees and mounded close to the mount line on these (-1.5, -2) - would the cochise be kind of a firmer enforcer 104 thats better blasting through chop?

    Also, question 2 - hows the tail compared to the M102, K108? More spring-boardy and punishing if you get backseat or similar?

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749
    Quote Originally Posted by MD12 View Post
    Bandit man - thank you for the great initial impressions. Question 1 - say i had a pair of enforcer 104 frees and mounded close to the mount line on these (-1.5, -2) - would the cochise be kind of a firmer enforcer 104 thats better blasting through chop?
    It's funny that you bring an Enforcer into the conversation. I was trying really hard to not say "They Enforcer-ized the Cochise...but forgot to keep a hint of forgiveness". The 185 Cochise 106 is really manageable...until you ski it fast in crappy snow and then the sadistic side of the ski is revealed and the ride starts to feel harsh. You hit on the best parts of the ski...it's awesome off-piste where it is easy to pivot/quite agile and blasts through chop. That being said, it IS NOT as well rounded a ski as an Enforcer 104. Sure it has a much higher top end, but there is a price for that. Additionally, the Cochise 106 is pretty meh on groomers, where as the Enforcer 104 is rather good on groomers.

    Quote Originally Posted by MD12 View Post
    Also, question 2 - hows the tail compared to the M102, K108? More spring-boardy and punishing if you get backseat or similar?
    Nothing really stood out about the tail. Based on the limited time I was on the ski, I never had a moment of feeling that it is too harsh. I'd say it was similar to the Volkl's in that it is supportive without being punishing and easy to break loose. Never got in the backseat, so don't know if I would have gotten spanked.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    870
    Comparing brand new skis to skis that have many days on them is rather tough. The break in period is real thing and skis tend to relax a bit after some use.

    As has been covered the new Cochise uses the core from a Rustler 11. The goal was originally to use the Trueblend core but it was too heavy in such a wide ski. The goal with this generation was to make the tips and tails torsionally softer than the previous generation which is what made them such tanks especially in tight terrain or steeps, they just wouldn’t release. The skis are more versatile in technical terrain, much easier to maintain your balance especially. But they still have the construction, weight, and longer sidecut to be incredibly stable at speed. For me the present 192 is also a much more manageable ski than the OG 193. I would agree that the originals were more fun on groomers. They had an overall side cut design that was much more similar to a carving ski so the more you laid it over the tighter the radius got.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749
    Quote Originally Posted by wasatchback View Post
    Comparing brand new skis to skis that have many days on them is rather tough. The break in period is real thing and skis tend to relax a bit after some use.
    But isn’t that how all ski tests and demo day impressions work? You get a couple runs on a fairly new ski and base your impressions on that experience?

    I own and enjoy a few Blizzard skis. Spent lots of days on my 187 Brahma 88’s and am a huge fan. Also love my 188 Rustler 11’s. Also have OG Cochise and Bonafides.

    I gave the blue with carbon tips Cochise 3-days. That was enough to tell me that it wasn’t the ski for me. The flood of that model Cochise that showed up in Gear Swap that year told me I wasn’t the only one that didn’t click with that ski.

    After just a few hours on the 106, I like it a lot more than the previous version. The claim that it is some improved re-incarnation of the original seems like a stretch so far. Maybe that impression will change if I give it more time.

    The real challenge for the new Cochise is living up to being compared to the original...just like the new Katana. But when you brand a ski like that...it seems like a natural consequence.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,825
    What is /was wrong with the "blue" period Cochise? I like it. It took a bit to get dialed in but I think doing so made me a better skier.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    But when you brand a ski like that...it seems like a natural consequence.
    So true.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749

    2020-21 Cochise 106

    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    What is /was wrong with the "blue" period Cochise? I like it. It took a bit to get dialed in but I think doing so made me a better skier.
    Not as smeary and loose as the first version. Still a big mountain crusher (as you likely know) but more like a comp ski. The original was a charger with a playful and almost forgiving side. When they added the carbon tips and tails the ski just got harsh to many skiers and much more one-dimensional IMO.

    But...it was better on groomers.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Not as smeary and loose as the first version. Still a big mountain crusher (as you likely know) but more like a comp ski. The original was a charger with a playful and almost forgiving side. When they added the carbon tips and tails the ski just got harsh to many skiers and much more one-dimensional IMO.
    That actually sounds like the R11 IMHO. At least in 192 from my experience. So the new Cochise has to be somewhat different ?


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749

    2020-21 Cochise 106

    Quote Originally Posted by Gweilo View Post
    That actually sounds like the R11 IMHO. At least in 192 from my experience. So the new Cochise has to be somewhat different ?


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
    Yeah, with the Rustler 11 in the lineup, it’s like they were trying to avoid overlap and keep the ski unique. When the Cochise first came into being, I thought I read it was created as a narrower version of Arne Backstrom’s Bodacious design.

    The new Cochise isn’t a bad ski, it just has a lot to live up to. It still a charger and still skis loose. However, with skis like the Katana K108 and MFree108 out in the marketplace, it has some real competition. In all honesty, I think those two skis are closer to the OG Cochise than the Cochise 106.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Not as smeary and loose as the first version. Still a big mountain crusher (as you likely know) but more like a comp ski. The original was a charger with a playful and almost forgiving side. When they added the carbon tips and tails the ski just got harsh to many skiers and much more one-dimensional IMO.

    But...it was better on groomers.
    Is the new 106 more of a charger? I was actually getting the impression it lost a little bit of it's gusto.. Am I wrong to assume that?

    I've been trying to read up on too many different skis, I may be mixing up some.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,257
    Quote Originally Posted by AEV View Post
    Is the new 106 more of a charger? I was actually getting the impression it lost a little bit of it's gusto.. Am I wrong to assume that?

    I've been trying to read up on too many different skis, I may be mixing up some.
    I have all three version in 192/193. It still charges as hard as you want so I wouldn’t worry about that, just still has a similar carbon tip feel that gen 2 did.

    Also my gen 2s are beat and not sharp and a new gen 3 is still easier to ski.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Yeah, with the Rustler 11 in the lineup, it’s like they were trying to avoid overlap and keep the ski unique. When the Cochise first came into being, I thought I read it was created as a narrower version of Arne Backstrom’s Bodacious design.

    The new Cochise isn’t a bad ski, it just has a lot to live up to. It still a charger and still skis loose. However, with skis like the Katana K108 and MFree108 out in the marketplace, it has some real competition. In all honesty, I think those two skis are closer to the OG Cochise than the Cochise 106.
    Mmmh. Then It could well be what I am looking for to bridge the gap between the Brahmas and the R11 on low tide days !


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,339
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    What is /was wrong with the "blue" period Cochise? I like it. It took a bit to get dialed in but I think doing so made me a better skier.
    I like them too. They have some energy in them whereas the OGs are pretty dead. It takes same work but you can load up the tail and snap off quick turns with the gen 2 in a way that isn't possible with the OG. But they need to be skied a lot more precisely. The OG was just so easy to ski and forgiving as well as being looser and a smoother ride.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    I have all three version in 192/193. It still charges as hard as you want so I wouldn’t worry about that, just still has a similar carbon tip feel that gen 2 did.

    Also my gen 2s are beat and not sharp and a new gen 3 is still easier to ski.
    That's very good to know. I was starting to think it lost some of those bull genes. I didn't think Blizzard would do that, but I guess I'm just not picking up on what the reviews are putting down, my own fault.

    I don't know how I feel about carbon tips. I have had skis with carbon in the tips, but never had a ski with so called "carbon tips". Are they just loud, or do they feel odd at speed? I swear, as soon as I find a ski, I dig deeper into it and find more flaws.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749
    Quote Originally Posted by AEV View Post
    Is the new 106 more of a charger? I was actually getting the impression it lost a little bit of it's gusto.. Am I wrong to assume that?

    I've been trying to read up on too many different skis, I may be mixing up some.
    Yeah, it just doesn’t feel as quiet and stable at speed to me. I felt like it was not sucking up the irregularities in the snow like the old one...but you can ski it fast.

    I kept thinking that I should try the 192 as the 185 felt like a lot less ski than my OG version. It certainly feels lighter.

    To be perfectly honest, the 106 reminded me a lot of the Woodsman 108 but the Woodsman is more forgiving and provides better dampening.

    I would definitely demo the Cochise 106 before committing to it.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Yeah, it just doesn’t feel as quiet and stable at speed to me. I felt like it was not sucking up the irregularities in the snow like the old one...but you can ski it fast.

    I kept thinking that I should try the 192 as the 185 felt like a lot less ski than my OG version. It certainly feels lighter.

    To be perfectly honest, the 106 reminded me a lot of the Woodsman 108 but the Woodsman is more forgiving and provides better dampening.

    I would definitely demo the Cochise 106 before committing to it.
    Ya I will demo first.

    I used to ski the OG in 185, loved it, but still preferred the 184&191 Katana 112. I was 185lbs back then, wish I could get back to that weight.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,257
    Just also want to add that I’ve felt the cochise skis pretty different between the 185 and 192 for each gen also. The 190+ has always been a much stronger ski.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,825
    A 192 Cochise is just a scary concept. In early winter I was seeing a lot of them for sale barely used. Did get another pair of Blue 185 pretty cheap esp for a ski that only had 5 days on it and looked it. I think the guy said he liked to 17? but just could not ski the 185.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    3,630
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Yeah, it just doesn’t feel as quiet and stable at speed to me. I felt like it was not sucking up the irregularities in the snow like the old one...but you can ski it fast.

    I kept thinking that I should try the 192 as the 185 felt like a lot less ski than my OG version. It certainly feels lighter.

    To be perfectly honest, the 106 reminded me a lot of the Woodsman 108 but the Woodsman is more forgiving and provides better dampening.

    I would definitely demo the Cochise 106 before committing to it.
    I have to say I don't have the exact same sentiment on these but I think we are feeling the same exact thing. I agree they are not as damp or pure plow machines like the OG, but they make it up for this with some liveliness. The Gen 1's are awesome skis, there is a reason I am still skiing them 6 years later, but sometimes they get boring to me. So for my skiing I find the 106 more playful and obviously for others this isn't necessarily true. I think the no camber vs camber is a factor in this as well as construction. For me this little bit of liveliness is a positive as I don't think it deflects it just can load up unlike the OG, its still a metal Blizzard after all. I am pretty sure they are within 10-15 grams of the OG and I think the carbon tipped model is actually the heaviest iteration.

    The pivotability or looseness of this ski is what reminded me so much of the OG model and is what I think makes the 106 stand out. For it to still have a fully engageable edge but be able to break loose is a pretty unique thing that a lot of skis miss. In cut up steeps this ski is perfect, its there when you need it but can let go and get into position quickly, I find it very adaptable.

    I think the only way to have the 106 be the OG would be to make pretty much an exact copy, the 106 is not that but I do feel it took some things that are great about OG and mixed in some attributes of skis that actually are selling for them. Its funny how change can be perceived.
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,339
    Quote Originally Posted by Eluder View Post
    I have to say I don't have the exact same sentiment on these but I think we are feeling the same exact thing. I agree they are not as damp or pure plow machines like the OG, but they make it up for this with some liveliness. The Gen 1's are awesome skis, there is a reason I am still skiing them 6 years later, but sometimes they get boring to me. So for my skiing I find the 106 more playful and obviously for others this isn't necessarily true. I think the no camber vs camber is a factor in this as well as construction. For me this little bit of liveliness is a positive as I don't think it deflects it just can load up unlike the OG, its still a metal Blizzard after all. I am pretty sure they are within 10-15 grams of the OG and I think the carbon tipped model is actually the heaviest iteration.

    The pivotability or looseness of this ski is what reminded me so much of the OG model and is what I think makes the 106 stand out. For it to still have a fully engageable edge but be able to break loose is a pretty unique thing that a lot of skis miss. In cut up steeps this ski is perfect, its there when you need it but can let go and get into position quickly, I find it very adaptable.

    I think the only way to have the 106 be the OG would be to make pretty much an exact copy, the 106 is not that but I do feel it took some things that are great about OG and mixed in some attributes of skis that actually are selling for them. Its funny how change can be perceived.
    Hmm. You make it sound like the Cochise I've been looking for. I'm with you on the OG's being boring sometimes. I just bought some used 188 Corvuses. If those don't tread the needle for me I'll start looking for cheap 106's.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Eluder View Post
    I have to say I don't have the exact same sentiment on these but I think we are feeling the same exact thing. I agree they are not as damp or pure plow machines like the OG, but they make it up for this with some liveliness. The Gen 1's are awesome skis, there is a reason I am still skiing them 6 years later, but sometimes they get boring to me. So for my skiing I find the 106 more playful and obviously for others this isn't necessarily true. I think the no camber vs camber is a factor in this as well as construction. For me this little bit of liveliness is a positive as I don't think it deflects it just can load up unlike the OG, its still a metal Blizzard after all. I am pretty sure they are within 10-15 grams of the OG and I think the carbon tipped model is actually the heaviest iteration.

    The pivotability or looseness of this ski is what reminded me so much of the OG model and is what I think makes the 106 stand out. For it to still have a fully engageable edge but be able to break loose is a pretty unique thing that a lot of skis miss. In cut up steeps this ski is perfect, its there when you need it but can let go and get into position quickly, I find it very adaptable.

    I think the only way to have the 106 be the OG would be to make pretty much an exact copy, the 106 is not that but I do feel it took some things that are great about OG and mixed in some attributes of skis that actually are selling for them. Its funny how change can be perceived.
    I agree with you what you have described above. The new 106 is a good ski...for all the reasons you laid out above. I get why you like it.

    What is funny, is that if the ski didn’t have the the Cochise name on it and instead you told me this was a new ski called the Rustler 10.5, I’d probably have less bias and more objective praise.

    Finally...how do you make the Cochise 106 into a ski with a 24-m turn radius and make it more “meh” on piste? The Gen 1 and Gen 2 versions skied on piste far better IMO.

    Maybe I should just sell my 106’s and buy some LP105’s/MPro Prorider 105 Pros for Pros.



    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •