Shop for Tecnica Cochise backcountry skiing and freeride boots.
Que Macho (or in Apache as Cochise would have perhaps said, “Ik aa’ye iidenka ashii nadndaal. ei nanlwogo aniile shiiyii’ii.Â, look it up), Tecnica has upped the anti with their tech compatible freeride backcountry skiing boot series. The shoes are named after competition rodeo bulls, one of whom is named after the Apache warrior/leader who’s become part or our western legend. All good, but can a boot named in honor of bulls and fighters hold up to the WildSnow tech fitting ANSI approved tractor pull?
Results of tractor pull powered by my ANSI approved pry bar -- it looks like answer to above question is YES. Tecnica's version of tech fittings stayed true, force I applied ripped binding out of workbench it was screwed to with extra long screws. The boot fitting deformed a tiny amount during this extreme test, but the force I applied was in my opinion way beyond anything it would receive in normal skiing. Thus, I give this a 100% pass as well as a thumbs up for Tecnica's extra effort at making their fittings ultra reliable for big skiers with big boots and big skis.
Cochise is probably Tecnica's most 'backountry friendly' freeride boot. Two liner options are available. I used the lighter but slightly softer 'light' liner. Total weight of my size 27.5 Cochise with light liner is 68.5 oz, 1938 gr, per boot. Not bad for a full-on beefer.
Sole swap blocks are attached with large button head machine screws that thread into an internal double-T-nut. This is one of the the strongest sole attachment systems I've seen yet. I ground down this set of blocks so they'd work in alpine bindings yet still snap into a tech binding such as Dyanfit. Cool.
Arrow points to double-t-nut. Displayed on inside of sole block for demonstration, T-nut is actually located inside of boot shell. In the case of the toe tech fitting, the sole block attachment screws actually go through the fitting, thus sandwiching everything together. As far as I could tell, Tecnica's sole block system has nearly zero wobble or play. Boot 'shoe' without sole block is shown to right, arrow indicates holes where sole block fastener goes.
Tec fitting comparison, Tecnica to left is quite substantial and boasts more metal surface area to the outside than most tech fittings, thus preventing boot damage as well as making binding entry easier. To right is typical fitting you'll find in many tech compatible boots, it's strong enough for most skiers, but as boots and skis get bigger, perhaps thicker fittings are a necessary trend. Note that tech fitting failure is rare, but the Solomon tech fitting debacle of last spring means we need to cover every company's tech fittings as thoroughly as possible.
Tecnica tech fitting in tech binding, with double-T-nut attached for demonstration. Nice to see Tecnica's effort to make their fittings ultra strong.
View inside Tecnica Cochise boot shell lower shoe, showing how doubt-T-nut backs attachment of sole blocks. In the case of the tech toe fitting, the attachment screws go right through the fitting and sandwich everything together in logical fashion.
Another view of the Tecnica boot toe tech fitting. I have to say I like the looks of this thing. The large holes are where the sole block attachment screws pass through the fitting.
Ok, that’s it for worship of the Tecnica boot toe tech fitting. How about the heel fitting? Somewhat similar to other makers, but note that the Tecnica heel fitting attachment screw goes all the way through the sole block into the lower backcountry skiing boot shell. That is good, but will require backing out the fitting screw to remove the sole block, which will in turn eventually wear out the threads cut by the screw in the boot plastic. Another thing I noticed about the heel fitting is that the reinforcement/locating nibs are press fit into the sole block, thus eliminating play. I’ll give the heel fitting a 100% pass, but as with most other boot makers who use screws to attach their rear tech fittings, I’d like to see a bigger screw or beef added by some other means.
View of rear beef and ski/walk mode latch. You pull up on the loop for walk mode, and press down on the metal part of the latch to return to ski mode.
Cuff removed from boot to display mode latch foundation. Latch nib inserts in hole indicated by red arrow. Which red arrow? We trust our readers can figure it out.
Tecnica mode latch inside boot cuff. The latch is a simple spring loaded nib which inserts in the hole shown in photo above. In my opinion the spring should be stronger, but consumer testing will tell the tale. Mode latches are a common weak point of newly launched freeride backcountry skiing boots, and extensive field testing is the only way to totally vet them.
We're always ramping things up here at WildSnow HQ. I've made a commitment to do ever more thorough boot evaluations, which will often include a nearly complete disassemble of the thing so we can look at parts such as the mode change machinery. Should I put it back together myself, or send it back to the company in parts? Probably the former, but if I didn't like someone at a boot company I suppose I could mail the boot back in stages, like the mob mailing a kidnap victim's ear, then their finger, and so forth (just kidding, I like everyone).
Lucky for me and my relationship with boot makers, Garmont is selling this cool cuff pivot screw rivet. Yes, I won't have to send the Tecnica Cochise boots back in parts. The Garmont fastener is mainly for repairs of worn out ski boot cuff rivets, but super nice to have for mods or evaluations that require removal of the upper ski boot cuff. That said, as always I wish all boot makers would simply make all their boot fasteners user serviceable.
Tecnica hybrid power strap takes the place of both upper buckle and independent power strap. It works quite well, mostly by eliminating the herky jerk most people do with their power straps (you just snug down the strap then flip the buckle, for as much cinch as you want.
As with many quality ski boots, Tecnica provides cuff alignment. It's been said here that such 'cant rivets' don't allow enough adjustment to make a difference. We beg to differ, though it's possible that too much cuff cant can interfere with walk/ski mechanism. Another method of changing cuff alignment is to simply pad one side of the boot liner cuff.
One thing I really like about freeride boots is that many have alpine type boot boards that can be tuned for delta and cant. This is the one you find inside a Tecnica. Interestingly, it is molded with the name 'Demon,' indicating it is cross compatible with other more alpine category Tecnica boots.
While the Tecnica Cochise won’t be my go-to backcountry skiing boots (I use lighter stuff), I did give them a good test during that day of powder snowcat skiing last week, as well as some walking. Luckily Tecnica sent me a rather small shell size for my feet (320 mm), so once I heat molded the liners I got a near perfect heel fit. My toes were a different matter, but as these are PU shells the toe was easy to blow out a half size or so. I’m not a good evaluator of boot stiffness, but these overlap cuff guys are noticeably stiffer than my ZZero Green Machines, with a sweeter flex. They’re rated by Tecnica as a flex 120, but as always we warn you that flex numbers are only a rough guide to boot stiffness, not any sort of industry standard.
Due to my use of the softer ‘light’ liner, my tester Cochise had a bit of extra give I found to my liking for powder and crud, but might be better eliminated for performance skiers by using a denser liner. (This is a good place to say that if you don’t know it already, please know that your liner choice has a HUGE influence on how stiff a boot skis and how it flexes – experiment.)
I found the Tecnica hybrid buckle power strap system to be super effective. For me, it combines the function of both a top buckle and a strap, but those of you used to taller boots might find they want a taller rear spoiler and additional strap. Small spacer spoilers are included that velcro to the front and back of liner, but these are more spacers than they are spoilers. Easy aftermarket mod.
Another thing I liked about this boot was the section of flexible plastic in the lower overlap, intended to make entry and exit easier. I’m a good tester for that with my fused ankle, and can testify that it does work. But if I was skiing these boots much I’d still probably cut away some plastic to make entry easier.
Cochise cuff mobility in walk mode is excellent, but again, much of that depends on your liner choice. Forward cuff lean is not adjustable, and appears difficult to modify mechanically (though one can always play around with liner thickness behind calf).
Not much to say about the Tecnica liner. Basic stroble construction with what feels like foam of adequate density to compromise between performance, weight and comfort for backcountry skiing. They need a pull loop on the rear as well as on the tongue, that’s my only gripe.
In all, a fairly beefy boot worth a look. If I rode the cable more, I’d definitely consider these as my go-to since they fit my feet nicely and ski well. They were fun to test and try to destroy. Should I invoice Tecnica for my workbench?
Shop for Tecnica Cochise backcountry skiing and freeride boots.
(Editor’s note, as in the case of naming the Dynafit “Green Machine,” I owe the “tractor pull” metaphor to Aspen Skiing Company lifer, dad, guest blogger, and backcountry skiing fanatic Bob Perlmutter. Thanks Perl!)
59 comments
Do you clamp the tech binding closed? Isn’t it supposed to release even when “locked”?
(Imagining the effect a release failure like that would have on a human leg: my leg.)
This is only semi-related, but it’s on my mind because I’ve been dealing with it lately. Have you ever had problems with the ‘cant rivet’ moving on its own? On my Scarpa Spirit 3s (very similar cant rivet to these, that’s why it came to mine) I just can not get the alignment to stay put no matter how I tighten it down. By the end of the day both boots have rotated out of whack. Should I be greasing one part and loctite-ing another?
Tuck, yes, of course I lock the binding toe for this test, otherwise the boot would pop out immediately. There is no consistent release when the toe is locked, and depending on boot fittings and angle of boot while testing, you can end up with quite a bit of resistance. The angle at which I do this test, and how I apply the pry bar, ends up placing a huge amount of force on the fitting and binding. My test is not in any way intended to simulate a ski fall or to test release. It is only a test of fitting strength.
Inside sources have told me they’ve tested many bindings to either screw failure or final release of boot from toe unit, and the release value (RV) of such tests goes anywhere from RV 16 on up. Lack of consistent release in touring mode is definitly a quirk of tech bindings, but bear in mind that once the heel of your boot is up off the ski, if you do need a release the amount of leverage provided by the boot is increased to the point where you probably will rip the screws or fail the binding before you fail your leg. As for my test, I lever with a pry bar up on the exact location of the tech fitting, so what I do is VERY UNLIKE what would happen in a ski fall.
One other thing. Yes, it would be nice to have easier release in touring mode in case of avalanche. Thing is, if binding model such as Dynafit FT with stronger toe springs is used, or Onyx, both those bindings can be toured by mid to lightweight folks without the toe locked, thus providing full release in touring mode. Conversely, if tech bindings were designed to release easier when toe is locked in touring mode, you would hear howls of pain from here to Antarctica about pre-release in touring mode. In other words, there is a certain amount of mutual exclusivity going on with the issue of release in touring mode.
Scott, yes I have had problems with that. Key is to make sure area that needs to slide and move is lubricated, and that the rivet is not too tight. Seems there is a sweet spot for how tight you get the things… they’re really quite primitive, but in my experience can usually be made to work.
Thanks for the clarification, Lou.
Pretty impressive work by Technica.
Damn, I thought you were gonna say the walk mode latch turns into a bottle opener . . .
Who needs a bottle opener? Around here, we drink our beer out of cans and we’re proud of it. Thing is, a beer can can be crushed to fit the hand, so while holding and saying “hey, watch this” it doesn’t get dropped.
Glass is slippery, and turns into dangerous shrapnel when you crater after that 75 foot attempt at Facebook fame.
Nice to see more “beef” boot reviews here! I recently migrated from a green machine to a Titan, and for me the improvement in the down far out weighs the additional weight. But each of us is different so it’s really nice to see all the offerings in boots with tech fitings that are becoming available. This looks like a really good boot. For me the lack of adjustable forward lean isn’t a big deal – most strong alpine boots don’t feature this in the shell design, but often utilize a wedge type rear spoiler that attaches to the liner with velcro. By adjusting the wedge up or down you change the forward lean. This is a very simple and effective method and I wish more AT boots utlized it. Lou, this is a good boot review, good job! I would like to read your take on how this boot is lasted relative to other AT models. And, I know it’s a pain, but those boot measurements you made by filling the shell with foam were super useful, please make more.
Tom, Tecnica indeed does include a spacer that hook/loop attaches to rear of liner, and as mentioned in review, one could of course mess around with spoilers and such to tweak forward lean. I agree it is not a big deal, just thought I’d mention it in the review because some AT boots have forward lean adjust.
Lou, also nice to read your thoughts on the mysterious rotating cant rivet. I’m having this problem on my Titans, but I’ve never had the problem on an alpine boot. I have been suspecting that it has to do with the wide range of movement by the cuff when in walk mode (thus the reason you don’t really see this problem in an alpine boot) and had been thinking that the solution somehow involved lubricating the surface of the rivet against the cuff. Haven’t tired it yet, but nice to read that someone else maybe came to the same conclusion. Thanks!
Lou, in fact I think forward lean adjustment can be a big deal, I just think the adjuatable velcro spoiler is a better solution than a mechanism that changes the angle of the boot cuff. Nice to see that Tecnica has implemented this type of adjustment.
Thanks for the tips, looks like I’ll be spending some quality time with grease this afternoon.
Also, who needs a bottle opener even when you’re drinking out of bottles? Shouldn’t you always have a ‘biner/knife/rock/lighter available in the BC?
Scott, a dab of JBweld in the right place might help as well. Analyize what’s not supposed to move, loosen things, clean, and put some JB in there when you tighten back up.
Where can one get the Garmont cuff rivet?
The thorough review is much appreciated. Keep ’em coming!
Rob, I’d start by calling Garmont customer service…
http://www.garmontusa.com/contactus.html
I solved the roving cant issue on my Titans with a bit of duct tape on the inside of the cant adjustment. Hasn’t moved since.
Really have no need/desire for this boot, but had to comment to say this is a great review. Thanks Lou!
What is the general consensus of using boots with lugged AT soles in alpine bindings? I have always heard it is unsafe and unwise. Does grinding down the lugs under the toe (where the AFD would contact) make this a viable option? I would love to keep the Rally soles on my Scarpa Hurricanes all the time but spend time in both alpine bindings and AT (Fritschi) binders.
Great and thorough reveiw by the way!!!
Steveo, there is not general consensus. It depends greatly on the binding and how good the AFD is, and whether the binding has adjustable toe height or not. Without adjustable toe height you have to grind an awful lot off some soles, due to the rocker…
Lou,
Thanks for the review. The toe inserts look to be at the extreme end of the sole in the photos, might just be the angle they were taken; but how does the placement compare to Scarpa, Dynafit et al. in relation to the pivot point when in the binding?
Good catch Tay, I didn’t notice that. The fittings are indeed a few millimeters farther forward than what I’d say the “average” location is (I just compared to a few other brands of boots), but not enough farther forward to be an issue. The extra metal on the outside makes them look farther forward than they really are. I also tested how they snapped into tech binding and how they functioned in release (some tech fittings stick). They snapped in fine and the release is smooth.
IMO the most innovative/hopefully will be copied, advancement in this boot is the way to cuff attaches to the shell. Notice that it attaches very low on a more alpine like rear lower shell, with the attachment points to spread the force to a larger amount of plastic. This allows the shell to absorb and rebound more energy than with the systems other boots with similar cuff articulation have.
I skied this boot for a full day lift serviced last week and was very impressed with its downhill capabilities. The addition of a touring option did not make the boot feel noticeably different from its Demon siblings w/o a walk mode. I would say it skied every bit as well as the any other high performance/not a detuned race boot on the market.
The other positive of the boot was its versatile out of the box fit. I think this is due to both Technica having a lot of experience selling volume boots with a performance image, and the less is more tack they took with their liner. It is padded and has stretchy toes. 99%+ of alpine boots out there are fitted and sold with that system. The out of the box fit and familiar appearance of the boot makes it alot less intimidating to skiers new to backcountry equipment.
I have been very underwhelmed by recent mainstream manufacturers attempts to metoo themselves into back country and side country. The atomic tracker and lange superblaster are based on good downhill boots, but the addition of ski walk mechanisms with poor function make them good choices for no conditions.
The planned price for the boot in this series two models down is going to make an outstanding entry level product for our sport.
If only the names weren’t soooo horrible. And embarrassing to say to grownups. Or type on the internet.
Disclosure: I am looking forward to being profitable selling these boots. It is a product that I don’t see taking sales away from our dynafit/scarpa/garmont stock, but adding new consumers to the market.
Great take Harry, thanks! I agree. Since they appear to work really well, what a terrific boot to sell to crossover skiers just starting with backcountry.
Agree about the names. Am sensitive to Native American issues, and always wonder what they think when we name stuff like boots after them. Native Americans should get revenge and name their shoes “Obama” or “Clinton” something like that (grin). Come to think of it, how about a ski boot line called the “Presidential” series?
” What boot do you ski?”
” Hey, the Bush is radical, but my pair of Clintons just doesn’t go far enough.”
My William Henry Harrisons only lasted 32 days before the rivets blew out…
Cans are better for the BC. 😀
Fit? Last width?
BSL vs size?
As for avalanche safety uphill, one partial solution might be modding the lever so that when you knee-fall it’s pushed to open position by the boot. This would give some probability of releasing spontaneously, and you may even try to intentionally fall forward to release the binding as soon as you see the avalanche start. On the other hand you may end up with a lost ski in some other cases. Maybe a removable thingy to use only in dangerous terrain.
Or simply get an ATK RT.
Hilarious catchy title! Spurs at least myself on to other creativity!
— ” I ground down this set of blocks so they’d work in alpine bindings ” —
How did you do that, what kind of tool did you use to ground down the ruber?
Greez from Austria
Hi Bernhard, I just used a handheld disk grinder with a sanding disk, along with water spray. As stationary wet sander works better. There is really not that much material to remove, as you mostly just knock down the rubber lugs. It’s a bit tricky to do it right, you have to have the binding handy and keep placing in binding to see where sole contacts and how high the toe is, since the sole has rocker.
‘best, Lou
Hi Lou
Totally off topic here.
We had another tragic avalanche incident near Golden, British Columbia.
http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/cbc-article.aspx?cp-documentid=27739597
Ray, thanks for the heads up on that. We’re in avy caution mode today, as a matter of fact… I wish the sledders, and the skiers for that matter, could at least spread themselves out so only one person got caught at a time… am trying to do better with that myself, easy to let down one’s guard especially on the up track.
All of the new Tecnica boots with cuff mobility (Cochise, Bushwacker, Crossfire) are 100mm lasts. These are not roomy 100mm lasts either it’s a pretty tight performance oriented fit. A lot of people have been saying that this new 100mm mold fits tighter than the new Lange 97mm mold. These are meant to be high performance ski boots that you can tour in. The standard alpine liner that comes in the boot is going to be heavier but it will provide you with a much snugger fit and better overall downhill performance. The light liner (which Lou tested and is available separately as an accessory) will save a considerable amount of weight but you will sacrifice some performance.
As far as Boot Sole Lengths go:
26.5 = US 8.5 = 310mm
27.5 = US 9.5 = 320 mm
Yes those are relatively long sole lengths for a boot that size but keep in mind that is an external measurement. Due to the boots interchangeable sole system the plastic had to beefed up externally at the toe and heel to optimize the strength of the system. Consequently you have a boot that has a little longer sole length due to the fact that the plastic around the toe and heel is extra thick but these do not fit any larger than your typical 26.5 or 27.5 boot. Internally they should fit closer to a 305mm for the 26.5 and 315mm for the 27.5. I have not had one person say that they fit big.
C., your comment ended up in the moderation q and I was out skiing, sorry about that. Very good information, thanks!
so size wise the tecnica have been running small
if you are a 9 you need to ski an 8 = 26.0
still true with these new ones?
They run true to size. Next fall they will be available in sizes 23.5-30.5.
tech sheet I got from tecnica shows bodacious with a 98mm last, cochise w/100mm last, bonafide w/100mm last, bushwacker w/98-100mm last, crossfire w/100mm last
Cochise, Buckwacker, Crossfire are all 100mm last
– The Bushwacker has Air shell which is a customization technology
that utilizes an air bladder between the liner and the shell. Last starts at
100mm but it can be pumped up to fit more like a 98mm last
Boadacious and Bonafide are 98mm
– These are the two Big Mountain boots that don’t have cuff mobility but do have interchangeable soles so you could put a tech compatable sole on them if you want. They utilize the same external last as the Cochise, Bushwacker, and Crossfire but use a different internal plug to create a thicker walled 98mm lasted boot. The Bodacious is also injected in very lightweight Triax plastic. They come in at 4.7lbs per boot in a 310mm sole length. In Europe the Bodacious will come standard with Tech compatable soles but in the US it will come stock with DIN soles. Both DIN and Tech soles are interchangeable among all of these “Freemountain” boots from Tecnica. DIN soles will retail around $40 and Tech compatible AT soles will retail around $70.
Hey Lou, how much does just the shell of the Cochise weigh?
Justin, I added to our gear weights page a while ago. Check it out:
https://www.wildsnow.com/backcountry-skiing-articles-2/backcountry-skiing-gear-weights/
Only a jack ass would ski in an AT boot named after a bull……..ha.
75 days on my Cochise boots now and they’re holding up very well. The spoiler is very necessary for performance. I use the stock liner for backcountry and an Intuition wrap liner when inbounds to beef it up. First AT boot I’ve ever been able to ski inbounds- what a concept. Fastest transitioning boot I’ve ever had; buckles and walk/ski mode are easy to use even with winter gloves on. Ski well with big skis, small skis, Dynafit, Fritschi, and Duke bindings…
How does the forward lean on the Cochise compare with the Titan?
Which one is more upright?
Thanks for the excellent review.
Lou,
Have you seen a list of boot sole lengths for the Cochise based on size?
Cochise forward lean is between the two settings on the Titan…
Bot Sole Lengths are as follows: (see below for explanation)
23.5 = 280
24.5 = 290
25.5 = 300
26.5 = 310
27.5 = 320
28.5 = 330
29.5 = 340
However don’t be skewed by the external measurements. The internal fit is similar to something about 5mm shorter… So they should fit like a typical 26.5, 27.5, etc.
Thanks for all the specs C.Brown. If you have the Titan there, how does the cuff mobility compare between the Cochise and Titan?
I currently ski a Scarpa Spirit-4 with the black tongue at the resort on Marker Baron … would this be comparable? or more towards the Bushwacker that is categorized at 110 Flex by Tecnica ? I know they aren’t the same construction, but any comments are welcome here! I’m looking for a resort boot that “walk” … for sidecountry stuff, short skin … or walking short distance. I’m not an agressive skier, I don’t huck, jump anyting worth mentioning … just like to ride 🙂 Thanks! LOVE THIS SITE!… tons of information here!… keep up the good work!
Hey!
Got these boots a while back to replace my Garmont radiums for touring. I know they are more for side country, but I have always had trouble getting touring boots to fit, and technica alpine gear works for me, so I figured this might be a good shot. I havent been disappointed. Fit really well. No issues comfort wise.
The walk is Ho hum….good enough, not great. The switch has an annoying habit of switching back into downhill mode when touring up. The range of motion is like a bad touring boot, I guess…..but that said, I do like them.
Downhill is great. Only one small complaint…..more on that in a moment….but they are stiff as many performance alpine boots I’ve had. It’s a great feeling! Strong enough to push even my fat alpine skis, i would say.
When skiing down though, I find the forward lean too small….I tend to stay low and forward, andnthese boots don’t like it. They feel very upright for me.
I read that others recommend swapping out the spoiler to get more forward lean. I’ve never seen aftermarket ones. Who makes them and can I order online?
Any other ideas for increasing the forward lean?
Trying on boots in Verbier Switzerland today. I ski a size 27 Nordica Doberman alpine boot on a 10 1/4 length foot. The Cochise does run large. Swam in the 27s. I’ll be buying a pair in size 26, but they’re still a bit more roomy than I prefer for the downhill, but good for a touring boot. A size 27 Dynait Titan fit more snugly, but has a notchy flex and very difficult to get on and off. I’ve owned many pairs of touring boots, and they’re all horrible for skiing downhill. The Technica is the first one that feels like a real ski boot; probably because it’s made by a real ski boot company.
Hi.
Have had quite a few days skin in my cochise this winter. Mostly on dukes and other alpine bindings, but lately tried it with the tech bindings. When i was in pow it seemed no problem. I am new to tech bindings and therefore decided to do some groomed turns to see how they were holding up. I experienced major lack in lateral stiffness. It seems the problem is in the lower shell, so in regular AT bindings it is not a problem, but in tech bindings wit all lateral stiffness coming from the toe, it was like skiing on a boat. Anybody else experience similar type problem? any idea how to fix it? it is very easy to see it if u lock the boot in an tech binding (touring mode) and push the top of the cuff from side to side. Have been thinking about fixing some carbon fiber along the lower boot or a type of sole bed in the shell. Not sure how to attack the problem. Thanx for all answers=)
Lou,
Thanks for the review!
I have a pair of Dynafit Zzeus from a few seasons back that are getting fairly beat up. I’m thinking of getting another beef boot to replace them, and I’m considering these.
One problem I had with the Zzeus is it took a couple of hours of work to get them to fit my feet; in particular the toe box felt too narrow and I felt tons of pressure on the inside of the sole. I’d like to avoid such fitting and just get something that fits out of the box much better.
Obviously you don’t know the shape of my foot, but given that the Zzeus was rather tight, do you think this one has substantially more room? Have you found that your feet are wide for most boots, or have any recommendations on something similar for wider feet?
Help much appreciated… thanks!
– Adam
Some reports over on TGR of people having issues with the tech fittings releasing on the toe when they shouldn’t due to premature wear and/or the shape of the fitting. Anyone else having these issues?
Hey Lou, one of the complaints I’ve heard about the Cochise is somewhat limited rearward touring range of motion. Since you’ve had the boot totally disassembled, is there anything in the cuff to stop you from doing the Steve Romeo style mod to improve touring? Like this http://www.tetonat.com/2011/12/14/maximizing-walk-mode-rom-of-the-black-diamond-quadrant/
No love for my question?? inquiring boot geeks need to know…
Justin, I have the new Cochise Pro Light sitting here next to me. It essentially goes to vertical when in touring mode, but not past that. They could perhaps be modded for a tiny bit more range. This boot is really nice, and definitely designed to ski downhill like an overlap alpine boot. I wouldn’t look at it particularly to provide cuff range for touring. Lou
Thanks for the reply Lou, I think you should get crazy with some grinding and report back…
Lou – I just replaced my tech soles. Is a torque wrench necessary? I just cranked the screws until I no longer could (maybe that’s too much).
Thanks in advance!
Tom, don’t get too agro but no, a torque wrench is not necessary. Use a tiny bit of blue Loctite. The screws in the Cochise are nicely backed by T-nuts etc. so you’ve got metal to metal. Nonetheless you could strip the threads or spin a T-nut of you apply too much torque. The use of a short (normal length) hex wrench helps limit torque. My main concern with these types of fittings is corrosion, as with a high-use boot that’s constantly wet, and gets salt in there from road salt or race hill salting, or sidewalk snow melting. Keep your eye on them!
Comments are closed.