2012-2013 Tecnica Cochise Pro Light AT boot

Boot: 2012-2013 Tecnica Cochise Pro Light

Tecnica Cochise Pro Light, Blister Gear Review
Cochise Pro Light

Flex Rating: 120

Stated Last: 100mm

Weight: 1,493 grams (shell) + 195 grams (liner)

Boot Sole Length: 310mm at 26.5

Skier: 6’2”, 205 lbs., athletic, technically proficient, fast and fluid skier.

Foot: size 10.5/11 street shoe (278mm actual length); C+ width (105mm width, weighted); high instep; low-volume heel, ankle, and lower calf.

My regular ski boots: 27.5 Head Raptor RD 130 (95mm last) with several punches for width in the instep and metatarsal heads.

Conditions tested: Backcountry powder, sun affect, wind affect, in-bounds soft, chalk, firm. Basically everything.


The following is really a labor of love, and outlines my desire to search out the best dual-purpose inbound/backcountry crossover boot. I know that this is possible, but every offering out there seems to just miss the mark.

My personal requirements are:

• Compatible with both tech and alpine bindings

• Rigid spine—alpine boot flex and power

• Precise anatomical shape with exceptional heel hold

• Functional walk mode

• Replaceable soles (I hike on lots of rocks, burn through my soles every season, and would rather replace the soles than the whole boot.)

• Reasonable weight to skin for 5+ hours in a day, ideally around 1,800 grams

Before I get too far out into left field with this review (and I’ll tell you now, I’m heading out to boot liner left field), I would like to directly compare the new Tecnica Cochise Pro Light to its relative that I reviewed a year and a half ago, the Tecnica Cochise 120. I’ll also compare it to some of the Cochise Pro Light’s competition, the new Dynafit Vulcan and Scarpa Maestrale RS (which will see their own articles shortly). And if you haven’t read my First Look on the Cochise Pro Light, you may want to read that first for more information on its design and fit.

Features: Cochise Pro Light vs. Cochise 120

• The Cochise Pro Light is, in essence, a stripped-down Cochise 120. There are a few small differences that were mostly implemented to save weight. The shell of the Pro Light is about 150 grams lighter than the shell of the Cochise 120, and the Pro Light liner is about 150 grams lighter than the Cochise 120’s. (Advantage: Pro Light)

• The Pro Light has a single-density lower, as opposed to the Cochise 120’s dual-density shell.  The 120‘s lower uses a more malleable plastic on the instep of the boot, supposedly to make sliding it on easier. I found the Cochise Pro Light to slide on totally fine, and felt the Pro Light flexed a little truer to its claimed 120 flex.  (Advantage: Pro Light)

• The Pro Light features stripped down wire-bail buckles that save a little weight. Both buckles systems work totally fine. No downside in skiing performance in either direction.  (Advantage: Pro Light, for the weight savings)

• The Pro Light forgoes the fancy buckling power-strap arrangement in favor of a standard power strap.  I actually added the power strap buckle of the Cochise 120 onto the Pro Light to stiffen the flex slightly. (Advantage: Cochise 120)

• The Cochise Pro Light comes with a lightweight, heat moldable, Palau liner as opposed to the stock, alpine-style liner of the Cochise 120. I can say that the new 120 liner for 12/13 is a marked improvement over the 2011 liner. The Pro Light Liner is very nice, but is a little thin and low volume for my personal needs. But it will work well for many skiers. More on this later. (Advantage: It’s a push—depends on which one works best with your foot and the fit you’re going for.)

• The Pro Light saves weight by removing the pad under the instep. I’m okay with that, though I could imagine plenty of sled skiers wishing it were there. The pad itself is about 40 grams in weight. (Advantage: Cochise 120, or push. It really depends on your needs. It’s easy to remove the pad from a Cochise 120 should you wish, but it’s more difficult to add it to a Pro Light….)

Buying Recommendations: Cochise 120 or Cochise Pro Light?

If I already owned an 11/12 Cochise 120, I would not rush out and buy the Cochise Pro Light just for the lighter shell and liner. And if I was in a shop choosing between the two boots, I would probably buy based on what liner worked best for me. However, if I didn’t plan to use a stock liner for either the Cochise 120 or the Cochise Pro Light, I would spring for the Pro Light 100% of the time.



53 comments on “2012-2013 Tecnica Cochise Pro Light AT boot”

  1. Wow, thanks for all of that detail, Marshal. Good to know the Light has a little more forefoot volume vs. the Pro 130 – I’ll have to check out both as that could be an issue for me with the latter, especially after down-sizing. Swapping the liners from the 130 is also a great suggestion.

    • On a follow-up note, I ended up buying the Cochise Pro 130. The liner is definitely a significant improvement over last year’s Cochise 120. I would say the forefoot is only smaller over towards your little toes and the lesser volume would only be an issue for people who really need that square toe box and the resulting extra space that you’d get along the outside of your foot.

      Also, that top strap that you can simply flip to loosen is genius.

  2. As usual MO provides the detail and analysis I crave. I bought the Cochise 120 based on it’s fit, feel and Marshal’s original review. Threw in an Intuition liner and it’s solid. The power strap top buckle might be the best feature on any AT boot, ever. Sounds like the Pro light is good but think I’m sticking to the 120 for another season. Blister fkn rocks!

  3. Thanks Marshall; that review is gold!
    Especially useful due to all the detail regarding fit and foot length. I now know, that I can confidently look for a 27 shell for my 280mm foot, and not lose my toe nails.
    Three cheers.

  4. Nice review, thanks. A couple random thoughts. You mention this boot being about 200g heavier than Vulcan etc. If you take into account the fact that a 26 Cochise is similar in size to a 27 Vulcan, the weight is almost identical. One negative I’ve heard about the Cochise is that the rearward touring range of motion is somewhat limited, at least compared to the Vulcans etc. I think you said elsewhere that you didn’t notice that being an issue. However, I wonder if a bit a grinding could improve the touring range of motion, like Steve Romeo did with Quadrants here… http://www.tetonat.com/2011/12/14/maximizing-walk-mode-rom-of-the-black-diamond-quadrant/

  5. Hey Justin,

    I have not gotten there yet, but I do know that this is possible, yes. It looks like modifying the back of the upper cuff would add maybe 2-3 degrees, give or take. The front cuff of the shell on the cochise is about as high as romeo modified the quandrant too, and IMO is great the way it is, so i don’t think that is worth hacking at.

    I believe that, un-altered, the cochise and titan are both about 10deg.


  6. Just tried the Pro 130s on, no Cochise Lights to be found yet. One thing I noticed is when in touring mode when my leg is pushing the cuff backwards, I could feel the upper part of the lower shell digging in around my achilles. Anyone else notice this? I wonder if I could fix that somehow?

  7. Justin,

    I have heard of people dremelling or sanding down the top of the lower a bit. There is a small ridge there
    that you could get rid of without compromising the integrity of the boot which might stop the bite into your Achilles. I haven’t seen it done but I’ve heard of people doing it.

  8. Simen,

    Which Agent 130 do you have? The Cochise Pro 130 would probably be a better replacement for that boot than the Cochise Pro Light. The Cochise/Demon mold is more upright than your Agent 130s but not as upright as say the new Lange boots. Tecnica doesn’t have a published forward lean angle for the Cochise but most agree it’s around 14*.

    • Thanks for the answer!
      I have the purple/black ones (10/11?), and I ski them with the top rivet removed. I like everything about that boot, except that the 27,5’s I have are likely a little too big.

      I looked at the 130’s, but I’m guessing that there is no way to modify the forward flex on them like on the Agents? Without removing the top rivet, I feel they are too stiff for pow and choppy offpiste conditions and that it’s hard to get properly over the tips of my skis.

      Regarding forward lean, I seem to always prefer the most forward setting possible, be it in Kryptons, Quadrants, Factors etc.

      Any insight is highly apprechiated!

  9. hey simen,

    the cochise pro 130 is likely more like a 120 agent (i.e. basically an agent 130 with 1 rivet out) in terms of forward flex. for sure less stiff than the agent 130 stock.

    adding forward lean (via a spoiler in the cuff) is pretty easy, if you want something more forward.


  10. hey justin, i do barely feel my ankle just barely touch the lower shell while really fully flexing the cuff in the living room, but i don’t ever feel it while actually touring. your mileage may vary. i do think it would be easy to dremel a small notch in the lower to create a little more space for the achilles though.

  11. Thanks for thorough write up! Nice meeting some of you folks in Lenas.

    I’ve got a few observations and questions regarding boots:

    I just spent a month skiing the 12/13 Pro 130 in Chile/Argentina and dig the boots but can’t really see them as a primary touring option for me because the fit I like for skiing in this boot is too tight for touring. I downsized to the 26.5 with a shell fit around 5mm. The 27.5 felt huge to me and I really didn’t consider it. Last year I did most of my lift served skiing in the same sized (26.5) bodacious and found them to be a great fit that I could comfortably ski all day once the stock liner was packed out enough (could barely get them on with stock liners when new and was quite painful 5-10 days break-in period). The Pro 130 shell fit is identical as far as i can tell and they ski well inbounds (albeit considerably softer in forward flex than the bodacious) but the fit isn’t working for me as a touring boot. I have tried Dreamliners (LV and MV), powerwrap plugs, and the stock liner. I get my best foot out of the broken-in Bodacious liner (dreamliner have poor heal hold for me and powerwrap just didn’t feel right and is quite restrictive for touring) but the performance fit that I love for skiing is pretty painful on the up either with dynafits or booting. Similar to comments above, I get a ton of pressure across my achilles and toes get a bit crushed when walking/skinning while unbuckled. It’s tolerable for a day of hiking Las Lenas but I spend 70-100 days a year touring in Alaska 5-10k per day and can’t imagine being in a boot that tight and (comparatively) heavy. I wonder if another go at Intuitions is the answer but it’s hard to imagine that I can have the performance fit I want for lift/sled served skiing combined with the ability to tour big days in that shell. Suggestions? Worth messing with the shell if I can’t make it work with the liner? Grind the achilles area as suggested above. The Pro Light has enough additional volume to make it a better long day boot in the same shell size?

    Incidentally, I feel that my Pro 130 walk modes have developed an increased amount of play since new. (about 20 days, 6′, 185lbs)

    Also on fit, for those wondering about comparisons btw other popular AT boots. I’ll note BSL even though it’s hardly a relevant comparison given the different constructions of these boots.
    For my foot:
    -I’ve skied somewhere shy of 100 days on Dynafit titans in a 27.5 with intuition pro-tour liners and booster straps. My shell fit is around 8-10mm and there is marginally more toe box volume with similar instep volume in comparison to my Pro 130’s (BSL 312)
    -Over 100 days on 28.5 TLT5 Performance with approximately 1cm shellfit and Intution powerwrap plug with scarpa booster strap. This is the boot that fits my foot best for a touring boot, and because the fit and touring is so good, I’m usually willing to ski these over anything else even on big days, big skis and big terrain. (daily winter touring ski is 192cm Lotus 138 white/red stripe flex 3 and this combo is awesome in anything softish or better) for my foot: tight heal pocket and reasonable contact throughout the rest of the shell. I tried the 27.5 indoors and had a super tight shell fit and could not really get my foot in them with stock liners. the 27.5 tlt5 had a notably shorter shell length for my foot. (BSL for my 28.5’s: 307)

    -I’ve tried on the Dynafit mercury and the 28.5 is massive. The 27.5 is ~8mm shell fit as best I could tell in the shop, uncomfortably tight across the instep, less positive heal pocket than other boots mentioned above. unlike the Titan with stock liner, I can reasonably comfortably get my foot in the 27.5 Mercury with an unmolded stock liner which was a surprise to me. (BSL 304)

    So I’m all over the place on shell sizes with similar fits from 26.5-28.5 and wondering what direction to go this year. I was hoping to have one boot for everything but will likely never give up the TLT5 for certain kinds of days but would love a beefier boot for day to day touring.

    Much thanks!

  12. hey paul, thanks for sharing the comments.

    you might see if any dealers around you have a pair of zipfit gara liners around that you can try on. they have awesome heel hold, and create the most space in the toe-box of any liner i have skied. they also add a small amount of stiffness compared to most liners. that is of course at a small expense to the touring stride.

    anyhow, i would be interested in hearing how those might feel on your feet in the shop… see if it relieves any pressure at the toes, and also addresses the heel pocket issue.

    the cochise light is a very slight amount more toe box space, but not hugely so, IMO. slight all the way thru.

    hope that helps?

  13. Thanks Marshal, I’d like to take a look at the zipfits. I don’t know of anyone in Alaska selling them but could be wrong. I was playing with the boots again tonight and I think the shell fit is just too tight to tour. I think I’m truly right at about 5-6mm. Somehow, with the stock liners (after some very painful break-in) I can happily ski lifts and boot pack all day with these and the bodacious but a big day of skinning and hiking is just painful, especially in the achilles. I can handle a little toe crunch but even with no liner in the boot I can’t extend at the ankle even close to the cuff travel of the boot without the top of the lower shell digging into my achilles and with the liner in it’s a bit tortuous. I don’t think I’ll be happy with the bigger shell size from tecnica. I have a low tolerance for slop in my fit. Zipfits might help but I’m thinking that the only way they’ll really do it for big days touring is to punch out a little length and try to grind down the back of the lower shell. Not sure it’s worth it. I know others find the right fit but I’m starting to wonder if I’ll ever be happy lift skiing in a boot that has a fit I can tour in. Unless I’m traveling there’s not much incentive for me to do that either except for cost and always being on familiar gear.

    I think I’ll sell the 130’s, stick with my bodacious for lifts, and go Maestrale RS or Vulcan for a beefy touring boot, depending on which fits better. (looking forward to more from you on those).Thanks again for your insight. Paul

  14. Thank you very much for this extremely helpful review. I downsized my Cochise 130s to 26.5 after reading this and trying on my usual 27.5 as well, and I’m very happy with the shell fit… can’t wait to get them on snow. As you said, the stock liners felt very short, but this was easily fixed with size 28 PowerWraps (a bit packed already, but not much). No shell mods needed so far. I’m coming off a few years in Titans, which have been great but are showing their age big time now. Swappable soles rule! The Titans lasted as long as they did thanks to this feature. I love the fact that the swappable soles on the Cochise screw into metal t-nuts instead of plastic like the Titans. That feature alone made me switch, plus I’m hoping for an even more alpine-like feel and more precision.

  15. thanks! good idea. will check out the shell /heating, molding option. tried on a maestrale RS tonight (after skiing! crappy glacier snow but it’s coming) Good shell fit, not the greatest heal pocket but similar in that regard, on my foot, to the vulcan/mercury/one shell (i had a dynaftit One on the other foot). Couldn’t get a great sense of flex in the store and didn’t have my 130’s with me. i like the pro-tour liner in the maestrale but suspect i’d swap for a powerwrap despite the loss of stride.

    Maestrale is laterally as substantial as the Tecnicas? (as the Vulcans?) thanks again, paul

  16. Hey Marshal,

    I have been doing a lot of research on these boots. I am torn between the Pro Light or the Pro 130.

    I am currently in the 07′ modle of the Tecnica Diablo Magma (110 flex) which I love, but feel that I am easily over sking the capability of the boot.

    I am 5’10” and 180 lbs. I originally was looking at the 130, but am thinking it might be too burly of a boot for me? I like to rip hard carving lines on the groomers, but do a lot of BC skiing as well and like a little bit of flex for the pillows and drops.
    Another issue is I have not been able to actually try on a Pro Light, but have been fitted in the 120 and compared them to the 130. Both boots fit my foot perfectly (would need to stretch the 130 just a bit). The Light appeals to me more for the BC, but want to know if I would feel like I am overpowering the boot when ripping hard like I do now on my Magmas.
    Also I was fitted in the 26.0 Cochise 120 boot, If I go the route of the Light, should I go to the 26.5 so it has the bigger liner?

    • Hi Brandon, First off the 26 and 26.5 are basically the exact same boot. no need to stress there.

      the 120 and Light will realistically be similar stiffness to your Diablos. The Light, if you use the stock liner, will *feel* softer since the liner itself is less supportive than an alpine boot liner. you could allays use your liner from the diablo in the cochise for inbounds and switch to the lighter, softer liner for backountry use as well.

      hopefully that helps.

  17. Thanks Marshal,

    So if I feel that my Diablos are too soft for my ability now, do you think I should go with the 130? Do they have a similar “softer feel” that the 120 and Lights do? As I said before, both boots fit very nicely and I will be taking them to a boot fitter out of the box.

    • brandon, the 130 is notably stiffer than the 120 shell, going only off what you have said above, i would suggest going that route. the internal shape between the 120 and 130 is pretty similar. a tiny bit more compression on the foot on the 130, but should be very similar.


  18. Marshal thanks for review, exactly what I was looking for – from somebody who got experiencis with Cochise PL in action not only from store. I want to update my backcountry set and cant decide between Cochise PL and Dynafit ZZeus. Friend of mine got Cochise 120DYN and he’s saying that on his weight 180 lb (81 kg) they are very stiff. I’m a bit heavy guy 210 lb (95 kg), 5,9 ft (181 cm) and don’t know how they will behaviour in colder condition as in the shop is different temperature.
    Dynafit team wrote me back that ZZeus got flex index about 120 what is the same as PL, but for sure can’t compare two different manufacturer as the flex index is no standard. ZZeus got four magnesium buckles and seems that their are higher that PL so I think they can hold my leg better. PL are stripped-down Cochise 120 so instead of power strap connected with buckle (cochise 120) they leave there only power strap with three aluminum buckles. So how do you felt in PL in downhill mode, the transmition from leg to ski was good, is the cuff high enough? Also I couldn’t find how big the lean angle is. Is it between 15°- 21° as in ZZeus or lower? I will use them with Marker Baron and skis Line Prophet 100.
    Sorry for to many questions but I’m trying to get as much information as I can, becasue I have limited selection of products that I can also try here. Thanks in advance =))

    • hey johnny – a few comments:

      1. the zzeus is the same boot as the titan (weight, stiffness), the titan just has higher performance plastic, so it has improved lateral rigidity and rebound.

      2. the cochise is significantly more laterally rigid (i.e. ability to put power into the edge) than the titan.

      3. the cochise is fore-aft a touch stiffer than the titan. roughly if othe cochise 120/pl is 120, the titan is 110 and the zzeus is 95.

      4. the cochise and titan fit very differently, so BE SURE to try on before buying both.

      5. the cuff is equivalently high between cochise and titan. the cochise is significantly more powerful into the edge.

      hope that helps?

  19. Thanks for the review, helped a lot! Just bought the cochise pro light and I’m sure they will be great. Tried the One, both Maestrales, Mercury and Sherpa 5/5. Liked the Maestrale RS but the fit of the Cochise felt more precise, slightly stiffer and with only 100g in real world weight difference and the ability to swap soles sealed the deal in favour of the Cochise PL.

  20. Marshal, great review – I am about to order the Cochise 130 pro, because I didn’t like the width of the 100mm last models. My foot is 278mm too, and I tried a Cochise 90 just to get an idea of what size I need. The 27.5 was too big. So I tried the 26.5, which felt good for alpine use, but I am a little worried that my toes get crunched when touring. I have to say, that I never toured before.
    Would you say, that the 26.5 works for you for both up- and downhill, or would you consider sizing up, if you were doing lots of AT.
    Also: if I’d get the 26.5…what’s the chance that a fitter can punch out enough space for my toe box. I feel I’d need at least 3mm for my big toe.
    Greetings from Madison. I saw you’re a bike guy too…I am from Europe, but currently working for Trek in WI.

    • hey joey-

      madison represent!

      anyhow, i do feel the front of the shell when touring and taking a long stride as it sits now. I plan to get a little space in the heel pocket (look at those grind able ribs to suck you heel further back into the heel pocket), and then also punch forward a bit for maybe 2mm of forward length. both of these seem reasonable and doable. grinding the heel ribs a touch is the easiest, so i plan to start there.

      good luck man.

  21. Does your foot touching the shell bother you much when touring?
    And since you have some experience with heating up the shell with boiling water: do you think that could work to improve toe box space?

    I do have a medium width(C-D)/low instep foot – ideally I would prefer the 110 over the 130 pro model, which has the wider 100mm shell. I found the 90 I have tried in a shop quite wide, and am wondering if heat molding the stock liner will improve my fit (after all it won’t fill up empty spaces…) – is there an aftermarket liner which you would recommend in my case (adding volume especially around the heel and on top of my arch, but not around the toe area), or would you go for the 98 last.



    • hi joey,

      heat molding just about any liner creates space (i.e. relieves a hot spot), it does not allow the liner to occupy more space. if you feel the boot needs volume taken up with a stock un-molded, non-packed out liner, then something is way wrong with the sizing of the boot in my opinion.

      with repect to actually taking up space there are a few solutions: first you can use a different liner (zip fit and foam injected liners, with zip fit offering the most toe and forefoot space), however neither of these liners bend very well, meaning they dont tour super incredibly. or you can try to add dense foam padding (C or L pads, eliminator tongue).

      however none-of-this can really be done over the internet. really a trip to a good boot fitter is the best solution.

      the 98mm last is pretty similar to the 100 last, just slightly lower volume overall.

      either way, its much easier to get the heel hold you want and then punch out the toe box for space than it is to build up more help hold from an ill-fitting shell.

      hope that helps?

  22. That helps for sure, thanks.

    I’ll be going for the 98 last anyway – it didn’t feel bad at all in the shop, just the big toe crunch doesn’t please me. I guess a custom foot bed will also help for a tighter fit in combination with a possible different liner.
    Back in the days, when I was alpine snowboard racing I had liners called Thermoflex – they seem not to be around anymore. I really liked those a lot.

    • hey joey,

      Intuition liners in vancouver and palau in france both basically make the equivalent to the Thermoflex liners.

      i am not super familiar with the palau range, but the Intuition power wrap is the closest to the thermoflex from intuition.

      you might try to the pro 98mm last on with your old liners to get a feel for how the shell itself fits. the toe box of the pro 98mm liner is pretty tight out of the box.

      cheers man!

  23. Hey Marshal – Thanks for the great review. I’m in the market for an AT boot and have been on a similar quest to find the perfect boot. Not being in the industry, I don’t get a chance to try before buy, so the usual pattern is buy a boot, begrudgingly tolerate it for a season or two, repeat. I’m looking for a stiff, responsive boot that walks well. I just went to a shop and tried on the Cochise 110 (just for fit) as they didn’t have the 130 or either 120 in my size. The fit is good with surprising heel hold out of the box. The shop is getting in a 130 for me to compare, but they don’t stock the 120’s. If I like the fit of the 130 better, then discussion is over. However, if I do find it too snug, it will be a choice between the 120 and the Pro Light. Finally to my question: can the Pro Light really be similar in flex to the 120 given the different type of plastic? Also, will the flex of one of them be more affected by temperature (mostly concerned about softening in Spring temps)? And finally, how much stiffer is the 130? Regardless of the model, I will likely ski them with my Intuition Power Wraps.
    Thanks a ton…

    • hey BK, the Pro Light and the 120 are made from the same plastic, so the shell is the same stiffness. the 120 “feels” sliffer because it has a thicker more substantial liner stock, than the pro light does.

      the 130 is noticeably stiffer than the pro light with the same liner in them. not hugely, but you can for sure tell. the 130 is a little lower volume. it pulls more compression on the foot. the same foot would fit both shells IMO. i don’t see it as a “fit” distinction, unless you have a super narrow foot. otherwise, yeah… more compression and stiffer on the 130.

  24. So I’ve skied the Cochise Pro light for two weeks and I’ve got two problems:
    1. Lost my left bigtoenail, guess the liner is a bit short and my left foot is 3-4 mm longer than the right. Would it be possible to recook and stretch the liner lenghtwise? The above text about stitched liners leads me to believe that it wont be possible. If not then any other advise or is a new liner the only way to go? Guessing Pro tour or Dreamliner is the way to go in that case since I don’t need to stiffen the boot.
    2. Difficult to tighten the cuff around the shin resulting in some shinpain. Considering buying a booster-strap or adding the buckle from the 120 to the existing powerstrap, which would you recomend? I guess a Dreamliner HV would also help since it is thicker?


    • hey jimmy,

      a couple quick comments there.

      first off, i would suggest confirming that it is, for sure, the liner that is causing toe cramp, rather than the shell. easiest way to do that is pulling the liner and trying it on without the shell. then sliding the footbed and your foot into the shell only, and see how that feels for space.

      then, i would try the boot on with any random, old, used liner than might be from your retired boots or some such thing, and try the boot on with those, to see how if fits in comparison.

      punching the toe box slightly is obviously very easy. if you want to stick with the stock liners, and work on them, i would suggest taking them to a skilled and competent boot fitter and ask for them to be stretched. this would be done by relieving some seams and to open the length. i would be very skeptical that heat would generate, say, a 1/2 size additional length given the construction of that particular liner.

      hope all that helps?


  25. Thanks Marshal! I did try the shellfit when I bought them and if I remember correctly it was about 1,5 cm so more of a comfort fit which I figured wuld be good for a touringboot. But I´ll check agian and go back to the store, I’ve heard they are quite competent.
    About the difficulties tightening the cuff around my calf, do you think adding the buckle from the 120 to the powerstrap would help? Or maybe something like an eliminator tounge?

  26. Hi Marshal,

    Thanks for the great review. I am currently skiing Dynafit Titans and after reading your review on that boot, I was wondering if you could compare the forward lean on the Cochise and the Titan. Sorry if I missed that info in the articles. I have also noticed that the Titans have a slight cant to them, even in the 0 degree setting, which can be problematic for me. How does the Cochise cuff compare in this respect?

    Thanks again for all of the info

    • hey noah,

      the cochise cuff angle is about in between the titan’s 2 leans, but the cochise has a different foot bed angle, so your ankle is slightly different.

      most boots come with a ~2deg cant, including the titan, correct. i believe the cochise is a 1 deg cant angle.

      hope that helps?


  27. Thanks Marshal,

    That does help. The main problem with my Titans is that I feel like the 0 degree or neutral position is not actually neutral. This makes it hard for me to ski bases flat or get off of and inside edge. I would like to avoid this feeling it future boots, or at least find a way to make it better.

    Maybe its just me, but I swear if I look a my boots, I see a slight cant in the neutral position. Just wondering if you ever noticed this, and if the Cochise is different…or maybe I am crazy and should just ski more instead of looking at my boots.

    Thanks again


    • hey noah,

      it really sounds like you ought to go into a good boot fitter and get an alignment check.

      there are a lot of potential things here: sole-cant (if using frame/alpine bindings), heel varus wedge (to adjust ankle angle), as well as the cuff cant (and you can even do an inside rivet cant to add more if so required).

      anyhow, more than i can offer over the internet, or even can be done at home in a useful way!


  28. Hi Marshal,
    You mentioned in your review that you added the power strap buckle from the 120 to the Pro Light.
    I just got the Pro Light and would like to do the same.

    With regards to this, Can you recommend anyone that sells these Power Strap Buckles as separate items? (On-line shop preferred as i am sitting in Norway.)

    Also any tips on mounting it would be appreciated. (it seems that the strap needs to be cut and reversed to get the buckle onto the outside.)

    Many thanks for the great review.

    • greetings tamas,

      the buckle is open to order to any dealer. the question is of course if tecnica has any in stock, and if the store wants to do it for you.

      from there, you would need to grind off the rivets holding the straps on, switch the straps to the other foot, then rivet them back on, as well as the buckle.

      not exactly plug-and-play at home, but not hard. generally i would recommend a boot fitter just doing the whole operation.


  29. Hey Marshal,
    Last season I bought the Nordica Speedmachine 110 but didnt know what I was buying. After reading almost all of these boot reviews i realized that I had no clue if the Speedmachines are a good boot for what I like to do (a lot of cliff drops and skiing really fast but no groomers). I also measured my boots to have a 1.1 cm boot fit and i realized that my ankle is really loose in the boot and has about 1 to 2 cm of lift. I measured my boots to weigh 2473 grams and I tour about once a week. I am wondering what kind of pad I would need to anchor in my ankle or if I should ditch my old boots and get the cochise pro light boot? I also have never replaced the stock footbeds and Im wondering if I should get a regular aftermarket footbed or if its worth spending the money to get an orthotic?

    • hey there garrett, thanks for the question.

      to be honest, this is well beyond anyones ability to boot-fit over the internet. a 1.1cm shell-fit is certainly not terrible, in terms of length. whether it fits around the ankle-pocket and heel, and if this if fixable or not… well… that is something for a boot fitter to determine.

      without knowing your feet or physiology, i can’t say for sure, but i am strongly of the opinion that some form of footbed or orthotic will benefit every skier. stock footbeds are NOT designed to be skied in. they are designed to take up some space so you can figure out how well the boot will fit with a proper footbed in it.

      be aware that there are a number of footbed designs out there, semi-weighted, dynamic, posted, and orthotic (which are actually corrective footbeds for bone-missalignment). getting into the right footbed makes a huge difference. getting into the wrong footbed will cause more pain and anguish than you started with. there is a lot going on there…

      however, I WILL say that I am of the opinion that you cannot begin to fit a boot without the foot being properly held in place, and at least in my opinion, that cannot be done with the stock footbeds in a boot.

      i am sure this creates more questions than it answers!


  30. I was hoping you can talk more specifically about using Tecnica Cochise boots with Salomon STH2 bindings. I have Technica Cochise Pro boots, which I think are the same soles as Pro Light.

    In your opinion, will the Cochise Pro work perfectly with these bindings, even though they’re not WTR boots? Anticipated problems with release issues based on too much friction because of the Cochise soles? Release issues as intended at particular DIN settings? Will a ski shop mount these bindings with Cochise boots?

    Any specifics here would be appreciated.

    Also, any word on STH2 bindings vs. Marker Lord bindings (or any other bindings that you know of?) for use of AT boots with an alpine binding?


    • hey teddy, all that i can say is the sample set of 1 that i tested (on a s916 binding, not an STH2) passed.

      you really would have to speak to your local shop about their desire to setup/test such an arrangement. i certainly cannot speak for them.

      hope that helps?

  31. got some palau liner initial fitting tips? i.e: temp to bake, amount of time, other tips, etc. (I bought my cochise lights on line and need to do the fit myself)

  32. Hi Marshal,

    First I would like to thank you a lot for your review. So useful, all my question were answered just by reading it! I have decided to go with the Lights but can’t figure out which shell to go with. In the smaller shell I have about 10mm space between the shell and my toes with the heel firmly placed against the shell? Is that enough? Would it give me worries when touring?

    Thanks a lot in advance!


  33. Just tried for the first time my Intuition ProTour MV I’m my Coachise 120… Ski toured for the whole day, with long flats to skin in and out, what a difference that make! I used the Tourimg liner from Technica on my regular Coachise because I had it almost for free, but geez, I should have went right away with a real liner… Lighter, Warner , better heel hold and more so, flex way better for skinning! I bought it mostly from what I read on this site!!! Thanks for a. The good review you guys put in…. Just wanted to chip in and share my first impression of this liner!

Leave a Comment