Rant: 2-Piece boots vs 3-Piece (Full Tilt/ Dalbello) boots

Tagging @onenerdykid really interested on the professional input.

WisconsinBadger4basically what I’m asking is: if a 2-piece boot design has the 2 pieces completely bolted together, how the hell are they even expected to be considered a 2 peice boot and function as such

Well, I think the first step is knowing that 2-piece boots work and they work at the absolute highest levels of skiing performance, whether that is on the World Cup, Freeride World Tour, Dew Tour or X-Games. That's our factual starting point, next is to figure out how it works.

A 3-piece boot functions with the tongue acting has the main deformation or resistance point- as you said the cuff is free to pivot and the tongue provides the support/resistance. This style of boot produces a more linear flex pattern, where the boot generally feels similar from beginning to end of its flex pattern. Some skiers love this, but for a lot of performance-oriented skiers this isn't what they are looking for.

A 2-piece boot functions with the cuff acting upon the lower shell, relying heavily on plastic thickness & types of materials, and material deformation to ski the way it does. This style of boot generally produces a more progressive flex pattern where the boot gets stiffer, more responsive, more supportive the deeper you get into the flex pattern. For most performance-oriented skiers, this style of boot is going to be more responsive and transmit skier input to the ski more efficiently.

Even if they are connected with a screw it’s still 2 pieces of plastic so it’s fair enough to call it a 2 piece

The biggest reason why I prefer a 2 piece boot for most things isn't just how it flexs but how much better the rebound feels. A 2 piece gives more snap out of a turn imo instead of feeling mushy. I used to think I liked Dabellos but I won't be buying another pair

the flex comes from the plastic deforming

3 piece = more linear flex and generally your able to flex the boot further than a 2 piece even at higher flexes
2 piece = more progressive flex

In my experience with multiple boots, 3 piece boots tend to break more quickly.

Different strokes for different folks.

I think the real question is why more companies aren't making more 3-piece options. Pro Tip Euro boot brands, you don't have to market 3 piece boots to just park and freeskiers. Although heavy af, I enjoyed my time on Head Hammers and would love to see those make a comeback.

OhJayDifferent strokes for different folks.

I think the real question is why more companies aren't making more 3-piece options. Pro Tip Euro boot brands, you don't have to market 3 piece boots to just park and freeskiers. Although heavy af, I enjoyed my time on Head Hammers and would love to see those make a comeback.

This is the simple fact of the global boot market: 3-piece isn't used in racing, so it's not accepted by the general skiing public, globally speaking. It's a bit less marketing a 3-piece as a park/freeski boot and more about the market's perception of a 3-piece boot based on the simple fact that they aren't used at the highest levels of competition outside of park. 3-piece is not in racing, it's rarely used on the FWT. You just see 3-piece accepted in the park world.

The Head Hammer was a failed race concept, so they marketed it to park/freeski but it wasn't well accepted.

The SPK was a failed rental concept, so they marketed to park/freeski & somehow it was well accepted.

The Raichle Flexon was a semi-successful race boot, but the boot world at that time was seeing a lot of crazy ideas. Once brands figured out how to properly make 2-piece boots then that boot vanished from the race scene.

It most often comes back to what is used at the highest levels of competition and that influences a lot people's perception of what a boot is good for and what it's not good for.

onenerdykidThis is the simple fact of the global boot market: 3-piece isn't used in racing, so it's not accepted by the general skiing public, globally speaking. It's a bit less marketing a 3-piece as a park/freeski boot and more about the market's perception of a 3-piece boot based on the simple fact that they aren't used at the highest levels of competition outside of park. 3-piece is not in racing, it's rarely used on the FWT. You just see 3-piece accepted in the park world.

The Head Hammer was a failed race concept, so they marketed it to park/freeski but it wasn't well accepted.

The SPK was a failed rental concept, so they marketed to park/freeski & somehow it was well accepted.

The Raichle Flexon was a semi-successful race boot, but the boot world at that time was seeing a lot of crazy ideas. Once brands figured out how to properly make 2-piece boots then that boot vanished from the race scene.

It most often comes back to what is used at the highest levels of competition and that influences a lot people's perception of what a boot is good for and what it's not good for.

Step up K2 FL3X boots to help make 3Piece be accepted by the larger skiing population :)

Agreed though 3 Piece was almost hurt by how well Josh marketed Full Tilt to park skiers. Although they do have benefits for park they also have a lot of benefits for the wider skiing population too. Most skiers do not need race performance and instead appreciate comfort and ease of use and its here where 3 Piece has some real advantages.

Hopefully now we have brought the boots into the K2 fold they will get accepted more by the general skiing population and also by boot fitters who would never have brought out a Full Tilt in the past. Having both 2 and 3 piece in the line just gives fitters even more options in finding just the right boot for every customer.

@tomPietrowski @onenerdykid appreciate your guys' insights as always.

Had no idea the Head Hammer series was a failed race concept. Funny that was the case given how much marketing they put out as if it were R&D'd from the ground up with their freeski team.