Review: DPS Phantom Permanent Base Glide Treatment

[Jacques]

Soo .. it occurs to me that if you run Phantom, you never have to worry about burning the bases because you didn't wax before the season started (or the big powder day happened before you got around to waxing your fat skis, etc, etc).

Is that right?

The base will burn eventually, then "they" say a grind will be needed. That's what "they" said, not me.

 

[Jacques]

This would be a big advantage for me. I HATE that sticky, grabby snow...I always feel like I’m going to reinsure my knee. I’d pay $100 to help prevent that nasty sensation.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but no matter what you do, some snow conditions will just not allow anything to not get "sticky".
Sure there are things that can be done to make the best of it. Those things can help quite a bit. Much better than nothing.
That said, good luck!

 

[Monique]

The base will burn eventually, then "they" say a grind will be needed. That's what "they" said, not me.

But burning bases would presumably be based on how much you ski, and not based on "I didn't wax before I took them out for the first time" ... or is there also a calendar element? Maybe it's like oil changes - "3 months or 3k miles" ... ?

 

[cantunamunch]

It is SUPPOSED to penetrate the entire base material. That's what they claim, and that's what it seems is happening based on a few reviews above. (i.e. After one grind it is still working). It is hard to imagine, but then again it's hard to imagine how Helium can escape from a sealed balloon, yet it does (right thru the balloon material).

There could be a super easy way to let people imagine it. Let's say we're in the context of a shop doing Phantom. Take the skis and put them in an aquarium like this:

Perfecto Manufacturing 125 Gallon 72 inch

Spread the liquid material on. Then seal the whole thing with a clear lid and put a vacuum pump on it, like is done with lumber in this video:


Let the punters oooh and aaah over the bubbles coming up - then shine the UV lamp right through the glass..

Of course, if it doesn't bubble then our current notions are a bit wrong and we need to look at amorphous domains for a conceptual basis - back at the drawing board.

 

[Sibhusky]

But we're not using a vacuum here, plus my impression is that ptex is really not that absorbent relative to wood. I can see that sun on the base would cause some heating of the bases and maybe the ptex accepts the liquid better, but I'm really having a hard time believing that thick stuff is penetrating the entire base. I'd need to see a clear base and dyed Phantom and then cut the base open to really buy that. Certainly maybe a grind, or even two, depending on the grind, but the full thickness of the base? In which case why aren't the manufacturers stirring this stuff into the ptex to begin with? Call it ptex2 or something.

 

[James]

I don't think there's much doubt about amorphous domains in uhmw-pe. I may not understand it, but it's been researched in the context of medical and industrial uses for quite awhile. It's also been infused with vitamin E to stabilize it when undergoing radiation for sterilization, ie in knee, hip replacements etc.

This is old by now:
https://epdf.tips/the-uhmwpe-handbo...-weight-polyethylene-in-total-joint-repl.html

 

[cantunamunch]

But we're not using a vacuum here, plus my impression is that ptex is really not that absorbent relative to wood.

Exactly - we're not. And that's my point above. If we did, we could settle the 'porosity' debate once and for all. If it doesn't bubble then we stop using balloon permeability as an explanation.

In which case why aren't the manufacturers stirring this stuff into the ptex to begin with? .

They are stirring in 'stuff' - just not necessarily this stuff.

 

[Mendieta]

This would be a big advantage for me. I HATE that sticky, grabby snow...I always feel like I’m going to reinsure my knee. I’d pay $100 to help prevent that nasty sensation.

Yes.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but no matter what you do, some snow conditions will just not allow anything to not get "sticky".
Sure there are things that can be done to make the best of it. Those things can help quite a bit. Much better than nothing.
That said, good luck!

And yes.

Here is how I Iook at this. Grabby snow typically is preceded by very abrasive snow. Maybe on the same run. So, on a typical spring day, your carefully waxed skis might start performing better than your phantom skis. But the phantom performance will stay the same through the day. And the shinny wax you put on the other will degrade quickly. That would be my hunch.

 

[KingGrump]

Here is how I Iook at this. Grabby snow typically is preceded by very abrasive snow. Maybe on the same run. So, on a typical spring day, your carefully waxed skis might start performing better than your phantom skis. But the phantom performance will stay the same through the day. And the shinny wax you put on the other will degrade quickly. That would be my hunch.

In my experience, my standard spring wax jobs last way more a single day.

 

[Andy Mink]

Sometimes you get multiple conditions not only on one run but on one turn. Shade to sun to sun on a slightly different aspect. I don't know how anything will handle it all excellently.

 

[James]

What evidence is there that it eliminates grabby spring snow?

 

[pchewn]

In which case why aren't the manufacturers stirring this stuff into the ptex to begin with? Call it ptex2 or something.

Maybe the manufacturer of the PTEX (or Durasurf) can't add "this stuff" before the ski is manufactured. Maybe adding "this stuff" makes the base material hard to bond to the ski, or less machineable, or less stable over temperature, or it warps it, or the color doesn't stay durable, or ????? There could be a whole lot of reasons that treating the base with Phantom has to be done after the ski is manufactured, and not added to the base before ski manufacture.

 

[Jacques]

Yes.



And yes.

Here is how I Iook at this. Grabby snow typically is preceded by very abrasive snow. Maybe on the same run. So, on a typical spring day, your carefully waxed skis might start performing better than your phantom skis. But the phantom performance will stay the same through the day. And the shinny wax you put on the other will degrade quickly. That would be my hunch.

That why one needs to wax all the time. I usually re-wax a ski after about three day of workin' it. Sometimes four or five when I'm tired. So yes.

 

[Andy Mink]

What evidence is there that it eliminates grabby spring snow?

Just anecdotal by skiing it in spring snow. I wouldn't say it "eliminates" grabby snow but it's better than a bare base. As good or even a touch better than the yellow wax we used. @Mendieta used it back to back with a waxed ski. Also, my wife said it worked well on her skis, same conditions. Who am I to argue with that?

 

[KingGrump]

I am on skis a good part of the season. I generally put the skis in for a base grind at the beginning of the season. The ski bases generally stay decent for the reminder of the season with proper waxing and repairs. Usually, I don’t put a ski through a second base grind mid-season unless there are substantial base and/or edge damage.

For spring skiing, I get anywhere from 3 to 5 days from a wax job. For midwinter skiing, that number goes up to 5 to 8 days. It is not too bad but it is work that I rather not do if I don’t have to. If Phantom works I would definitely switch over. Even when the initial cost is steeper than what I would like to see.

My biggest concern with Phantom is the requirement of periodic grinding of the ski base to renew the glide property of the Phantom. I don’t recall anyone actually stated what the interval should be. The required renewal base grinding will add substantially to the life cycle cost of the Phantom product.

 

[Started at 53]

Always dangerous to assume, but I read it that you only do a base grind when it is needed as normal, not to recondition the Phantom treatment. DPS says that a base grind does not get rid of the Phantom treatment because the Phantom permeates the material thus a base grind does not eliminate the Phantom.

My take is a Phantom treatment is good for the life of the ski.

I did not feel like it was as slippery in the lift line as a freshly waxed ski, but was very good while trying not to fall (i.e. while skiing)

 

[Andy Mink]

Always dangerous to assume, but I read it that you only do a base grind when it is needed as normal, not to recondition the Phantom treatment.

This is my understanding. @Philpug, is this what DPS indicated to you?

 

[Philpug]

This is my understanding. @Philpug, is this what DPS indicated to you?

Correct, base grides are needed as needed not to rejuvenate Phantom.

 

[ScottB]

My biggest concern with Phantom is the requirement of periodic grinding of the ski base to renew the glide property of the Phantom. I don’t recall anyone actually stated what the interval should be. The required renewal base grinding will add substantially to the life cycle cost of the Phantom product.

This was a point of confusion with Phantom and somewhere on the DPS site or online they clarified things. Phantom does not require any base grind. You do it the same as you normally would (if at all). The message DPS was trying to get out was if DPS is applied and in the future the ski has a base grind, you don't have to re-apply because it goes all the way through the base (they have data on that) and it even gets more slippery after a grind, not less.

Base burn is a different issue. I am not sure what effect Phantom has on that, and personally, I am not convinced it is even an issue, but I do agree waxing makes the bottoms look a lot better. I am not sure if DPS does the same thing. I have skied it for one season and my skis look fine, no base burn. They have never had it, so no change.

 

[Andy Mink]

Base burn is a different issue.

I'm pretty sure 99.5% of recreational skiers don't ski hard enough to burn the bases. I think drying out/getting that whitish tinge may be confused with burning.