Review: DPS Phantom Permanent Base Glide Treatment

[Monique]

For people who really wax every 3-4 days, the time savings would be enormous, unless of course it’s an excuse to recede from the active household, in which case never mention Phantom or you might get it in your stocking.

That's why you have a quiver - spread those waxing days out!

I definitely find waxing my skis soothing - when I finally find the time.

I wonder if you could get reasonably reproducible conditions using an indoor facility.

 

[Andy Mink]

I definitely find waxing my skis soothing

This is a point I've made several times, probably further up in this thread. If you like waxing, or need or want that last bit of performance a condition-specific wax will provide, then Phantom is probably not for you. And that's ok. On the other hand if you don't like waxing or paying to have skis waxed, or don't have the time or space, then Phantom is a legit option. I think the per application price is a bit steep but if you figure in your time and the cost of wax over time it really isn't that expensive.

Another reason I wouldn't use Phantom is if I constantly traded skis in and out of a quiver. I don't think you'd get a good ROI when selling, at least not until, or if, Phantom becomes more mainstream.

The test I'd really like to see is on racing skis, especially Super G or downhill, is Phantom under wax-of-the-day. Will it give a top notch racer that little bit at the bottom of the course when much of the wax has been stripped off? I don't know how you'd test that short of two differently prepped skis on the same run. And if it's a big difference one way or the other do you really want to find out at 80mph? And 75mph on the other foot!

 

[dbostedo]

^^^
I think maybe you could test it in training runs over several weeks swapping between pairs of skis, not mixing Phantom and non-Phantom. And ideally not having the skier know which was which when they put them on. Then you might get honest feedback on feel, and you'd have real data on times. I don't know how many training days it would take to have a large enough sample though, to filter out some of the variables.

 

[DanoT]

I am pretty sure that if DPS thought that their coating was faster than a race wax tuned ski then we would have heard about it from their marketing dept. Maybe a future formulation will achieve that but my guess is that the waxless only do once coating is for those who don't do their own waxing and only own one pair of skis (so only one pricey outlay for the DPS coating system), in other words, the majority of the skiing public.

So, not for racers, not for those with a quiver of skis unless it is a small quiver or you have deep enough pockets.

 

[Andy Mink]

faster than a race wax tuned ski

I've no doubt that a properly waxed ski is faster than a Phantom ski. I'm wondering if, after the bulk of wax is worn off, Phantom would be faster than a bare ski. I just seem to remember in the Olympics LV's skis were burned up after one of the runs; it looked like nothing was left wax-wise.

 

[Seldomski]

I guess my basic question is on a scale of 1 to 10:

Condition 1 (ideal ski day)
Day temp = 25 deg F
Last grind ~5-20 ski days ago
No wax = ??
DPS Phantom (after break in period) = ??
All temp wax, 2 ski days old = ??

Condition 2 (spring ski day)
Day temp = 45 deg F
Last grind ~5-20 ski days ago
No wax = ??
DPS Phantom (after break in period) = ??
All temp wax, 2 ski days old = ??

Fresh, temperature specific wax job for conditions = 10
Unwaxed ski on fly paper snow at low speed (sticky) = 1

 

[nay]

I've no doubt that a properly waxed ski is faster than a Phantom ski. I'm wondering if, after the bulk of wax is worn off, Phantom would be faster than a bare ski. I just seem to remember in the Olympics LV's skis were burned up after one of the runs; it looked like nothing was left wax-wise.

Consistent glide and speed are two different things, the former being vastly more important to recreational skiers.

I honestly like the idea that Phantom isn’t as fast. I’ve never been on something steep and sketchy and found myself thinking “I just hope my wax is fast”.

Phantom is something where I don’t see any need for more than anectdotal reports. This isn’t a question of what is faster, it’s whether you have consistent glide over a long period of time (life of the ski) in a variety of conditions.

On any sticky day, we all report back and say “it was sticky so I headed for Sixth Alley”. Wax never cures that. If you were grippy OTOH, meaning slow like I was on a few transitional days last spring, that informs to take the prep seriously, because I didn’t in order to introduce that as a variable and now I have to remove that variable if I want to keep testing for consistent glide.

It’s sort of like feeling you have to keep putting your car engine on a dyno to make sure it is making the rated horsepower. Who cares if you never noticed any difference getting up the mountain?

 

[Monique]

I’ve never been on something steep and sketchy and found myself thinking “I just hope my wax is fast”.

I *have* thought my skis were alarmingly fast ... after @Doug Briggs tuned them. Never when I wax them myself.

 

[nay]

alarmingly fast

This is what I mean. I have no doubt that ^^^ is the standard that’s being discussed here.

Gonna buy some Phantom and slow tf down .

 

[cosmoliu]

After reading through this entire thread I decided to bring some new Stöckli skis with me to Jackson Hole to be Phantomized. The Mudroom ski shop at the tram base has one of DPS's UV "curing stations", the only one anywhere close to any of the places I'll be skiing this season. I'm not averse to DIYing something like this, but it did seem that the process is just quirky enough for me to be convinced that paying The Mudroom $45 to apply the treatment would be money well spent. BTW, $145 is their early season price. I believe it is going up to $165. Since getting the cure station in last week they said they worked through a waiting list of about 20 pairs and now are able to do the treatment on a walk in basis, overnight. After a day skiing gingerly in early season conditions, I'm a believer. I was on the fence about getting it done on the other pair I brought when I took a core shot to one of them. Since I decided to spring for a full tune, I got the Phantom treatment on them as well.

FYI, the DPS website has a map listing this year's curing station locations.

 

[Tricia]

After reading through this entire thread I decided to bring some new Stöckli skis with me to Jackson Hole to be Phantomized. The Mudroom ski shop at the tram base has one of DPS's UV "curing stations", the only one anywhere close to any of the places I'll be skiing this season. I'm not averse to DIYing something like this, but it did seem that the process is just quirky enough for me to be convinced that paying The Mudroom $45 to apply the treatment would be money well spent. BTW, $145 is their early season price. I believe it is going up to $165. Since getting the cure station in last week they said they worked through a waiting list of about 20 pairs and now are able to do the treatment on a walk in basis, overnight. After a day skiing gingerly in early season conditions, I'm a believer. I was on the fence about getting it done on the other pair I brought when I took a core shot to one of them. Since I decided to spring for a full tune, I got the Phantom treatment on them as well.

FYI, the DPS website has a map listing this year's curing station locations.

 

[Jim McDonald]

me too

 

[E221b]

It’s nice to hear other people with good experiences on Phantom. I know that there are a lot of skeptics, but for a certain kind of skier, it’s a great fit.

 

[cosmoliu]

New information- I was chatting with the tech tonight and he said something about buffing out the wax on a pair of skis he was finishing and about to deliver. When I responded with a pretty quizzical look on my face, He said that the Phantom rep, who also is their wax rep, said that for best performance, wax still is a part of the picture. Particularly on cold snow. Something about getting the ski started from a dead stop. Once moving, the hydrophobic qualities of the Phantom treatment take over. I dunno, I wasn't following it all. He asked where I'm from, and when I said CA, he said that spring Sierra Cement should be noticeably less sticky with Phantom alone. Again, the hydrophobic aspect of the interaction with wetter snow. Part of the discussion was that wax, no matter how studiously applied, is a surface treatment with a finite life. He wouldn't go so far as to say that the motto "Never wax again" is hyperbole, because someone who truly doesn't want to wax really doesn't need to. Phantom, after all, is better than no wax at all. Maybe the take home lesson is: Phantom is better than no wax, wax on top of Phantom is better, and a serious prep in the style of Jacques is better still. He did seem to indicate that I could leave the wax iron at home, and that an occasional application of liquid wax would be pretty satisfactory. And even that should, ideally, be brushed out. I can say that after two days on snowmaking snow, the bottoms of my skis are still pretty darn slick. Noticeably so. And I don't mind the idea of still occasionally applying a liquid wax when it's particularly cold. No more wax curls left on hotel room floors.

 

[Andy Mink]

Something about getting the ski started from a dead stop.

I noticed this, especially early on after a fresh application. It seemed to get better as time went on. I actually kind of liked it in the lift lines; I didn't have to worry as much on some of the little inclines/declines that happen around the gates.

 

[cosmoliu]

I haven't noticed it. But that's probably because there still is wax on top of the Phantom.

 

[David Chaus]

OK, so I have my first day on my Renouns with Phantom. I clean the base of the factory applied wax, with two different applications of citrus base cleaner, plus brushing a new brass brush, before applying the Phantom 2.0. So no wax.

The first few steps shuffling around were sticky, then once I started for real, the glide was great and I didn’t notice any more lift line grippiness. It performed at least as well as wax, and my gliding speed on flats was better than other skiers with comparable lengths of skis and comparable ability. I was mostly a groomer day, with some soft bumps and some cut up off piste. So far I’m happy.

Tomorrow it’s supposed to snow all day, so I’ll see how it does.

 

[pchewn]

I applied Phantom to my 3 pair of skis. All 3 have been skied on this season in conditions from groomed wet harpack to new snow. (All snow high moisture). One pair of skis took about 4 runs before the stickiness of the application went away. All 3 pair are acting as though they were waxed with red high-temperature wax. I have yet to ski in any dry or very cold snow. So far so good. (All on Mt Hood)

 

[Slasher]

Skied yesterday and today on new skis, freshly Phantom'ed by Escape Route (www.escaperoute.ca, Squamish/Whistler). I was running staff orientation for a pod of instructors.

Conditions yesterday: -2C, icy. As expected, not noticeably different from unwaxed (or even from waxed).

Conditions today: +2C, damp & heavy overnight snow. Whoah ... everyone in the pod kept complaining how slow and sticky the snow was, while I kept zooming by. The running joke (which eventually become annoying to them and hilarious to me) was that I kept asking "is the snow sticky?" because I honestly could not tell.

Best $100 I ever spent!

 

[ScottB]

I put Phantom on three skis last season. All worked great right out of the shute. No stickyness and good glide in all conditions. This year I did 3 more skis. I also skied on one ski from last year that had a base grind. I can report the base grind had no effect on the Phantom, felt the same as it did last year. I have skied 2 of the 3 skies I did this year. For some reason, all 3 had a lot of residue, especially white powdery looking stuff. It looked like some of the photo's that were posted from last year. Both skies from this year had good glide, so the residue didn't seem to effect the performance. What I did find, though, was one ski was a little sticky initially, and then by the end of the day it went away. Basically what others have been reporting. I can say that the sticky ski was the one that had new structure put in the base, and the non-sticky ski had virtually no structure. I could visually see that I couldn't get all of the residue out of the structure after putting on the Phantom. I wiped, brushed, fibertex'd, did a lot by there was still some white residue in the structure. It seemed some came by the end of the day, but not all. A few more days should take care of the rest. It was gliding well by the end of the day, so I am not too concerned about it.