Review: DPS Phantom Permanent Base Glide Treatment

[neonorchid]

Think about highly edged skis that aren't being used on completely hardened, even surfaced snow. Most stick figure diagrams will show the force onto the snow (and the reaction force back up) as being through the bases, but this is an oversimplification. The force normal to the snow surface is exactly the same as it would be if the ski weren't edged at all, and it's applied to the tiny area of edge and sidewall.

The second case is that of a ski sinking in powder especially during turns. It is not as dramatic as the first case because the total force is distributed over a greater area.

All of these become even worse in high friction snow, such as fresh snow below - 10F (think northern tier or Eastern Canada) or such as man-made snow fresh out of the guns that hasn't been allowed to sit for 24 hrs+ (Think southern resorts trying to make snow over a short snowmaking interval, especially early season).

There are a few products on the market already (Holmenkol sidewall juice frex) but I am of the more is better mindset.

Not sure about the Voile - pretty much all the others (G3, Madshus, Asnes, Fischer, Rossi, Altai) are not.

If I'm not mistaken most of those ski's have a Cap-Construction.

Also, you can still use Holmenkol sidewall juice flex on a Phantom treated ski if you're not sold on Phantom working well on the sidewalls of your sidewall constructed skis.

 

[RuleMiHa]

Think about highly edged skis that aren't being used on completely hardened, even surfaced snow. Most stick figure diagrams will show the force onto the snow (and the reaction force back up) as being through the bases, but this is an oversimplification. The force normal to the snow surface is exactly the same as it would be if the ski weren't edged at all, and it's applied to the tiny area of edge and sidewall.

The second case is that of a ski sinking in powder especially during turns. It is not as dramatic as the first case because the total force is distributed over a greater area.

All of these become even worse in high friction snow, such as fresh snow below - 10F (think northern tier or Eastern Canada) or such as man-made snow fresh out of the guns that hasn't been allowed to sit for 24 hrs+ (Think southern resorts trying to make snow over a short snowmaking interval, especially early season).

There are a few products on the market already (Holmenkol sidewall juice frex) but I am of the more is better mindset.

So based on reading the patent application for (what I think is Phantom, and likely used to be Juice Permanent) and how they describe the process of distributing the compound throughout the base (they basically hook it onto another compound as a carrier) it is unlikely to travel through to the sidewall from the base because of the adhesive between the SW and base. However, depending on the molecular composition of the SW, there is a chance that direct application to the sidewall would work. IIRC the carrier molecule should permeate most plastics, I think it would just depend on the specific characteristics of the sidewall plastic. What is a sidewall made from?

 

[neonorchid]

So -

- IIRC the carrier molecule should permeate most plastics, I think it would just depend on the specific characteristics of the sidewall plastic. What is a sidewall made from?

ABS plastic and UHMWPE (P-Tex) are the most common materials used.

 

[Seldomski]

Reading the info DPS has posted -- seems like this stuff is basically a low viscosity hydrophobic resin that cures with UV light. Seems it seeps into the sintered base material pores, then cures with UV exposure. Probably end up with a matrix of plastic (sintered base) and low durability hydrophobic glue (DPS 'wax') when you are done. The sintered base provides backbone for the less durable glue. I guess the hydrophobic resin/glue abrasively wears out over time as it rubs on snow, but theoretically not much faster than base grinds are needed for a typical skier. This is all speculation based on their marketing materials.

So it sounds like this is a non-reversible process. I think the only negative consequence may be that wax will be removed faster from a DPS'd ski vs. a virgin ski without this treatment. The sintered material pores are filled on a DPS'd ski. Less tooth/pores for wax to grab and hide in. But if you are doing this to never wax again, not really a downside.

Would love to see more scientific test data on this. What is the coefficient of friction over time vs. all temperature wax at different speeds/temps?

 

[RuleMiHa]

@cantunamunch and @neonorchid I looked over the patent application again for what I think is Phantom. It's fairly dense so there is a possibility that I missed something. But what it seemed to say was that any ethylene plastic was definitely a candidate for this treatment, but it didn't seem to say that other plastics weren't. ABS is Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene so I don't where that falls. It definitely works on UHMWPE.

It also comments on the possibility of using it on the topsheet, but doesn't comment on the SW at all. It also lays out the difference between sintered and extruded bases and comments on the superiority of sintered and why. Basically saying the problem with extruded isn't Phantom, it's the problem inherent with extruded bases.

Here are some quotes:

"The permeable material may be at least in part any ethylene plastic. Preferably, the permeable material may be at least in part ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE). Alternatively, the permeable material may be at least in part wooden."

"Skis are commonly made from ethylene plastic, often being UHMWPE. The composition is able to permeate UHMWPE and confer hydrophobic properties to virtually the entire material."

"The ski may include a top layer which is treated with the composition."

"It is advantageous to also treat the top layer of a ski as it will reduce drag in scenarios such as off-piste skiing, where deep snow may overlie the ski. It can also reduce the accumulation of snow on the top layer of the ski. According to a second aspect of the invention, there is provided a method for treating the material of a surface of a ski"

Here is the link for the patent application, maybe you can find something I missed.

http://google.com/patents/WO2016042323A1?cl=en

 

[RuleMiHa]

@cantunamunch and @neonorchidI looked at what I think is the patent application for Phantom again. It's fairly dense so there is a possibility that I missed something. But what it seemed to say was that any ethylene plastic was definitely a candidate for this treatment, but it didn't seem to say that other plastics weren't. ABS is Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene so I don't where that falls. It definitely works on UHMWPE.

It also comments on the possibility of using it on the topsheet, but doesn't comment on the SW at all. It also lays out the difference between sintered and extruded bases and comments on the superiority of sintered and why. Basically saying the problem with extruded isn't Phantom, it's the problem inherent with extruded bases.

Here are some quotes:

"The permeable material may be at least in part any ethylene plastic. Preferably, the permeable material may be at least in part ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE). Alternatively, the permeable material may be at least in part wooden."

Skis are commonly made from ethylene plastic, often being UHMWPE. The composition is able to permeate UHMWPE and confer hydrophobic properties to virtually the entire material."

"The ski may include a top layer which is treated with the composition."

"It is advantageous to also treat the top layer of a ski as it will reduce drag in scenarios such as off-piste skiing, where deep snow may overlie the ski. It can also reduce the accumulation of snow on the top layer of the ski. According to a second aspect of the invention, there is provided a method for treating the material of a surface of a ski"

Here is the link for the patent application, maybe you can find something I missed.

http://google.com/patents/WO2016042323A1?cl=en

 

[Magi]

Here is the link for the patent application, maybe you can find something I missed.

THANK YOU for finding the patent - I poked around for it but wasn't able to locate it.

After reading this I'm sold on Phantom being real (all the chemistry makes sense), and the real question for me is why no base manufacturer is just doing this to begin with. This is an aftermarket process that should be doable by the manufacturer for pennies...

Which is part of why this is genius - I think this has been possible for years, there's nothing particularly "new" that I'm seeing - it just took a the person with the right bits of knowledge to go "and here's how we crosslink siloxane into the UHMWPE so it's as hydrophobic as wax".


For anyone wanting to roll their own Phantom - the patent is pretty clear on what you need and the rough amounts. (really good patent) I also wish you luck for rolling your own for less than $500 on the chemicals.

 

[VickieH]

Decided I'd order this, but saw that it needs to cure for 3 hours in the sun. Twice.

In Portland, this could mean skis being out of commission for weeks.

 

[ScottB]

I ordered 4 applications of this stuff. Will use 2 on my son's skis and I will try two on my skis. If you ordered multiple applications the price comes down to a more reasonable $70 or so per ski. If I try to do all 6 of my skis it does get a little pricey. I figure I'll treat the skis I use the most and see how it works. From what Phil reports its pretty good. Still wondering about really cold temps (like we have in NE right now) and in really warm temps DPS claims it works great.

 

[dbostedo]

Decided I'd order this, but saw that it needs to cure for 3 hours in the sun. Twice.

In Portland, this could mean skis being out of commission for weeks.

That could be a tough one for me too, since I don't have a yard. I'll have to figure something out.

 

[Monique]

Which is part of why this is genius - I think this has been possible for years, there's nothing particularly "new" that I'm seeing - it just took a the person with the right bits of knowledge to go "and here's how we crosslink siloxane into the UHMWPE so it's as hydrophobic as wax".

Brilliant ideas are often obvious in hindsight, right?

 

[E221b]

That could be a tough one for me too, since I don't have a yard. I'll have to figure something out.

If you’re handy, you can rig up some UV lights over an indoor workbench. I don’t know what the specs of the lamps would need to be, but it’s what DPS will be recommending to shops that want to apply Phantom.

 

[Jacques]

If you’re handy, you can rig up some UV lights over an indoor workbench. I don’t know what the specs of the lamps would need to be, but it’s what DPS will be recommending to shops that want to apply Phantom.

Ha ha. Just take them to a tanning salon!

 

[Started at 53]

This works for UV light curing
https://olefloridaflyshop.com/shop/tying-tools/loon-uv-infinity-light/

 

[dbostedo]

This works for UV light curing
https://olefloridaflyshop.com/shop/tying-tools/loon-uv-infinity-light/

Hmm... I wonder if a light like that would cure it quickly, versus hours in the sun. I'll have to check the website and maybe send them the question.

 

[Started at 53]

@dbostedo

I use those for curing UV glues for fly tying, they are amazing and work very quickly.

I would not hesitate to use one for UV curing, not sure if the DPS Phantom needs more time tho.

 

[KingGrump]

Hmm... I wonder if a light like that would cure it quickly, versus hours in the sun.

If you are gonna do it. Do it right and that starts with the right tools.

 

[dbostedo]

If you are gonna do it. Do it right and that starts withe the right tools.

Plus I could stick my head in and show up at the slopes with a ready-made goggle tan, like a real expert...

 

[Started at 53]

If you are gonna do it. Do it right and that starts withe the right tools.

View attachment 36144

Go Big or Go Home

 

[Swiss Toni]

As with all types of polythene UHMWPE ski bases are degraded by UV radiation so I would go easy with the UV exposure.

This product was developed over a very short period of time, so there would have been no time to test the long term effects on the base material.

Somebody over on NSers found this patent that appears to be related to Phantom: http://google.com/patents/WO2016042323A1?cl=en

This is the patent for Juice, a different product. Patent applications are not published until 18 months after filing https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1120.html

I’m pretty surprised that they haven’t published the results of any of the glide tests they must surely have carried out. Using two strong magnets , an Android smartphone and this app http://www.skiira.com/products-services it would be easy to carry out some basic glide tests.