DPS Phantom Kickstarter

[PisteOff]

So you knock a nice gouge into your ski that now requires a good size p-tex repair. You now have an untreated section of your ski base. Speed killer. What is the shelf life of this product? Is it a two part mixture? Is it a single solution? Am I out another 100 every time I repair a base with P-Tex? Can I possess and store the stuff to use for repair coverage?

I'm with Jacques. They present wax like it is a surface treatment only. I've rarely had my skis get grippy and slow. We sinter ski bases so that wax can permeate. If this solution saturates your base as they say than any waxing you attempt on the skis afterwards would only be a very short lived surface treatment. Would it not? Again, there are so many questions that aren't answered.

My suggestion would be for them to simply give away a few hundred applications of the stuff to people here, at Blister, at New Schoolers, at TGR, Ski Divas, etc and let the chips fall where they may. An outpouring of positive feedback from a number of successful ski sites would have this stuff flying off the shelf if it lives up to the hype. It would be a far better marketing play than a kickstarter campaign with a weak presentation. There's a number of good skis in my loaner rack that I would put this stuff on just to cut down on my maintenance work load. I'll stick to waxing my personal babies for the foreseeable future.

This will certainly be followed closely by many, myself included.

 

[Read Blinn]

Wasn't there a discussion here recently that challenged the idea that wax absorbs into the base? Guy claimed that his electron-microscope inspection (and his extensive experience with poly bases) made it clear that absolutely nothing could sink into a base — that all wax was a surface treatment, quickly skied off. He had his own base replacement, I think, perhaps a material that didn't require wax. I'd search for this thread, but I'm more about heading to bed at the moment. Was this guy exploded?

 

[PisteOff]

Wasn't there a discussion here recently that challenged the idea that wax absorbs into the base? Guy claimed that his electron-microscope inspection (and his extensive experience with poly bases) made it clear that absolutely nothing could sink into a base — that all wax was a surface treatment, quickly skied off. He had his own base replacement, I think, perhaps a material that didn't require wax. I'd search for this thread, but I'm more about heading to bed at the moment. Was this guy exploded?

I missed that one........

 

[neonorchid]

Wasn't there a discussion here recently that challenged the idea that wax absorbs into the base? Guy claimed that his electron-microscope inspection (and his extensive experience with poly bases) made it clear that absolutely nothing could sink into a base — that all wax was a surface treatment, quickly skied off. He had his own base replacement, I think, perhaps a material that didn't require wax. I'd search for this thread, but I'm more about heading to bed at the moment. Was this guy exploded?

I missed that one........

https://forum.pugski.com/threads/myths-about-uhmw-base-material-and-new-base-material-idea.2460/

 

[Jacques]

Yes, we have heard it all before, but sometimes it really is different (and I am not suggesting it is). This is from the abstract:

"The chemicals react together as the solvent evaporates, on application of the composition to a ski base. Each hydroxyl group on a molecule of compound (I) can substitute with the chlorine atom on a molecule of compound (II), or cause ring-opening of the epoxide in a molecule of compound (II). When compound (III) is present, the amine group can instead cause epoxide ring-opening in compound (II) at the terminal end of the polymer chain. The amine group can perform additional ring-openings with additional epoxides, subject to steric considerations, allowing the relatively short individual chains to form a three-dimensional network through the permeated material of the ski. These steps are commonly known as 'curing' . Furthermore, in the presence of compound (IV), the silicate groups of compound (III) can be cross-linked by condensation of ethanol from compound (IV) and the alcohol groups generated from epoxide ring-opening, forming a three-dimensional silicate network through the material of the ski it has permeated. This silicate network in particular confers hydrophobicity to the material, with cross-linking also occurring as the solvent evaporates. When applied to a ski, the above composition confers hydrophobicity to the exposed surfaces as well as the bulk material, such that exposing a new surface of the treated portion of the ski, for example, through accidental damage such as a scratch, merely affects the physical shape of the ski, and not its hydrophobic properties. This is possible because the composition permeates the ski and bonds to the surfaces of individual grains within the base layer, coating the outer surface of each grain (even where the grain is located away from the external ski surface). This results in each coated grain having a predominantly silicate surface, conferring hydrophobicity. As such, any grains which are lost from the ski base due to damage or wear simply expose further grains with the same hydrophobic properties, allowing the ski to retain its hydrophobic properties. The composition can be said to become part of the material microstructure."

OMG! You gotta' take some thing with a grain of salt. I believe that wax can penetrate into a sintered plastic! I make that happen all the time.
Gee.........thanks for the chemistry lesson.
Can you make clean LSD? Oh.....I guess not as now I see this is a quote. Still would have to be a chemist to understand.

 

[Jacques]

As is usually the case, things are a bit more complicated than this. Different materials behave differently, and while regular wax obviously isn't repelled by the material ski bases are made out of (polyethylene?), it's entirely possible that this product can be absorbed into a base far more readily, due to the way it interacts with the base on a molecular level (think hydrophobic vs. hydrophilic materials), viscosity, or other factors. Short of a hot box, I wouldn't expect wax to penetrate a base especially deeply, and as it doesn't actually bond with the base material, it will always wear off eventually.

Similarly, I don't think DPS ever claimed this "seals" the base. It bonds with the base, yes, and apparently strengthens it, but this doesn't mean the base is no longer porous or can't absorb wax. I'm just going off of DPS's claims here, but none of them seem obviously impossible or contradictory off the bat.

I'm not a chemist or material scientist, so please forgive any vagueness or lack of proper technical terminology. And I'm certainly not making any claims as to the effectiveness of this product, though I'm interested enough to try it out on a pair of skis. (I have plenty…)

Well, I was asking or raising a question. Seems to me that if that stuff filled the base and polymerized that then nothing else could get in.
Again, I am asking questions. Food for thought.

 

[PisteOff]

https://forum.pugski.com/threads/myths-about-uhmw-base-material-and-new-base-material-idea.2460/

Holy Bejesus that's a brain burner........I'm 3 pages deep and I need a break.....

 

[Jacques]

I can't remember their name now, but there was a ski company that touted a new base material that never needed waxing.
This was a recent thing.
Anyone know what brand that was? I know another ski maker tried it, then it seemed to die I guess. Maybe too much expense to compete with all the rest.

Bingo! Here they are. https://melt-ski.com/

 

[pchewn]

In the absence of data, all theories are valid.

My theory: This "Phantom" stuff not only will make the skis run better without waxing, the application also helps wax permeate the base and last longer. Well, why not?

Oh yeah, and after treatment with Phantom, the bases smell better too.

 

[nay]

Most of the recent comments are taking about Phantom as if it is a wax substitute rather than something that is chemically altering the base of the ski.

There is zero reason, just for example, that the altered composition is “sealed” post chemical reaction anymore than it was “sealed” prior. The theory is that the base material has simply had its friction properties modified, and therefore doesn’t need a surface friction modifier, e.g. wax.

The pointlessness of all of this is that ski bases should be engineered to slide on snow without having to wax and scrape them. Whether or not this stuff really works, obvious problems are left unsolved until somebody is sick of it. Imagine if you had to do this with your tires to maintain proper friction. A bunch of dudes waxing (!) nostalgic about time in the shop scraping wax and hot boxing tires and how much faster they are. Your wives would kill you sooner than they are currently planning.

Imagine bindings that blow up knees because they rely on elasticity instead of sensors. Who would ever use such a thing?

 

[Marker]

I see some interesting cage matches in the future!

Phantom vs Juice
Phantom vs Zoom wax

 

[JWMN]

Somewhere in this thread it said that this treatment makes the base harder. Wouldn't that then alter the flex pattern of the ski? Seems to me it would.

Just wondering!

DPS Declares "Wax Is Dead"
Never wax again with Phantom permanent base glide treatment


SALT LAKE CITY, Utah – November 1, 2017 – DPS Skis, innovators of carbon skis and snowsports technologies since 2005, introduces Phantom – a permanent, one-time application base-penetrating formula that forever eliminates the need for waxing skis and snowboards. Available now through a 30-day Kickstarter campaign with special early bird pricing, the disruptive solution ushers in a new era for the future of snowsports.

View attachment 32395​

“Phantom’s approach is a truly innovative scientific advancement. It’s a recipe that simply works day after day, tune after tune, and forever fundamentally changes our conception and approach to fast-running boards designed for daily use,” said Stephan Drake, founder and CEO of DPS Skis. “We came across a history of different alternative solutions attempting to solve the wax problem, but nothing was deemed competitive. We then began a developmental relationship with a group of top material scientists to research and attack the problem via an advanced free radical polymerization approach.”

Developed by a team of expert chemists and material science engineers, Phantom’s patent-pending formula creates a hydrophobic environment that offers three undeniable benefits. First, unlike wax, Phantom is only applied once and permanently alters ski and board bases to make them both faster and harder for the life of the product. Second, Phantom offers consistently fast on-snow gliding performance across a broad range of conditions and temperatures. Third, and most importantly, Phantom is made up of non-reactive chemical functional groups that are both inert to the environment and safe to those applying it – something that traditional waxes have never been able to achieve.

Initial research and development was extensive, with 50 compound variations having been explored and tested in both the laboratory and in the mountains of Utah, Chile and New Zealand. Lab results of the final formula correlated the hydrophobicity, coefficient of friction, shore hardness and full base penetration with test ski days in every condition, including manmade snow, midwinter groomed snow, fresh powder and warm spring snow.

For more information about Phantom, visit the Kickstarter page.

About DPS Skis
Located at the base of the Wasatch Mountains in Salt Lake City, Utah, DPS designs the world’s most advanced ski products by fusing space age carbon technology with groundbreaking shapes. DPS is responsible for the world’s first and only pure pre-pregnated carbon fiber sandwich ski, the first 120mm-waisted powder pintail, the first rockered ski with sidecut, the Spoon – a convex three-dimensional shoveled ski with radical edge bevel and Phantom, a paradigm-shifting permanent, one time application base-coating that forever eliminates the need for waxing skis and snowboards. DPS products are sold on five continents and are the trusted brand of choice for serious skiers worldwide. For more information visit www.dpsskis.com or call +1.801.413.1737.

 

[pchewn]

Somewhere in this thread it said that this treatment makes the base harder. Wouldn't that then alter the flex pattern of the ski? Seems to me it would.

Just wondering!

Hardness is a different property than stiffness. If you take steel and harden it, you have not affected the stiffness. Unhardened and hardened steel both have a stiffness of 30X10^6 PSI. The base material stiffness may or may not be affected by the treatment. Even if it is, the effect may be negligible compared to the other layers in the ski (e.g. unidirectional carbon fiber).

This is one of my favorite interview questions for new engineers. I would ask them to explain the difference between stiffness, strength, strain, stress, toughness, and hardness. Each one is different.

 

[JWMN]

Good to know. Thanks!

Hardness is a different property than stiffness. If you take steel and harden it, you have not affected the stiffness. Unhardened and hardened steel both have a stiffness of 30X10^6 PSI. The base material stiffness may or may not be affected by the treatment. Even if it is, the effect may be negligible compared to the other layers in the ski (e.g. unidirectional carbon fiber).

This is one of my favorite interview questions for new engineers. I would ask them to explain the difference between stiffness, strength, strain, stress, toughness, and hardness. Each one is different.

 

[dbostedo]

OK... I'm in for a single treatment. A few reasons :

-- I don't wax my own skis (feel free to gasp), so I'm terrible about maintenance and waxing (only got 2 waxes last season for about 16 ski days - and the second was just to combat spring slop, with IMO little effect)... anything to make that better would be good
-- I'm really curious and buying just to experiment myself

I'm not sure I'm the best tester given all that, but looking forward to giving it a shot.

 

[JWMN]

A little more info. From an article in the Denver Post: Really, the online fundraising campaign has more to do with reaching snowboarders, who don’t have much reason to be familiar with a boutique ski maker like DPS.

The article http://theknow.denverpost.com/2017/11/01/ski-wax-maintenance-dps-skis-utah/165018/

 

[Started at 53]

When is it gonna ship?

 

[dbostedo]

When is it gonna ship?

Per the Kickstarter site, estimated delivery is January 2018.

 

[Eleeski]

Hardness is a different property than stiffness. If you take steel and harden it, you have not affected the stiffness. Unhardened and hardened steel both have a stiffness of 30X10^6 PSI.

Not sure I buy that. My understanding is that the modulus changes by about 10 to 20 percent. Makes sense if the tested steel is shaped like a composite panel with the hardened skin adding stiffness. My analogy fails with different shapes - that don't look like skis. Hardening a skin of a ski will change the stiffness.

The base material stiffness may or may not be affected by the treatment. Even if it is, the effect may be negligible compared to the other layers in the ski (e.g. unidirectional carbon fiber).

This however makes the question of hardening bases irrelevant. Whatever skin exists in a ski ( especially carbon but even including wood) had better be a LOT stiffer than the polyethylene base - regardless of how it's been modified.

This does beg a different question, is polyethylene the best base? Stainless steel? Teflon? Chrome? An ablative material like graphite pencil? Unobtanium!

Eric

 

[mogsie]

So you knock a nice gouge into your ski that now requires a good size p-tex repair. You now have an untreated section of your ski base. Speed killer. What is the shelf life of this product? Is it a two part mixture? Is it a single solution? Am I out another 100 every time I repair a base with P-Tex? Can I possess and store the stuff to use for repair coverage?

I'm with Jacques. They present wax like it is a surface treatment only. I've rarely had my skis get grippy and slow. We sinter ski bases so that wax can permeate. If this solution saturates your base as they say than any waxing you attempt on the skis afterwards would only be a very short lived surface treatment. Would it not? Again, there are so many questions that aren't answered.

My suggestion would be for them to simply give away a few hundred applications of the stuff to people here, at Blister, at New Schoolers, at TGR, Ski Divas, etc and let the chips fall where they may. An outpouring of positive feedback from a number of successful ski sites would have this stuff flying off the shelf if it lives up to the hype. It would be a far better marketing play than a kickstarter campaign with a weak presentation. There's a number of good skis in my loaner rack that I would put this stuff on just to cut down on my maintenance work load. I'll stick to waxing my personal babies for the foreseeable future.

This will certainly be followed closely by many, myself included.

If it is hydrophobic, I don't see how it would interfer with application of wax...