Over the years we have had many topics in the THP Forum about SST Pure and the process of shaft PUREing. Often polarizing, we wanted to dive in a little deeper. We went right to the source and sat down with SST Pure for another episode of The Quick Six.
THP: What is SST and where did it come from?
SST: SST stands for Strategic Shaft Technologies. The process of shaft PUREing was created by Dick Weiss after his research revealed that shafts have irregularities in their composition from the manufacturing process. This affects how the shaft performs during a swing because the forces of those irregularities affect the golfer’s ability to swing a club. Dick was able to bring his technology to the PGA TOUR, where Pros using the SST PURE have won over 2 billion dollars. It’s been more or less an open secret on the Tour for about 20 years.
THP: Can you explain the process for those that might not know about it?
SST: Put simply, PUREing a shaft is aligning the shaft to the most stable position.
In more detail, The SST PURE machine analyzes a shaft to find the most stable plane where the oscillation of the shaft is as flat as possible. This is done by adding a weight to the tip of the shaft and measuring the shape of the shaft’s oscillation. In a default position with the shaft label facing up, the oscillation will have an oval shape. So, the SST PURE machine continually measures this oscillation shape by rotating the shaft to different positions until the oscillation shape is flat. The machine then marks the shaft so that the club builder can assemble the club with the shaft in this PURE alignment.
THP: What differences have you seen in regards to the outcome?
SST: If we apply the idea of shaft oscillation shape to a golf swing:
as the golfer swings their club with an unPUREd shaft, the shaft is moving in an oval or rounded path. This is another variable in a golf swing, an event with numerous innate variables. The result of the oval shaped path is less speed, less consistent impact, negatively affecting distance and accuracy. However, when a golfer is swinging a club with a PUREd shaft, the shaft is moving in a flatter, more consistent shape through the swing. The result is an increase in clubhead speed (1-2 mph), which leads to higher ball speed (2-4 mph), and more consistent impact on the face. These results lead to an increase in distance and improved accuracy.
We’ve tested these outcomes with robots and humans of varied skill levels with nonpartisan 3rd parties. The results speak for themselves.
THP: Visual technology is something that grabs golfers and tells them something works. This is the opposite. Will a golfer know, see or feel what has changed?
SST: A golfer who has their shafts SST PUREd will receive a printed report illustrating the oscillation shape of their shaft in both the PUREd and unPUREd positions. That’s a piece of visual evidence the golfer has to see how their PUREd shaft will perform better.
Feel is subjective and difficult to quantify. That being said, 85% of human testers picked the PUREd club over the unPUREd – the clubs were not marked – saying it felt better, felt more under control, and their mishits felt much better.
When a golfer sees that they are hitting the ball farther, it’s landing closer to their target, and scores are lower, that is hopefully all the evidence the golfer needs to know something has changed.
THP: What do you say when you hear things like this is snake oil?
SST: Just because a person hasn’t heard about something doesn’t make it not real. SST has had very little budget to grow until recent years. To pull the curtain back a little, the SST PURE machine is a very expensive tool to build, more expensive than many people pay for a car. Additionally, PUREing a shaft is not a fast process either, each shaft takes about five minutes. If every fitter and golf shop could spend the money on purchasing a machine, it would be everywhere. And if the time it took to PURE each shaft was more feasible, more would do it. We’ve spoken with major manufacturers and they know it’s real. But for them, time is money. Five minutes times one million drivers sold, you can do the math. Making that more streamlined is a solution we are working toward as we continue to grow.
The proof is out there, though. Look at the $2 billion won on Tour; that comes from many of the biggest names in golf PUREing their shafts and having success at the highest level. Look at all of the independent 3rd party testing done by human and robots. NOT one of these tests has ever been able to show that PUREing doesn’t work, but countless have. It’s as real as real gets.
THP: Fun question, without naming the shaft, what is the worst shaft you have encountered during the process?
SST: That’s hard to answer without a name, or showing oscillation graphs, or explaining the deviation and the deviation amounts defined. Suffice it to say that there have been shafts so bad when you do the initial test on the machine, they don’t even make an oval shape, they start moving vertically.
Another point, because we hear it a lot; money spent on a shaft does not correlate to not needing to be PUREd. They ALL need to be PUREd. There have been $5 shafts and $500 shafts that tested equally bad. Furthermore, shafts claiming to not have a “spine” and therefore don’t need PUREing is awful, terrible, misleading information. Most shafts never had a spine to begin with. They have irregularities that occur when the pieces of materials are layered together and pockets are created. It’s almost like a knot in a tree that can’t be bent against. From the sanding process making wall thickness vary, to the heating and cooling that happens in manufacturing, this all leads to irregularities in the shaft. The SST PURE process makes sure these irregularities are aligned so that when the shaft is installed, those irregularities are stabilizing during the golf swing, not fighting against the swing.
For more information about the process or to find a place near you that offers the service, check out their website at www.sstpure.com.
IMO the equipment could cause a bad result, but I think the odds of it being the equipment user are way more likely the culprit.
You sold me, take my money.
Herein lies the issue and why I so badly wanted to do this interview.
Shaft companies speak about how important fitting is, and always want their products to shine in the best light possible and do not reference Pureing. Perhaps because it could make it look as if the product is flawed, or perhaps they do not believe it be necessary or real. I don’t know the answer to that.
I have said for years that if a golfer thinks it works for them, they should absolutely have it done because of the mental side of this game. Does it work? I don’t have a definitive answer for me personally.
You and I have that similar take in it. Esp the, you think it works…do it, mentality.
Probably the biggest question and one with the most important answer: Has Bryson done it? What’s his take on it since he was so involved with the shafts in his clubs?
Im going off memory here, but it’s fairly inexpensive considering what the machines cost. I believe around $30.
I certainly can’t speak to all of them, but I do know that Bryson got his metal woods done. I know that shouldn’t surprise a lot of folks, but I asked him when he first got to LA Golf if he was going to and he said he already had.
Well that piques my interest. Is that per club or total?
I only had it done at my driver fitting, so it was part of it, but I believe its per club.
Makes sense, thank you!
Like you had made mention, it wouldn’t surprise me to hear it was to remove variables in the shaft that are just outside his control. If they could make a lightweight rebar that didn’t flex at all, I’m sure Bryson would be all about it.
Yeah, I’m not sure about this process either.
On the one hand, I can’t argue that any given shaft has a "most stable" configuration when it is loaded cyclically as it is in the machine. But throw a club head onto that shaft, and the C.G. is not in line with the shaft, so now you’ve introduced torque to the loading of the shaft, and you’re looking at entirely different conditions than the testing conditions. It is likely more effective than not, just perhaps not as effective as advertised? In the end, it is a game of variables, and trying to remove as many of those variables as possible can’t hurt, right?
It’s a cool concept though and even if a person gets a placebo effect from itI would say it’s probably worth it. I think it would be interesting to try a before/after with a driver shaft though to see if there’s a difference.
Anyone on here ever paid for it? Only place I see it from the OEM is Miura.
How would it be affected by clubs with adjustable hosels though? Would that not change the orientation of things if you altered the setting?
I think that would depend on how the hosel works? With Callaway, the orientation of the shaft doesn’t change so that wouldn’t affect it I would have said
If the price point is acceptable then I am one that is always of the mindset it can’t hurt. I probably wouldn’t have it done to my clubs as I switch too often for myself to feel I got my money’s worth. Yet, if I had a particular driver shaft that I loved and would keep as I changed heads, year to year, I wouldn’t mind throwing in the extra.
Same thing with the Callaway adapter. At least if I want to change my loft on my Club Champion built driver, I won’t be messing with the PUREing process that was included.
Yup that is very true. So are you a big believer in the pured process?
See my previous post. I am not sure if I believe in it or not. I believe that there is a "most stable" orientation for a shaft that is oscillating. I am not sure that that matters as much as advertised in the context of the golf swing.
Then many years later, about 10 yrs, I had it done on 2 fairway shafts, and hated them. I believe the puring stiffened the shaft the way the club maker installed – I read later if you install the shaft after puring on one side, it gets stiffer, the other side, softer. Before I read that I had trashed those fairways.
I’ve also had club makers say, today’s quality graphite is so good that you don’t really need Puring. So what is it? I’m confused.
I’ll take an occasional lesson and practice more to build my mediocre skills.
Maybe when I get good enough, to play on TV, my sponsors will pick up the tab for purring the shafts..
This is exactly why we wanted to dive in a bit deeper and will have a follow up with those that have questions here. It’s definitely polarizing.
This process can’t fail. I’m not sure if that’s a selling point or another reason to call it snake oil. Its not going to make your shaft worse. You’ve spent $30 on another swing thought at the worst. Cap already beat me to bringing this up, but I see an issue with them testing the shaft with weight positioned in line with the shaft itself when we know that’s not how golf clubs are made. The skeptic in me is alarmed by their talk of "well, its a complicated and expensive machine," as well as their continued claim of bringing in 2 billion in winnings. That’s a big stretch, even for golf marketing.
They referenced 3rd party studies, does anyone have access to these? I’ve not seen any, but haven’t really looked either. If there was a study where they tested un-pured, pured, and anti-pured shafts against each other and it showed a measurable benefit, I’d buy their service on my next opportunity.
Theranos made an "expensive and complicated machine"….. Doesn’t seem to have worked out that well for Elizabeth Holmes or anyone else either…
Now THATS some kind of comparison!
I have read that historically it was more important with graphite shafts than steel. I am not sure if that is still the case.
I know that Xcaliber puts an alignment mark on their shafts to have the shafts properly installed. I think it is pretty interesting that they align their shafts during the manufacturing process.
For a set of irons it is an expensive add on though running $200+ for the set depending on how many irons in the bag. At the moment my driver, 5W and wedges have not been pured. I am confident hitting those just like the rest of my clubs.
That and "no one’s ever proven it doesn’t work."
Not exactly a resounding affirmation of the benefits of their service…
I question whether I could tell one way or another. If you tell me the is pured, I’m going to think it is better whether it actually is or isn’t. I’d have to see it to believe it.
I think you answered a number of questions for people, so thank you for sharing your experience.