Jump to content

Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at GolfWRX such as viewing all the images, interacting with members, access to all forums and eligiblility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

- - - - -

Is PUREing still relevant in 2017?


75 replies to this topic

#31 Howard Jones

Howard Jones

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,071 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100881
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2405

Posted 11 June 2017 - 07:15 AM

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

Howard,

Quick question, what is your take on a Pured shaft vs a flo'd shaft as a performance variable?  (I totally appreciate why you do what you do from a quality control/reproduceability perspective)

I have personally seen numerous Pure'd shafts wobble all over the place once the head was added to the shaft.  The offset weight of the head changes how the shaft reacts.

I have not seen that many PURED shafts to be sure i know what it is.
Those ive seen was all on the weak FLO line, so im not really sure if they use the weakest or "the best" FLO line.
i prefer FLO, i can do it my self, and then im in control of it all, and for me this is quality control to duplicate a club, i cant say that FLO alone or PURING makes a performance difference to be noticed, but i know that feel of flex does, so thats why i do it.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#32 dbleag

dbleag

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,543 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 11778
  • Joined: 02/12/2006
  • Location:USA
GolfWRX Likes : 813

Posted 11 June 2017 - 07:22 AM

Good players will adjust to the clubs they own, whether they fit them or not.

I also hear from people who go on vacation and rent clubs which feel really good to them.  They come back and want to duplicate that set, which never feel the same.

My club once held a US Open Regional Qualifier and a player's clubs got lost by the airlines,  He borrowed a set from someone on our staff and managed to make the cut.

Maybe what feels good is irrelevant and what works well is more important.  Does PURING help feel or results?

2

#33 apprenti23

apprenti23

    Major Winner

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 3,060 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 40702
  • Joined: 10/11/2007
GolfWRX Likes : 1465

Posted 11 June 2017 - 08:20 AM

We can all agree on this-

Most golfers suck and need all of the help in the world. If Pure or Flo shafts help them albeit purely based on confidence or feel then great! That being said it works.

We can also agree that the better players can adjust to fit anything over time. They shouldn't have to though. If Pure or Flo shafts feel great and give them confidence or every possible competitive advantage available to them- why would they not have it done? Even if it is placebo effect?

Mickelson even has his wedge shafts PUREd- how much oscillating is going on there? Not much, right? So why does he get it done? Because he has complete confidence in his equipment. That has to help.

3

#34 jgallant415

jgallant415

    Member

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 181 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 370973
  • Joined: 04/13/2015
  • Location:NH
  • Handicap:18
GolfWRX Likes : 77

Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:09 AM

View PostBigHook25, on 10 June 2017 - 10:12 AM, said:

View PostHoward Jones, on 10 June 2017 - 05:44 AM, said:

View PostBigHook25, on 08 June 2017 - 09:53 AM, said:

View Postbcflyguy1, on 08 June 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

View PostStinger26, on 08 June 2017 - 08:58 AM, said:

I'm wondering if people think graphite technology has advanced enough to make the benefits of puring (if there are any) minimal.

Yes, it has.  Lots of independent testing has shown this to be the case.

Can't help but notice that the loudest proponents of shaft puring are the custom fitting places that have that equipment they need to pay for.

Having said that, if going through that process will give you added confidence in the club, it's up to you to decide whether that confidence comes at good value for what you'll pay.

Agree with this and also seen tests that showed no difference in performance of a "pured" shaft versus one that is not.  I also think the tolerances and technology with the golf shafts is so much better now.  Just think back in the 80's and even into the 90's how cheap some of the graphite shafts were.  Now, many of the graphite shafts are made with a composite of materials and are very high quality.

Has anyone of you seen what tolerances OEMs accept for loft and lie or swing weight, or what tolerances shaft manufacturer accept for flex strength or profile differences within production? Has any one of you seen a set of irons where specs was as advertised, or for what tolerances they accept for driver lofts?

I guess the answers to all this questions is NO, but still you talk about tolerances as if they where know numbers and something we can relate too?

Shaft FLO or PURING is a quality control, and by knowledge we improve quality, juts like TT weight sort their shafts to Tour Issue for better weight and flex match. How much it matters is a question of if club specs matters in the first place, and how far off they might be vs what fits the actual player.

I never made a club without FLOing the shaft, and i never will, i both want and need to know specs of the clubs i make, or they could just be assembled in china with the lack of quality control and the tolerances there is. Thats not the kind of clubs i advocate, because you never know what you get.

We have 2 different scenarios here. the first is where a player has been to a TRUE Club fitting, and the demo equipment has known specs. To duplicate the best club found during fitting, ALL club specs must be duplicated, so with Shaft specs, and thats where FLO or PURING comes into it.

The other scenario is where someone is buying a shaft because he thinks it might fit him, in that case, FLO or PURE most likely dont matter at all, since the player dont really know what shaft specs he seeks.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but until I see facts that show a "pured" shaft performs better then a non "pured" shaft, then I'm not sure if puring is worth it or relevant.  If someone can provide me data that it makes a substantial difference, then I would change my mind.

I'm not overly knowledgeable about this topic, hence why I've been following the post, but if I'm interpreting Howard's comments correctly, it's not a matter of a pured shaft outperforming a non-pured shaft in an absolute sense, but rather about consistency of performance.

In other words, if we were to hand you two of the same 7 irons with identical specs, one with a pured shaft and one without, the pured wouldn't necessarily perform better for you than the other - that would depend on the particulars of your swing and if the random variability in the non-pured shaft happens to fit you better than the precise specs of the club design.

But, if you're fit to a certain head/shaft combo, a pured shaft will more exactly match the specs you've been fit to. And, a set of pured shafts will exhibit more consistent performance characteristics through the set than an non-pured set that will have wider variance from iron to iron vs. spec. So, while any individual club may not perform better in an absolute sense, you will see more consistency through the bag.

How material this difference is, I don't know, and I agree that I'd love to see some data, though if I'm understanding correctly, testing is probably a bit more complicated than traditional testing where a robot swings a club and we can say Club X is longer or straighter or lower spin than Club Y...

4

#35 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,524 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4597

Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:42 AM

View PostHoward Jones, on 11 June 2017 - 07:15 AM, said:

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

Howard,

Quick question, what is your take on a Pured shaft vs a flo'd shaft as a performance variable?  (I totally appreciate why you do what you do from a quality control/reproduceability perspective)

I have personally seen numerous Pure'd shafts wobble all over the place once the head was added to the shaft.  The offset weight of the head changes how the shaft reacts.

I have not seen that many PURED shafts to be sure i know what it is.
Those ive seen was all on the weak FLO line, so im not really sure if they use the weakest or "the best" FLO line.
i prefer FLO, i can do it my self, and then im in control of it all, and for me this is quality control to duplicate a club, i cant say that FLO alone or PURING makes a performance difference to be noticed, but i know that feel of flex does, so thats why i do it.

According to Tutelman:

You may have heard of PURED shafts. They are shafts whose FLO has been found using a proprietary machine from SST PURE (Dick Weiss' company). The machine uses a computer-controlled process to home in on the FLO plane by examining the wobble quantitatively and deducing the FLO plane from the details of the wobble. To do that, you need a mathematical model of the wobble. Fortunately, the vibration of a clamped shaft with a spine is remarkably simple as mathematical models go. You can see the model and a derivation of it in my article on FLO.

And the process includes specifying a specific alignment for those FLO lines:

At the time [late 90's], SST was fairly open that PURED meant oriented with the FLO-found spine oriented in the 9-3 plane. (They are more secretive about their strategy now, or at least they use words not congruent with the terminology common among custom clubmakers. They are clearly trying to establish a product differentiation, now that almost everybody can do some sort of spine alignment.)


So, in that respect, I'm with Howard that there is likely little benefit of SST PURR vs FLO (assuming you can check the frequency to differentiate the strong and weak FLO planes  (spine vs NBP)

Edited by Stuart G., 11 June 2017 - 09:45 AM.


5

#36 YoungJedi

YoungJedi

    Major Winner

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 1,033 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 367691
  • Joined: 03/23/2015
  • Location:Edina, Mn
  • Handicap:0
GolfWRX Likes : 559

Posted 11 June 2017 - 10:00 AM

View PostRogerinNewZealand, on 10 June 2017 - 02:30 AM, said:

To Cristphoto,

About 3 years ago i bought some S58 irons.7 iron was real harsh and they were nothing special.
So i pulled the shafts, spine aligned them and whole set was a lot nicer to use.
Thats a simple example from me.

To SelfishChris.... great example !!!

Spine aligning is not the same as a PURE machine.

Pure will give you even bwtter results.
WITB

Driver: Taylormade M1 9.5* (Blacked Out) with Accra CS1 Gold Limited Edition shaft- Stiff, 60g.
3 wood: Callaway Epic with Accra Concept 400 Series, 75 grams, stiff, SST PURED
5 wood: Callaway Epic with Accra Concept 400 Series, 75 grams, stiff, SST PURED
Irons: Mizuno JPX 900 forged 4-GW, with KBS $ Taper 120's, stiff, SST PURED.
Wedges: Edel DVR Hand Ground Wedge's in 55, 60 with KBS 610's- stiff, SST PURED.
Putter: Taylormade Spider Tour Black, 33 inches, Superstroke Flatso 2.0 countercore.

Ball: Taylormade TP5x - #54

6

#37 rybo

rybo

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,842 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 16062
  • Joined: 07/12/2006
  • Location:Naples, FL
  • Handicap:+1.6
GolfWRX Likes : 314

Posted 11 June 2017 - 10:19 AM

View PostStuart G., on 11 June 2017 - 09:42 AM, said:

View PostHoward Jones, on 11 June 2017 - 07:15 AM, said:

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

Howard,

Quick question, what is your take on a Pured shaft vs a flo'd shaft as a performance variable?  (I totally appreciate why you do what you do from a quality control/reproduceability perspective)

I have personally seen numerous Pure'd shafts wobble all over the place once the head was added to the shaft.  The offset weight of the head changes how the shaft reacts.

I have not seen that many PURED shafts to be sure i know what it is.
Those ive seen was all on the weak FLO line, so im not really sure if they use the weakest or "the best" FLO line.
i prefer FLO, i can do it my self, and then im in control of it all, and for me this is quality control to duplicate a club, i cant say that FLO alone or PURING makes a performance difference to be noticed, but i know that feel of flex does, so thats why i do it.

According to Tutelman:

You may have heard of PURED shafts. They are shafts whose FLO has been found using a proprietary machine from SST PURE (Dick Weiss' company). The machine uses a computer-controlled process to home in on the FLO plane by examining the wobble quantitatively and deducing the FLO plane from the details of the wobble. To do that, you need a mathematical model of the wobble. Fortunately, the vibration of a clamped shaft with a spine is remarkably simple as mathematical models go. You can see the model and a derivation of it in my article on FLO.

And the process includes specifying a specific alignment for those FLO lines:

At the time [late 90's], SST was fairly open that PURED meant oriented with the FLO-found spine oriented in the 9-3 plane. (They are more secretive about their strategy now, or at least they use words not congruent with the terminology common among custom clubmakers. They are clearly trying to establish a product differentiation, now that almost everybody can do some sort of spine alignment.)


So, in that respect, I'm with Howard that there is likely little benefit of SST PURR vs FLO (assuming you can check the frequency to differentiate the strong and weak FLO planes  (spine vs NBP)

The issue is what use is it to find a flo plane, hard side, soft side, etc of  a shaft in isolation?  Quite easy to measure & find flo with a perfect concentric weight about the shaft or in a machine when the shaft is isolated to itself.  Completely different set of parameters when finding the best location for a shaft with the offset weight of a clubhead.

If I ever hit a ball with just a shaft then Pureing may have some use.  Finding the best location for a shaft as part of an assembled club makes more sense.  Having seen many installed Pured shafts wobble all over the place makes me think Pureing is not a good method for determining shaft orientation of an assembled club.  Floing, simple straight line movement back and forth, is simple, quick and uses the clubhead weight in the same orientation as an assembled club.

7

#38 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,524 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4597

Posted 11 June 2017 - 10:49 AM

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

The issue is what use is it to find a flo plane, hard side, soft side, etc of  a shaft in isolation? Quite easy to measure & find flo with a perfect concentric weight about the shaft or in a machine when the shaft is isolated to itself.   Completely different set of parameters when finding the best location for a shaft with the offset weight of a clubhead.

Not according to this:
http://csfa.com/technote29.php

And FLO doesn't necessarily mean the actual club head is used.

Edited by Stuart G., 11 June 2017 - 11:06 AM.


8

#39 rybo

rybo

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,842 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 16062
  • Joined: 07/12/2006
  • Location:Naples, FL
  • Handicap:+1.6
GolfWRX Likes : 314

Posted 11 June 2017 - 11:49 AM

This video has stuck with me for years.

https://www.youtube....h?v=k4PUDXvfSsM

So simple and makes sense, at least from the perspective of being able to see a pronounced difference.  No opposing forces from the shaft when orientated in this manner.  The shaft and the head are working in harmony from the first oscillation to the last.  Place a load on a shaft and the shaft is going to move in some manner to find its natural center. The larger the load the more the shaft will have to move to find its natural center. Aligning the head and shaft up eliminates the excess movement the shaft may cause by not being in harmony with the overall weight of the head.  COG of a driver head vs overall size of the head have different effects on a shaft.  

Does it make a difference?  Hard to say.  Just seems intuitively better then finding a hard side or soft side of a shaft in isolation.

Edited by rybo, 11 June 2017 - 11:50 AM.


9

#40 Howard Jones

Howard Jones

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,071 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100881
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2405

Posted 11 June 2017 - 12:19 PM

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 11:49 AM, said:

This video has stuck with me for years.

https://www.youtube....h?v=k4PUDXvfSsM

So simple and makes sense, at least from the perspective of being able to see a pronounced difference.  No opposing forces from the shaft when orientated in this manner.  The shaft and the head are working in harmony from the first oscillation to the last.  Place a load on a shaft and the shaft is going to move in some manner to find its natural center. The larger the load the more the shaft will have to move to find its natural center. Aligning the head and shaft up eliminates the excess movement the shaft may cause by not being in harmony with the overall weight of the head.  COG of a driver head vs overall size of the head have different effects on a shaft.  

Does it make a difference?  Hard to say.  Just seems intuitively better then finding a hard side or soft side of a shaft in isolation.

Both the weak and the strong FLO line has good flo, and the head will move in a strait line like in that video.
But, since the flex difference between those lines might be large, we must use the weak or the strong FLO line closest to our flex target. Like i explained above, in one example we actually stretched the flex range from softest to hardest vs Label up/down when we used FLO, so without knowing flex on that line, we might go the wrong way for flex vs our target.

Edited by Howard Jones, 11 June 2017 - 12:20 PM.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#41 pinhigh27

pinhigh27

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,779 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 73898
  • Joined: 01/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2585

Posted 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM

Clubfitters pushing Flo and pure seems a little ironic.  I'd think an oem could build a machine to do it pretty fast and efficiently if they thought it was worthwhile. I'll stick with them and the majority of tour players who don't have their stuff Flo or pured. Seems to work for them

Edited by pinhigh27, 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM.

How to be in better shape for golf?
Become a better athlete.
Don't worry about golf specific.
Compound lifts w/ linear progress
Don't forget the mobility work.
More results, more functional

Spin is not your enemy, everything is a trade-off.
17 * 1700 goes really far, but doesn't go very straight or consistent
8* 3500 goes really straight, but doesn't go very far
Answer for most is somewhere in the middle.
Pga tour driver avg launch conditions: 11* 2700

11

#42 YoungJedi

YoungJedi

    Major Winner

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 1,033 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 367691
  • Joined: 03/23/2015
  • Location:Edina, Mn
  • Handicap:0
GolfWRX Likes : 559

Posted 11 June 2017 - 02:47 PM

View Postpinhigh27, on 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

Clubfitters pushing Flo and pure seems a little ironic.  I'd think an oem could build a machine to do it pretty fast and efficiently if they thought it was worthwhile. I'll stick with them and the majority of tour players who don't have their stuff Flo or pured. Seems to work for them

Majority of your players that don't? lol

I can't trust an OEM to build clubs to spec, how can I trust them to build a pure machine?  Lol

View PostYoungJedi, on 11 June 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

View Postpinhigh27, on 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

Clubfitters pushing Flo and pure seems a little ironic.  I'd think an oem could build a machine to do it pretty fast and efficiently if they thought it was worthwhile. I'll stick with them and the majority of tour players who don't have their stuff Flo or pured. Seems to work for them

Majority of your players that don't? lol

I can't trust an OEM to build clubs to spec, how can I trust them to build a pure machine?  Lol

I can send you a list of all the players that pure their shafts... or you could google it. Anyone who is anyone pures their shafts
WITB

Driver: Taylormade M1 9.5* (Blacked Out) with Accra CS1 Gold Limited Edition shaft- Stiff, 60g.
3 wood: Callaway Epic with Accra Concept 400 Series, 75 grams, stiff, SST PURED
5 wood: Callaway Epic with Accra Concept 400 Series, 75 grams, stiff, SST PURED
Irons: Mizuno JPX 900 forged 4-GW, with KBS $ Taper 120's, stiff, SST PURED.
Wedges: Edel DVR Hand Ground Wedge's in 55, 60 with KBS 610's- stiff, SST PURED.
Putter: Taylormade Spider Tour Black, 33 inches, Superstroke Flatso 2.0 countercore.

Ball: Taylormade TP5x - #54

12

#43 YoungJedi

YoungJedi

    Major Winner

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 1,033 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 367691
  • Joined: 03/23/2015
  • Location:Edina, Mn
  • Handicap:0
GolfWRX Likes : 559

Posted 11 June 2017 - 02:50 PM

http://sstpure.com/pro-players/
WITB

Driver: Taylormade M1 9.5* (Blacked Out) with Accra CS1 Gold Limited Edition shaft- Stiff, 60g.
3 wood: Callaway Epic with Accra Concept 400 Series, 75 grams, stiff, SST PURED
5 wood: Callaway Epic with Accra Concept 400 Series, 75 grams, stiff, SST PURED
Irons: Mizuno JPX 900 forged 4-GW, with KBS $ Taper 120's, stiff, SST PURED.
Wedges: Edel DVR Hand Ground Wedge's in 55, 60 with KBS 610's- stiff, SST PURED.
Putter: Taylormade Spider Tour Black, 33 inches, Superstroke Flatso 2.0 countercore.

Ball: Taylormade TP5x - #54

13

#44 BigHook25

BigHook25

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,832 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 143811
  • Joined: 10/23/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 426

Posted 11 June 2017 - 03:09 PM

View PostHoward Jones, on 11 June 2017 - 07:15 AM, said:

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

Howard,

Quick question, what is your take on a Pured shaft vs a flo'd shaft as a performance variable?  (I totally appreciate why you do what you do from a quality control/reproduceability perspective)

I have personally seen numerous Pure'd shafts wobble all over the place once the head was added to the shaft.  The offset weight of the head changes how the shaft reacts.

I have not seen that many PURED shafts to be sure i know what it is.
Those ive seen was all on the weak FLO line, so im not really sure if they use the weakest or "the best" FLO line.
i prefer FLO, i can do it my self, and then im in control of it all, and for me this is quality control to duplicate a club, i cant say that FLO alone or PURING makes a performance difference to be noticed, but i know that feel of flex does, so thats why i do it.

I appreciate the explanation, and your expertise on this issue, as I really like to educate myself as much as possible.  I had two close family members who are professional club-builders.  What I'm essentially asking and my point was, is "puring" worth it?

14

#45 dan360

dan360

    not a jacked loft

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,804 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 8694
  • Joined: 12/13/2005
  • Location:Olympia lowlife...
GolfWRX Likes : 5949

Posted 11 June 2017 - 03:48 PM

Inside a lab, sure it probably does help.  

Outside in the world's space, how much does it matter when the improvement is 1/2" of extra accuracy?

Controlled environments create a lot of smoke & mirrors for marketeers and people who like to talk in absolutes.

As of 01AUG2017

Mizuno JPX-800 9°
TaylorMade R7TPST 15°

Mizuno MP-H5 Hitogami 1 iron
Mizuno MP-33 3-P custom single length

Mizuno MP-T11 54/60
PING Anser 2 'pat pending' stainless 35"
Callaway Chrome Soft Truvis
PING Hoofer green

15

#46 pinhigh27

pinhigh27

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,779 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 73898
  • Joined: 01/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2585

Posted 11 June 2017 - 06:32 PM

View PostYoungJedi, on 11 June 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

View Postpinhigh27, on 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

Clubfitters pushing Flo and pure seems a little ironic.  I'd think an oem could build a machine to do it pretty fast and efficiently if they thought it was worthwhile. I'll stick with them and the majority of tour players who don't have their stuff Flo or pured. Seems to work for them

Majority of your players that don't? lol

I can't trust an OEM to build clubs to spec, how can I trust them to build a pure machine?  Lol

View PostYoungJedi, on 11 June 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

View Postpinhigh27, on 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

Clubfitters pushing Flo and pure seems a little ironic.  I'd think an oem could build a machine to do it pretty fast and efficiently if they thought it was worthwhile. I'll stick with them and the majority of tour players who don't have their stuff Flo or pured. Seems to work for them

Majority of your players that don't? lol

I can't trust an OEM to build clubs to spec, how can I trust them to build a pure machine?  Lol

I can send you a list of all the players that pure their shafts... or you could google it. Anyone who is anyone pures their shafts

Yup who are Rory spieth and day? Bunch of bums
How to be in better shape for golf?
Become a better athlete.
Don't worry about golf specific.
Compound lifts w/ linear progress
Don't forget the mobility work.
More results, more functional

Spin is not your enemy, everything is a trade-off.
17 * 1700 goes really far, but doesn't go very straight or consistent
8* 3500 goes really straight, but doesn't go very far
Answer for most is somewhere in the middle.
Pga tour driver avg launch conditions: 11* 2700

16

#47 Howard Jones

Howard Jones

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,071 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100881
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2405

Posted 12 June 2017 - 12:19 AM

View Postpinhigh27, on 11 June 2017 - 01:55 PM, said:

Clubfitters pushing Flo and pure seems a little ironic.  I'd think an oem could build a machine to do it pretty fast and efficiently if they thought it was worthwhile. I'll stick with them and the majority of tour players who don't have their stuff Flo or pured. Seems to work for them

Have you ever seen a set of irons from OEM where loft and lie was like it should be?
the answer must be NO,. that set dont exist, but they all have loft and lie machines so its got nothing to do with what they can or can not do, but you have a problem with club makers who build clubs to actual specs?

OEMs dont care if specs is right or wrong, they will not be able to sell their product with profit if they did a actual quality work and testing, their prices would be way to high, and only a part of the playing public is willing to pay for improved quality.
Everyone on this board knows that the old TT Dynamic can be found with Tour Issue labels, and the only difference is sorting and better tolerances.
Many are willing to pay for that, others is not, so why do you think its any different with other club specs, and why do you think your opinion is representative for right or wrong here? There is no real knowledge behind your statement, only a opinion about a subject you dont really seem to understand the importance off and when its important or not, but you do have the option to stay ignorant.

17

#48 Howard Jones

Howard Jones

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,071 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100881
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2405

Posted 12 June 2017 - 12:22 AM

View PostBigHook25, on 11 June 2017 - 03:09 PM, said:

View PostHoward Jones, on 11 June 2017 - 07:15 AM, said:

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 07:07 AM, said:

Howard,

Quick question, what is your take on a Pured shaft vs a flo'd shaft as a performance variable?  (I totally appreciate why you do what you do from a quality control/reproduceability perspective)

I have personally seen numerous Pure'd shafts wobble all over the place once the head was added to the shaft.  The offset weight of the head changes how the shaft reacts.

I have not seen that many PURED shafts to be sure i know what it is.
Those ive seen was all on the weak FLO line, so im not really sure if they use the weakest or "the best" FLO line.
i prefer FLO, i can do it my self, and then im in control of it all, and for me this is quality control to duplicate a club, i cant say that FLO alone or PURING makes a performance difference to be noticed, but i know that feel of flex does, so thats why i do it.

I appreciate the explanation, and your expertise on this issue, as I really like to educate myself as much as possible.  I had two close family members who are professional club-builders.  What I'm essentially asking and my point was, is "puring" worth it?

If you have been to a high end club fitting where actual club specs is part of it, the answer is YES, then shafts should be FLOed or PURED.
If you are buying a shaft you think might work for you, and you never played that shaft, so you are not familiar with it, then PURE or FLO does not matter in a way where the cost / benefit can be defended. Thats the short answer.

18

#49 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,524 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4597

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:36 AM

View Postrybo, on 11 June 2017 - 11:49 AM, said:


He found one FLO line - but unless he measures the frequency and compares it to the other FLO line, he's wrong when he calls it a 'spine'.  It may be the spine (strong axis) or it may be the NBP (weak axis).   As Howard mentioned, with enough asymmetry, there can be a big difference between the two.

Also, he doesn't seem to understand how the shaft really bends (loads and unloads) relative to the club face.   Not so simple to 'match' the FLO lines with the actual loading and unloading as he seems to think.  This is just one example.  Different players can have different patterns.

shaft-lab-xy-bend-Jacobsen.gif

Edited by Stuart G., 12 June 2017 - 03:39 AM.


19

#50 rybo

rybo

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,842 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 16062
  • Joined: 07/12/2006
  • Location:Naples, FL
  • Handicap:+1.6
GolfWRX Likes : 314

Posted 12 June 2017 - 07:05 AM

What would be interesting is having that same analysis done with a Pured club, a flo'd club and a club with the shaft in the worst orientation.  If there's no difference to Jacobsen's pattern across those three scenarios that would provide something of an answer.  If there is a difference, then there are a lot more questions!

Would love to see down range distance and accuracy comparisons/data for all three scenarios.  Nobody has ever put info like this out and this is what matters!  If it's a 1/2 yard better performance at 200 yards, then it's likely not much help.  If it's 5 yards, or 3 yards, well that makes a difference.

The shaft is the only item that moves in a golf club during a swing, it's a dumb item in most aspects, but there is this thing called physics that eventually takes over.  There's a reason why shaft changes produce huge differences when doing fittings.  Same length, weight, swingweight, grip, etc have wide ranges in playability.  Those that bend in concert with the golfer produce better shots.  It's why there are daily posts advocating going to a fitter to find proper equipment.  Does Pureing or floing enhance the shafts interaction with the golfer?

Go look at Tollbros post on Big Bad Low Spin Shaft Review, 13 shafts producing spin ranges with differences of 750-1,000 RPM's from low to high spin all with the same head, ball, Trackman, etc for each of the golfers.  Would Pureing or Floing help or hurt these differences in performance?  Don't know


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

20

#51 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,524 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4597

Posted 12 June 2017 - 07:23 AM

View Postrybo, on 12 June 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:

What would be interesting is having that same analysis done with a Pured club, a flo'd club and a club with the shaft in the worst orientation.  If there's no difference to Jacobsen's pattern across those three scenarios that would provide something of an answer.  If there is a difference, then there are a lot more questions!

Would love to see down range distance and accuracy comparisons/data for all three scenarios.  Nobody has ever put info like this out and this is what matters!  If it's a 1/2 yard better performance at 200 yards, then it's likely not much help.  If it's 5 yards, or 3 yards, well that makes a difference.

I think it would need a similar test with a robot as a sort of 'control' to take out the human factor.   e.g.  with an high level player, there would still be the question of how much of the variation was due to asymmetry in the shaft vs just the fact that a different orientation can give a different feel for flex as a root cause for a variation in the swing (which would also lead to variations in the bending).


View Postrybo, on 12 June 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:

The shaft is the only item that moves in a golf club during a swing, it's a dumb item in most aspects, but there is this thing called physics that eventually takes over.  There's a reason why shaft changes produce huge differences when doing fittings.  Same length, weight, swingweight, grip, etc have wide ranges in playability.  Those that bend in concert with the golfer produce better shots.  It's why there are daily posts advocating going to a fitter to find proper equipment.

Subtle difference but possibly an important one.  For those people that do see significant differences (many do not), I see it more as the golfer swinging in concert with (or fighting against) with natural shaft response,   Basically, the feel of the shaft driving the swing to perform better or worse  - instead of a single swing driving the shaft to perform better or worse based on the match.

Edited by Stuart G., 12 June 2017 - 07:24 AM.


21

#52 cxx

cxx

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,500 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 142023
  • Joined: 10/10/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 615

Posted 12 June 2017 - 07:50 AM

Maybe you'll agree or maybe not, but here are a couple of interesting things from Tutleman's pages. Thanks to him for publishing all this work.

From the page http://tutelman.com/...boutSpines2.php

"In finding FLO, you can use any convenient tip weight, as long as it is secured solidly to the shaft tip. The FLO planes will not change with the amount of weight. They won't even change if the weight is off-center -- which means there's no advantage to testing for FLO with the actual clubhead. John Kaufman did an interesting experiment to confirm this."

Also an interesting experiment on how the shaft bend behaves as the club is rotated through the swing.
http://tutelman.com/...s/shaftBend.php

I have not detected a difference in aligning the spine after determining it with FLO so I've stopped doing it. A lot of the shafts that I did FLO had little difference between the strong and weak directions.

I don't think puring provides anything beyond what you get with FLO.  The underlying principles are too simple for there to be much of a difference.

On the other hand, bearing spine finders are less than useful.

22

#53 Howard Jones

Howard Jones

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,071 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 100881
  • Joined: 12/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2405

Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:55 AM

View Postrybo, on 12 June 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:

Go look at Tollbros post on Big Bad Low Spin Shaft Review, 13 shafts producing spin ranges with differences of 750-1,000 RPM's from low to high spin all with the same head, ball, Trackman, etc for each of the golfers.  Would Pureing or Floing help or hurt these differences in performance?  Don't know

That test is interesting, but have several weaknesses.
To be able to judge "anything" on a driver, IMPACT SPOT is needed.
We like to think "bending properties" is the only impact a shaft might have but thats wrong.
The feel factor is important, and changes the way a player swing the club, and by that the delivery of the club head to the ball, so the shaft deliver more than "bending", but bending itself is a part of it all.

Depending on what specs that really fits each player in the test, and what ACTUAL specs the shaft used had the way it was installed, vs what specs that same shaft could have on strong vs weak is not a question we are able to answer, but if specs on weak or strong line was a better fit, it would work better, its that simple. For a player with a late release and a tad to high launch and dynamic loft the strong FLO line, deepening on how much stronger, could have tuned his launch conditions just right, or for another, the soft line.

We did not know what was the right shaft for them in the first place, so a test like you suggest, should be done after we made a club that really fits the player, and then make a duplicate, but with a shaft "off specs". Only then would the test be valid, any other attempt would be a shot in the dark where any of the shafts could "win" because it by coincidence was the closest on actual specs to what fits the player

Edited by Howard Jones, 12 June 2017 - 09:27 AM.


23

#54 bc1

bc1

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 105618
  • Joined: 03/31/2010
GolfWRX Likes : 22

Posted 12 June 2017 - 10:35 AM

View PostStinger26, on 08 June 2017 - 08:58 AM, said:

I know this is a hotly debated subject. And I have read previous posts relating to this topic.

Back when puring first came out, shaft technology was in its infancy. Shafts were wildly inconsistent compared to the ones we see in today's market. (I made this part up, but it seems like a good guess)

I'm wondering if people think graphite technology has advanced enough to make the benefits of puring (if there are any) minimal.

I'm re-shafting some of my longer clubs, and am considering puring them (hate the idea that the logo might not be up).

Thanks

If it did anything, everyone on tour would do it....I only know of a few guys that use it out there. There's no way those guys on tour and on the vans would not use it if it made any difference
917 D2 9.5 Tensei Orange v2 70 TX
                917f 15 Tensei Blue 80 TX
                917f 18 Diamana D+ 80 TX
                716 TMB 3,4 c taper stiff
                716 ap2 5-9 c taper stiff
                SM6 46,50,55S,60m 10 S400
                Newport 009

24

#55 pinhigh27

pinhigh27

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,779 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 73898
  • Joined: 01/27/2009
GolfWRX Likes : 2585

Posted 12 June 2017 - 02:57 PM

View PostHoward Jones, on 12 June 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

View Postrybo, on 12 June 2017 - 07:05 AM, said:

Go look at Tollbros post on Big Bad Low Spin Shaft Review, 13 shafts producing spin ranges with differences of 750-1,000 RPM's from low to high spin all with the same head, ball, Trackman, etc for each of the golfers.  Would Pureing or Floing help or hurt these differences in performance?  Don't know

That test is interesting, but have several weaknesses.
To be able to judge "anything" on a driver, IMPACT SPOT is needed.
We like to think "bending properties" is the only impact a shaft might have but thats wrong.
The feel factor is important, and changes the way a player swing the club, and by that the delivery of the club head to the ball, so the shaft deliver more than "bending", but bending itself is a part of it all.

Depending on what specs that really fits each player in the test, and what ACTUAL specs the shaft used had the way it was installed, vs what specs that same shaft could have on strong vs weak is not a question we are able to answer, but if specs on weak or strong line was a better fit, it would work better, its that simple. For a player with a late release and a tad to high launch and dynamic loft the strong FLO line, deepening on how much stronger, could have tuned his launch conditions just right, or for another, the soft line.

We did not know what was the right shaft for them in the first place, so a test like you suggest, should be done after we made a club that really fits the player, and then make a duplicate, but with a shaft "off specs". Only then would the test be valid, any other attempt would be a shot in the dark where any of the shafts could "win" because it by coincidence was the closest on actual specs to what fits the player

or you can just hit the ball and score 99 % the same regardless of fitting. it just seems to me you guys are selling fitting and puring like it takes a 15 from a 5. You talk about OEMs trying to sell clubs but I don't see fitters as much different. I play pretty much the same with everything as long as the shaft is somewhere in the right ballpark for me.

How to be in better shape for golf?
Become a better athlete.
Don't worry about golf specific.
Compound lifts w/ linear progress
Don't forget the mobility work.
More results, more functional

Spin is not your enemy, everything is a trade-off.
17 * 1700 goes really far, but doesn't go very straight or consistent
8* 3500 goes really straight, but doesn't go very far
Answer for most is somewhere in the middle.
Pga tour driver avg launch conditions: 11* 2700

25

#56 sailfishchris

sailfishchris

    Advanced

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 465 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 151183
  • Joined: 12/15/2011
  • Location:Long Island NY
  • Handicap:2.6
  • Ebay ID:mark10631
GolfWRX Likes : 216

Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:39 PM

Is it every 8-12 months this topic comes up and Howard, Stuart, Nessism, and others have to school everyone on how this works? Just search for past conversations- this is ridiculous! Maybe one of these should be pinned for future reference.
Ping G LST PX T1100 75 6.5
Ping G30 14.5 Tour 65 X
Mizuno MP 67 3-9 DGTI S400
Vokey SM5 48-52-56-60 DGTI S400
Odyssey Tank Works #7
Snell MTB

26

#57 Stinger26

Stinger26

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 466638
  • Joined: 05/07/2017
  • Location:Northern NJ
  • Handicap:7
GolfWRX Likes : 20

Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:56 PM

View Postsailfishchris, on 12 June 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

Is it every 8-12 months this topic comes up and Howard, Stuart, Nessism, and others have to school everyone on how this works? Just search for past conversations- this is ridiculous! Maybe one of these should be pinned for future reference.
I've read all the posts. I tried to form the question in a way that would explore the topic from a slightly different angle. Sorry you find it so ridiculous!
Callaway TI Epic Sub Zero 9* - Kuro Kage XT 70 X (44.5") D4
Callaway TI XR 16 Pro 14* - Fujikura Atmos Black (42.75") D3
Titleist 712 U 2 - Project X HZRDUS Black 105g 6.5 D3
Titleist 716 T-MB 3-iron - Nippon Super Peening Blue X D3
Titleist 716 CB 4-PW - Nippon Super Peening Blue X D3
Titleist F Grind 51 - TT DG Onyx TI S400 D4.5
Titleist S Grind 55 - TT DG Onyx TI S400 D4.5
Titleist M Grind 59 - TT DG Onyx TI S400 D4.5
Scotty Cameron Select Newport 35"

27

#58 sailfishchris

sailfishchris

    Advanced

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 465 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 151183
  • Joined: 12/15/2011
  • Location:Long Island NY
  • Handicap:2.6
  • Ebay ID:mark10631
GolfWRX Likes : 216

Posted 12 June 2017 - 10:11 PM

View PostStinger26, on 12 June 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

View Postsailfishchris, on 12 June 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

Is it every 8-12 months this topic comes up and Howard, Stuart, Nessism, and others have to school everyone on how this works? Just search for past conversations- this is ridiculous! Maybe one of these should be pinned for future reference.
I've read all the posts. I tried to form the question in a way that would explore the topic from a slightly different angle. Sorry you find it so ridiculous!
Is the basis of your question -should I pure or flo my golf shafts?  It's been asked before..... a lot.
Ping G LST PX T1100 75 6.5
Ping G30 14.5 Tour 65 X
Mizuno MP 67 3-9 DGTI S400
Vokey SM5 48-52-56-60 DGTI S400
Odyssey Tank Works #7
Snell MTB

28

#59 Stinger26

Stinger26

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 466638
  • Joined: 05/07/2017
  • Location:Northern NJ
  • Handicap:7
GolfWRX Likes : 20

Posted 12 June 2017 - 10:37 PM

View Postsailfishchris, on 12 June 2017 - 10:11 PM, said:

View PostStinger26, on 12 June 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

View Postsailfishchris, on 12 June 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

Is it every 8-12 months this topic comes up and Howard, Stuart, Nessism, and others have to school everyone on how this works? Just search for past conversations- this is ridiculous! Maybe one of these should be pinned for future reference.
I've read all the posts. I tried to form the question in a way that would explore the topic from a slightly different angle. Sorry you find it so ridiculous!
Is the basis of your question -should I pure or flo my golf shafts?  It's been asked before..... a lot.
I sincerely apologize, sir
Callaway TI Epic Sub Zero 9* - Kuro Kage XT 70 X (44.5") D4
Callaway TI XR 16 Pro 14* - Fujikura Atmos Black (42.75") D3
Titleist 712 U 2 - Project X HZRDUS Black 105g 6.5 D3
Titleist 716 T-MB 3-iron - Nippon Super Peening Blue X D3
Titleist 716 CB 4-PW - Nippon Super Peening Blue X D3
Titleist F Grind 51 - TT DG Onyx TI S400 D4.5
Titleist S Grind 55 - TT DG Onyx TI S400 D4.5
Titleist M Grind 59 - TT DG Onyx TI S400 D4.5
Scotty Cameron Select Newport 35"

29

#60 Pure745

Pure745

    The surgery was a success, but the patient died.

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 8,205 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 35341
  • Joined: 07/23/2007
  • Location:Orange County, CA
  • Handicap:+1.1
GolfWRX Likes : 8154

Posted 12 June 2017 - 11:09 PM

I've paid more than I'd like to admit to have Cool Clubs build some irons for me, also have had irons built by OEM tour departments etc.. I can't tell the difference.  I will say that paying the extra for the "whole enchilada" from Cool Clubs were some of the best builds I have had.  All irons frequency matched, SW, everything just 100% spot on was reassuring.. Pure'ing itself, I won't pay extra for, but if it's offered at no cost, will choose to have it done.

Callaway Epic 7.5˚ (ECPC) - Diamana PM Prototype
Callaway Epic 14˚ - Fujikura Atmos Black 8tx
Titleist 716 T-MB/CB/MB combo set - Fujikura Pro95 Tour Spec
Vokey SM6 46F, 51F, 55V, 60V - Fujikura MCI 125 Mild
Scotty Cameron 009 Tool Box

Instagram: @pure745 https://www.instagram.com/pure745/

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

30



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

GolfWRX Sponsors