DHS
Hurricane 301.

Few blades cause as much confusion over their name as this one. Many players go looking for "the Hurricane 3 Viscaria" or "the DHS Viscaria", mixing into a single label the name of a legendary rubber (the Hurricane 3), that of an iconic blade (the Butterfly Viscaria) and that of the Chinese manufacturer DHS. The misunderstanding is worth clearing up first, because a fair number of wrong purchases hang on it: this is not a rubber, nor a particular combination, but a blade — the DHS Hurricane 301, an arylate-carbon board that the market openly recognises as the Chinese, and far cheaper, answer to the Butterfly Viscaria.

This review looks at what the Hurricane 301 actually offers, how far that resemblance to the Viscaria really goes, which player it makes sense for and where it stands against its closest alternatives.

First things first: what the Hurricane 301 is and is not

The Hurricane 301 is a 5+2 blade: five wood plies reinforced with two layers of arylate-carbon (ALC) fibre, the same material family that made the Butterfly Viscaria and the Timo Boll ALC famous. It should not be confused with:

• The Hurricane 3 rubber, the tacky-topsheet Chinese rubber usually mounted on this kind of blade.
• The Butterfly Viscaria blade, with which it shares a concept but neither maker nor price.
• The variants within the 301 series itself — 301X, 301T and 301Z — which change the construction and the feel. They come up again below, because picking the wrong one inside the family is a common mistake.

This review concerns the base Hurricane 301, the reference model of the range.

Where the product sits

DHS is, above all, a giant in rubbers: the Hurricane 3 equips much of the Chinese national team and is a world reference among tacky rubbers. Its blades, by contrast, spent years in the shadow of the Japanese and European brands. The Hurricane 301 series exists precisely to fill that gap: an arylate-carbon blade built on the Viscaria concept — hard koto faces, fibre next to the core, an offensive and direct feel — at roughly a third of what Butterfly asks.

That positioning explains its success. Over the years the Viscaria has become the yardstick for every outer-ALC blade; and the 301 is, plainly, the most serious and affordable attempt to offer that experience without paying for the Japanese label. It is not a disguised copy the maker pretends about: it is a product that competes head-on in that territory.

One technical nuance is often overlooked. The Viscaria places its fibre in the outer plies ("outer" ALC), while the Hurricane 301 sits the arylate-carbon next to the ayous core ("inner" ALC). It is a real architectural difference: for all the "clone" label, the 301 is strictly an inner-ALC blade with hard koto faces, not an exact replica of the Viscaria's construction. Far from a catalogue subtlety, that distinction shapes the feel, as will become clear.

The specifications that matter in play

It helps to translate the data sheet into what the bat feels like in the hand.

The thickness, around 5.8-5.9 millimetres, is typical of an offensive arylate-carbon blade. Combined with the koto faces — a hard, dense wood — it produces a dry, crisp impact, with a shorter contact time (dwell, the instant the ball stays on the surface) than an all-wood blade. That directness is deliberate: the 301 is built for hitting with intent, not for caressing the ball.

The weight runs, unit to unit, between 82 and 90 grams, with the variation inherent in any product made from natural woods. It is worth bearing in mind when buying: a light unit is nimbler in fast play and blocking; a heavier one gains stability and punch on the power stroke, at some cost in manoeuvrability. Where the shop allows a choice of weight, it is worth picking one to suit the player's own style and the rubbers to be mounted — and there is an added factor here: thick, heavy Chinese rubbers of the Hurricane type push the final weight of the assembly up considerably.

The layout of the fibre is what most defines its character. The available lab testing shows that the base 301 runs the arylate vertically and the carbon laterally, an asymmetry that gives the blade a slightly different response depending on the direction of the stroke. It is not something the average player will dissect at the table, but it explains the sense of a board that feels "alive" yet controlled, as those who use it describe it.

Behaviour in play

Here it is worth being honest about the nature of this analysis: what follows is a technical judgement grounded in the specifications, in the available lab data and in the broad consensus of players and reviewers, not the account of a personal test at the table. That said, the portrait that emerges is remarkably consistent across sources.

The 301 behaves like an OFF-class offensive blade, not a runaway OFF+. It has what many players describe as "several gears": in the short touch and in feeding play it responds in a contained, predictable way, while under power it wakes up and delivers notable speed and spin. That progression is one of its best qualities and puts distance between it and the cliché of the Chinese "plank" — stiff and without nuance.

It is close to the table in topspin that it shines. The dry impact of the koto faces favours direct hitting, with a fairly flat trajectory and a medium-low launch angle. The ball comes off fast and low, which makes it very effective in the aggressive mid-distance exchange and on the smash. The block benefits from the same quality: firm, flat and controlled, with good information coming back to the hand.

Spin deserves a qualification. Arylate-carbon adds speed and stability, but the short contact of this construction imparts, all else being equal, somewhat less rotation than a more "wrapping" all-wood blade. It is not a blade poor in spin — fitted with a tacky rubber such as the Hurricane 3 itself it generates plenty of rotation — but its strength lies in speed and penetration, not in the slow, heavily loaded loop from distance.

Play away from the table is its least natural ground. The 301 holds power in reserve for the counter at mid-distance, but its direct character and contained launch angle penalise the player whose game rests on defensive topspin from three metres back. It is not incapable of it; it simply is not what it was designed for.

One important and recurring note: the 301 demands technique. Its margin for error is narrower than that of a softer, slower blade. It rewards clean striking and good footwork, and punishes imprecise mechanics with long balls or lost control. It is not the blade on which a beginner should learn to loop.