Experience with some other Loki rubbers - Arthur China, GTX Pro (inc)

Michael Zhuang said:

Definitely, this rubber is quite unusual and awkward. Once you make some adjustments, it does have potential. If you saw the video I posted of my 1 game, I was using GTX, so its not a complete failure of a rubber. I was hitting some forehand loops today, and people we're saying how much topspin there was. So it does have potential, but its a little hard to unlock, and quite strange rubber. I probably won't buy it again, but I already spent the money so I'm trying to get my money's worth out of it.

Did you boost your Arthur China? How does the Arthur China compare to the Hurricane 3 (assuming both are unboosted or both are boosted the same amount).

Click to expand...

I saw it, but sadly it is hard to judge the equipment because of the low quality of feedback from your opponent. What i mean by that is, that either his returns were really long and slow or high and slow (and sometimes even both). On top he doesnt generate much of any kind of spin. The only thing i could see in terms of spin is, that you were able to generate some sort of spin from your loops. You did brush those balls quite well.
I am mostly hitting the balls a bit differently and harder as you can see here: https://youtu.be/-YXxUptyUhE

Yeah i get that. I mean it is definitly a rubber and you have good amount of controll and even speed if boosted, so it is playable. In my case it is just not enough^^

Well i still didnt boost it, and i probably wont because it is already pretty fast. Way faster than unboosted H3 and probably still faster with H3 boosted, depending on how you boosted it.
In that video above i was playing with Arthur China and i can generate high amount of spin and dont have to be in perfect position to hit fast shots. The room for error is surprisingly big.

The only disadvantage compared to H3 is the slightly lower amount of spin in several situations, and the slightly (really not by much) flatter arc. But either way it is a great budget rubber and on top it is consistent. This was my second rubber and it feels exactly the same and both are really tacky.

Michael Zhuang said:

But its not really budget, right? I think its like $24 on Aliexpress. But from your description and video, it makes me want to try the Arthur China. What do you pair it with on your BH?

Click to expand...

Well nearly everyone around my level plays with at least 40€ rubbers or even Tenergy which is around 60€. So as long as i am playing stuff around or even under 30€ i am playing budget stuff imo.
From my current experience i cant go much lower. Everything i played with, which was under 20€ had tremendous issues, either in the spin or speed department.

In that video i played Hurricane 8-80. Right now i put it back on my second setup as long as i am comparing it with Yasaka Rakza Z which got more expensive too in the last months so i am not so sure if i will stick with it. In case the difference is negligible i will stick with Hurricane 8-80 and order some more of them^^.

Michael Zhuang said:

Which is faster, the Arthur China or Hurricane 8-80/Rakza Z?

Is Rakza Z a bouncy/fast rubber? I read some comments that said Jupiter 3 is actually a faster hybrid rubber than Rakza Z.

Click to expand...

Thats rough to compare for me. h8-80 and rakza Z arent compatible because i use arthur china exclusivly for my fh while the other rubbers are for bh purpose.

But i will give it a try:
H8-80 and rakza z have both a too high throw angle for fh imo. While h8-80 is a bit lower it is too bouncy for my fh. I once twiddled my racket and many shots went over the table with h8-80 on my fh.

I would assume nearly the same with rakza Z. You would have to close your racket quite hard to make it work on your fh.

In terms of raw speed i would say rakza z>H8-80>arthur china. But not by much. H8-80 and arthur china are really tacky and are quite capable to slow down the shots especially in the shortgame. Rakza Z is semitacky and has a little stronger initial bouncy. Flicking with it feels quite smooth and natural because of it.

I cant say much about the jupiter but isnt is supposed to be a pure fh rubber? At least it is advertised as such.

So a year later i actually revisited Lokis Arthur China.
But this time not only on fh but also on my bh, too.

Before i draw serious conclusions here, i want to mention that a friend who played Hurricane 8 earlier this year on his fh, was looking for something faster, with a better arc. So we were theorycrafting a bit, he was testing several things, and soon i mentioned and recommendend the LAC to him. Some weeks ago he tested it and found it actually to be his new fh rubber.
This friend plays approx around 2100-2200 USATTR (cant really tell because he is not playing in germany anymore), so i was even more surprised to get such a feedback. He kinda compared it to a slightly downgraded K3, because LAC is somewhat slower and doesnt grab the ball in the same way.

But it actually does grab the ball. More than enough to propperly control loops, topspins and even great flicks from my bh. And still it has a better kick/bounce than H8-80 and can keep up in terms of highend speed from the boosted H8. I just did the transition from H8 to H8-80 to H3 and now to LAC and i had no issues to getting used to the rubber. Around half and hour i needed for some minor adjustments and i could make use of that rubber on my bh and play on the same level as before, if not better.

On fh though i actually have some more issues. LAC is in itself way faster with a higher arc, than all of my previous rubbers i used after i lastly used it. I am actually hitting too hard now in several situations, and miss shots or cant control the drawbacks. So currently i have so adjust angles a bit and especially my fullstroke and topspins. Loops are a breeze to perform as i remembered, though.

So i am planning on keeping them for the next weeks at least and train a bit more. Not sure now if i will stick to it on my fh, but definitly on my bh, because surprisingly it brought everything to the table i wished for.
If everything goes as planned i might be able to film a bit of training stuff with the current setup on friday, but we will see.

turbozed said:

Hey I'm glad that you've been able to find a BH rubber that checks all the boxes. Have to admit, I will miss reading your reviews of random rubbers during your search.

I would've thought that the LAC is too hard for a BH rubber. Are you planning on boosting?

Click to expand...

Well i cant tell for sure i wont find some flaws in the near future that will "force" me to a change once more.
And still i have to see if i can adjust myself to play lac on fh again. So maybe i will start over testing fh rubbers now

I thought too, that this rubber is too hard for bh. But that would be the case also for the K3 and D09c...
So yeah that the lac has such grip, hold of the ball and a decent bounce, actually surprised me as well. Never expected the top layer alone would be that responsive.

Well as ive said before, there is literally no need to boost that rubber. It would enhance characteristics, that are already there and it would negate the characteristics of chinese rubber that i still need. More of those could make this rubber more of an esn style rubber.
And the worst part would be that you would destroy the consitency of the rubber. Every batch was the same for now and feels really great. If i boost that now i would never be able to keep the consistency.
All in all i cant tell which advantage i might get through boosting this rubber.

TensorBackhand said:

I still have a new LAC that I haven't opened or tested yet. But I'm pretty sure I will like it, based on what you said.

But everytime I go back to Jupiter 3, I am still amazed how good it is.

Click to expand...

They are actually quite comparable.
Throwangle and especially the arc of the J3 are lower which would be my biggest issue, especially on bh.
Speed might be nearly the same.
Feeling and control though is probably lower from the j3 because the topsheetof the j3 is harder too. I usually didnt get the same, good feedback from my j3 than i get from the lac. J3 just doesnt seem to grip the ball (in the same way).

hclnnkhg said:

I might have missed it from previous post, but how hard does LAC feel compare to J3 38 or J3 39?

Click to expand...

Lac is 49. So on paper they should feel around the same.
Id guess there are 2 differences though. J3 has a tuned and dense sponge while Lac has a more porous sponge.

In my perception the topsheet feels different too. While j3 feels overall hard, the topsheet of the lac feels somewhat softer.