Peak LED Ural HA Review

Folks,

It saddens me to write this.

Today I received the Peak Ural HA, a 400-lumen XM-L light in a 4-inch by 1-inch body:



As you can see, the tail switch, body, and head are all made from slightly different (or at least differently-finished) materials. It's hard to tell from the photo, but the machining of the decorative spiral on the head is extremely sharp -- so much so that it feels like it would cause cuts if you weren't paying attention. It is physically uncomfortable to hold.

Inside, the body is a mess:



The tail switch is dirty and stained, and part of the plastic ring (10 o'clock position) is broken off:




Threads on the head are dirty/stained as well:




The light cannot tail-stand because the switch sticks out too far:




Finally, the beam. What the heck? It's SQUARE! It is, in fact, a projection of the XM-L LED. The photo doesn't even do justice to how bad it looks in real life:




I bought this light because I was looking for a hard-driven, compact XM-L light, and because so many people on CPF have raved about Peak products. What happened?

Finally, this light does not seem to achieve the advertised 400 lumens brightness. I gave it a fully-charged AW IMR 18350 and got slightly less output than my Thrunite Neutron 1C, which delivers ~300 lumens on AW IMR 16340.

The Peak Ural HA will be the first light I've ever returned.

There seems to be a lot of unfinished stuff in there. Have you talked with Curt or Robyn @ Peak? I am sure they'll set this straight (and that's my experience). Fortunately, I haven't received any poor quality products from them.

Looks like it may be a pre production model that skipped through the cracks and shouldn't have been sent out. Peak or RMSK will take care of it for you. Don't worry.

I have a K2, which is the same light with a P7 LED.

The inside of the body tube and the inside part of the tail switch is the same as yours; that plastic isn't broken off, that's just the way that part is made.

The tailcap shroud is plastic of some kind, IIRC, not metal, which is why it looks different, and can be slid out slightly to make the light able to tail stand, or push it in all the way to get a protruding clicky if that's what you like. More of an anodization mismatch on the head than mine.

The beam on the K2 is pretty fugly too. I fixed that problem with a a turn or two of electrical tape around the head to make a Surefire F04 diffuser fit. I think Peak rates their lights with emitter lumens; actual output is dimmer.

And AW has 18350s now? Sweet! I'm using cheap Ultrafires; want better quality cells for it.

yowzer said:

I have a K2, which is the same light with a P7 LED.

The inside of the body tube and the inside part of the tail switch is the same as yours; that plastic isn't broken off, that's just the way that part is made.

The tailcap shroud is plastic of some kind, IIRC, not metal, which is why it looks different, and can be slid out slightly to make the light able to tail stand, or push it in all the way to get a protruding clicky if that's what you like. More of an anodization mismatch on the head than mine.

The beam on the K2 is pretty fugly too. I fixed that problem with a a turn or two of electrical tape around the head to make a Surefire F04 diffuser fit. I think Peak rates their lights with emitter lumens; actual output is dimmer.

Click to expand...

All of which I'd be OK with if the light cost $8...

And AW has 18350s now? Sweet! I'm using cheap Ultrafires; want better quality cells for it.

Click to expand...

Yep! Now all I need is a decent light that takes them. I love my Neutron 1C, but no dice -- even 16340 is snug in that body.

I'm rather shocked by these photos. This would not be OK for even an $8 light.

I'm failing to see any real issues, aside from the beam (Which is a big one, admittedly). So the inside of the battery tube's not finely polished. Big whoop. How does that impact the function of the light at all?

As for the beam... how bad is it in real world use, and not just white wall hunting? What's the throw like?

yowzer said:

I'm failing to see any real issues, aside from the beam (Which is a big one, admittedly). So the inside of the battery tube's not finely polished. Big whoop. How does that impact the function of the light at all?

As for the beam... how bad is it in real world use, and not just white wall hunting? What's the throw like?

Click to expand...

I find the beam artifacts to be problematic in real life as well -- mainly, I think, because they are so asymmetric. If your hand rotates at all while looking at an object in the hotspot, you get a kaleidoscope effect in the spill area. Thanks to 4.5 billion years of evolution, any changes in light in your peripheral vision are perceived as movement (TIGER!), which is extremely distracting.

Total light output appears similar to the Thrunite Neutron 1C (~300 OTF lumens on AW IMR 16340), with slightly more throw and less flood, and a more defined hotspot (i.e. more abrupt transition from spot to spill).

On the overall quality front, I guess we just have different expectations. A light that costs close to $100 should be a piece of fine craftsmanship, not something minimally functional.

BTW, I've discovered two additional quality problems since the initial post. The light flickers as you turn it on (almost like a disco mode), presumably due to repeated intermittent contacts inside the switch. More significantly, if you fiddle with the switch a bit, the brightness varies. In particular, the light is not quite at full brightness when you simply click it on; you have to move the switch around to find a place that makes good electrical contact, and hold it there.

My personal experiences with Peak have all been positive.

I would contact Robyn or Curt and explain your concerns, I'm sure they'll make it right.

The asymmetrical beam is due to a slightly off center LED, you can counter this with a small, round piece of clear shelf paper or write-rite, affixed to the optics center (or slightly off, to account for the asymmetry). I've done this with my El Cap, just to alleviate the square spill beam and it works wonders. It won't affect the hotspot at all.

flashflood said:

BTW, I've discovered two additional quality problems since the initial post. The light flickers as you turn it on (almost like a disco mode), presumably due to repeated intermittent contacts inside the switch. More significantly, if you fiddle with the switch a bit, the brightness varies. In particular, the light is not quite at full brightness when you simply click it on; you have to move the switch around to find a place that makes good electrical contact, and hold it there.

Click to expand...

There's lots of good threads on those switches.

Remove the main spring, lift up on the gold spring and re-seat the main spring so that one rung of the gold spring is above the bottom rung of the main spring.

That will prevent the bounce/varying brightness.

I've used those switches on arcs, mags, peaks..etc and they all require that simple spring adjustment.

FYI.. your 10'oclock on the switch isnt broken. that indented section doesnt have plastic because the side spring is there. unscrew the switch from the body and you'll
see how it works. the plastic housing is 2 peices, you can insert a flathead in that indent to take the switch apart to service it.

Also clean the tail threads, no lube is necessary on the threads for that switch. and actually can hinder the switch's performance.
if anything.. use only di-electric grease.

jabe1 said:

a small, round piece of clear shelf paper or write-rite, affixed to the optics center (or slightly off, to account for the asymmetry). I've done this with my El Cap, just to alleviate the square spill beam and it works wonders. It won't affect the hotspot at all.

Click to expand...

good tip.
scotch tape works too. i do this as well on my lights that have optics. surefire, peaks..etc. as jabe1 said, it doesnt affect the throw or hotspot, as the hotspot is
determined by the outer edges of the optic, the center of the optic provides beam spill.



i'm at work right now..but gimme a few minutes and i can take a pic of both of these modifications.. My 2 night patrols are my primary work lights.

i use one for throw(cool white), one for flood(high cri)

cut out a peice of round scotch tape. cover the center of the optic only.. trial and fit the size to get the beam to your preference.
the tape on mine has been on for >1year and no issues.


tail switch spring overlap adjustment.


beam with scotch tape "spill diffuser" that softens the squareness and removes beam artifacts.
This light has a K2 200 TFFC, 1.5amp high, modified nitize tail switch. insanely throwy beam.


brass night patrol beam(neutral high cri led, shiningbeam true 1amp 3-mode driver -
neutral high cri shows up as purple/red on camera - beautiful beam tint in person)
also no squareness in beam.


sorry about exposure/color/quality of pics. taken at work with cell phone.



it would be nice if Peak has diffusers for their larger optic lights, just like they have for the medium eigers. i've seen optic diffusers
that only diffuse the center of the optic. those would be perfect for peaks. but as you can see..the scotch tape method works
fine too. just isnt a factory option.

they believed in "made in usa"

hi flash.
do you think your dissatisfaction with the optic will apply to all optics - its just the nature of the beast ?



cheers

MWClint said:

Remove the main spring, lift up on the gold spring and re-seat the main spring so that one rung of the gold spring is above the bottom rung of the main spring.

That will prevent the bounce/varying brightness.

Click to expand...

Brilliant!

That is a fantastic solution - just performed this on my ARC LSH-ST and no flicker! How have I missed this before.

As to the OP's dissatisfaction, I'm sure a call to Robyn will sort it out. I was not aware of the Ural until reading this post, and I kind of have been inspired to buy one, at least one. I've had Peak lights in my collection for a long long time and they have all been great, with one or two exceptions - which Robyn fixed or replaced with no quibbles at all.

In fact They are the only US Manufacturer that I call up (from England!) on a regular basis, simply because I like their lights and they are delightful to chat with. They don't have a huge production line and hundreds of employees, it really is a fantastic small operation, where the customer can get precisely what they wish. Just takes a call and some patience.

I'd also like to say that I am a satisfied customer, not an affiliate or shill!

Hope you get your problems sorted and I'll post here when I get my own Ural.

TTFN

Nyctophiliac said:

Brilliant!

from England!

TTFN

Click to expand...

I just had a chat with their CS rep (or smb else, couldn't see ). They claim they don't ship outside US (wishing me luck and terminating the chat shortly afterwards oo. How do you handle that ?

I was just considering a Ural as a "compact pants-pocket EDC" that runs off smth more substantial than AAA (AA or CR123 would do).
The issues presented in the trhread might be a turnoff, but I'm more concerned with their errrrrrrmmmmmnnnnnn...... deliverability (?). Ability to ship worldwide, that is .

Or maybe I confused "calling up" with "doing business" and you actually meant that you read their info, chat with them and such, not making purchases ?

All these tweaks necessary to make the light work "just right" (intertwining the switch springs, applying a small diffuser to the center of the optic, etc.) ought to be done at the factory. It is a $100 light, after all. You know that money didn't get spent on the materials, because it's made of aluminum and plastic. Writing off the cost differential as being due to higher hourly wages for US workers only goes so far. I think part of the issue is that Peak still hand-solders their electronics instead of using an automated process, and hand-soldering takes a lot longer and costs a lot more.

Peak are good people, and I've enjoyed talking on the phone with them in the past, but it's concerning that this forum has lately been filled with complaints and discussions about how to work around the shortcomings in Peak's products. That is not a good sign, because it means the products are not keeping up with consumers' expectations. I, for one, would much rather buy a Peak that's just as polished as a good-quality Chinese light, even if it costs a lot more, rather than a competitively-priced light with obvious shortcomings. That's what I did when I bought all those Gizmos over the past few years.