The OP question is justified. I really don't believe in that Armyteks are 10+ times tougher than the competitors...
My suspicion is that the claims of Armytek are a bit exaggerated and the competitors are underrated.
Thanks. That's my suspicion as well, though I'm not so sure about the competition being underrated, as I've seen far too many videos of lights going out right at or around the 1.5 meter claims and I've got a Skillhunt that did as well. Most of the videos I saw they were dropping the light onto concrete or something else rock hard, sometimes a rock itself. They would usually drop it 2-5 times from the max rated height and then go a little beyond that, like holding the light at or above head height. A few failed within the max distance rating, but most failed after 2-3 drops above the max. And they were doing controlled drops where the light landed on it's side, which to me would seemingly be better than landing on it's head. Whether the light was on or not also seemed to make a significant difference. Obviously, a drop onto concrete is going to send much more shock through the electronics than a drop onto dirt, sand, or grass. The Skilhunt fell about 5-6 feet and impacted directly on the head - probably the worst place for it to have hit - onto concrete. The outside of the light still looks practically flawless, except for a bit of paint scratched off the very corner of the head, which is why I presume that's where it first contacted. Nothing rattles inside. The lens isn't cracked. It just won't turn on anymore. Actually, it would come on initially, but only about 1 in 5 tries and it often wouldn't stay on or switching modes would cause it to blink off. Now it won't come on for more than a second, if that. So, it would seem the LED itself is fine.
From everything I've found, it doesn't appear that Armytek has any manner of shock absorption inside. So that leads me to the following assumptions: If their light really can take an impact at 33 feet, it's likely an subjective claim based on falling onto a softer surface than say, concrete or wood. Or, in addition to optimal soldering, etc., maybe they've positioned the electronics inside the light in such a way that they wouldn't be directly affected by any impact at that height. Or, lastly, they're simply gambling, whether blindly or based on extensive drop testing of their own, that the light is unlikely to impact any key area that could result in damage to the electronics inside, so warranty claims justified by impact damage should be rare enough that the losses they absorb would be outweighed by the sells they receive based on their marketing claims - assuming their warranty isn't like ebay, just smoke and mirrors. With more of the weight being in the battery, maybe that makes the light more likely to impact on the tail end. Though, that wasn't the case with the Skilhunt, which was probably even more battery heavy due to an even lighter head than the Wizard. The Wizard is only slightly tail heavy, so maybe it'll be less likely to spin when dropped and more likely to hit on it's side. Just brainstorming here.
I think that the bodies are tough, the battery tubes are thick, double o rings are nice.
I don't know, but I felt like the manufacture changed hands after they got their initial marketing pump, if the pill were assembled with lead solder and good soldering technique, with premium components, then they'd be one of the best lights around, from my current state of ignorance.
I'm really waiting for a custom builder to create a premium pill for the Predator.
I just compared it with the Skilhunt and sure enough the battery cylinder does appear thicker on the Wizard.
From everything I've read here and elsewhere, it would seem that most regard Armytek to at least be among the better brands in terms of build quality. But such praise is tempered by mention of questionable QC more often than not. It is also my impression that most don't regard them high enough to trade features/performance for claimed durability/warranty. Which was part of the purpose behind my initial post, as I've been trying to decide between an Armytek Viking Pro with the XHP50 and the Nitecore TM03 which has the XHP70 and an interface that I subjectively prefer. If the Armytek is indeed better built and dramatically more reliable, for me it's a no-brainer. But, if it's not... if you're really just paying for a promise of repair, rather than genuinely superior construction, I'd opt for the Nitecore and maybe buy accident protection, if I was really concerned about something happening.
I wonder what Armytek's 10 year warranty actually covers, if it's a one-and-done type warranty or if they're saying they cover every incident of failure to the light for a period of 10 years.
Thanks to everyone who has replied.
