Compare Desloc D110 Plus Smart Lock vs ULTRALOQ U-Bolt Pro Smart Lock

Access logs were useful for seeing lock history, entry timing, and who entered.

Reviewers who discussed logs found them useful for seeing who entered, when access happened, and how the lock was used; notification-style detail was praised more often than criticized.

The app was generally described as simple, easy, and user-friendly, with good access controls and setup flow.

The app drew mixed reactions: several reviewers found it intuitive or easy, while others reported connection hiccups, slow loading, or an unpolished interface.

Auto-lock was praised for peace of mind and convenience, but multiple reviewers flagged limits around timing and open-door behavior.

Auto-lock was valued for peace of mind, especially with door sensing, but multiple reviewers disliked that it could lock too quickly or surprise them by being enabled by default.

Failed-attempt lockout drew criticism from one reviewer because the settings and behavior were not clearly adjustable or explained.

Backset setup had one notable quirk: one reviewer found the embossed sizing guidance backward, which made this otherwise standard compatibility step confusing.

Battery impressions were good overall but not exceptional, ranging from solid and efficient to fine but not incredible.

Battery impressions were mixed: some reviewers expected months of use and liked low-battery warnings, while others worried about fast drain and vague battery reporting.

Bluetooth pairing was generally smooth, with reviewers appreciating quick pairing and local control, though it was less central than Wi-Fi in the overall experience.

Most reviewers described the lock as solid, sturdy, or durable for the price, while one found the construction quality questionable.

Build quality was a clear strength, with reviewers repeatedly describing the lock as solid, durable, heavy-duty, or tank-like.

Door-sense was a clear weakness because reviewers noted there is no door sensor and the bolt can extend while the door is open.

Door-sense feedback was positive where tested; reviewers liked the added sensor and remote reporting of open/closed and lock/unlock state.

One reviewer cautioned that very thick doors may require modification even though standard doors worked well.

The 90-day follow-up praised Desloc for frequent firmware updates and meaningful improvements.

Reviewers viewed the Wi-Fi model’s added capabilities as meaningful improvements over earlier versions, especially built-in Wi-Fi, door sensing, and Smart Auto Lock.

Fingerprint access was one of the most praised areas, with many fast and accurate reports, though PCWorld found it hit-and-miss.

Fingerprint access was one of the strongest areas, with most reviewers calling it fast, reliable, accurate, or flawless; the main caveat was angle sensitivity in one review.

Geofencing divided reviewers: some found auto-unlock slick or improved, while one older review said it never activated and others noted setup behavior mattered.

Guest access was praised for one-pass, scheduled, IC-card, and Airbnb-style temporary access options.

Guest and temporary access were repeatedly praised, especially scheduled codes for cleaners, dog walkers, renters, family, and one-time visitors.

Reviewers consistently liked that no separate hub or gateway is required.

Hub feedback depended on version and setup: built-in Wi-Fi was praised for removing a bridge, while bridge-based versions drew complaints about range and pairing friction.

Industrial design was praised as sleek, ergonomic, modern, and premium-looking rather than overly bulky.

Design opinions varied sharply: some liked the compact or satin finish, while others found the look industrial, unattractive, or lacking curb appeal.

Installation was usually described as quick and simple, but one reviewer had jammed bolts and another noted a short cord and over-tightening sensitivity.

Installation was usually described as easy, quick, or straightforward on the newer Wi-Fi version, but older and bridge-based experiences included serious setup frustrations.

One reviewer specifically reported no jamming during several days of testing.

Backup mechanical keys were valued as a practical fallback, especially for power loss.

Physical key backup was treated as a reassuring safety feature, especially for dead batteries, forgotten phones, or other electronic access failures.

Keypad impressions were mixed: PCMag found it responsive and well-lit, PCWorld found it slow to wake, and another liked the soft glow.

The physical keypad was mostly praised for tactile, accurate buttons and anti-peep use, though one reviewer said the circular layout slowed code entry.

Speed was mostly positive for voice and remote response, though one reviewer found it fast but slower than pricier locks.

Locking and unlocking were typically fast, with several reviewers praising instant response; Magic Shake was the notable speed-related exception.

Motor feel was mixed: one reviewer found it smooth and quiet, while another warned that over-tightening could make the bolt struggle.

The motor generally felt smooth and quick, but some reviewers found the locking action louder or shakier than competing locks.

Reliability was a strength across several reviews, with reports of perfect testing, stable 90-day use, and natural daily fit.

Core locking reliability was very strong overall, with most reviewers reporting no failures, smooth operation, or dependable keyless entry.

Notifications were useful for awareness and security, but one reviewer wanted push notifications instead of emergency emails that went to spam.

Notifications were useful for low battery, remote status, and entry alerts, but one reviewer criticized the lack of blanket notifications across users.

Reviewers repeatedly liked the small on-lock display, describing it as helpful for setup, status, battery, alerts, and local control, though one saw it as basic rather than groundbreaking.

Palm vein recognition was not included, and one reviewer missed that faster, convenient method from another lock.

Physical resistance evidence was moderate: reviewers cited BHMA certification and durability, but one emphasized it is the lowest acceptable commercial level.

Physical security impressions were positive where discussed, with reviewers valuing stronger screws, reinforced security, and ANSI-related strength claims.

Remote access was a major convenience, especially for managing the lock away from home or unlocking for guests.

Remote access was a major strength when Wi-Fi or a bridge was working, letting reviewers lock, unlock, and check status away from home; Wi-Fi/cloud latency was the main caveat.

Security features such as anti-peeping and anti-hijacking were viewed as useful or reassuring, with PCMag also noting enhanced security options.

Encryption and account/security features were generally reassuring, but security confidence came mostly from reviewer judgments rather than deep technical testing.

Smart-home integration was the main limitation: Alexa and Google were supported, but reviewers missed HomeKit, Matter, IFTTT, or broader security-system support.

Smart-home integration was broad and useful across Alexa, Google, IFTTT, SmartThings, and routines, but HomeKit, Amazon Key, and 2.4 GHz setup limits created tradeoffs.

The touch surface/keypad was praised as responsive, well lit, and visually integrated into the front panel.

Two-factor authentication was a clear weakness in the Reviewed review, which criticized the app for lacking this extra account-protection layer.

User access management was a strong point, with praise for simple schedules, temporary codes, and control over different users.

User access management was a standout for families and rentals, with reviewers praising individual profiles, schedules, temporary users, and revocable access.

Value was the broadest strength because most reviewers saw a lot of features for the price, although PCWorld rejected the value claim after testing.

Value was viewed favorably overall: even when called expensive, reviewers often concluded the lock was worth it because of its feature set and access flexibility.

Voice control worked well in the reviews that tested it, especially with Alexa and Google Assistant.

Voice control worked well in the reviews that tested it, especially Alexa setup and commands, though some reviewers saw it as useful only in limited scenarios.

Support evidence was limited but positive, with one review summarizing users as generally satisfied with responsiveness and replacement help.

Weather resistance was generally viewed positively, including rain/outdoor use, though one reviewer called the IP54 rating tame.

Weather resistance was supported by limited real-world evidence and positive expectations, with reviewers noting temperature performance and IP65 confidence.

Built-in Wi-Fi was praised for direct connectivity and remote use, and one follow-up noted updates that improved Wi-Fi stability and power use.

Wi-Fi was the biggest technical split: built-in Wi-Fi and remote access were praised, but 2.4 GHz requirements, pairing trouble, and slower cloud response drew criticism.