Finally received my Uni-T UT17B Pro, I'm pleasantly surprised - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 02:43:10 am
content: After a month and a half, I finally received my UT17B Pro today from across the ocean.This looks like a direct successor to the UT139C, but better in basically every way.They named the meters this way because they want the 15BPro and 17BPro models to compete with Fluke's similar offerings in the Chinese market.Things I'm pleasantly surprised about:- The pouch it came with is nice, has a pocket, designated spots for leads and the meter.- The ruggedness of the meter- The rotary switch is recessed and doesn't touch the ground when landing on the floor face down.- Diode mode emits a short beep when detecting a voltage drop and continuous beep when detecting a short- Continuity mode doesn't miss a single beep no matter how fast I short the tips.- Gold plated probe tips are a nice addition, 18AWG leads, probe handles are rubberised- The backlight mechanism is great and a big step up from their previous models- Thermocouple wire is similar to Flukes in terms of feel- Two Bussmann fuses, board looks clean, input protection looks decentThings they claim:- 30000 rotary switch cycle test- 8kv transient voltage protection on all rangesThings I'm not happy with:- The meter is pretty big. Maybe similar to 139C in terms of height, but definitely wider.Overall, for the price I paid, this is probably the best value for money for a multimeter.

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 03:04:55 am
content: A couple of small details I like:- The rotary switch has rubber overmold, it feels nice.- The bottom of the tilt stand is coated with rubber. The tilt stand is wide and stable.- The screen is big and digits are very clear! This is one of the easiest to read screens out of the tens of multimeters I've owned and used.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 10:39:32 am
content: It looks well made, safe and well priced.Some downsides:No independent testing( ELT and CE are mentioned in the manual, ELT is embossed on the back of the meter)No bargraphNo decent bandwidth for true RMS (500Hz max)Logic level frequency test 100 KHz max100uV resolution onlyhttps://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001155376244.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.7fff270anvWB2Q&algo_pvid=1ddd12b6-3871-4cf3-bc40-91a80bf8cc44&algo_expid=1ddd12b6-3871-4cf3-bc40-91a80bf8cc44-5&btsid=0be3764515968833870752980e9dec&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_,searchweb201603_

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 11:46:32 am
content: I think you may have some unrealistic expectations for a 65 USD (90AUD) multimeter. It's made to target a specific market.Quote from: Wytnucls on August 08, 2020, 10:39:32 am

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 12:31:28 pm
content: I have no expectations.Few multimeters, if any, are perfect.I am just pointing out the areas which are below par for this particular 6,000 count meter.The prospective buyer can then decide if he can live with the restricted set of features, which won't affect his planned measurements.

author: coromonadalix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 12:41:27 pm
content: The major fail for me is : the second fuse is hidden? i would punch a hole for it ... unacceptable for meSeems Uni-T have upped their game in some models (better design and protection) ? and the look and feel seems better too.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 12:47:18 pm
content: Quote from: coromonadalix on August 08, 2020, 12:41:27 pmIf you manage to blow the big fuse then you should probably be looking inside the meter for damage.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 12:51:41 pm
content: What's the diode test voltage?Looks solid... but accuracy is below par for a $100 meter.(accurate enough for most purposes IRL though)

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 01:00:49 pm
content: What is disconcerting, is that Uni T built what seems to be a very safe 'PRO' CAT IV meter, which is now compromised bythe lack of a proper certification. ELT certifiedThey then add a VFD and flashlight feature to the same meter, instead of a decent true RMS converter.

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 01:01:51 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on August 08, 2020, 12:51:41 pmOpen circuit voltage is about 3.26V.

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 01:05:48 pm
content: Quote from: Wytnucls on August 08, 2020, 01:00:49 pmBut... do you consider the much more expensive Brymen BM235 and Fluke 117 having better RMS converters? I'm a noob so correct me if I'm wrong, those two meters only have a bandwidth of 500-700Hz?EDIT: never mind, I found the corresponding numbers in the data sheets.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 01:48:20 pm
content: Quote from: Corner on August 08, 2020, 01:01:51 pmGood enough!(There seems to be a boost circuit on the PCB right next to the battery contacts so hopefully that's not the battery voltage)

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 03:11:04 pm
content: Hard to say how it would hold up. It looks like the high speed clamps are tied to the return path for the MOVs. If they use a different reference for other sensitive parts, it may not hold up very well. I wouldn't say UNI-T has a good track record in getting this right. I think I have looked at more UNI-T products than any other and they never perform very well.Quote from: Corner on August 08, 2020, 02:43:10 amIf this is true, it's interesting that they would talk about the 30K cycle test. We could run it to 50K full cycles and see if there is anything left.If the whimmpy grill starter didn't damage it and it survived my smaller generator (6KVish), that would be a big improvement for UNI-T. The 138C can't come anywhere near that.Really, I would want the "UT181B Pro".

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2020, 11:00:05 pm
content: The similarly priced UT191T may be a better choice, having been through GS certification (CAT III 600V).It also has a few extra features like a bargraph, peak capture, LoZ and is dust/water proof with an IP65 rating.Some downsides:No decent bandwidth for true RMS (500Hz max)100uV resolution onlyhttps://www.aliexpress.com/item/32920369855.html

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2020, 03:51:25 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 08, 2020, 03:11:04 pmThey do make these claims on their official store on Taobao, see attachments. It IS interesting that they claim the 30k switch cycle test considering almost no one does it. They also say the test leads go through a series of high stress tests.

author: Saskia
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2020, 05:02:37 pm
content: probably going to buy when it creeps by and is available as a bargain.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2020, 07:04:19 pm
content: Quote from: Corner on August 09, 2020, 03:51:25 amOf course they also claim the UT90A is rated for CAT III 600V with those piss ant fuses in there.Maybe Dave will break out his toggle bot and spit shin the contacts on one. If you decide to contact them about the meter and their testing, I would be interested to hear about how they conduct the switch tests.

author: joseph nicholas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2020, 07:12:32 pm
content: It's such an old school meter. I would look for a used Fluke 87v in a pawn shop for $50 usd.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2020, 07:50:17 pm
content: Quote from: joseph nicholas on August 09, 2020, 07:12:32 pmReally? I thought that was a brand new product for them.

author: joseph nicholas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2020, 10:49:19 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 09, 2020, 07:50:17 pmWell, it does seem designed for the electrician in mind, it also looks to be referencing some of the work you have done by claiming high voltage protection. Do I exaggerate?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2020, 11:37:46 am
content: Quote from: joseph nicholas on August 09, 2020, 10:49:19 pmOTOH it has a uA range and a decent diode test voltage.From what I've seen so far I'd say it was a fairly good meter for the money.OTOH: It has no independent certification and it's a Uni-T so you can't garantee that the one you buy will have the same components inside it as the one shown here.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2020, 01:22:26 pm
content: It has an ETL certification, as embossed at the back of the meter and as stated in the Chinese user manual.(Intertek's Electrical Testing Labs)

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2020, 05:08:01 pm
content: I see many people excited but this meter has the crappiest AC bandwidth , no bargraph , so beside beeing cheap what is the point buying it for electronics ? And I doubt any professional electrician would trust a company like this for his life ...At this price the quality can't be good , I'm sorry but good things don't come free ... I don't want to be evilbut first check if those fuses are't just chinese fakes . They know by now how much people love big fuses

author: coromonadalix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2020, 05:33:26 pm
content: Bigger is better loll

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2020, 11:46:07 pm
content: Quote from: CDaniel on August 10, 2020, 05:08:01 pmTo be fair, I don't trust Uni-T either, but the actual physical construction and the PCB are made to a higher standard than a lot of their previous models. I was just curious as to what the meter feels like so I bought it to check it out. If you wanna depend your life on it? That'd be crazy, and I wouldn't do that either, but for someone who's looking for a cheaper alternative with relatively good quality (compared to those absolute cheapies), it does feel a lot better in the hand, and the measurements are consistent, screen is big and fonts are bold, not to mention the great backlight feature and the beeping diode mode.I see nothing wrong with these cheaper alternatives. They have a place in the market, and I see no prob Uni-T actually try to improve the quality of their cheapies.EDIT:Again, is 500Hz bandwidth too different from 800Hz? Is a crappy bargraph worth having? Name me a few meters that have decent bargraph in the $60-$70 range that has similar fit and finish and construction? The UT61E seems to be a lot better in this regard, but it was not built in the same way. Nothing is free I guess as you said.What I'm really trying to say is, nothing is free. You get something, you lose something. I don't believe you'd be able to get a UT61E successor in this kind of build quality for a similar price. Well that hasn't happened yet, so we'll see.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 12:31:38 am
content: Quote from: Corner on August 10, 2020, 11:46:07 pmLooks like it would be around $100 USD with tax and shipping, for a 6000 count UNI-T. What's this great back light feature you keep mentioning? The fact it actually has one? Or can you leave it on forever until the battery drains?Quote from: Wytnucls on August 10, 2020, 01:22:26 pmAfter seeing Dave's 121GW get ETL cert and not even be able to do simple autorange, I have little confidence in their ability.It's interesting that Fluke used to send them to several agencies, I suspect partly to avoid having a test house that replaced their senior staff with fresh outs who have no idea what a DMM is, just to make more profit. Surely this couldn't happen.With Dave's new meter having a UL cert, it will be interesting to see if it follows a similar path. So far, that lack of transparency and leaking a little bit here and there, it sure seems like this it the path it is heading down.

author: Corner
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 02:27:42 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 12:31:38 amWell, it's only $100 AUD shipped including the Australian GST:https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001122129754.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.7a03270aUPB6rp&algo_pvid=7ae98d28-1bcf-44b5-9978-2913752e273b&algo_expid=7ae98d28-1bcf-44b5-9978-2913752e273b-0&btsid=0ab6d59515971125434111042e2898&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_,searchweb201603_And this one is $94 AUD shipped including our tax:https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001253921623.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.0.0.7a03270aUPB6rp&algo_pvid=7ae98d28-1bcf-44b5-9978-2913752e273b&algo_expid=7ae98d28-1bcf-44b5-9978-2913752e273b-2&btsid=0ab6d59515971125434111042e2898&ws_ab_test=searchweb0_0,searchweb201602_,searchweb201603_The backlight is way more convenient to use than their other models. It's light sensing. It'll stay on forever if ambient environment is dark enough. It'll time out in maybe 20 seconds if not, then enabling it again is not as gruelling as the 139C/E models where you have to hold a button for 2 seconds. Just cover the light sensor and it'll come on. Completely disabling it is just a press of a button.

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 06:23:40 am
content: Quote from: Corner on August 10, 2020, 11:46:07 pmAt least 20KHz bandwidth for audio purpose I would say is enough for electronics ...When buying a multimeter you shouldn't think how cheap it is even if you are poor , a good brand could last for life and have all the fuctions you need .

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 11:16:43 am
content: Quote from: Corner on August 11, 2020, 02:27:42 amI would have guessed you would find it for less.Four years ago I had modified a UT61E to demonstrate how backlight's intensity could be controlled based on the ambient light. It took them long enough to copy the concept.While they are pretty good at copying. The UT181A is a decent clone of the Fluke 289 with some added bling. It's too bad that when it comes to actually improve the UT181A they fall way short. I was told that the 181A was now certified to the 61326 EMC standards and so I looked it up (see attached). Intertek wrote up a cert for it but having that paper means less and less to me. Do I actually believe a brand new UT181A would survive even the most basic of tests? If I did, I would have one!Old video showing the adaptive backlight control....

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 12:20:56 pm
content: The automatic backlight feature, triggered by ambient light intensity has been around for a while:Appa 507 505 503 since 2011Holdpeak HP770DSome meters have a backlight with voice activation.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 02:30:29 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 08, 2020, 03:11:04 pmThat is a sin of the cheap meters - it seems they copy each other's mistakes.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 08, 2020, 03:11:04 pmWell, truth be told, either 30k or 50k is a very respectable lifetime for the switch. The issue is believing if they are a design feature or instead simply a "prepared" unit.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 08, 2020, 03:11:04 pmAre you referring to the UT139C? If so, in your tests it went up to 5kV. I wouldn't necessarily classify it as "can't come anywhere near that".Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 12:31:38 amWe mentioned this somewhere else; there is a possibility the test procedure does not exercise or cover this scenario. It is a somewhat CYA operation.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 12:31:38 amI wouldn't be surprised that Fluke, having created or shared a great deal of the practices and design rules that inspired the standards, would get these certifications done for pennies on the dollar.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 12:31:38 amJust like you, I think that a decent equipment is mostly tied to the OEM than to the standard itself.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2020, 03:29:56 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on August 11, 2020, 02:30:29 pmThey may spit shine them every 5,000 cycles like Dave demonstrated. I don't think I ever life cycled a UNI-T product. The fact they even mention it for this particular meter seems like it would be a good choice.Quote from: rsjsouza on August 11, 2020, 02:30:29 pmYes. Just a typo. An old story... When I ran that first set of $50 meters, the AMPROBE AM510 was the runner up, if you want to call it that. The Fluke 101 surpassed it by a very large margin. Still to this day, I am not sure by how much as the 101 has yet to be damaged. I consider anything that can't compete with the AMPROBE AM510 not to be robust. So moving forward, when the I designed the new generator, I based it off what the AM510 could survive.I know many people whined about how the 139C performed. I gave it a second chance on the new generator where it was again damaged at levels below what both the AM510 and Fluke 101 could easily survive.You may see these numbers as being too harsh. It makes no difference to me if you felt the free Harbor Freight meter was a great meter. I could care less. My goal was never to sell meters but rather just benchmark them. The 139C did poorly, twice.Quote from: rsjsouza on August 11, 2020, 02:30:29 pmYes we did and I pointed out key parts of the standards. But there was no conclusion. Me personally, I don't trust them to do their job. Seeing that Gossen get through with such obvious problems, I don't trust them as well. If the agencies want to dilute their value, I'm fine with it.Quote from: rsjsouza on August 11, 2020, 02:30:29 pmYeah when that person had brought up HIOKI being self certified, it's a good case and point.***Was going to mention that I believe the AMPROBE AM-510 was certified by Intertek and made by UNI-T (see attached). Of course, the same companies produced and certified the AM-530. The 510 far surpassed the 530 in my testing. Just shows that if you make enough products, eventually you may stumble on a combination that is better than others. Design by random chance.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2020, 01:00:25 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 03:29:56 pmI didn't remember this. If they did so, then it would not be very realistic.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 03:29:56 pmYes, the little Fluke is still the one to beat. However, I had a few quality problems with two very different units built with two different date codes that it reduced my trust significantly on them.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 03:29:56 pmI have zero skin in the game. I don't care one way or another either, but my comment is about words, not numbers. Thanks for providing the parameter of "joeq's standard of robustness" (TM)Quote from: joeqsmith on August 11, 2020, 03:29:56 pmI was going to comment that as well. The AM530 seems quite alright w.r.t. input protection but it may simply be a weakness brought by the added features.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2020, 03:22:02 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on August 12, 2020, 01:00:25 amYeah, he kept pulling it apart. Then in the end proceeded to explain how to properly test a switch. It's interesting how much that plastic had wore down on the 121GW I ran. I piked that meter up the other day and forgot just how little resistance there is from the detent now. It's shot. In more ways than one!Quote from: rsjsouza on August 12, 2020, 01:00:25 amThe second 139C was damaged at 5KV but had survived 4K. Somewhere in 1-2KVish off the mark. We've seen meters that couldn't even make it to 2KV. Hard to say what it would take to improve it. The secondary clamps on the 139C were not good enough to save the IC, unlike the AM510 which could be repaired.Quote from: rsjsouza on August 12, 2020, 01:00:25 amI've seen similar comments about the added features being to cause of the weakness. I never understood that. If UNI-T wants to design products that survive, then they just need to put the effort in. I've looked at a lot of meters with far more features than the 139C that could easily survive that 6KV transient and weak grill starter. Pretty much every Brymen and Fluke I have looked at had no problems. Even that Gossen Ultra with it's lack of shields survived everything I put it through. I would imagine the difference is the skill set of their designers compared with UNI-T is all. That or the designers are not asked to come up with robust designs. That's certainly possible.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2020, 03:19:10 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 12, 2020, 03:22:02 amWe talked about this somewhere else as well: the standard seems to not give a damn for the survivability of the circuit itself, as long as the damage does not cause harm to the operator. Sure, the more intact the meter is after an event, the better, but it is impossible to have a 1:1 correlation between your tests and whatever the cert agencies put out.(Special case for the Gossen, which actually changes its status due to magnetic forces, showing an incredible gap in testing).However, my comment is that the survival chances of a circuit can be due to many factors, ranging from improper input protection to changes on the IC design. The IC used on the AM510 could be borderline above the input transient, while the AM530 could be internally weakened by an internal switch, mux or even a floating GPIO or anything else, really. That could be evidenced by your tests if a simple Ctrl-C+Ctrl-V of the input protection circuitry was done across these two models. Given the amount of damage between the two could simply be a small "poof" on the main IC and the physical integrity is intact, that becomes a non-issue for the manufacturer.I always recall an ancient video of Dave and Doug blowing up meters with a 40J pulse, where the most potentially dangerous was indeed a Fluke 7x series (it was a 75 IIRC), where the rotary dial flew off at a high speed.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2020, 05:10:07 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on August 12, 2020, 03:19:10 pmStill to this date, I couldn't tell you if the spirit of the standards is that the meters must survive or not. I have presented sections from the standards that I would tend to interpret that the must survive. Obviously a lot of meters would not, at least the way I test them. Some have UL approval. So yeah, hard to say. Again talking directly with Fluke, I was told they design them to survive these test. I spoke with another large company who were on the opposite end of the spectrum."...but it is impossible to have a 1:1 correlation between your tests and whatever the cert agencies put out."It's good to finally see comments like this echoed.No doubt there can be many causes for damage. Countless. If the design goals are clear, I have no doubt that a team of competent designers could achieve it assuming there is some give and take in cost and such. The UNI-T 181A is a bothersome case. It has some decent components and it certainly seems the intent was to have a very electrically robust design. The odd thing it that it appears to have all fallen apart in the final stages of the design. Maybe they can't test the layout before it goes into production. I would have thought a senior EE could have spent an hour reviewing it and may have improved it before boards were ordered. Who knows.It would be interesting to talk with UNI-T and get their insiders scoop. Not the marketing / sales BS and not the engineering managers view but the actual designers.The 121GW is also odd as in that case is we have Dave, the expert in DMMs and super critical of all poorly designed products approving it. By approving, I mean allowing them use of his brand and also directly selling the product. I wouldn't necessary have thought the meter would be robust but I would have expected it to be fairly solid from all other aspects.

author: totalnoob
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2020, 06:39:15 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 12, 2020, 05:10:07 pmJoe,I don't have the expertise that you do, on this subject, as a matter of fact, I am way out of my league. I do not disagree that manufacturers cannot design and build resilient meters capable to surviving the conditions of the safety standards and keep on being used. However, one thought that I have that manufacturers have a legitimate reason for having their meters NOT survive the conditions of the standard, but provide protection to the user. That reason is that they likely cannot guarantee that the meter will survive multiple exposures to the standard. To have a meter survive and remain in service (let's face it, an electrician is NOT going to replace a meter if it's not broken) after being exposed to the highest level of exposure of the standard is asking for a lawsuit should the meter not survive a subsequent exposure. To give an analogous example, when I was involved in a car accident on my way home from work, I had a child seat in the back seat, but my child was not with me. (Edit to add: All the damage was to the front end, no damage to the back passenger area and there was nothing in the child safety seat. End Edit) Despite that, and because of the severity of the accident (the car was totaled) my insurance company said that I had to replace the car seat because they would not pay for medical costs to my child should I decide to re-use the car seat in my next car and if that car was involved in an accident while my child was in the child seat. True story. We did not hesitate to replace the car seat. I can see meter manufacturers doing a similar calculation as my insurance company and deciding to make a meter that will protect the user for a one-time exposure, but after that exposure, the meter will not be usable.Of course this does not absolve the manufacturers of meters who can't make a meter that at least protects the user from conditions in the standard or that lie about being tested to the standard.This is just another POV. I'm not saying I'm right, just saying that there is likely more to the calculation than I have seen put forward until now.

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2020, 08:59:09 pm
content: Unfortunatly with some exceptions meters are seen just as consumer products ... so durability is not truly wanted . Like the bilions of crappy staff on the market . The owners of this companies who take decisions are by chance producing this , they could have been in business with pots or toilet paper , just the same

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2020, 12:20:28 pm
content: Quote from: totalnoob on August 12, 2020, 06:39:15 pmI'm not sure how to respond other than I have seen others post similar comments and I am always having to pick my jaw up off the floor.I ride bikes and wear a helmet. The helmets are certified for a limited number of years. If you race, this is one of the things they will inspect. If the helmet is exposed to any shock, say you drop it on the concrete, you should replace it. They are designed for a single impact. They cost a fair amount so it's best to take good care of them. I personally trust Snell and have included a link for some basic background.https://smf.org/aboutWhat's all this have to do with DMMs? Nothing! It's common for people to equate everything to automotive for some reason or another. My guess is it stems from their lack of understanding of the subject.From my FAQ:Quote

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2020, 01:51:29 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 12, 2020, 05:10:07 pmI agree with you; the pieces of the standard are not terribly clear on this regard. It could be the case highlighted by totalnoob above (liability after an event) or perhaps one of the troubles of "industry standards" committees: it is an amalgam of various philosophies and interests that comprise the final text. Or, it could be something completely different.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 12, 2020, 05:10:07 pmJust for the record, I always said that.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 12, 2020, 05:10:07 pmUnfortunately we may never know exactly what happened in this scenario. In my experience, a clear design specification is something achieved with a lot of experience, tenacity and a great number of iterations and feedback between field, design and test teams. This does not happen from day one.Quote from: joeqsmith on August 12, 2020, 05:10:07 pmDuring the release process of the 121GW I was also working on a product release for work, and I ended up identifying myself with several mishaps during the wildly public product release, initial feedback and even the stock/HW version issues even you had gone through. It would be idiotic of me to say that I would never fall into the same traps that Dave did, so my stance is that it takes a lot of courage of him to take the design so openly from its early stances (with even a major design change such as the core processor) and, as I said before and you reiterated, take the harsh feedback from his crowd that were so reliant that something coming from him would be anything less than "a meter to rule them all". 😁

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2020, 02:33:02 pm
content: If we deviate to David's meter , let's admit that he did't had time himself , then he should have done initial beta testing , simply borrowing some meters to serious hobbyists ( not fanboys to tell how good it is) ... then all the issues should have been discovered and corrected before releasing .

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2020, 10:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: CDaniel on August 13, 2020, 02:33:02 pmIf I understood correctly what you are saying, you mean that Dave should have kept a close circle of testers before spreading the word out, right? Well, that may well have been a much better alternative, but it was a rare time (outside of a crowd source project) that a DMM was so openly designed, tweaked, etc. Thus, my comment is that his attitude to be the guinea pig deserves at least some acknowledgment. Also, by sending one of the prototypes to Joe, it seems he was looking past the "yes men" you aluded- the meter failed miserably in several fronts.I am pretty sure that is the reason his new $150 meter is being kept under wraps this time.At any rate, I suspect I am helping drift the discussion away from the main topic. Sorry, OP.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2020, 01:54:25 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on August 13, 2020, 10:06:46 pmI honestly don't think he knew or understood that I was benchmarking them while also dissecting them under the microscope. Maybe people were filling his head with stories of meter exploding drama. I know he was really just looking for me to blow the thing up and I was looking to what we could learn from it. In the end, I think he felt it was a mistake and I can't say I disagree.I've said UNI-T had reached out to me at one point about looking at I think this meter. I assume they were looking for some sort of unboxing, five star review where I talk about all the MOVs it has while pointing at the PTCs. After explaining I would run it to failure, rank it against every other meter I had looked at and make it all public, that ended the conversation. There's no free rides in my reviews. You want a high rank, you earn it.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2020, 09:33:54 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on August 14, 2020, 01:54:25 amInteresting; I had some impression he was not entirely pleased after the fact, but I suspected he at least followed some of your videos to know what you usually do. Well, tough luck. In the end, we (consumers) are all much better for your efforts.I would be very impressed if he, despite all this, would offer one of the new $150 meters for you to test it.