I would say YOU are back to ... Don't wrap every one else into your safety chatter.
Take a look at the specs though. This meter is literally an order of magnitude less accurate than any other 60k count meters. What good does that extra digit do if it's not accurate??? To me, it's close enough in price to the BM786 or 789 that if I want a 60k meter I would still prefer one of them. If I wanted cheap I would get the 61E which has better accuracy than this meter.
I am VERY confused by that teardown pic and the specs. That looks like a HY3131 chip, which is definitely capable (with the correct other hardware of course) of much better accuracy than this meter.
Interesting. I didn't really look into the specs, I just saw a new 60K meter from Uni-T at an attractive price point. I just assumed it would be at least as accurate as a 61E+ (which I also happen to have). I don't understand why they wouldn't take a fairly proven (if not perfect) design like the 61E+ and add the precision to it for $25 more.
Interesting. I didn't really look into the specs, I just saw a new 60K meter from Uni-T at an attractive price point. I just assumed it would be at least as accurate as a 61E+ (which I also happen to have). I don't understand why they wouldn't take a fairly proven (if not perfect) design like the 61E+ and add the precision to it for $25 more.
It's got "electrician" features
Interesting. I didn't really look into the specs, I just saw a new 60K meter from Uni-T at an attractive price point. I just assumed it would be at least as accurate as a 61E+ (which I also happen to have). I don't understand why they wouldn't take a fairly proven (if not perfect) design like the 61E+ and add the precision to it for $25 more.
Their web page claims "high precision", not high accuracy.
https://meters.uni-trend.com/product/ut117c/
EDIT: Actually the 61E+ is now selling for $82 on AliExpress, virtually same as this meter. I was thinking the 61E+ was quite a bit cheaper. So I guess the upshot between these meters is you can have precision or accuracy for the same price, just not both.
I would say YOU are back to ... Don't wrap every one else into your safety chatter.
Huh? Somebody else mentioned "61010" a couple of posts up.
I believe you have access to a copy so maybe you could make a definitive statement on the matter. End speculation.
I don't understand why they wouldn't take a fairly proven (if not perfect) design like the 61E+ and add the precision to it for $25 more.
Huh? Somebody else mentioned "61010" a couple of posts up.
I believe you have access to a copy so maybe you could make a definitive statement on the matter. End speculation.Like, I don't care about safety an my testing has nothing to do with it. I've made that statement many times over the years. Never sinks in with certain people.
EDIT: Actually the 61E+ is now selling for $82 on AliExpress, virtually same as this meter. I was thinking the 61E+ was quite a bit cheaper. So I guess the upshot between these meters is you can have precision or accuracy for the same price, just not both.
My question is why would you ever buy a Uni-T? You can get the 61E's accuracy in a Zoyi for much less money (the ZT-219/Aneng 870) and you can get a genuine CAT III meter from Brymen with input jack alert, etc., for the price of this meter.
The only interesting thing I see in the Uni-T lineup is a data logging meter for about $80 (the 61E). I don't think any other brand can match that.
(nb. Zoyi have some Bluetooth meters but I don't know if the protocol is known/hacked)
I know the UT61E has an army of fans though so that's just me.
I don't understand why they wouldn't take a fairly proven (if not perfect) design like the 61E+ and add the precision to it for $25 more.Your idea of a proven and perfect design certainly differs from my own. I like that 200MHz frequency counter function it has.
Huh? Somebody else mentioned "61010" a couple of posts up.
I believe you have access to a copy so maybe you could make a definitive statement on the matter. End speculation.Like, I don't care about safety an my testing has nothing to do with it. I've made that statement many times over the years. Never sinks in with certain people.
I never said you did.
The standard is written around "safety" so that's the word I'm forced to use. Please stop trying to be obtuse.
And by "fairly proven" I refer simply to it's aforementioned popularity among hobbyists -- it has definitely proven itself a popular and capable meter for it's price point with that demographic.
And by "fairly proven" I refer simply to it's aforementioned popularity among hobbyists -- it has definitely proven itself a popular and capable meter for it's price point with that demographic.
Right, like the free Harbor Freight meters. May be the most popular meter out there and tough to beat that price point.
He also did this video:
comparing the AN870 and the 61E+, and it was really no comparison.
He concluded with "Personally, I'd pay the premium for the more expensive Uni-T UT61E+ if I had to choose one or the other."
BTW I also have an AN870, which is certainly a decent meter for the money, but as soon as you handle it you recognize it's very cheaply made.
BTW I also have an AN870, which is certainly a decent meter for the money, but as soon as you handle it you recognize it's very cheaply made.
I'm more of a fan of the AN860B+.
As I have stated many times, that standard has nothing to do with my testing
Talking about safety from the context of this thread shows a lack of understanding.
FWIW I asked the AI and got this answer:
Talking about safety from the context of this thread shows a lack of understanding.
The question isn't about safety. The question is whether or not the meter is supposed to survive it's rated transient without damage.
My belief is that the standard is ambiguous on this point but I don't have a copy the standard because it's expensive and not much use to me.
It seems logical to ask somebody who does have access to the standard if they could clarify things (or simply confirm that yes, it's ambiguous).
One of the reasons that IMO is a strong indicator of the 61010 ambiguity is the line of Hypertough meters sold at the large Walmart stores in the US. Their M830B clone (manufactured by All-Sun) is way better than the average crap meters but I don't think it would qualify.
it withstood 280VAC applied to all its ranges - except battery tester, hfe and A/mA.
As usual, I did a review for my channel. My feelings are mixed - despite it is of a lesser quality than the A/B brand meters, it is built to a much higher quality than the M830B clones, which a great deal of people that can understand Portuguese uses them in extremely dangerous scenarios. Disclaimers galore but I would be happy if people used this particular one instead of the über crap stuff you find in Brasil.
Talking about safety from the context of this thread shows a lack of understanding.
The question isn't about safety. The question is whether or not the meter is supposed to survive it's rated transient without damage.
My belief is that the standard is ambiguous on this point but I don't have a copy the standard because it's expensive and not much use to me.
It seems logical to ask somebody who does have access to the standard if they could clarify things (or simply confirm that yes, it's ambiguous).I had momentary access to a few versions of the 61010 and it is quite ambiguous - I recall Joe had the same impression. I had commented before in this thread that IME such standards are subject to pressure from various players in the industry and such specific point might have well been kept somewhat ambiguous on purpose, clearing out the market for varying degrees of performance under transients.
One of the reasons that IMO is a strong indicator of the 61010 ambiguity is the line of Hypertough meters sold at the large Walmart stores in the US. Their M830B clone (manufactured by All-Sun) is way better than the average crap meters but I don't think it would qualify. However, Intertek mark is stamped left and right across its packaging and enclosure - no way Walmart would open themselves to a class action suit in case people started being electrocuted by one of their products.
One of the reasons that IMO is a strong indicator of the 61010 ambiguity is the line of Hypertough meters sold at the large Walmart stores in the US. Their M830B clone (manufactured by All-Sun) is way better than the average crap meters but I don't think it would qualify.
That meter reminds me of my "Big Clive" meter, which I enjoy using - it's simple, it takes up almost no space, and it stays on all day long without complaint.
The case is really boring though. You'd think they'd make it stand out from the crappy DT830a so you can easily tell them apart. eg. The Big Clive has a Fluke-like rubber boot.
it withstood 280VAC applied to all its ranges - except battery tester, hfe and A/mA.
The Big Clive claims 500V on most ranges in the manual but I haven't tested it.
(I don't see hFE on yours in your video...)
Well... Brasil is a country full of suicide showers. People have a higher immunity to electricity there.
I've mentioned before that I think Intertek has become a bloated, ineffective monopoly. Worse, it seems much of the cert is now rubber stamping for a price. I think it's more about trying to control trade than safety. My thoughts on that have not changed and this extends far beyond handheld multimeters.