I was very surprised as well. Now I wonder about a virgin one.

Hi Joe, EE is not my area, but I have modeled physical behavior with computers. Could one use a circuit modeling tool, like SPICE, to predict the robustness of these dmm's? If so, how much of the device's circuit would one have to represent? Your database would serve as a very good validation reference for models because of your consistent test parameters. Though seeing that ptc desolder itself was too cool to miss.

@@jspencerg Maybe. You would somehow need to model the PCB as part of it. At these speeds, you will need to consider a lot of details.

@@jspencerg You’d use an EM modeling tool (that can be your head and eyes, with enough experience) to capture the parasitics of the PCB circuits. Then stick them into SPICE, use accurate transistor models that capture package parasitics if needed, and you should get at least the right ballpark results. Most SPICE models are not developed for this purpose, and model capture is an art in itself. You certainly could write a book about capturing BJT and other device models with “outlandish transient” response in mind. Many of them would be coupled electro-thermal models.

There are a few things I don't like about the BM869s but overall, it's still my meter of choice. If UNIT made a better version of the UT181A, or Gossen would fix the Ultra rather than just renaming it to Prime, or Fluke came out with a classic version of the 189, I may have to rethink that. I've put the two BM869s through tests that most meter will not survive and they continue to work just fine. Enjoy your new meter.

@joe smith thanks man. I can't believe how big it is compared to my other meters. I don't have as much experience with a lot of different brands like you

It's holding up better than I was expecting.

@@joesmith-je3tq , it's good news, because my UT61E+ is on the way from the seller now and I'm planning to make it more robust. You already helped a lot to many DMM-owners. Your shared experience is priceless. Thank you!

@@Scorry You should make a video showing how you are validating your results.

@@joesmith-je3tq , I'll try. I do not have now any decent video camera except for one on the phone. At least I can take photos and document/trace changes.

@@Scorry That should do.

I'm a bit curious as well about the drift.

Hard for me to make comment on how people justify what they purchase. Now if the 161E would be more robust, it's hard to say. It would require running two virgin meters. I may have another look at the 61E+, depending how the remaining tests turn out.

No idea. I switched to NiMH.

Those batteries are on the market for so long time, nobody complains about any problem. Go ahead.

I suspect you are right. I know of 8 of the UT210Es people I knew bought, 3 have had switch failures so far with light use. It still may be good to find out.

May be easier to buy a meter that is better suited for your particular needs.

@@joesmith-je3tq Thanks for the reply. They're really expensive in this part of the world so, sadly i have to make do with what i have. It'd be very nice to learn if oscillator mod would work on this one?

I did not damage the meter.