If both of my WF-188s hadn't been sent to recycle after early demise, of both, in after a very few months of use and I was still using one I would keep very close watch on it, frequently testing batteries before and after charge, and not use it near any flammables.
After having two WF-188s go bad on me, each in less than a couple of months I'll never recommend one again. The first one was a physical breakage. The second one, one bay started varying voltage, up and down, and discharging AW IMRs. Closed that bay off. Soon after the second bay started doing the same thing and actually killed several old AW IMR 14500s by draining them to 0 volts. One wouldn't expect both bays to do that as they are supposed to be totally separate channels. I've had several different chargers and none have ever done that. I see a potential fire hazard in that "action." Now..... I have a >10 year old WF-139 that is still charging as reliably as it did when new.
Wasn't it a WF-188 that Tripp was using when he had a battery "explosion?" It may have been user error, though.
I, personally, won't be buying any more WF-188, nor recommending them.
A whole bunch of people who have several different brands of chargers will comment that they feel like a piece of junk. That includes one vendor who said that to me in an email but only carried them because of demand.
Of course all of the chargers present inherent risks involved charging batteries but I think the QC and construction of the WF-188 is shoddy. I don't have experience with the newer WF-139; only the old one. The cheap chargers I purchased from China "felt" more substantial than the WF-188. I used them for several months before purchasing first WF-188 along with my trusty old WF-139. Never any problems with them. (I liked the selectable mAH switch and the selectable voltage on the WF-188. That's why I purchased them in the first place. Lower mAH, slower charging is better for Lithium chemistry batteries. )
Just my
Hugs, Feisty Alice
