My old Craftsman multimeter was lost in a car Break-in. I've decided to build an Amp Camp Amp and a Korg Nutube preamp and then whatever this new hobby (rabbit hole) puts in front of me. Should I get a Fluke 289, with graphing capabilities or a cheaper multimeter and a bench multimeter or an oscilloscope? I need a multimeter in my tool box and I play with electronics a bit.
Does anyone have some wisdom that might help me to get tools that will help me without wasting a lot of money?
Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom and/or point of view.
Does anyone have some wisdom that might help me to get tools that will help me without wasting a lot of money?
Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom and/or point of view.
Hi,
since we bought Brymen DMMs for our company the Fluke289 collects dust.
Look for the Brymen BM860 or 780 series.
The displays are easier to read, the handling is alot easier -no stupid menues that are always preset with the wrong parameter- and best of all .. they cost much less
jauu
Calvin
since we bought Brymen DMMs for our company the Fluke289 collects dust.
Look for the Brymen BM860 or 780 series.
The displays are easier to read, the handling is alot easier -no stupid menues that are always preset with the wrong parameter- and best of all .. they cost much less
jauu
Calvin
There was a time when a Fluke meter was the gold standard. There was little competition back then, because digital electronics was still in its infancy. China was still an isolated farming nation of rice-paddies and straw sun-hats, instead of the economic and manufacturing powerhouse it is today.
Things are very different today, and today's cheapest made-in-China DMMs are far more accurate than old-fashioned analogue VOMs ever were.
Not just that, there is little difference in accuracy between cheap DMMs and Fluke DMMs that cost ten times more. This was verified by actual measurements made by an experienced EE who is a diyAudio member.
I have some quite nice DMMs that cost me $35 CAD each, or around $27 USD. You'd expect to pay ten times that amount for a Fluke.
IMO, the relevant question is, do you have any requirements of your DMM, that actually justify paying ten times the price for one? Do you actually need something that only the expensive Fluke can provide?
As one example, if you work on high-tension power lines, the 1 kilo-volt flashover protection of the Fluke could save your life, and justify paying ten times the price for it.
But if you plan to work on voltages no higher than the ordinary 120V AC home line voltage, I honestly can't think of a good reason to pay for a Fluke. I certainly wouldn't.
A DMM with graphing ability (a portable 'scope) is very handy if, for example, you're servicing automotive electronics, and have to make your measurements under the hood of a vehicle. You can't fit a car on your workbench, so your scope has to go to the car.
But if you work on portable electronic projects that will fit on your workbench, a contemporary (benchtop) digital oscilloscope is likely to offer you more than the graphing DMM does. More pixels, more readable traces, more bandwidth, more features that make the 'scope more useful for a wider range of measurements.
One of the nice things about cheap DMMs is that they are so cheap, that you can buy one, and if you later change your mind and buy a Fluke, you won't have lost more than a few bucks on your initial purchase. There is no big downside to getting a cheap DMM. (Just don't try to measure 1kV voltages with it!)
-Gnobuddy
Fluke still makes nice meters. But I would shy away from the 289. I have one, and it collects dust. It's really bulky, has lousy battery life, a mediocre display, etc. The 189 is a great meter (though discontinued). The 289 hasn't impressed me.
The 179 and the 87 V are really nice meters, and they're still at the top of my list. That said, the Brymen meters are really pretty close to the Flukes these days at much better prices. I'm the VP of the Amateur Radio Club at my university, and we just bought one of the EEVBlog BM235 meters. I've been quite pleased with it. It's a well-built and very usable meter.
I still think that some of the older Fluke meters, like the old 77, are a good buy on the used market for many things. I got a few of them for about $35 each at auction, and for 90% of what I do, they're just as good as my 189 (which is my main handheld).
I got all of my Fluke meters for nearly nothing - mostly buying "broken" ones at auctions, but if I were going to buy a new meter I'd probably just buy a BM235 and be done with it. It's very compact, and it has enough functionality for a handheld. IMO, if you need better specs than the BM235, then you probably should be using something like a 34401A, not a handheld.
The 179 and the 87 V are really nice meters, and they're still at the top of my list. That said, the Brymen meters are really pretty close to the Flukes these days at much better prices. I'm the VP of the Amateur Radio Club at my university, and we just bought one of the EEVBlog BM235 meters. I've been quite pleased with it. It's a well-built and very usable meter.
I still think that some of the older Fluke meters, like the old 77, are a good buy on the used market for many things. I got a few of them for about $35 each at auction, and for 90% of what I do, they're just as good as my 189 (which is my main handheld).
I got all of my Fluke meters for nearly nothing - mostly buying "broken" ones at auctions, but if I were going to buy a new meter I'd probably just buy a BM235 and be done with it. It's very compact, and it has enough functionality for a handheld. IMO, if you need better specs than the BM235, then you probably should be using something like a 34401A, not a handheld.
I have use the same Fluke 77 in field service for about 40 years. It has travelled in my tool box in the belly of airplanes, and in the trunk of my car for thousands of miles. It has survived drops to the floor many times. There are many meters at all price points that work just fine sitting there politely. But I need reliability. I spend $200 on a meter instead of $40 because when the cheap one breaks, I can't continue to take voltage readings on site with the money I saved. Unless I carry two of them.
Ask yourself why you would need a meter with fancy features like graphing, and why pay for such features. WHen I do something stupid with my meter, and we all do, my Fluke survives that too. Mostly a new fuse fixes it. A lot of cheap meters, instead of replacing the fuse, you replace the meter. Yes, I carry spare meter fuses in my kit.
Ask yourself why you would need a meter with fancy features like graphing, and why pay for such features. WHen I do something stupid with my meter, and we all do, my Fluke survives that too. Mostly a new fuse fixes it. A lot of cheap meters, instead of replacing the fuse, you replace the meter. Yes, I carry spare meter fuses in my kit.
If you need to see, which is fine of course, get a real scope.
Even one of those $30 credit card size Scope-PCBs will be better or at least the same.
Why pay a fortune for "same thing", just mounted inside a meter?
Do-it-all stuff often does not really "all" , and with lots of compromises.
Just get nice mid priced benchtop digital scope and any "reasonable" meter and you´ll be fine.
Even one of those $30 credit card size Scope-PCBs will be better or at least the same.
Why pay a fortune for "same thing", just mounted inside a meter?
Do-it-all stuff often does not really "all" , and with lots of compromises.
Just get nice mid priced benchtop digital scope and any "reasonable" meter and you´ll be fine.
You sound like me. I'm DIY/hobby rather than need to use for a professional use.
I would suggest multimeter. The first thing you will reach for is your trusty multimeter, even with a scope, given it's faster to test with. Fluke 179 I'd love but given the cost difference between that and the level of use I'll probably add a known brand 1KV capable dependable multimeter or bench multimeter at some point.
I bought a scope recently (1104X-E) for signal work and it reduces the guesswork around signals but it's not a multimeter replacement. You will find in quick time, you'll want a signal analyser too given they both have different roles.
I definitely wouldn't spend the $600 a Fluke 289 costs.
IMO, there are MAJOR diminishing returns above the $150 mark when it comes to multimeters. You get a little more, but the times when I go "man, I'm really glad I have a 189 and not a BM235" is exceedingly rare.
You can pay a lot of money for handheld meters with a million features, and most of those added features are fairly useless.
IMO, there are MAJOR diminishing returns above the $150 mark when it comes to multimeters. You get a little more, but the times when I go "man, I'm really glad I have a 189 and not a BM235" is exceedingly rare.
You can pay a lot of money for handheld meters with a million features, and most of those added features are fairly useless.
Indeed. I think my first DC orientated one (not CAT rated 200/600Vac) was £14. Still going strong with anything up to mains 240V. Second 600V CAT rated die not much more. Although I would say cheaper multimeters are less accurate was looking at a simple Tenma bench multi meter that does simple features up to 1KV for ~£80 and the next hand multimeter price point seems to be around £120-150 which I may look at instead.
JAAMOI my first multi-meter (given to me by a friend) was a Goerz Unigor 6e. I now have 3 different digital ones bought for affordability. None are "good quality" but good enough for DIYAudio, viz. Major Tech MT883, Velleman DVM 1200 & DVM9912. However the DE-5000 LCR meter was a have to have as was the DCA-55. The DCA-55 has been used to match input BJTs for an amp I'm rebuilding.
in the case of a cheap dmm, consider safety and meter protection.
Index of reviewed multimeters table
Index of reviewed multimeters table
I quite agree.
I have a DMM that will measure capacitance, measure frequency, test transistors, and so on. I've hardly ever needed any of those capabilities.
IMO the most useful features are auto power-off, and a replaceable internal fuse for the current and resistance ranges. My $35 (CAD) cheap DMM from Amazon Canada has both those features.
Beyond the pliers, side-cutters, wire strippers, and maybe crimpers that Jean-paul mentioned, there is the whole issue of housing your electronics projects, which needs yet more tools. Enclosures may need to be measured, marked, drilled, punched, cut, and so on.
For this purpose, my set of tools include a centre-punch, set of drill bits, electric drill, a couple of hole-saws and step drill bits, a countersink bit for cleaning up drilled holes, digital calipers (for measuring hole locations and thread diameters), a set of screwdrivers, and a set of small wrenches (spanners to our British friends).
Then there's the matter of finishing. I keep it simple, rattle-can spray paint and primer, sandpaper, steel wool, Scotchbrite scouring pads.
The attached image is a recent simple but useful project, a foot-switch which will be part of a larger guitar-related project I've designed, and am in the process of building. Even this very simple project involved drilling four properly placed holes, and prepping and painting the rather unattractive die-cast Hammond aluminium enclosure.
-Gnobuddy
Attachments
I've had my Fluke 77 for 30 years now.
Still going strong, along with a Fluke 23.
And yes, they're considered a "gold standard" in the service industry, for good reason.
I was thinking of something like this: https://uk.farnell.com/tenma/72-7730a/multimeter-dig-hand-held-19999/dp/2100035
With 1KVA, true rms, but also mF capacitance and 20k count. Tenma meting a known corp too.
With 1KVA, true rms, but also mF capacitance and 20k count. Tenma meting a known corp too.