6 responses to “EEVblog #15 Part 2 of 2 – Fluke 189/289 Multimeter Review & 87V Comparison”

• Seemanta July 1st, 2009 at 23:52

  Hats off to you, Dave! I really like your site and frequently visit it every now and then.

  The facts you mention are really cool and I really appreciate the effort you have put into making this Vlog. I really like your work in making electronics accessible for mortals like us.

  Best wishes
  Seemanta

  Reply

• Andrew July 4th, 2009 at 02:28

  Fluke is not new to off-the-shelf parts and using refence desigsn.

  Models from the stone age, like the Fluke 8020, 8022A, 8024 have a main IC called 429100. That one happened to have the same pin configuration as the Intersil ICL7106. The circuits of the meters are very much Intersil reference designs. And not surprising, the 429100 is supplied by Intersil. Guess what IC it really is, just with a magic Fluke custom number …

  Reply

• Darrin July 5th, 2009 at 03:13

  As a rule of thumb, power consumption is proportional to the display size in my experience. Bigger displays usually take more power to run, so the shorter battery life isn’t all that surprising. I also wonder if they had to increase the processor clock to drive that display, making the situation worse.

  Reply

• Walter August 18th, 2009 at 08:26

  Could you cover exactly what the counts are. For instance this meter is 4,000 count …

  I don’t understand what the count is and how it is related to accuracy.

  Reply

• Steve G. September 23rd, 2009 at 13:52

  I believe Pomona (?) sells probes with similar dimensions as those great Fluke probes, but I’m guessing the quality isn’t the same (we had problems with one set in the lab, but in our lab I wouldn’t rule out abuse).

  Reply

• Todd Harrison October 10th, 2009 at 10:08

  I got those tiny Fluke probes about 2 years ago at:

  http://www.circuitspecialists.com/prod.itml/icOid/10161

  I see they cost a lot more now ~$45 US but well worth it. I only use these probes for all my small electronics. They are very nice.

  Reply