Brymen 867s or Agilent U1252A

[Leuven]

I've been after a high count multimeter for general use (electric and electronic troubleshooting) and after much consideration and given my current options, it comes down to these two: Brymen 867s or Agilent U1252A. I can get them at the same price.

It's a complete tie for me. Agilent has that slow continuity but it's such a nice meter otherwise! I had a U1242B in my hand and it has that quality feel to it - the display, range switch, backlight, a real pleasure to use.

Brymen can't be faulted technically, but the finish is not on the same level. It's just a functional tool.

I'm inclined to go with Brymen, but I thought I'd put it out there. Which one would you personally choose between the two?

[ebclr]

Don't go with workers go wit the king

Fluke87

[Lightages]

Don't go with workers go wit the king

Fluke87

Why?

What does the Fluke 87 have over the other meters the OP is looking at? What does it not have? Is this going to turn into another fanboi rant?

[ebclr]

Robustness, long-term accuracy, "De facto" standard isn't a toy that will be out of production in 2 or 3 years

[Lightages]

I've been after a high count multimeter for general use (electric and electronic troubleshooting) and after much consideration and given my current options, it comes down to these two: Brymen 867s or Agilent U1252A. I can get them at the same price.

Is the Agilent U1252A new? If so it must be quite old stock.

[Mr. Scram]

Robustness, long-term accuracy, "De facto" standard isn't a toy that will be out of production in 2 or 3 years

These Brymen models have been around for a bit and will likely be around for a while. While I own an 87V myself, it's not unlikely I will buy a Brymen BM86X in the future, as it has a number of features the 87V doesn't have.

[Lightages]

Robustness, long-term accuracy, "De facto" standard isn't a toy that will be out of production in 2 or 3 years

HP/Agilent/Keysight is a toy manufacturer that hasn't lasted more than 3 years? 

Brymen hasn't been making meters for more than 3 years? 

Brymen actually makes meters for Amprobe, Extech, and others. Amprobe is actually owned by the same company that owns Fluke.

Any more FUD you would like to throw into the pile of BS?

[Leuven]

I've been after a high count multimeter for general use (electric and electronic troubleshooting) and after much consideration and given my current options, it comes down to these two: Brymen 867s or Agilent U1252A. I can get them at the same price.

Is the Agilent U1252A new? If so it must be quite old stock.

Yes, old stock but new.

[Lightages]

In that case, you might want to consider the calibration expiry time. The only thing I know about problems with Agilent is that some of them had bad soldering. Otherwise, pick the one you like better. They are both great meters and both have more to offer than the Fluke 87 for the electronics hobbyist.

[ebclr]

Look inside a fluke even you can note the difference

[Terry01]

I would take the Brymen buddy.

I have the 867s and it's a great meter to use. I don't own an Agilent or even used one but they seem a bit more complex to use for hobby stuff. The continuity thing is something i use often too. I also took the fluke 177 over the 87v when I decided to get a Fluke. I like that meter too. I'm very happy with both.
I'm still very new to electronics so only giving an opinion on what little I do know.

I can recommend the 867s and 177 as both nice easy meters to use and have everything I will ever need. They are both equal on most things they both do too speed and accuracy wise.

I'd listen to the guy who does the videos too. He obviously really knows his meters.

Hope your happy with whichever one you chose

[tooki]

I've never owned a Brymen, but based on demos and reviews, and on me owning a U1252B, I'd say that if this is your only meter, go for the Brymen. The Agilent's continuity is just plain too slow. (It can also be a bit slow to autorange on some functions, at least compared to my Fluke 87V and my bench meters.)

On the other hand, if you already have a meter with good continuity, a U1252 (A or B) makes a great addition to the arsenal.

[nanofrog]

Both are decent meters, so check out the functions available between them and see which is more useful to you. For disclosure, I own both an Agilent U1252B and a Brymen BM857a (predecessor to the 86x models). Both are decent meters.

Regarding the continuity for the Agilent, the probes do make a difference IME. For example, if I use the ODM leads that came with my Agilent, it lags (it's a non-latching type). Swap them out for a set of Probemaster's however, and there's a world of difference (comes close to a latching continuity and definitely usable).

And if you still need a faster continuity, you can get an inexpensive DMM with a latching type. A second meter is quite handy to have around as well; say a Uni-T 139C as it has decent protections and a nice feature set (~$34 shipped).

BTW, the non-latching types have their advantages as well (think tone to indicate good/poor continuity).

[tooki]

I dunno, I use ProbeMaster probes, and even with them, I find the U1252B to be maddeningly slow.

(The absolute gold standard in my lab is the Keithley 2015, whose continuity tester is just amazing. It actually makes a Fluke 87V look sluggish!)

I think you've accidentally swapped the terminology of latching and non-latching, nanofrog. Non-latching means it's literally an analog comparator circuit with an oscillator. They react instantly, but scratchy, and can miss intermittent continuity.

A latching continuity tester uses circuitry to "hold" a pulse of continuity longer than it actually lasted, so you don't miss it. (Some do the opposite, too, of lengthening a lapse in continuity.) But they also have to use some kind of noise rejection so as to not beep constantly, and this is where the quality of implementation shows. The Fluke 87V, Keithley 2015, and U1252B all have latching continuity, but the first two work great, the third is awful.

Indeed, many cheap meters have latching continuity that's borderline OK, such that the included probes make it work poorly, but using nice gold-plated makes the continuity test come to life, so to speak. (Uni-T is like this.) Gold probes also make non-latching continuity testers WAY less scratchy. In contrast, really good continuity testers like Fluke and Keithley are so good they can actually mask the low performance of cheaper probes.

[sainter]

I have a BM867s, and I like it. When buying, I was considering fluke, agilent ant other MT, but in the end decided on this one. Fluke is more an electrical MT rather then electronics.

Protection for this kind of device (when working up to Cat II) is more than good, not going to put it in a tool box to be bashed around. Plus, usb adapter for logging is a feature I would like to have for at least one MT in my kit.

Sometimes I think I better should have bought BM869 (better acc. and temperature measurement) but It's not the first or last MT I'm going to buy. But it is the most used.

Waiting for the EevBlog MT for my next one

[wraper]

In that case, you might want to consider the calibration expiry time. The only thing I know about problems with Agilent is that some of them had bad soldering. Otherwise, pick the one you like better. They are both great meters and both have more to offer than the Fluke 87 for the electronics hobbyist.

That was particular batch of U1272A. I was one who found the issue, several other members then checked their meters and found it too. All of them were bought from Farnell at almost the same time. Agilent sent new meters to all of us by DHL.

[wraper]

Robustness, long-term accuracy, "De facto" standard isn't a toy that will be out of production in 2 or 3 years

Very convincing to hear that you should go for the most expensive option from Rigol fanboy and Keysight hater.

[Mr. Scram]

Look inside a fluke even you can note the difference

Be specific. Empty statements are just that.

[John B]

I can't really comment on the functional difference between the 867s and 869s in day to day use, but I have the 869s and I highly recommend it. I have a few of the brymens (829s, 257s) and the 869s is the favourite. The biggest practical difference between the 829s is the bandwidth. I think the true rms converter is specified up to 100kHz, but it seems happy measuring up to around 300Khz, depending on the amplitude. The frequency counter measures up to around 1.9MHz. The AC/DC voltage and resistance accuracy is nice, but many meters will be accurate enough. I use the 829s when working around mains though, as it has non contact voltage detection, where the 869s does not. All the back lights are annoying though, they turn themselves off after ~30secs.

[nanofrog]

I dunno, I use ProbeMaster probes, and even with them, I find the U1252B to be maddeningly slow.

(The absolute gold standard in my lab is the Keithley 2015, whose continuity tester is just amazing. It actually makes a Fluke 87V look sluggish!)

I think you've accidentally swapped the terminology of latching and non-latching, nanofrog. Non-latching means it's literally an analog comparator circuit with an oscillator. They react instantly, but scratchy, and can miss intermittent continuity.

A latching continuity tester uses circuitry to "hold" a pulse of continuity longer than it actually lasted, so you don't miss it. (Some do the opposite, too, of lengthening a lapse in continuity.) But they also have to use some kind of noise rejection so as to not beep constantly, and this is where the quality of implementation shows. The Fluke 87V, Keithley 2015, and U1252B all have latching continuity, but the first two work great, the third is awful.

Indeed, many cheap meters have latching continuity that's borderline OK, such that the included probes make it work poorly, but using nice gold-plated makes the continuity test come to life, so to speak. (Uni-T is like this.) Gold probes also make non-latching continuity testers WAY less scratchy. In contrast, really good continuity testers like Fluke and Keithley are so good they can actually mask the low performance of cheaper probes.

May have to do with what I've on-hand, as the Agilent is my only non-latching type. And it's certainly on the slow side (and scratchy as all with less than stellar probes). The few latching types I own are quick IME; Fluke, Brymen, and Uni-T. I don't try and break speed records in continuity mode though, so that's likely a major factor in regard to my experiences. Personally, I like having both types available to me as both have their merits and drawbacks.

Regarding probes, Probemaster is my go-to brand. Discovered them many years ago and I've never looked back. So yeah, I'm quite certain I'm beyond spoiled at this point. 

[tooki]

Huh? The U1252B's continuity is latching. (It's categorically impossible for it to be "slow" and non-latching.) So I'm confused how it can be "slow" and "scratchy" (since scratchy is indeed normal for non-latching.)

I first got a ProbeMaster catalog (ordered with the response card in a Popular Electronics) some time in the late 80s, when I was but knee-high to a grasshopper and a) didn't have any clue what I was doing* and b) didn't have any test gear. It wasn't until last year, at age 36, that I finally got the ProbeMasters. About damned time!



* I wish I'd had someone to mentor me, but nobody in my family is a science/physics/electricity nerd!

[Leuven]

Thanks all. Looks like Brymen has the edge.