200 $ Multimeter

[psycho0815]

Hi,
After fiddling around with microcontrollers (mostly arduino), i've been getting more serious about electronics lately, so i decided to replace my el cheapo multimeter.
Now, i've been watching reviews of multimeter in the 100€/$ class, and all of them had at least one thing i just didn't like, so i decided to up the budget and go for a 200€ Meter.
So far i have looked at:
Agilent 1241b/1242b
Extech EX530
Fluke 177/179

I have watched/read reviews for the Extech and Fluke, but haven't been able to find anything on the agilent so far. So if any of you have any experience with one of the mentioned meters, or any new suggestions, that would be much appreciated.

Cheers Psycho

PS.: I'm german, so please excuse my possibly rubbish english.

[poodyp]

I'm not sure about prices in Germany, but here the venerable Fluke 87V can easily be had for under $200. I got one in great condition for $150 after keeping my eyes open for the right one. If you can do without a few extra features you can get an 87III for about half that.

[DRT]

I have the Agilent 1241a, which looks pretty similar to be b model apart from the colours. Very happy with it. A link to my "show your multimeter" post : https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-chat/show-your-multimeter!/msg133131/#msg133131

[EEVblog]

The Fluke 177/179 is an electrical meter for field use, not electronics. It doesn't even have uA measurement.
I'd get something more useful for electronics.

The U1242B is a good choice.

Dave.

[psycho0815]

The best price for a new 87V is 479€.
Also, there aren't many used ones on the market. Apparently no one wants to get rid of those.

[nanofrog]

Found a few Youtube vids you might want to look at.



No where near full reviews, but they might offer some useful information on their behavior.

Hope they help, and good luck. 

[samgab]

Yeah, for ~€200, I reckon I'd probably go for the 1242B.
Specs aren't too bad, a couple of highlights:
Basic DC V accuracy: ±(0.09% +2 counts).
True RMS.
Has a backlight.
Has data logging capabilities. (Need to get the cable)
Dual/differential temp capability. (Need to get the thermocouples/adapters)
Runs on 4x AAA cells.
Min/Max recording.
Comes with a cal cert!
CAT III 1000V / CAT IV 600V rated.
10,000 count isn't too bad.

Seems like a reasonable meter, for the money... On paper, at least.

EDIT: Continuity looks painfully slow. Can you live with that? Not everyone needs a fast continuity buzzer.

[T4P]

Well it is supported by the U1177A bluetooth adapter too!

[paul23]

I´ve got the U1242B and Bluetooth adaptor, but there is a catch.  You have to get a separate bracket for the U1242B to use the adaptor, it doesn´t fit on the back of the multimeter without it.  Apparently all the higher range Agilent meters do not need the bracket as the Bluetooth adaptor clips right on.  Other than that it is a good meter.

[grenert]

I think there's a bug in how the orange Agilent meters do averaging.  An average reading should typically settle on a reading as time goes on.  You can see in the third video above that it continues to oscillate.

You can also see it on the U1272A at about 3:00 into this video by mjlorton.  Compare it to how the Flukes quickly settle down to the average reading:

[M. András]

i dont really get how many times you need to measure uAmps unless you are doing some insane low power sleeping microcontroller stuff or its just me who thinks in high power stuffs?(over 50 watts atleast)

[psycho0815]

I suppose whenever you do something that's battery-powered µAmps become interesting.

[T4P]

Heh. 6F22 battery powered? Not.
I think you mean AG4 and AG3

[psycho0815]

Yeah i was thinking about coin cells and such. However for some people, it's a matter of pride to get the lowest power consumption out of their design.
But since this is propably going to be my only serious meter for a while, having a µAmp-Range seems like a good thing. Doesn't mean i wont get the fluke 179 or another fluke at one point. If only for the continuity-tester.

[T4P]

Just be weary of most meter's quite shocking voltage drop on uAmp and mAmp

[psycho0815]

Yeah i know. Unfortunately the 1242b manual doesn't give any specifics on burden voltage. It just says something like <0.6V on the µA Range which seems like a lot to me. I'm actually thinking about saving another month and getting the fluke 87V instead. would you say it's worth it or would it make more sense to invest the ~200€ difference in something else like a functiongenerator or another meter?

[samgab]

Yeah i know. Unfortunately the 1242b manual doesn't give any specifics on burden voltage. It just says something like <0.6V on the µA Range which seems like a lot to me. I'm actually thinking about saving another month and getting the fluke 87V instead. would you say it's worth it or would it make more sense to invest the ~200€ difference in something else like a functiongenerator or another meter?

I don't regret a cent of what I spent on the 87V, it's a very good meter. Very reliable and robust. But it's getting a little bit long in the tooth in terms of features. You could also consider going up to the U1272A for a similar price point, and it has a few more features and is similar or better in terms of accuracy.
Burden voltage is something to be *wary* of whichever DMM you use, it's just something to be aware of which happens with all DMMs.
The burden voltage specifics are in this pdf: http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/U1241-90063.pdf
The amount depends, of course, on the range.
DC A:
1000.0 ?A @0.1 ?A, < 0.06 V
10000 ?A @1 ?A, < 0.55 V
100.00 mA @0.01 mA, < 0.18 V
440.0 mA @0.1 mA, < 0.8 V
10.000 A @0.001 A, < 0.4 V

Compared to the 87V burden voltage: http://support.fluke.com/find-sales/Download/Asset/2161164_6116_ENG_B_W.PDF

[BravoV]

This DMM burden voltage is the reason Dave created uCurrent from the 1st place.

[nanofrog]

This DMM burden voltage is the reason Dave created uCurrent from the 1st place.

Exactly.

Get a good meter otherwise, and if burden voltage is an issue with uA measurements, then the uCurrent will cover this one area of the meter that isn't all that wonderful.

Kinda sad IMHO to disqualify a great meter for the intended use over one issue (whatever it turns out to be), especially if that measurement isn't the only one the instrument will be used for.

[psycho0815]

I didn't disqualify the meter. I just meant that it would have been nice if agilent would give the burdenvoltage as mV/mA like everyone else, for better comparability.
Apart from that, i guess if you really need a certain feature, you have to disqualify any meter that doesn't have it. Like if you need to measure temperature on a daily basis, a meter without temperaturemeasurement won't be any good for you. As usually it all depends on your requirements i guess.

[M. András]

Current dc
1000.0 ?A 0.1 ?A < 0.06 V (50 ?) 0.1% + 3
10000 ?A 1 ?A < 0.55 V (50 ?) 0.1% + 3
100.00 mA 0.01 mA < 0.18 V (0.5 ?) 0.2% + 3
440.0 mA2 0.1 mA < 0.8 V (0.5 ?) 0.5% + 3
10.000 A3 0.001 A < 0.4 V (0.01 ?) 0.6% + 5
directly from the 1242 datasheet

[ejeffrey]

Yeah i know. Unfortunately the 1242b manual doesn't give any specifics on burden voltage. It just says something like <0.6V on the µA Range which seems like a lot to me.

That is typical of multimeters.  I have never heard of a general purpose multi-meter which has a burden voltage substantially lower than that.  They may exist, but they are not common.  The standard way to "fix" this is to use a power supply with sense leads or a special purpose current preamplifier.

[Smokey]

I think it's funny that Dave would send the guy away from a meter because it doesn't have a uA range.  That's a great excuse to push the uCurrent.

[nukie]

I think it's funny that Dave would send the guy away from a meter because it doesn't have a uA range.  That's a great excuse to push the uCurrent.

Don't talk with your ass. If a person bought a meter with an usable uA function, then an uCurrent is not required anymore. Do you even understand why the uCurrent exists?

tapatalk

[baljemmett]

I think it's funny that Dave would send the guy away from a meter because it doesn't have a uA range.  That's a great excuse to push the uCurrent.

Don't talk with your ass. If a person bought a meter with an usable uA function, then an uCurrent is not required anymore. Do you even understand why the uCurrent exists?

... isn't that Smokey's point?  He finds it funny that Dave says "don't buy that meter, you need one with a uA range instead" and loses an excuse to push the uCurrent, as opposed to saying "that meter's great!  oh, you need to measure figures in the microamps?  here, buy my shiny thing."

(Of course, giving people bad meter-buying advice and pushing his product in place of missing features would quickly earn Dave some scorn and poor rep, I suspect...)