I'm not an expert but Brymens have been around a while, too, and the components inside Brymens are pretty much the same components as inside Flukes.
If Brymens were going out of spec then people would have noticed by now.
I'm not an expert but Brymens have been around a while, too, and the components inside Brymens are pretty much the same components as inside Flukes.
If Brymens were going out of spec then people would have noticed by now.
We already have one out of spec and it's been a day!
Joking, but it all depends where Brymen gets it's parts from.
I like the Brymen 869s. Not sure about the others though. I'll stick with "likely" for now and if proven wrong will be good for Fluke to have competition and make the Fluke 189II and 189 MAX.
For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.
For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.
For those interested, as a large Brymen seller, there is certainly a not insignificant failure/return rate with them. I should have kept proper numbers on this, but I'd estimate a 0.1 to 0.2% failure rate. None of them have ever been reported as drifting or beign slightly out of cal, it's always some other failure mode. IIRC about three main chip failures.
Were they DOA or did they take time to fail?
PS: Do you still have the three Brymens you reviewed in video #432 ?
Did you ever give away your brymen for external calibration ?
I did, few weeks ago after buying.
They (Cal-Lab) must do some adjustments for reaching the specs although the meter was new.
At work, we got some real old fluke 87, one of them is a Fluke 87 model ONE.
It is in the calibration circle for decades and musn´t adjusted until now.
Always in it´s specs.
That separate the boys from the men.
Which model of yours had to be aligned and by how much on which value?
It always meets its specs, but even then, its a choice whether or not you also have it aligned.
BTW I sometimes also doubt the calibration labs, although they are accredited by the national measuring institute and of course have very nice equipment etc etc.
First investigate what exactly is the difference between a DAKKS calibration and an ISO17025 calibration....
Free shipping!
Expensive for some, maybe...
I bought an 'as new' but damaged Fluke 88v a while back that had an Eprom Error from GSM phone frequency exposure and it was sold dead 'for parts'...
I paid just under $50 US for this 88v and promptly sent it into Fluke Celemetrix in Sydney for the fixed rate $185 AUD repair. What I got back was a new version 11 (GSM proof) main board + calibration (with certificate), new holster, port covers, battery and CDRom.
No need to have a doubt about it...
When it´s an accredited lab, theyr calibration references are above the ISO standard vulgo Dakks, which makes sense.QuoteFirst investigate what exactly is the difference between a DAKKS calibration and an ISO17025 calibration....
Have fun...
The only thing I know is that it´s the worldwide reference standard, accepted from everyone including MIL purposes.
I have 7 Flukes, 8020, 8022, 2x 8060, 10, 123, 28. They don't let you down. Simple as that. I also have 2 off Gossen MetraHit (14 and 25), and a hp 973a. They don't let you down either.
I've dropped it on the floor, knocked it off ladders and accidentally probed 240VAC on the resistance range.
I've dropped it on the floor, knocked it off ladders and accidentally probed 240VAC on the resistance range.
So basically you're saying "Don't lend James your multimeter.".
So basically you're saying "Don't lend James your multimeter.".