Adam Savage on multimeters

[J-R]

OK, I'll play a little, I've got the Fluke 87V, 88V and 287, and none came with the TL75 leads, none cost me $450 and the one Fluke C35 carrying case I did buy was $23.79.

Lucky you.

In my country there's no such thing as a second hand Fluke 87V and a new one would cost much more than $450.

Result? I bought a Brymen with more features for $180. Gold plated leads and case were included.

The fact remains you posted incorrect pricing and product information in direct response to a user located in the US.  You even directed the words "You pay" at them.

If you have a specific technical issue with a specific Fluke product, simply state the facts so we are aware of it.

Maybe that wasn't what was being discussed here. Maybe that's just you barging in.

Are you serious?  In probably the most popular forum in the world for this type of discussion, specifically labelled "Products » Test Equipment", you consider a call out for a "specific technical issue" "barging in"?

[vk6zgo]

Fluke meters weren't always reliable. In around 1978 I had a Fluke 8000 multimeter, which was not so rugged. Every 6 months or so I had to open the case and re-solder several broken solder joints. The battery charging circuit used an incandescent lamp for control.

Example of the Fluke 8000....

Fluke 8000A teardown and repair attempt: http://kuzyatech.com/fluke-8000a-teardown-and-repair-attempt

I agree-----my work had several desk type Flukes from around that era.or decades
The older one was erratic, but fixable, but the next generation one was horrible.
The saying was:- "It's a Fluke if it works!"

The stuff we used  was routinely packed up, put into a road case & taken all over the State, so reliability
was at a premium!
I never liked any of the handheld ones with the side buttons, either, but my more sensibly designed 77 has lasted for decades!

The first handheld DMMs we had were Beckman (or " Beckperson" as we called'em).
You could play football with them, & they would still work.

[Fungus]

If you have a specific technical issue with a specific Fluke product, simply state the facts so we are aware of it.

Let's start with "Why hasn't the 87V been upgraded to CAT IV 1000V like the Brymens have?". I'm sure all the "pro electricians and linemen that do all of their work on high energy circuits" would appreciate that.

Instead we find them fitting cheaper fuses in the latest models, visible tracks on the PCB after less than 100 cycles of the selector and missing o-rings (QC issues)?

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/fluke-87v-(2021)-teardown/msg3498862/#msg3498862


Then there's "Why can't they add True RMS and a bar graph to the Fluke 17B+" (for example)? Is it because it would be expensive to do? The 17B+ would be a truly great hobbyist meter if it had those two things and could eat up a whole lot of Brymen sales. Are Fluke working on that? 

etc.

[NoisyBoy]

I have a tiny sample size so it is statistically insignificant.  But I have owned two 8000A for at least 15 years, both bought from eBay for nostalgic reason, one was broken from the start, but the other one has worked flawlessly.  After an adjustment (thanks to Joe's guidance) a little over a year ago, it was back within spec.  I just finished a checkup, all measurement are still within spec.  I also pulled all the original electrolytic and checked them this time, all were still well within spec after 40+ years.  That meter got used weekly, the only maintenance I do is to use deoxit D100, G100, and F100 to keep all the push buttons and input jacks clean.  So I guess I am the lucky one, I plan to revive the other 8000A this summer if it is fixable.

Fluke meters weren't always reliable. In around 1978 I had a Fluke 8000 multimeter, which was not so rugged. Every 6 months or so I had to open the case and re-solder several broken solder joints. The battery charging circuit used an incandescent lamp for control.

I never had to re-solder anything in the meter except when I damaged it, which was often enough that I eventually bought an HP and never turned back.  The damaged parts were custom made for Fluke and it would cost around $70 every time (with me doing the labor).

[EEVblog]

Savage lost me at "loyalty to Fluke".  In the past their multimeters were great but the current Fluke has been bought out and living off of their past reputation for decades now.

They have earned that reputation and loyalty.
Name another digital meter brand that has been in continuous production for like 35 years like the 70 and 80 series have.
Are you saying that the modern 70 and 80 series meters are crap?

[Wytnucls]

If you have a specific technical issue with a specific Fluke product, simply state the facts so we are aware of it.

Let's start with "Why hasn't the 87V been upgraded to CAT IV 1000V like the Brymens have?". I'm sure all the "pro electricians and linemen that do all of their work on high energy circuits" would appreciate that.

Instead we find them fitting cheaper fuses in the latest models, visible tracks on the PCB after less than 100 cycles of the selector and missing o-rings (QC issues)?

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/fluke-87v-(2021)-teardown/msg3498862/#msg3498862


Then there's "Why can't they add True RMS and a bar graph to the Fluke 17B+" (for example)? Is it because it would be expensive to do? The 17B+ would be a truly great hobbyist meter if it had those two things and could eat up a whole lot of Brymen sales. Are Fluke working on that? 

etc.

Fluke has the Amprobe HD160C already, CAT IV 1000V, with an IP rating of 67. Working outdoors with a meter that lacks an IP rating would be foolish, even if rated for 1000V.
That cheap 87 V may be a refurbished unit, for all we know.
The 17B was designed to compete in the low price Asian market.

[EEVblog]

If you have a specific technical issue with a specific Fluke product, simply state the facts so we are aware of it.

Let's start with "Why hasn't the 87V been upgraded to CAT IV 1000V like the Brymens have?". I'm sure all the "pro electricians and linemen that do all of their work on high energy circuits" would appreciate that.

The 80 series has never really been targeted at the high end industrial testing market.
They have the new 87V-MAX BTW:
https://www.fluke.com/en-au/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/87v-max
But I don't think any Fluke branded meter has a 1000V CAT IV rating.
And it's not just about the actual rating, it's also about confidence in the brand and work history, and how the meter performs in destructive overloads.
It could very well be the case were a better designed 600V CAT IV meter is actually safer than a lesser designed 1000V CAT IV meter. Even the likes of Joe's testing is nothing compared to what a meter may experience in true high energy failure scenario.
I think you'll have a hard time finding any industrial electrical person complaining that their Fluke 70 or 20 series meter isn't rugged and safe enough as-is.

[mansaxel]

I think that, as Dave writes above, Fluke has earned its reputation and following. Last week I unpacked my 5th Fluke, an ex-Swedish Army 8060A that cost me all of 15€ plus shipping. Fitted a new 9V battery, and as they say, Fluke sez Bam! (30mΩ off on that range is within stated accuracy, by far.)

Now, I am not the least surprised by the fact that by inclusion in a bigger corporation, there will be a focus on economical production and volume of sales. That is a natural consequence of management being recruited for expertise in capital gains vs performance gains. Of course one should not be surprised by comparatively small companies, pre-corporate-transition, having a more original product focus.

Also, if you look where Fluke aims their marketing (at least here in Sweden), it's at the electrical contractor / process automation market, who all of a sudden find that they must actually understand what they're doing and be able to document it.

That people whose focus area is best served by a precision bench DMM (because that is what electronics construction and tinkering probably would find most use for) then find the Fluke range less enticing is not entirely surprising.  Sure, the entry-level electronics tinkerer (they who just learned to build a hardware debouncer for their Arduino) will probably have a handheld meter, but that is -- in spirit -- mostly an intermediate step to the 3458A 

I think that the Savage recommendation is a sensible one.
Are there cheaper meters? Yes.
Is Fluke the best available? No.
Will it, in spite of that, still not kill the user while giving a sensible reading? Most certainly.

And final note on capacitance measurement. I have the Fluke 123, which was until the unscrupulous enablersfine people of the TEA thread made me ask for, and receive a DE-5000 as a birthday gift, was my only capacitance tester. It's somewhat crude, but it works. It with confidence identifies a broken motor capacitor, and that is probably its intended usage. Saved me from buying a new clothes dryer. 

[Fungus]

The fact remains you posted incorrect pricing and product information

Really? $449 is the price that comes up on Fluke USA's web page if I do a google search.



Fluke's 87V page says "TL75" on it for the supplied leads:

https://www.fluke.com/en/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/fluke-87v

 

[Fungus]

I think that, as Dave writes above, Fluke has earned its reputation and following

I don't believe anybody's denying that. The problem is that Fluke has changed from a "make the best meter possible" company into a "Milk them for the most profit" company.

Let's take the infamous 87V for example. Is there a single person here who can't think of a way to improve it?

eg. 9999 counts so that you have the same number of digits on screen when you're measuring 5V and when you're measuring 7V?

99 999 counts in high resolution mode?

A decent AC TRMS bandwidth - like the Fluke 8060A had in the 1970s and a [urlhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/recommendations-for-inexpensive-dmm-with-dbm-readout-at-audio-bandwidth/msg3497623/?topicseen#new]dBm scale[/url].

A way to power on in DC current mode by default, or at least not keep switching back to AC mode every time you move the selector. 

None of that changes the operation of the meter and can only enhance it's reputation.

I think that the Savage recommendation is a sensible one.

Me too. The Fluke 101 is a bargain for $40, even I've got one.

The 17B was designed to compete in the low price Asian market.

It's also carefully designed to not be able to compete with any of Flukes cash cows in the US of A.

Fluke used to make meters with TRMS and bar graphs in that price range but they phased them out. eg. this one:



Why would they stop making meters like that? ONly one reason I can think of - to stop taking sales away from more expensive meters.

I also have a really hard time believing that Fluke can't make a 17B with a decent continuity tester, etc. It's obviously bad on purpose.

[Wytnucls]

The 112 had a dismal bandwidth of 500Hz and lame resolution (1mV/10mA). Something more akin to the 101 series.

[tszaboo]

The 112 had a dismal bandwidth of 500Hz and lame resolution (1mV/10mA). Something more akin to the 101 series.

The 112 and 117 is targeted for electricians. There is nothing wrong with it, its just not for electronics.

I think that the Savage recommendation is a sensible one.

I have to agree. You could argue that there is the Brymen xxxx which is better for price, and the specifications is better. But there is the Fluke will be available in the local shop, and the Brymen likely not. And you can list a bunch of meters, people will only remember that it should be "the yellow one". And for Fluke, you can pick up practically any of the meters from today, or from 10 years ago, and it is likely going to be good enough.
And I like the fact that his specific recommendation is one without current measurement. I dont think absolute beginners, or people who are not interested in electronics, or children should have multimeters with current measurement. Or more than 2 input jacks.

[Fungus]

The 112 had a dismal bandwidth of 500Hz.

That's still more than the newer 17B.

You're missing the entire point though: Fluke has stopped trying. They have two or three cash cows in the west and two or three deliberately crippled meters in the east.

In the west they're even gouging customers who want decent leads with their flagship meter.

[Wytnucls]

I dont have sales figures for Fluke to know if these are hot sellers or not, but the company innovated somewhat with the 3000FC, several scope multimeters, the 279FC, 3000FC, 28II Ex and the 233.

As for the price gouging, that's par for the course in the real world.
Check the price of accessories for luxury cars.
In Europe the 87V comes standard with TL175 AFAIK

The Brymen 869 has been around for the best part of 12 years now. Not much has improved since then, not even an auto-hold feature, like on their latest models. No IP rating, NCV, or LoZ.
So Fluke is not an isolated case. Gossen has tried to freshen up their low range, but they are still quite expensive, with few redeeming features.

[joeqsmith]

Check the price for a Gossen magnetic hanger. 

[wizard69]

...


Why would they stop making meters like that? ONly one reason I can think of - to stop taking sales away from more expensive meters.

I also have a really hard time believing that Fluke can't make a 17B with a decent continuity tester, etc. It's obviously bad on purpose.

Probably because it is a feature few people use.   I can't even remember using a bar graph on a digital meter.   Like a lot of features people pine for it is more fluff than useful.

As for your other desires do realize that the target market really doesn't care!    They would rather buy a known quantity than to experiment with features they don't need.

There are plenty of fancy meters about, this one from AEMC: #MTX 3293B, is really interesting if a fancy display and a few extras are what you want.   However the price makes Fluke look like a discounter.    Further such a meter doesn't have a lot to offer the average Fluke user.    I don't deny that there are meters with more "functionality", rather that most of these features don't offer the Fluke user much incentive to switch.   

Now all of that said, yes it would be nice to see Fluke innovate or at least enhance its meters more.   Some things I'd love to see in a reasonably low cost meter:

• Larger displays, especially the main digits.
• Make that display bright.
• Backlight the dial and pushbuttons.  (yes i could use more light at work).   Or combine 1-3 here and implement a large touch screen.   Here is where conflicts come in, it is hard to beat the glove friendly nature of buttons and knobs.
• Implement an open Bluetooth communications facility.   More so make data collection dead simple!   It takes way to much time to setup classic systems to collect arbitrary data.   Fluke at otne time had a thermocouple based temperature monitor that could be set to simply stream out the meters readings to a serial port.   CSV files please.
• Do away with compatibility with any sort of Alkaline battery.   I don't really care if it is a primary cell solution or a rechargeable, I just don't want the temptation of leaking batteries in expensive meters anymore.
• If you are going to have the capability to monitor temperature make that capability totally independent of the other functions on the meter.   I generally find temperature ranges on handheld meters to be pretty useless if they require switching away from the meters other features.   This is why for the most part i prefer a separate meter for temperature monitoring.   As such I'm not even sure I'd make use of an independent channel for temperature monitoring.   The need to electrically isolate this feature would also likely drive up the cost so up in the air on this feature.
• Provide a flashlight function.   yeah working in the dark again
• Speaking of temperature, a display of ambient temperature would be useful.   This could be done cheaply with a silicon detector.
• Put a hole in the case for a reasonably size Carabiner or cordage.   Yeah I know making this not look like hell would be a challenge.   However safety is important and part of that means keeping things on a leash when working at heights.
• There is a lot to be said for solar power.   You may not have enough power available to run the unit but you could supplement a rechargeable battery and thus deal with the short run times rechargeables offer.   Beyond that a modern meter should use modern low power semiconductor technology which would benefit battery and the efficacy of solar.
• An output to drive a separate and VERY LOUD buzzer for continuity checking.   Either that or pair with and send beeps, to a Bluetooth connected head phones.  I have one primary use here and that is to aid in the debug of large loops of guard door switches.
• mathematics.   In this case the ability to apply a slope to the value being read.

In any event a quick list.   Note that many of these amount to "lets make existing functions more usable".   So yeah I have nothing against innovation, just make it something I can actually benefit from having.

[tooki]

Fluke is not the only reliable brand, Keysight and a few others do also get into that basket.
One parameter Fluke is very good at is a simple and easy to use meter. It is very difficult to find any other brand that can match it. That means if I had to send a couple of technicians out to measure some values I would give them Fluke meters (Not 287 or 289), because the risk of errors is lower than with other meters. The price of the meters is mostly insignificant, people are much more expensive.
This is not the same as saying that Fluke is the best brand, I seldom use a Fluke meter at home, even though I have a couple.

Keysight handheld meters are in no way as robust as Flukes. They’re not designed as well, and they’re not built as well. You get more features for your money, but it comes at a cost. Fluke meters generally stay in-spec for decades. One of my Keysight handhelds had drifted out of calibration while new in box. (I got it for peanuts so I was OK with it.) Joe mentioned a knob breaking. Not to mention the extremely widespread display failures on the OLED models.

There are other brands of meters that truly compete with Fluke in the industrial markets where reliability is paramount. Think Gossen, Chauvin Arnoux, Hioki.

[tooki]

• Speaking of temperature, a display of ambient temperature would be useful.   This could be done cheaply with a silicon detector.

Switch to temperature mode (with no thermocouple) and short the probes. Voila, ambient temperature.

The 87V actually has two internal temperature sensors already: the cold junction compensation sensor (the one that reads the ambient shown in the process above), and a thermistor that automatically adjusts display contrast.

[tooki]

If you have a specific technical issue with a specific Fluke product, simply state the facts so we are aware of it.

Let's start with "Why hasn't the 87V been upgraded to CAT IV 1000V like the Brymens have?". I'm sure all the "pro electricians and linemen that do all of their work on high energy circuits" would appreciate that.

Instead we find them fitting cheaper fuses in the latest models, visible tracks on the PCB after less than 100 cycles of the selector and missing o-rings (QC issues)?

Littelfuse fuses are not lower quality than Bussmann, and I actually don’t think they’re any cheaper, generally speaking. I’m pretty sure Fluke has used both brands for a long time, even if they mostly use Bussmann.

Initial scuffing of the selector contacts is perfectly normal. The question is, how does it hold up to 10 years of heavy use?

[EEVblog]

I think that, as Dave writes above, Fluke has earned its reputation and following

I don't believe anybody's denying that. The problem is that Fluke has changed from a "make the best meter possible" company into a "Milk them for the most profit" company.
Let's take the infamous 87V for example. Is there a single person here who can't think of a way to improve it?

Who says they have to improve something that's been an industry standard for 35 years?
Also, big companies like this are slow and hesitant to make changes. Take my GSM video that exposed an issue with the 87V, it took then 12 months to come out with a fix for it. I asked then why it took so long and they said something along the lines of "We like to take our time and make sure it's done right, and changing an industry standard product is a big deal".
They are up to v5 so it's not like they haven't changed it. But it's like Keysight and their scopes, the Megazoom IV ASIC is now something like 11 years old and it's still selling.

But maybe the real reason why they haven't changed the 87-V since it's release in 2004 is because their big customers don't want them to change it.
Heck Fluke is the company that had to introduce the dumbed down 27-II that didn't have True RMS because their military customers demanded it because countless test procedures had already been produced around the previous model.

Fluke is a company that has a different focus to more consumer oriented companies.

[Analog4]

....The saying was:- "It's a Fluke if it works!"....The first handheld DMMs we had were Beckman (or " Beckperson" as we called'em).....

At work, we used to say that about the Fluke 8000A back in 1978...."It's a Fluke if it works!"

I still have the first digital multimeter I purchased (Beckman DM20) .  My old Lafayette VOM died years ago.

I generally trust my old Fluke 70 more than the Beckman DM20. I think a Greenlee DM860 may be in my future.

[tszaboo]

Who says they have to improve something that's been an industry standard for 35 years?
Also, big companies like this are slow and hesitant to make changes. Take my GSM video that exposed an issue with the 87V, it took then 12 months to come out with a fix for it. I asked then why it took so long and they said something along the lines of "We like to take our time and make sure it's done right, and changing an industry standard product is a big deal".
They are up to v5 so it's not like they haven't changed it. But it's like Keysight and their scopes, the Megazoom IV ASIC is now something like 11 years old and it's still selling.

Yes, this "change it right now" seems to be very 21 century thinking.
The company receives feedback. They write it down, write a change request. If there are plenty of them, they review them and maybe they get implemented. It's not software, you cannot change already shipped products. And sometimes you just have to take a step back, and say:
"I hear you, but the product is actually good enough in our opinion, so we are not going to change it, despite your valid criticism."

[J-R]

There are Fluke and reseller kits available with different accessories included.  Fluke typically sells at list price although currently they are having a sale on some products.  I'm not sure why anyone in 2021 would not check around for the best deal.

$441.99 "Industrial Electrician Combo Kit" https://www.amazon.com/Fluke-87V-E2-Industrial-Electrician/dp/B000TKPRFO
$439.99 "Multimeter VIP Kit" https://www.transcat.com/brand/fluke-store/fluke-digital-multimeters/fluke-87-5-vip-fluke-87-5
$349.88 "87V/E2" https://www.ebay.com/itm/FLUKE-87V-E2-Industrial-Electrician-Combo-Kit-UGLY-BOX-SPECIAL/124607102254

[tooki]

I think that, as Dave writes above, Fluke has earned its reputation and following

I don't believe anybody's denying that. The problem is that Fluke has changed from a "make the best meter possible" company into a "Milk them for the most profit" company.
Let's take the infamous 87V for example. Is there a single person here who can't think of a way to improve it?

Who says they have to improve something that's been an industry standard for 35 years?
Also, big companies like this are slow and hesitant to make changes. Take my GSM video that exposed an issue with the 87V, it took then 12 months to come out with a fix for it. I asked then why it took so long and they said something along the lines of "We like to take our time and make sure it's done right, and changing an industry standard product is a big deal".
They are up to v5 so it's not like they haven't changed it. But it's like Keysight and their scopes, the Megazoom IV ASIC is now something like 11 years old and it's still selling.

But maybe the real reason why they haven't changed the 87-V since it's release in 2004 is because their big customers don't want them to change it.
Heck Fluke is the company that had to introduce the dumbed down 27-II that didn't have True RMS because their military customers demanded it because countless test procedures had already been produced around the previous model.

Fluke is a company that has a different focus to more consumer oriented companies.

Totally agree. It boggles my mind how some people struggle to understand that change for the sake of change isn’t actually a virtue. And that change causes a domino effect of costs in many situations.

[Fungus]

Who says they have to improve something that's been an industry standard for 35 years?

Obviously they don't have to do it.

Totally agree. It boggles my mind how some people struggle to understand that change for the sake of change isn’t actually a virtue.

What's the alternative? Never change, still be producing the exact same 87V 100 years from now?

That's the mentality that boggles my mind - that even a once-per decade feature refresh is unthinkable.

(Yeah, yeah, the "87V Max"...)

Imagine it's 2015 and Fluke releases the 87VI with 9999/99999 counts, 200MHz TRMS bandwidth and it autoranges twice as fast.

Small changes that won't affect any procedures or manuals unless they rely on getting "wrong" measurements (eg. when measuring a 20kHz signal).

Are you saying you wouldn't want one?

I'm calling bullshit on that.

I'm betting that a lot of people around here would buy one just to get the faster autoranging.

I'd also bet a lot of money that Fluke could release a decent $200 meter and all those entrenched contracts, procedures and manuals would suddenly start being reevaluated.

Bottom line: It's the Fluke name and yellow color that counts, not the exact technical specs of the meters.


PS: A lot of the richest companies in the world are built around "change for change's sake", eg. Apple, Microsoft, Google, Auto makers...