Good multimeter for Industrial use at work (Fluke alternatives)

[MerlijnD]

Hello everyone,

I work at a company that develops and manufacturs diesel rotary ups units. I myself work at service as a work preparator and manage the tools that our service technicians use at the customer.
We use Fluke 87v's and 287's; but they are very expensive here in the Netherlands. We are not bound to using Fluke's; i've looked at the DMM table and some video's but i'm missing important info about durability.

Our electrical engineers use their multimeter extensively during commisioning and annual maintenance. They handle them with normal care but they get dropped sometimes. They use more advanced features aswell and prefer a display that is able to display frequency and voltage at the same time.

Our mechanical engineers use their multimeter to check for safety and basic voltages, these multimeters get greasy, oily and more manhandled.

I was wondering if you people have any alternatives to Fluke for this type of work which are cheaper but offer the same features and are also durable/rugged? It must also have the option to attach a magnetic hanger.
Thanks for your time 

Greetings,
Merlijn

[Tomorokoshi]

1. Do the meters have a regular calibration schedule?

2. Let's say the cost of a Fluke is $1000, and the cost of an alternative is $100. It only takes one failure event to lose this savings.

3. I have used both Fluke and non-Fluke meters. I have had failures with both and great reliability with both.

4. Do you trust the certifications of the meters and any assorted test leads and accessories?

[Fungus]

Take a look at Brymen's industrial range (the square looking ones). The "industrial" meters have recessed screens, etc.. for extra toughness.

https://brymen.eu/product-category/multimeters/page/2/

Joe has tested Brymens with various solvents in his robustness videos, they all passed.

Brymens are also rated for drops, etc.

A BM857s will match a Fluke 87V on most specs for 160 Euros.

If you don't need such precision you can get a safe, decent meter for under 100 Euros, eg. the BM907s.

You can get calibrated Brymens from welectron, eg: https://www.welectron.com/Brymen-BM857s-Multimeter_1

[jonpaul]

In an industrial work on large mains machines and UPS, with voltages like 230V..480V, and currents of 100s A, I would not trust a consumer Chinese meter, poor safety and compliance and not robust.

Our Fluke meters last decades and have dropproof rubber enclosures and meet all safety specs.  You may find some used in great condition on eBay,or local classifieds sites.

Other good brands in EU old Philips, French Metrix (?), US Kline, Keithley, etc.

See  Transmission and Distribution magazine for professional utility equipment

Bon courage

Jon

[MerlijnD]

Yes, they are calibrated every year.

Certification and safety is very important. By cheaper I mean a max of 400-500 euro per multimeter.

[BillyO]

2. Let's say the cost of a Fluke is $1000, and the cost of an alternative is $100. It only takes one failure event to lose this savings.

You might want to expand on your math.  If one casts $1000 and the other cost $100, then the cheaper one only needs to last 1/10 the time before the saving are lost.  Do you have another consideration you are factoring in that we don't know about?

US Kline

Do Kline actually make any of their meters?

To the OP:  Brymen's top level meters generally meet all the same specs as Fluke and are also independently certified by the same people (UL)  to meet those specs.  I would suggest getting a couple and trying them out.  See for yourself how they stand up.

[Fungus]

To the OP:  Brymen's top level meters generally meet all the same specs as Fluke and are also independently certified by the same people (UL)  to meet those specs.  I would suggest getting a couple and trying them out.  See for yourself how they stand up.

This.

Next time you need to order a Fluke, order three Brymens instead and see how they "measure(ahem) up".

You could even deliberately try to break one of them. 

[Fungus]

In an industrial work on large mains machines and UPS, with voltages like 230V..480V, and currents of 100s A, I would not trust a consumer Chinese meter, poor safety and compliance and not robust.

The world has more than just "Fluke" and "Chinese consumer" meters in it.

Our Fluke meters last decades and have dropproof rubber enclosures and meet all safety specs.  You may find some used in great condition on eBay,or local classifieds sites.

If safety is important then you shouldn't be buying anything second hand through unknown channels.

(would you buy a used climbing rope on eBay?)

[Tomorokoshi]

2. Let's say the cost of a Fluke is $1000, and the cost of an alternative is $100. It only takes one failure event to lose this savings.

You might want to expand on your math.  If one casts $1000 and the other cost $100, then the cheaper one only needs to last 1/10 the time before the saving are lost.  Do you have another consideration you are factoring in that we don't know about?

US Kline

Do Kline actually make any of their meters?

To the OP:  Brymen's top level meters generally meet all the same specs as Fluke and are also independently certified by the same people (UL)  to meet those specs.  I would suggest getting a couple and trying them out.  See for yourself how they stand up.

We can consider the total costs of a failure in the field. Feel free to propose other numbers.
1. Starting with the savings: $900
2. The cost of one replacement: $100
3. The cost of getting a replacement ordered. An hour or two of office time: $100
4. The opportunity cost of waiting for the replacement to arrive. A couple days of lower-priority work: $500
5. The opportunity cost of having the technician without the tool at the customer. A few hours of field time: $500
6. The downtime cost at the customer if the technician can't get work done: $500 (Depends greatly on the situation. Could be multiples of this amount.)
7. The cost of reputation, etc.: ?

The point being that the line-item cost difference is easily noticed and accounted for, while difficult to identify costs don't enter into the accounting. For instance, is it trivially easy to purchase the new meter, or does a purchase requisition have to get filled out, get approval, go to Purchasing, wait for delivery, etc. That differential is difficult to measure, but it shows up as an indistinct "tax" or drag on efficiency and productivity.

[Fungus]

We can consider the total costs of a failure in the field. Feel free to propose other numbers.
1. Starting with the savings: $900
2. The cost of one replacement: $100
3. The cost of getting a replacement ordered. An hour or two of office time: $100
4. The opportunity cost of waiting for the replacement to arrive. A couple days of lower-priority work: $500
5. The opportunity cost of having the technician without the tool at the customer. A few hours of field time: $500
6. The downtime cost at the customer if the technician can't get work done: $500 (Depends greatly on the situation. Could be multiples of this amount.)

All of that applies to Flukes, too. 

Flukes aren't more expensive because they're more reliable, they're more expensive because they're yellow and recognizable.

[jonpaul]

Does the OP REALLY need all the logging and graphics and interface of the 287?

The downsides are bulky batteries, slow boot up and fragile large TFT screen, easy to break


For UPS><rotation machines, I would think a simple DVM CAT II or CAT III rated  for the V and I max, eg 1000 VAC VDC and 10..20A will suffice at a fraction of the cst.

I sometime  find bargains at ebay, LeBonCoin, ham fleas that are old meters new in the box.

CORRECTION: Kline/Milwalkie are just line hot testes and clamp on ammeters. No real DVMs.

Jon

All our good one are Fluke, a few old Keithley.

For 50 yrs the analog Simpson 260 has been an industry warhorse as well as the somewhat rarer Triplett 630

[Tomorokoshi]

We can consider the total costs of a failure in the field. Feel free to propose other numbers.
1. Starting with the savings: $900
2. The cost of one replacement: $100
3. The cost of getting a replacement ordered. An hour or two of office time: $100
4. The opportunity cost of waiting for the replacement to arrive. A couple days of lower-priority work: $500
5. The opportunity cost of having the technician without the tool at the customer. A few hours of field time: $500
6. The downtime cost at the customer if the technician can't get work done: $500 (Depends greatly on the situation. Could be multiples of this amount.)

All of that applies to Flukes, too. 

Flukes aren't more expensive because they're more reliable, they're more expensive because they're yellow and recognizable.

Possibly; but the proposition was that one could by a number of other meters and balance the cost when they fail. The meters are not used in standard conditions, so it's difficult to develop a statistical model of failures. For instance, if an organization had 2000 meters in active use, 1000 each of Fluke and some other meter, and they had certain replacement rates, then one could run some actuarial math and determine the best overall value. This becomes more difficult as the number of units becomes low and the usage conditions are varied.

Therefore, one is limited to a certain amount of reliance on reputation, internet stories, and internet claims - of all kinds.

[coromonadalix]

the 287 and 289 are in no ways industrial meters  loll

you had this one
https://www.tequipment.net/Fluke87V-EX.html

replaced by
https://www.tequipment.net/Fluke28IIEX-ETL.html

Absolutely not in the prices ranges you want

[BillyO]

Therefore, one is limited to a certain amount of reliance on reputation, internet stories, and internet claims - of all kinds.

That's why I suggested the OP buy a Brymen and try it out.  Minimal cost .. actual experience .. can't beat that

[MerlijnD]

About the datalogging on the 287; is it needed? No, some very experienced engineers might use it but very very rarely.

I will have a look at the Brymens; which one should I try out? The 867/869 has the option for two measurements at once I saw in the excel sheet. They are also very cheap. Or the 839?
And maybe try out the rugged brymen for the mechanical people; and the more advanced version for electrical engineers.

We have dedicated amp meters for unit load testing; >3600kva

Is Uni-T even worth looking at?

[BeBuLamar]

If I were the OP I wouldn't want to try to save money. I don't want to piss off the engineers. I may buy other brands other than Fluke like Gossen, Yokogawa etc.. I know that those meters along with Fluke offer little over the cheaper ones for the money but I wouldn't want to save a buck in this case.

[bdunham7]

Is Uni-T even worth looking at?

The top Brymen models are probably adequate, but if you are going to offer your engineers and techs non-Fluke instruments you will probably hear about it.  And if you offer them Uni-T, you'll likely be drawn and quartered. 

What is motivating you to do this change?

[MerlijnD]

I cannot explain the why in much regard.

But this is for us the best time to look into alternatives because:

Fluke's double measurement on 1 display is extremely expensive but the most used/requested feature for vfds and or generator mains failure frequency verification etc.
The fact that we keep extra stock and loan sets when their main equipment is being calibrated. (All our current loan sets are old and broken and some of the engineers main fluke stuff is breaking down as well. Current replacement stock in-office is zero).

I've seen a couple people mention Yogokawa; we use alot of their equipment in office and in other parts of our business.

[Black Phoenix]

The Yokogawa TY530 is the same model as the Kyoritsu 1051, same as the Yokogawa TY720 is the Kyoritsu 1061 if the memory doesn't fail me.

This last 2 have logging capacity.

[bdunham7]

The fact that we keep extra stock and loan sets when their main equipment is being calibrated. (All our current loan sets are old and broken and some of the engineers main fluke stuff is breaking down as well. Current replacement stock in-office is zero).

You could start by acquiring a couple of Brymens or whatever you are considering and setting up your loan sets with those.  Then you'll get some feedback that may help determine how acceptable they would be as a general replacement.

[Fungus]

I will have a look at the Brymens; which one should I try out? The 867/869 has the option for two measurements at once I saw in the excel sheet.

And maybe try out the rugged brymen for the mechanical people; and the more advanced version for electrical engineers.

The 869s is Brymen's top model. It's one of the best meters available and has CAT IV 1000V safety rating (higher than any Fluke) and has dual display, eg. voltage/frequency simultaneously. The screen is a bit too exposed to throw it in a toolbox though.

The 859s is their top "industrial" meter.

Both models have cheaper versions without temperature and less TRMS bandwidth.

Start with the 869s - it's obviously bigger than a Fluke and has dual display so it will be easier to "sell" to engineers. After that you can get some of the less flashy 857s for situations where a simpler meter that can take more abuse is indicated.

Is Uni-T even worth looking at?

Absolutely not.

If I were the OP I wouldn't want to try to save money. I don't want to piss off the engineers.

This is also true. Brymen have earned their reputation on EEVBLOG but the rest of the world doesn't know much about them. The engineers might feel you're trying to pinch pennies at their expense if they've got used to yellow meters and you give them something that isn't yellow.

[nightfire]

Alternatives to Fluke regarding safety and reliability? Aaaand a calibration structure behind them? Gossen Metrawatt comes to mind, but they are usually more expensive than Fluke- or maybe one of the newer models has some useful features to it than the existing Fluke meters. Also Hioki looks nice, but I have no first-hand experience with them.

[daisizhou]

Look at this one, the latest may be 27.Note that 27 is not equal to 27/FM.
I think 27/FM is the only one if you consider durability.Because the latest 27ii or 28ii are not as good as 27/FM, you can check the 27/FM shell or dial switch.Shock resistance is key

[Specmaster]

Dam, the quoting system has gone down again, so I'll have to cut and copy and hope that you all can catch my drift.

    Quote from: Tomorokoshi on Yesterday at 02:42:55 pm

        2. Let's say the cost of a Fluke is $1000, and the cost of an alternative is $100. It only takes one failure event to lose this savings.

    You might want to expand on your math.  If one casts $1000 and the other cost $100, then the cheaper one only needs to last 1/10 the time before the saving are lost.  Do you have another consideration you are factoring in that we don't know about?


    Quote from: jonpaul on Yesterday at 03:05:16 pm

        US Kline

    Do Kline actually make any of their meters?

    To the OP:  Brymen's top level meters generally meet all the same specs as Fluke and are also independently certified by the same people (UL)  to meet those specs.  I would suggest getting a couple and trying them out.  See for yourself how they stand up.


We can consider the total costs of a failure in the field. Feel free to propose other numbers.
1. Starting with the savings: $900
2. The cost of one replacement: $100
3. The cost of getting a replacement ordered. An hour or two of office time: $100
4. The opportunity cost of waiting for the replacement to arrive. A couple days of lower-priority work: $500
5. The opportunity cost of having the technician without the tool at the customer. A few hours of field time: $500
6. The downtime cost at the customer if the technician can't get work done: $500 (Depends greatly on the situation. Could be multiples of this amount.)
7. The cost of reputation, etc.: ?

The point being that the line-item cost difference is easily noticed and accounted for, while difficult to identify costs don't enter into the accounting. For instance, is it trivially easy to purchase the new meter, or does a purchase requisition have to get filled out, get approval, go to Purchasing, wait for delivery, etc. That differential is difficult to measure, but it shows up as an indistinct "tax" or drag on efficiency and productivity.


Surely then it makes perfect sense with the high costs attached to meter failure and the lower purchase price of the excellent Brymen 867/869 meters that you could comfortably afford to order in a few extra meters to allow for such unlikely events? That way, if and when you do happen to get a failure, issue another one from stock and start the process of ordering a replacement so that will always have a small float of meters to hand for emergency use and still be way under the cost of getting new Fluke meters.  I have both Flukes and Brymen meters but only the Brymen has the CAT IV, 1,000V rating, and that is the meter I use for almost all of my measurements, it also has dual display and the barograph and can be retrofitted with data logging feature for those that really need it.
 

[nightfire]

One thing to add: In which environment are those UPS used? If they feed into some main distribution cabinet of a sufficient size and short circuit potential, you are easily in a CAT IV zone- and then there is a limited choice of manufacturers I would trust. And then, including yearly cal and needed turnaround times, Fluke sometimes offers good longterm value, all costs added over a longer time.

[Fungus]

One thing to add: In which environment are those UPS used? If they feed into some main distribution cabinet of a sufficient size and short circuit potential, you are easily in a CAT IV zone- and then there is a limited choice of manufacturers I would trust.

In that case a CAT IV 1000V BM869 would be a step up from the Flukes they're currently using...

[BeBuLamar]

Brymen may be just as good or better but if I work for your company and you provide me with Brymen I won't be happy.

[MerlijnD]

Brymen may be just as good or better but if I work for your company and you provide me with Brymen I won't be happy.

Why not?

[MerlijnD]

One thing to add: In which environment are those UPS used? If they feed into some main distribution cabinet of a sufficient size and short circuit potential, you are easily in a CAT IV zone- and then there is a limited choice of manufacturers I would trust. And then, including yearly cal and needed turnaround times, Fluke sometimes offers good longterm value, all costs added over a longer time.

Yes all mains goes through the UPS by ride through method.  And yes; during maintenance/repairs/overhauls main distribution gets touched but supplies are de-energized and switched through switching procedures. Multimeters are mostly used for cabinet work (LV).

[AVGresponding]

Brymen may be just as good or better but if I work for your company and you provide me with Brymen I won't be happy.

Why not?

Presumably because Fluke have a proven track record in industrial grade TE and Brymen don't, yet.

The scariest thing about working on serious UPS systems for me was always the battery strings; you get a short within the string (fuses are normally only at the ends) on a big one and it can be spectacular, loud, and very dangerous. I don't envy anyone that has to work on modern ones with big lithium strings.

We were always issued with Fluke meters, (I had an 83 and a 95), and though I'm a Fluke fanboy still (too many to list, but 87V daily at work and 289 daily at home), but I also really like my Brymen 869S, it's a damn good bit of kit, and I'd be happy to trust it at work if I didn't already have the F87V.

[Monkeh]

Brymen may be just as good or better but if I work for your company and you provide me with Brymen I won't be happy.

Being proud of irrational bias is not a good look. An engineer who can't make a judgement on the suitability of a tool based on any metric but name and price is not an engineer worth hiring.

[MerlijnD]

Brymen may be just as good or better but if I work for your company and you provide me with Brymen I won't be happy.

Why not?

Presumably because Fluke have a proven track record in industrial grade TE and Brymen don't, yet.

The scariest thing about working on serious UPS systems for me was always the battery strings; you get a short within the string (fuses are normally only at the ends) on a big one and it can be spectacular, loud, and very dangerous. I don't envy anyone that has to work on modern ones with big lithium strings.

We were always issued with Fluke meters, (I had an 83 and a 95), and though I'm a Fluke fanboy still (too many to list, but 87V daily at work and 289 daily at home), but I also really like my Brymen 869S, it's a damn good bit of kit, and I'd be happy to trust it at work if I didn't already have the F87V.

We don't do lithium, its kinetic. (DRUPS - Diesel Rotary uninterruptible power supply)

[bdunham7]

Being proud of irrational bias is not a good look. An engineer who can't make a judgement on the suitability of a tool based on any metric but name and price is not an engineer worth hiring.

It's not irrational to factor in decades of experience with a product and a company or even to value those things more highly than advertised specs and low cost.  Then there is the secondary matter of workflow and procedures, where any change may cause an issue at some point.  Fluke's tradition of continuing particular models as long as possible (and sometimes even longer than you'd think possible) is a big plus for many customers. 

[Swake]

My 2 cents

Brymen BM235: Always in the car with me. It is small & cheap. If it gets broken or stolen I don't care about the cost. Incredible price/function ratio. check out the VFD function. I feel comfortable poking around in smaller 3x400V systems. Note that I have upgraded the test leads.

Brymen BM869s: My Fluke 289 is too expensive to be taken on the road all the time, so I wanted to try this Brymen. Have it only a couple of months and it just doesn't feel the same as a nice Fluke. I still grab the Fluke sometimes to cross check what the Brymen BM869s is telling me... It is relatively slow and has too many features to be handy actually. Hold function is a joke. The display is very bright, way better that any Fluke (shame on you Fluke). The beeper is too loud inside the house, it hurts my ears. I know this all is subjective and personal taste, but it is what it is. On a budget I take the Brymen.

Fluke 83: Its over 25 years old now. Never failed me except ones when I had to clean the zebra strips within the display. Still reads within spec as on the first day. Frequently spends cold and humid nights outside. Still my first set of leads and only the 5th battery or so! Merits retirement.... Should sell it for a newer one, it's not even an RMS meter... but I can't, it became a love affair, it trusts me as much as I trust it.

Fluke 289: Broken battery tab just after the warranty ran out. Come on.... Its sooo frequent that the Chinese make clones for those tabs... Devours batteries. 8 years in service and still spot on. I know that what is on the screen is the right thing. Slow start-up and worthless screen contrast and backlight. This is the meter I grab when the number 3 positions behind the comma is important. It is not fragile but certainly not rugged either.

Fluke T5-1000: My goto for quick electrics works. I didn't purchase it and would never have till a friend offered me one and I started using it. This thing is perfect if you only have 2 hands and no room to hang or lay down a classic meter. Pouch on the belt is handy too.

Every couple of years these meters are being checked to see if V/I/F is still within spec. Check is done against a standard in a lab but it is not a calibration (too expensive and not required in my case). Any meter that is out of spec is thrown out as I wouldn't trust it anymore in the field or for daily use.

Conclusion: If on a budget take the Brymen BM235; If you really need a double display go for the BM869s. If the brand, inherent trust and having a million features is important go for the Fluke 287/289.

[MerlijnD]

My 2 cents

Brymen BM235: Always in the car with me. It is small & cheap. If it gets broken or stolen I don't care about the cost. Incredible price/function ratio. check out the VFD function. I feel comfortable poking around in smaller 3x400V systems. Note that I have upgraded the test leads.

Brymen BM869s: My Fluke 289 is too expensive to be taken on the road all the time, so I wanted to try this Brymen. Have it only a couple of months and it just doesn't feel the same as a nice Fluke. I still grab the Fluke sometimes to cross check what the Brymen BM869s is telling me... It is relatively slow and has too many features to be handy actually. Hold function is a joke. The display is very bright, way better that any Fluke (shame on you Fluke). The beeper is too loud inside the house, it hurts my ears. I know this all is subjective and personal taste, but it is what it is. On a budget I take the Brymen.

Fluke 83: Its over 25 years old now. Never failed me except ones when I had to clean the zebra strips within the display. Still reads within spec as on the first day. Frequently spends cold and humid nights outside. Still my first set of leads and only the 5th battery or so! Merits retirement.... Should sell it for a newer one, it's not even an RMS meter... but I can't, it became a love affair, it trusts me as much as I trust it.

Fluke 289: Broken battery tab just after the warranty ran out. Come on.... Its sooo frequent that the Chinese make clones for those tabs... Devours batteries. 8 years in service and still spot on. I know that what is on the screen is the right thing. Slow start-up and worthless screen contrast and backlight. This is the meter I grab when the number 3 positions behind the comma is important. It is not fragile but certainly not rugged either.

Fluke T5-1000: My goto for quick electrics works. I didn't purchase it and would never have till a friend offered me one and I started using it. This thing is perfect if you only have 2 hands and no room to hang or lay down a classic meter. Pouch on the belt is handy too.

Every couple of years these meters are being checked to see if V/I/F is still within spec. Check is done against a standard in a lab but it is not a calibration (too expensive and not required in my case). Any meter that is out of spec is thrown out as I wouldn't trust it anymore in the field or for daily use.

Conclusion: If on a budget take the Brymen BM235; If you really need a double display go for the BM869s. If the brand, inherent trust and having a million features is important go for the Fluke 287/289.

Thanks for your insights!!

[HKJ]

My 2 cents

Interesting.
I love Fluke meters, there range switch is clearly marked and it is very obvious how to use the meter. No other brand are close to the simplicity and reliability of Fluke (289 not included). But you have to pay for it.
The Brymen meters looks much more complicated when looking on the range switch, but in practical usage they are just as good (or maybe better) than Fluke.

If you ask me for a simple but reliable meter I would recommend Fluke, but if you ask me for a good meter at a reasonable price I would say Brymen. There are many other brands that may get into the equation, but Fluke and Brymen are good examples of the corners:
Fluke: High price and very reliable.
Brymen. Fairly low price and reliable, but only a few years history (A few years is more than 5 years).
Both pass independent test, i.e. no inflated claims.

I am conservative enough to have a couple of Flukes and rate them as my most reliable meters, but I do use Brymen, probably more often than Fluke, except when I need a reliably measurement above all.
The takeaway: If you have enough money and want the most reliable meter, get a Fluke. In other cases Brymen is the best option (I got both and a couple more).

[Bud]

Where do you send your Brymen for repairs? Within 15 seconds I located a Fluke repair center in Canada. There is no "Brymen Canada" service  center per se.
Literally each and ever electrical supplier and even hobby shops here sell Fluke. To buy a Brymen I have to go sh!t knows where, Europe or may be US at best and the pray it does not break, since there is no place to send it to for repair or replacement.

[Monkeh]

Where do you send your Brymen for repairs? Within 15 seconds I located a Fluke repair center in Canada. There is no "Brymen Canada" service  center per se.
Literally each and ever electrical supplier and even hobby shops here sell Fluke. To buy a Brymen I have to go sh!t knows where, Europe or may be US at best and the pray it does not break, since there is no place to send it to for repair or replacement.

Third world troubles.

[HKJ]

Where do you send your Brymen for repairs? Within 15 seconds I located a Fluke repair center in Canada. There is no "Brymen Canada" service  center per se.
Literally each and ever electrical supplier and even hobby shops here sell Fluke. To buy a Brymen I have to go sh!t knows where, Europe or may be US at best and the pray it does not break, since there is no place to send it to for repair or replacement.

From my point of view you never send a meter for repair, you buy a new one. That may sound silly, but repair prices today is too high to repair a multimeter. With Fluke you pay for multiple meters when you buy it and they can simply send you a new meter.

The Brymen brand is not sold in US, because Greenlee has a agreement with them. I.e. look for Geenlee when you want a Brymen. The caveat is that Greenlee adds a healthy margin to the price. Also be aware that not all Greenlee meters are Brymen. I believe it is cheaper to buy a Brymen in Europe and pay shipping to US.

[BeBuLamar]

Where do you send your Brymen for repairs? Within 15 seconds I located a Fluke repair center in Canada. There is no "Brymen Canada" service  center per se.
Literally each and ever electrical supplier and even hobby shops here sell Fluke. To buy a Brymen I have to go sh!t knows where, Europe or may be US at best and the pray it does not break, since there is no place to send it to for repair or replacement.

From my point of view you never send a meter for repair, you buy a new one. That may sound silly, but repair prices today is too high to repair a multimeter. With Fluke you pay for multiple meters when you buy it and they can simply send you a new meter.

The Brymen brand is not sold in US, because Greenlee has a agreement with them. I.e. look for Geenlee when you want a Brymen. The caveat is that Greenlee adds a healthy margin to the price. Also be aware that not all Greenlee meters are Brymen. I believe it is cheaper to buy a Brymen in Europe and pay shipping to US.

I sent a 5 years old Fluke 287 that someone abused it and knocked the dial off the meter to Fluke for repair. They didn't repair it but gave me a brand new meter free.

[rsjsouza]

Just one aspect in favour of Brymens is that a very reputable tools supplier in the USA (Greenlee) has been using their rebranded meters in OEM and features lifetime warranty. This partnership comes from more than one generation of Brymen's product line and the first I saw was at least ten years ago. That debunks the myth that Brymens do not have a track record as well - a higher failure rate would probably not make Greenlee move to a second generation of products from the same OEM.

As for my own experience, I have a 2003-built Brymen BM857 that sees heavy use for ten years and is still accurate and solid as a rock. I recently got a smaller Greenlee DM-200A (Brymen BM251) that is extremely well built.

For the industrial segment, the only Uni-T that I would consider (with heaps of caution) is the UT195 family, with a small window for the UT139C. But track record of their models is quite poor.

Klein meters are rugged and survive quite the abuse - despite I have never used one, I have seen many in quite rough shape but still very accurate and still felt mechanically sound. They are also a reputable brand of tools in the US. They seem an original design and not an OEM.

Good luck with your procurement!

[Tomorokoshi]

In case you hadn't noticed it, there are two pinned threads specifically about multimeters:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/multimeter-spreadsheet/

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/a-list-of-multimeters-that-do-not-appear-to-meet-their-claimed-safety-specs/

[james_s]

How much do the Fluke meters cost over there? How much is the salary of one of the people using the meters? There are other good meters out there besides Fluke, but none of the ones I'd trust to use on industrial equipment is cheap. How much is the life of one of your technicians or engineers worth?

[BillyO]

How much do the Fluke meters cost over there? How much is the salary of one of the people using the meters? There are other good meters out there besides Fluke, but none of the ones I'd trust to use on industrial equipment is cheap. How much is the life of one of your technicians or engineers worth?

Point taken.

But let me play devil's advocate.  Can you provide a link or a citation to any kind of a record or an article of or about someone being killed by their modern multimeter in the last decade?  I have done Google searches and can't come up with anything, but may not be all that good at it.  In fact I usually suck at it.  I'd be interested to understand the circumstances.

[bdunham7]

Can you provide a link or a citation to any kind of a record or an article of or about someone being killed by their modern multimeter in the last decade?

Links in this post.  Not quite killed (in this case) and not Brymen, but CEM rebadged as a USA brand.  This is what a long-time Fluke user that isn't a multimeter enthusiast is going to worry about.  THey aren't going to know the difference between CEM, UNI-T and Brymen.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hear-kitty-kitty-kitty-nope-not-that-kind-of-cat/msg3714598/#msg3714598

[Tomorokoshi]

Can you provide a link or a citation to any kind of a record or an article of or about someone being killed by their modern multimeter in the last decade?

Links in this post.  Not quite killed (in this case) and not Brymen, but CEM rebadged as a USA brand.  This is what a long-time Fluke user that isn't a multimeter enthusiast is going to worry about.  THey aren't going to know the difference between CEM, UNI-T and Brymen.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hear-kitty-kitty-kitty-nope-not-that-kind-of-cat/msg3714598/#msg3714598

Wow! That case is an overflowing helping of screw-up. Not even sure where to begin. Non-Ex equipment in a mine? Basically defining Southwire as a hardware store? Forget it, Jake, it's Kentucky.

Hence, from my original response:

4. Do you trust the certifications of the meters and any assorted test leads and accessories?

[mendip_discovery]

One of the things you might want to look at and add to your shopping list is your accuracy requirements. They measure stuff on the UPS and that has a specification, so you need a meter that meets/beats that spec. Use it to help remove meters that are cheap but no way would be suitable for the job.

Sadly I have found through the amount of meters I calibrate that the fluke meters just work. They tend to keep within spec year after year. Yes they do break but not at the rate the others do.

Though many of my customers have swapped over the years to cheaper brands as they just needed to save money and the ease of next day delivery of a RS Pro meter does make a difference. Plus many of then realised that the meters arent used for precision measurments or they spend most of thier time as a continuity tester.

[iet]

At work I use different FLUKE multimeters. And for my home lab I use the PC Work PCW02 multimeter I bought last week. It is not expensive and I am satisfied with all the functions.
https://pcworktools.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/pcw02a-user-manual-digital-multimeter-pcwork.pdf

[AVGresponding]

Just one aspect in favour of Brymens is that a very reputable tools supplier in the USA (Greenlee) has been using their rebranded meters in OEM and features lifetime warranty. This partnership comes from more than one generation of Brymen's product line and the first I saw was at least ten years ago. That debunks the myth that Brymens do not have a track record as well - a higher failure rate would probably not make Greenlee move to a second generation of products from the same OEM.

As for my own experience, I have a 2003-built Brymen BM857 that sees heavy use for ten years and is still accurate and solid as a rock. I recently got a smaller Greenlee DM-200A (Brymen BM251) that is extremely well built.

For the industrial segment, the only Uni-T that I would consider (with heaps of caution) is the UT195 family, with a small window for the UT139C. But track record of their models is quite poor.

Klein meters are rugged and survive quite the abuse - despite I have never used one, I have seen many in quite rough shape but still very accurate and still felt mechanically sound. They are also a reputable brand of tools in the US. They seem an original design and not an OEM.

Good luck with your procurement!

25 years of use in the hobbyist market isn't quite the same as 50+ years in the industrial sector. I don't know if Brymen have a contract with the Taiwanese military, but that would be an excellent way to establish a credible presence. It's arguably military contracts that have been one of the main pillars of Fluke's success, on the basis that if the knuckleheads in the armed forces can use them out in the field without destroying them or killing themselves, they are probably a decent bet for a factory floor.

I have a UT139C, and it's a nice little meter for hobby use, but I wouldn't let it anywhere near a serious energy source.

[tooki]

Alternatives to Fluke regarding safety and reliability? Aaaand a calibration structure behind them? Gossen Metrawatt comes to mind, but they are usually more expensive than Fluke- or maybe one of the newer models has some useful features to it than the existing Fluke meters. Also Hioki looks nice, but I have no first-hand experience with them.

Exactly.

There are other top-tier meter manufacturers, but they’re not really any cheaper than Fluke, and often more expensive.

[nightfire]

And frankly, given the requirements of:

- industrial environment with vibrations
- dual display (because of monitoring frequency in relation to rpm of the moving parts)
- magnet hanger
- calibration papertrail

this narrows this down to a small selection of multimeters you can get in europe that fulfill those requirements. Frankly, Fluke might even be the best and cheapest (longterm) solution for the stuff the OP is doing. I would trust Gossen Metrawatt multimeters build-wise including the silicone holster to be as robust as a Fluke 87V, but those Metrahits are nearly double the price...
Keysight? I have the impression they are withdrawing from this market segment, and my U1272A is nice, but also same price as a Fluke, which I would regard as better regarding build quality.

In Europe you have also Chauvin Arnoux, which also has a decent reputation, or HT Instruments, that are rather tending to niches, and are nowhere as popular or available as Fluke multimeters, that you literally can get at every corner or online retailer.

[BillyO]

Can you provide a link or a citation to any kind of a record or an article of or about someone being killed by their modern multimeter in the last decade?

Links in this post.  Not quite killed (in this case) and not Brymen, but CEM rebadged as a USA brand.  This is what a long-time Fluke user that isn't a multimeter enthusiast is going to worry about.  THey aren't going to know the difference between CEM, UNI-T and Brymen.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hear-kitty-kitty-kitty-nope-not-that-kind-of-cat/msg3714598/#msg3714598

Having read the entire document I have to agree with the court's decision based on this: "Taylor’s claims fail for lack of proof."  There were no witnesses to the event, there were no reliable tests done to demonstrate the meter was the cause of the explosion and not Taylor's own error in use.  Is there anything there that is proof to you that if the meter had "Fluke" written on it the event would not have occurred?

I guess the court did not require that the meter be tested by a forensic lab of record because the injury was not fatal, but it seems to me that that step was lacking.  We just don't know what actually happened.  Basically we have to go on Taylor's word and the analysis of his so named "proposed expert".

[coromonadalix]

Court adjourned   lolll

It seems to go towards Fluke, because of their availability, calibrations ..   "easier to get and service"

I have one facility in my town, easy for Fluke, HP, Agilent, Keysight stuff, and some TEK  scopes  <1 ghz  bw,  they began to do the Rigol and Siglent brand

But not for the high end models i have, i have to send them  300km away

And here when we say Industrial, "the Yellow is the winner"

I rest my case

And yes   they should had examined the instrument in question ... even on a non fatal injury

[bdunham7]

Having read the entire document I have to agree with the court's decision based on this: "Taylor’s claims fail for lack of proof."  There were no witnesses to the event, there were no reliable tests done to demonstrate the meter was the cause of the explosion and not Taylor's own error in use.  Is there anything there that is proof to you that if the meter had "Fluke" written on it the event would not have occurred?

I guess the court did not require that the meter be tested by a forensic lab of record because the injury was not fatal, but it seems to me that that step was lacking.  We just don't know what actually happened.  Basically we have to go on Taylor's word and the analysis of his so named "proposed expert".

I'm not sure what you read, but that case was not decided on the basis of 'lack of proof' that the meter was defective or doubt that the defect caused the accident.  Nor could it have been decided on that basis at the summary judgment phase in this case.  The only legal issue remotely close to that was whether Southwire was aware that the meters manufactured for them by CEM were defective.  The UL determined that the meters sold by Lowes did not conform to the examples that had been submitted to the UL and Southwire later recalled those meters for these defects, although somewhat reluctantly. 

As for whether the accident would have happened with a non-defective meter, keep in mind that the summary judgement I posted isn't the whole record.  The meter was examined by forensic experts, the UL did conclude that the meter was not manufactured to standard and I'm pretty sure that the difference between an external fault and one internal to the meter would have been fairly obvious.  Southwire isn't even arguing here that the meter wasn't defective.  The reason the summary judgment doesn't mention all of that is that the court determined that under Kentucky law all of those things were irrelevant as to Southwire's liability.

[BillyO]

I'm not sure what you read, but that case was not decided on the basis of 'lack of proof' that the meter was defective or doubt that the defect caused the accident.  Nor could it have been decided on that basis at the summary judgment phase in this case.  The only legal issue remotely close to that was whether Southwire was aware that the meters manufactured for them by CEM were defective.  The UL determined that the meters sold by Lowes did not conform to the examples that had been submitted to the UL and Southwire later recalled those meters for these defects, although somewhat reluctantly. 

As for whether the accident would have happened with a non-defective meter, keep in mind that the summary judgement I posted isn't the whole record.  The meter was examined by forensic experts, the UL did conclude that the meter was not manufactured to standard and I'm pretty sure that the difference between an external fault and one internal to the meter would have been fairly obvious.  Southwire isn't even arguing here that the meter wasn't defective.  The reason the summary judgment doesn't mention all of that is that the court determined that under Kentucky law all of those things were irrelevant as to Southwire's liability.

I read the document you linked to in the other thread: "Case: 7:14-cv-00175-ART-EBA   Doc #: 41"  The defense moved for summary judgement based partly on Taylor's lack of proof.  What I wrote above is  a direct quote from the document.  They must have reason to claim lack of proof and to have the plaintiffs expert testimony excluded. 

Is there another document which I could read that provides more information?

[jonpaul]

Our experience with Fluke over decades has prooved their robustness and worth.

Yes they cost more than the Chinese clones, you get what you pay for.

The Fluke 87V is specifically for industrial applications with many features for transient filled environments.

 There are no fancy charts  or display just a great TRMS  meter, cost much lower and life of battery and display much longer than the 287.

Highly recommended

Bon chance

Jon

[2N3055]

Having read the entire document I have to agree with the court's decision based on this: "Taylor’s claims fail for lack of proof."  There were no witnesses to the event, there were no reliable tests done to demonstrate the meter was the cause of the explosion and not Taylor's own error in use.  Is there anything there that is proof to you that if the meter had "Fluke" written on it the event would not have occurred?

I guess the court did not require that the meter be tested by a forensic lab of record because the injury was not fatal, but it seems to me that that step was lacking.  We just don't know what actually happened.  Basically we have to go on Taylor's word and the analysis of his so named "proposed expert".

I'm not sure what you read, but that case was not decided on the basis of 'lack of proof' that the meter was defective or doubt that the defect caused the accident.  Nor could it have been decided on that basis at the summary judgment phase in this case.  The only legal issue remotely close to that was whether Southwire was aware that the meters manufactured for them by CEM were defective.  The UL determined that the meters sold by Lowes did not conform to the examples that had been submitted to the UL and Southwire later recalled those meters for these defects, although somewhat reluctantly. 

As for whether the accident would have happened with a non-defective meter, keep in mind that the summary judgement I posted isn't the whole record.  The meter was examined by forensic experts, the UL did conclude that the meter was not manufactured to standard and I'm pretty sure that the difference between an external fault and one internal to the meter would have been fairly obvious.  Southwire isn't even arguing here that the meter wasn't defective.  The reason the summary judgment doesn't mention all of that is that the court determined that under Kentucky law all of those things were irrelevant as to Southwire's liability.

In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...
In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

[alm]

In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...

Was the incident caused by the meter causing an ignition of a combustible atmosphere, which is what Ex certified models are designed to prevent?

In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

Why is Fluke not a good brand for Ex certified DMMs?

[2N3055]

In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...

Was the incident caused by the meter causing an ignition of a combustible atmosphere, which is what Ex certified models are designed to prevent?

In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

Why is Fluke not a good brand for Ex certified DMMs?

No, the incident was a flash arc type. But a coal mine is Ex environment, and that meter was not proper for that place anyways.. And tech made few bad mistakes too..

It's my English. 
I wanted to say that in Ex environment, just any Fluke is not enough. It has to be Ex Fluke or some other Ex certified brand. Actually, if I had to buy Ex meter, Fluke would be on a short list.

[H713]

I'm always hesitant to replace something that works, but I will point out a few things.

First, I know several engineers (myself included) who find the Fluke 289 and 287 to be an incredibly irritating meter to use. The contrast is awful, the tilting bail is a POS that regularly falls off, the battery life is abysmal, etc. Oh, and the UI is a pain on them compared to other meters. Fluke sells a lot of different meters, so my first course of action would be to look at their other offerings and see if any of them meet your needs.

You could buy a couple of good Brymen and Keysight units and offer to let employees try them, and ask for honest feedback. It's not unusual for companies to demo a few brands of equipment to see if there are any advantages to switching.

[BillyO]

I agree.

I've actually always been a bit of a Fluke fan.  I used Fluke exclusively professionally and even bought myself an 8024A when I was 20 at enormous expense (to me at the time) and I sitll had it up until a few months ago when it just went nuts.  I still have 2 Fluke meters (albeit old ones).

I do get it when people say Fluke have a proven track record over and above all the specs and certifications.  It's very true.  However, if good alternatives (like Brymen) never get a fair chance to develop that proven track record, then we'll be basically stuck with a monopoly.

Brymen are really, really solid meters.  Every bit as well built a Flukes and deserve a chance to prove that.  We as consumers, both professionally and on a serious hobbyist level, deserve viable alternatives.  The market needs solid competition.

It may be time to mellow on the yellow just a bit.

[iet]

I will explain in a little more detail my choice of a multimeter PC Work.
First of all, resolution.
DC,AC-0,1mV
DC,AC current-0.1uA
R-0.1ohm
C-10pF
The maximum measured capacitance is 100mF.
Simultaneous display of voltage and frequency.
As for the resolution of the multimeter and the capacitance measurement range, this parameter looks quite good even in comparison with the FLUKE 87V,289.
FLUKE 87V-100pF-1mF.
FLUKE289-10pF-100mF.
Of the additional service functions-light indication of the correct connection of the probes.
Non-contact indication of the presence of voltage.

[Black Phoenix]

I'm always hesitant to replace something that works, but I will point out a few things.

First, I know several engineers (myself included) who find the Fluke 289 and 287 to be an incredibly irritating meter to use. The contrast is awful, the tilting bail is a POS that regularly falls off, the battery life is abysmal, etc. Oh, and the UI is a pain on them compared to other meters. Fluke sells a lot of different meters, so my first course of action would be to look at their other offerings and see if any of them meet your needs.

You could buy a couple of good Brymen and Keysight units and offer to let employees try them, and ask for honest feedback. It's not unusual for companies to demo a few brands of equipment to see if there are any advantages to switching.

That one was my first own DMM and for years I didn't know best. Until I got the 87V by necessity and saw how fast and better it was in most aspects I need, to the point that if one day I get a 189 I may sell the 289.

The only thing that it differentiates is the function of seeing log measurement graphs directly on the screen, something that for my use case I don't see as a plus.

But at the same time having been with me in the beginnings of my professional career makes me think twice.

Probably I will turn into a TEA before I think of selling it.

The reality is that after that no meter released by Fluke replaces it, the 87V still is a money cow and Fluke new experiences with wireless communication between equipments although smart still is a niche use case.

[H713]

The 187 and 189 are still the best meters Fluke ever made, in my opinion, but they're long gone.

The reason I've looked to other brands is that I'm not overly wowed by the current Fluke offerings. There are two "serious" meters offered, the 87V and the 289. The 87V is getting rather dated in its usability (mostly little stuff, to be honest) and the 289 is a pain in the backside. I don't think the 87 V is a bad meter, but I'm just disappointed that Fluke doesn't have something between the 87 V and the 289.

As I have explained in other posts, I think the 289 is a lousy meter that is a pain to use. It's also enormous, to the point of being impractical to use as a handheld for people with normal-sized hands. That leaves the 87 V. So there isn't a lot of choice on the Fluke side.

Furthermore, some of the Fluke meters have what can only be described as "pathetic" display contrast - the 289 is the worst offender here, and honestly, the 189 isn't great either - compared to the Brymen meters I've used (the BM786 and the BM235), it's pretty sad.

[BeBuLamar]

The 187 and 189 are still the best meters Fluke ever made, in my opinion, but they're long gone.

The reason I've looked to other brands is that I'm not overly wowed by the current Fluke offerings. There are two "serious" meters offered, the 87V and the 289. The 87V is getting rather dated in its usability (mostly little stuff, to be honest) and the 289 is a pain in the backside. I don't think the 87 V is a bad meter, but I'm just disappointed that Fluke doesn't have something between the 87 V and the 289.

As I have explained in other posts, I think the 289 is a lousy meter that is a pain to use. It's also enormous, to the point of being impractical to use as a handheld for people with normal-sized hands. That leaves the 87 V. So there isn't a lot of choice on the Fluke side.

Furthermore, some of the Fluke meters have what can only be described as "pathetic" display contrast - the 289 is the worst offender here, and honestly, the 189 isn't great either - compared to the Brymen meters I've used (the BM786 and the BM235), it's pretty sad.

I do agree with you on this. The 87V is rather basic. The 289 is a pain to use. Its display is so low in contrast and it's slow autoranging in resistance mode. I do also agree that the 189 is a better meter. But going away from Fluke I wouldn't want to go cheap but rather others that cost the same or more like Gossen. Hioki, Yokogawa. I wouldn't go Brymen or UniT.

[Fungus]

I do get it when people say Fluke have a proven track record over and above all the specs and certifications.  It's very true.  However, if good alternatives (like Brymen) never get a fair chance to develop that proven track record, then we'll be basically stuck with a monopoly.

Yep, and sadly in the USA that's probably never going to happen because Brymen seem have an exclusive deal with Greenlee and Greenlee sell them very overpriced and mixed with other brands. They'll never get the sort of brand recognition that way.

The 187 and 189 are still the best meters Fluke ever made, in my opinion, but they're long gone.

The 187 was originally sold as the 87 IV but the backlash was huge and Fluke quickly went backwards with the 87 V. People don't want change. Fluke is basically stuck making the 87 V forever (although that's not a problem for Fluke - their profit margins must be huge on it).

I'm just disappointed that Fluke doesn't have something between the 87 V and the 289.

They have no motivation whatsoever to do that, even though they could make several improvements to the 87V which wouldn't change the basic functionality in any way.

Furthermore, some of the Fluke meters have what can only be described as "pathetic" display contrast - the 289 is the worst offender here, and honestly, the 189 isn't great either - compared to the Brymen meters I've used (the BM786 and the BM235), it's pretty sad.

Yep. My 187 display is terrible compared to my Brymen.

Even free DT830 "Harbor Freight" meters have better displays. Sure, they have less screen segments and less mutliplexing but if Brymen can make a decent display there's no reason Fluke can't at the prices they charge.

[nightfire]

One other question that should also be asked before going into wild guesses which DMM is better than any Fluke: What does the OP and his technicians really need?

From my own experience (last employer datacenter) there are situations where you simply want to get a reading quickly and move on without too much hassle  fiddling with your gear.
And here I have to admit that the usage of any Fluke DMM from basic up to the 87 series is quite straightforward and intuitive.
(289 etc. really do not count as simple DMMs)

Measurement-wise, what do they require in precision and measuring modes?
And not unimportant: calibration services including turnaround time until the multimeter is useable by the technician again.

[Fungus]

Bottom line: Get a couple of BM869s and BM859s and give them to some of the most "influential" engineers at the company so they can use the dual displays, etc. Sell them on the CAT IV 1000V rating and make sure other people know they can trade in their Flukes if they want to. See if you get a trickle down effect inside the company.

For repairs I probably wouldn't make much effort. They're a third of the price so just have a supply of new ones. I really don;t think they're going to fail anyway.

I'm sure calibration is a solvable problem, too. Give Welectron a call and see if you can work something out. If you calibrate meters in batches then shipping will be the least of it.

[Monkeh]

But going away from Fluke I wouldn't want to go cheap but rather others that cost the same or more

Because again you're basing your decisions on name and cost, not an evaluation of the equipment.

[Fungus]

From my own experience (last employer datacenter) there are situations where you simply want to get a reading quickly and move on without too much hassle  fiddling with your gear.
And here I have to admit that the usage of any Fluke DMM from basic up to the 87 series is quite straightforward and intuitive.

The one possible advantage of Fluke over Brymen in the field is that Brymens remember their mode when you switch them off, eg. if you were in DC current mode when you switched it off then it will power on in DC mode. A Fluke 87V will always power on in AC mode.

This can be good or bad depending on how you look at it: If you're grabbing a random meter from a toolbox then powering on in a known mode means you can rely on muscle memory instead of having to look at  the display to see what mode it's in. OTOH having AC mode as the default would annoy the hell out of me on the workbench.

[BeBuLamar]

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

[tooki]

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

Then you can’t buy a huge share of products on the market, since contract manufacturing and rebadging are now extremely widespread.

I mean, if you know the Greenlee is rebadged Brymen, then buying a Greenlee is buying a Brymen.

[Monkeh]

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

Well then you'll be shocked to learn Brymen is an OEM for Fluke.

[BeBuLamar]

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

Well then you'll be shocked to learn Brymen is an OEM for Fluke.

If that is true but it's not.

[Monkeh]

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

Well then you'll be shocked to learn Brymen is an OEM for Fluke.

If that is true but it's not.

Oh, it's not? Why, then, are they the biggest receiver of Brymen shipments in the US?

https://www.importgenius.com/suppliers/brymen-technology-corporation
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/dead-brymen-bm869s/msg3606703/#msg3606703

I'm sure they just import thousands of meters a month, including ones with their own model numbers on, for evaluation.

[BillyO]

I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

Fluke do not make all their meters.  Many of the more affordable models are made for Fluke in the far east.

[BeBuLamar]

and I don't buy those models.

[geggi1]

Try the Fluke 177
I have two for them and they have been working flawlessly for 15 years

[iet]

I was wondering if you people have any alternatives to Fluke for this type of work which are cheaper but offer the same features and are also durable/rugged?

https://www.kew-ltd.co.jp/en/products/detail/00977/

[bdunham7]

I read the document you linked to in the other thread: "Case: 7:14-cv-00175-ART-EBA   Doc #: 41"  The defense moved for summary judgement based partly on Taylor's lack of proof.  What I wrote above is  a direct quote from the document.  They must have reason to claim lack of proof and to have the plaintiffs expert testimony excluded. 

I don't want to spend time parsing out the summary judgment motion, but defendants will always argue 1) the product wasn't defective 2) if it was defective, the defect didn't cause the damages 3) if the defect did cause the damages, the product was misused or mishandled.... and in this case 4) if the product was defective and the damages were a result of that defect, we still shouldn't pay because (fill in excuse here)....

I only included this in the original post to show that in the case of rebadged offshore products, you might have a difficult time holding anyone accountable if something bad happens.  Please take my word as an expert that there is nothing else stated in this document and any attempt to infer or read in other information is pointless.  All of the issues you raise were briefly mentioned only to be dismissed as MOOT because Southwire was immune from liability under Kentucky law.  The court only actually considered facts relevant to that issue.  They did not reach any decision as to whether the meter was proven defective or whether the plaintiff's expert was reliable or not.  Again, defendants counsel will almost always make those motions at this stage of litigation and those motions are almost always denied. 

Is there another document which I could read that provides more information?

The first document from the MSHA that I linked in the original post should tell you all you need to know.  You can also read this self-serving recall notice from Southwire's PR department.

https://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/07/prweb12012744.htm

The issue with CEMs IP67 meters not being so waterproof has also been discussed elsewhere. 

[Monkeh]

If that is true but it's not.

and I don't buy those models.

Which is it? They don't have meters made for them by other companies, or they do and you have a detailed list of Fluke products not to buy?

[bdunham7]

In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...
In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

I don't see any mention of mistakes by the tech--what are you referring to?

I also don't know for sure what meter rating would be required in that particular place.  I don't know MSHA regulations and if they do require ATEX-type meters in that location, then apparently the 11060S model in question doesn't meet that rating.  However, this doesn't appear to be an explosive atmosphere accident, but rather a water intrusion problem in an IP67-rated meter.  So even if the meter was being used in an area that it should not have, the defect (water intrusion) would still be the root cause of the accident.  It would be a much messier legal case, though.

[Fungus]

Try the Fluke 177
I have two for them and they have been working flawlessly for 15 years

Only 15? I've got cheapo noname Chinese meters older than that. I've gpt a Radio Shack meter that I bought in the 1980s that still works perfectly.

[BillyO]

I've gpt a Radio Shack meter that I bought in the 1980s that still works perfectly.

Hey, me too.  Actually two of them an analog meter and a DMM.

[rsjsouza]

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

That is quite a stark stance. Fluke and Philips had quite the partnership for quite a long time. Perhaps you should start considering Zotek as well?

I guess I don't know Brymen because they are not sold in the US. I wouldn't buy the Greenlee though. I never like buying something from a company that doesn't make the products.

Well then you'll be shocked to learn Brymen is an OEM for Fluke.

If that is true but it's not.

Oh, it's not? Why, then, are they the biggest receiver of Brymen shipments in the US?

https://www.importgenius.com/suppliers/brymen-technology-corporation
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/dead-brymen-bm869s/msg3606703/#msg3606703

I'm sure they just import thousands of meters a month, including ones with their own model numbers on, for evaluation.

That can't be, right? Brymen has no track record in the professional segment - their only 20+ year track record is with hobbyists and curious people...

[BeBuLamar]

I think Brymen makes some of the Amprobe DMM and Amprobe is part of Fluke. I don't think Brymen makes any of the Fluke including those lousy Chinese made ones.

[J-R]

There is definitely a significant amount of "cross pollination" that has happened over the years, but I don't recall seeing any Fluke-branded handheld or clamp meters that looked like anything Brymen has ever made.

Wavetek-Meterman-Amprobe rebranded some Brymen meters for sure, however (I have a few), and of course Fortive owns both Fluke and Amprobe currently.  Some of Amprobe's current models are Chinese imports.

There is a good chance that parent company Fortive makes various deals with other manufacturers including Brymen, and obviously Brymen does the same, because Brymen doesn't make Alkaline batteries or cardboard boxes, for example!

So it's possible that when Fluke wants to build something they may consider obtaining some parts from Brymen.  I doubt it's the main PCB assembly, as that might help Brymen discover something Fluke doesn't want them to, who knows.  Some of the Fluke probes are made by Chinese manufacturers.  So Brymen might make something for Fluke somewhere in between those two extremes.


I purchased a Greenlee DM-210 (a rebranded Brymen BM202) over 20 years ago from a local electrical supply place.  I remember wanting it because it had a computer interface, which I used with my laptop and it was quite a bit cheaper than Fluke.  I think the only other DMM I had at the time was a Micronta 22-167 (all the others were analog).

While Greenlee pricing is slightly higher than direct from Brymen, it's not outrageous especially when you consider many Greenlee prices you see online are retail prices (and you do get the lifetime warranty).  If I go into my local store and ask for contractor pricing, it can be 10% or even 25% below retail in many cases.

So Brymen (via Greenlee) in the US has enjoyed quite a bit of exposure over the decades, but they really were never that popular IMHO.  I don't think Brymen (Greenlee) ever really was a direct competitor to Fluke, more like a budget brand back in the day.  But these days, "budget" typically means a low-cost Chinese DMM, which Greenlee does sell as well.  So this means even less of a chance for Brymen probably.

[tautech]

I think Brymen makes some of the Amprobe DMM and Amprobe is part of Fluke. I don't think Brymen makes any of the Fluke including those lousy Chinese made ones.

Yes the Chinese Flukes are just cheap rubbish, a fraction of the price of a Fluke in the west and with zero warranty outside China.
Last time I looked I could buy 3 of these cheap junk Flukes to one model 11*  Fluke yet Joe Smith ran a one of these POS Flukes, a 17B+ through his tests and it performed as well as the best of anything else.

So DON"T buy them or you'll push the price up !

[Monkeh]

I don't think Brymen makes any of the Fluke including those lousy Chinese made ones.

Then why does Brymen ship Fluke, not Amprobe, containers full of multimeters? And what makes their many products made outside the US 'lousy', other than xenophobia or racism?

E: Okay, it looks like the Amprobe name isn't used on the customs paperwork, fair enough. Still doesn't answer why we have evidence of complete, retail boxed Fluke brand meters being shipped from Brymen if they don't make them, now does it?

There is definitely a significant amount of "cross pollination" that has happened over the years, but I don't recall seeing any Fluke-branded handheld or clamp meters that looked like anything Brymen has ever made.

At a glance a Flir DM66 doesn't look much like a Brymen meter, but it's a BM235 in drag.

So Brymen might make something for Fluke somewhere in between those two extremes.

Or they might make the whole extreme, like shipping finished Fluke 373s by the container.

[J-R]

There is definitely a significant amount of "cross pollination" that has happened over the years, but I don't recall seeing any Fluke-branded handheld or clamp meters that looked like anything Brymen has ever made.

At a glance a Flir DM66 doesn't look much like a Brymen meter, but it's a BM235 in drag.

So Brymen might make something for Fluke somewhere in between those two extremes.

Or they might make the whole extreme, like shipping finished Fluke 373s by the container.

What are you going on about, Flir is not Fluke.

Do you have any photos showing a Brymen clamp meter that looks like the Fluke 373s?

[Monkeh]

There is definitely a significant amount of "cross pollination" that has happened over the years, but I don't recall seeing any Fluke-branded handheld or clamp meters that looked like anything Brymen has ever made.

At a glance a Flir DM66 doesn't look much like a Brymen meter, but it's a BM235 in drag.

So Brymen might make something for Fluke somewhere in between those two extremes.

Or they might make the whole extreme, like shipping finished Fluke 373s by the container.

What are you going on about, Flir is not Fluke.

Do you have any photos showing a Brymen clamp meter that looks like the Fluke 373s?

I'm saying it doesn't have to look like a Brymen product to be made by them, when it's a Fluke product. Why would Fluke have someone make a product which doesn't look like a Fluke?

[J-R]

It is within the realm of reason that once Fluke and Ambrobe became owned by the same parent company, that some of Fluke's manufacturing facilities now make Amprobe products as well, or at least do final assembly.  So your smoking gun of this product shipment to "Fluke" is very likely simply Brymen shipping the Amprobe models that are rebrands we already know about.  I have the Amprobe AMP-330, for example.

So yes, there is plenty of clear, solid evidence of Brymen making DMMs for other companies like Amprobe & Flir, such as identical LCDs, switch/button layouts, etc.  Without similar evidence showing Brymen making completed Fluke-branded products, it's just pure speculation.

Also, there is a big difference from sourcing certain parts from another supplier, VS. outright just rebranding the entire product.  So for sure let's keep the discussion on a technical level and stick with arguments that can be backed up.


The clamp assembly found on the Fluke 771 process meter and similar is one that I found interesting, as it's very good at low currents.  0.1mA accuracy is no problem for it.  I've not seen brands like Brymen make anything similar, although I'm open to suggestion if there is some evidence.

[Monkeh]

So your smoking gun of this product shipment to "Fluke" is very likely simply Brymen shipping the Amprobe models that are rebrands we already know about.

Feel free at any time to take a look at the second link I provided. Any time at all.

[J-R]

Slow down buddy, not sure why you are being so hostile, I looked at your links...

I did not see any direct evidence that Brymen is manufacturing the Fluke 373.  The link provided could literally mean that Fluke sent Brymen a bunch of 373 meters and Brymen shipped them back.  I'm not saying that, I'm just pointing out the vagueness of what is shown there.
All of the Fluke 373 units I see for sale currently on ebay either don't show a country of origin or clearly state Assembled in China, such as this one:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/284887002598

None of Brymen's current or past clamp meters that I could find match the 373 (please correct me if I'm mistaken).  Every rebranded Brymen I have seen so far has been immediately recognizable.  And this is logical, as it doesn't make sense for Fluke to have Brymen make a completely different product, otherwise there would not be good cost savings.  You would have to reconfigure your factory to make just that one Fluke product, then back to Brymen products...  It makes more sense for Fluke to ask Brymen to make small tweaks to an existing product that they already manufacture, such as logos, buttons, etc.

So I would more likely suspect Brymen is handling the final packaging for the Fluke 373 since the manual states printed in Taiwan, but not the assembly of the 373 meter, as it states Assembled in China.  Just one theory that comes to mind.


And to be clear, I really don't care who makes the 373 or where, and am not a Fluke fanboy, so I'm really just digging into this because I'm curious.

[Fungus]

Do you have any photos showing a Brymen clamp meter that looks like the Fluke 373s?

I'm saying it doesn't have to look like a Brymen product to be made by them, when it's a Fluke product. Why would Fluke have someone make a product which doesn't look like a Fluke?

The Amprobe AM140 doesn't look much like a Brymen BM857 on the outside but if you open them up the PCB is identical.

https://www.amprobe.com/product/am-140-a/

https://brymen.eu/shop/bm857s/

[J-R]

The AM-140 has zero changes from Brymen BM857s other than the outer shell.  Every aspect is identical.  Similar to one of my favorites, the Amprobe AM-47/Meterman PM55/Brymen BM27s.

From a simple photo, these take little to no effort to determine they are the same product.

[MerlijnD]

Hello people,

Alot of responses. Im currently gone for christmas and the rest of the year. I will evaluate and try to respond indepth in the beginning of 2023.
Thank you very much!!!

[BillyO]

I don't see any mention of mistakes by the tech--what are you referring to?

The MSHA document you posted says he was making a phase to phase measurement and goes on to specifically stress best practices should be phase to ground.

In any case, your point is taken.  A DMM was involved in an injury.  The MSHA determined that the meter did not meet it's IP67 rating, but did not say that was the cause of the failure.  I wonder what the UL report found?

[BeBuLamar]

The case was dismissed because Southwire had the middle man status. So if the meter was a Fluke then Fluke woouldn't have such a status but if it's a Brymen made Greenlee then perhaps Greenlee can claim the middle man status just like Southwire.

[joeqsmith]

...
Last time I looked I could buy 3 of these cheap junk Flukes to one model 11*  Fluke yet Joe Smith ran a one of these POS Flukes, a 17B+ through his tests and it performed as well as the best of anything else.
...

The 17B+ wasn't the only low cost Fluke I looked at.  For those interested, I maintain a spreadsheet that contains which meters I have tested and what levels they were damaged at.  Looking the the current release, there are two Fluke products that are not included.  I ran a 189 but it was obviously old and in poor condition.  The other was a Fluke T6-600 non-contact voltage fork that several people requested I look at after a Canadian expert had posted a video on it.   This meter is very unique and really doesn't fit in with the products I normally look at. 

I am not sure where Fluke makes their products or what defines Country of Origin vs Assembled in USA.  We have discussed this before.   I did post some comments about the general quality of a brand new Fluke 87V manufactured in Dec 2017 compared with a much older one.   Interesting thing with that 87V is the switch contacts are a different design and cut into the PCB, similar to what I saw with that last Keysight meter I looked at.  While the Keysight meter bound up to the point where the knob's plastic shaft broke after a few cycles, the Fluke just made really bad chattering sounds.   

[BillyO]

The case was dismissed because Southwire had the middle man status. So if the meter was a Fluke then Fluke woouldn't have such a status but if it's a Brymen made Greenlee then perhaps Greenlee can claim the middle man status just like Southwire.

That product liability middleman law is pretty weird.  Also, I think it varies state by state.

[joeqsmith]

...
In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...
In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=fluke+ex+rated

Fluke offers the 28 II EX along with a thermometer. 

[2N3055]

...
In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...
In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=fluke+ex+rated

Fluke offers the 28 II EX along with a thermometer.

I explained that later: my poor English. I meant not just any Fluke will do, but only Fluke equipment made to standard. And yes, I would trust Fluke to make Ex meter right.

[Fungus]

...
In the same document they pointed out several mistakes tech made. Also that meter was not made or claimed to be made for (Ex) environment, which a coal mine would be (both coal dust and methane risk). That is wrong example...
In that case not even Fluke would be a good brand, but only certified (Ex) models.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=fluke+ex+rated

Fluke offers the 28 II EX along with a thermometer.

I'd get one but the diode test voltage on the 28II is only 2V.

[joeqsmith]

Can you provide a link or a citation to any kind of a record or an article of or about someone being killed by their modern multimeter in the last decade?  I have done Google searches and can't come up with anything, but may not be all that good at it.  In fact I usually suck at it.  I'd be interested to understand the circumstances.

It's been a long time since I have searched.  I'm sure Google would find a few hits.  This was the first one that came to mind but exceeds your decade.   I had posted about a friend who had a name brand meter blow up in his hands.  PPE saved them.  The meter sent in and found defective.

https://www.ecmweb.com/safety/arc-flash/article/20898038/the-case-of-the-deadly-arc-flash


https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face9928.html

[Fungus]

Yep. If there's an arcflash hazard you shouldn't be relying on just the multimeter to save you.

Go look at the photos on the Fluke web site: Everybody's wearing big gloves, face shields, hearing protection... or more.



(Apart from the Fluke 179 guy in the red shirt, but he's a redshirt... )

[Black Phoenix]

He's measuring a 24V control line in the cabinet.

[floobydust]

People- don't forget the test leads are also a safety concern and need to be approved i.e. to IEC 61010-031. Tests include wire thickness, high voltage, heat, chemicals (if applicable), tug/yank, drop/bend/impact, probe length etc. all of which are important where your hands are concerned.

But going into a MV motor control cabinet with a LV multimeter is of course a mistake. Ref. Eddie Adams arc-flash fatality. The contactor's coils are LV but one probe to the wrong spot (MV) and it's very bad. Or open control cabinets in the rain, using multimeters then is dangerous. Workplaces need policies around the multimeter usage as a "safe" multimeter can still be used unsafely. Even allowing work alone was not permitted by one of my employers, you could get electrocuted in a substation and nobody would know.

[AVGresponding]

He's measuring a 24V control line in the cabinet.

Indeed, but it's highly likely that there will be mains in that cabinet, and quite possibly multiphase mains at that.

3ph UPS bypass switches can be fun; it's easy for a bit of brain fade to make those exceptionally dangerous.

[Black Phoenix]

He's measuring a 24V control line in the cabinet.

Indeed, but it's highly likely that there will be mains in that cabinet, and quite possibly multiphase mains at that.

3ph UPS bypass switches can be fun; it's easy for a bit of brain fade to make those exceptionally dangerous.

Probably 220V to a PSU for the 24V DC.

Power part of the machine isolated from the control part, with a 220V line from one of the phases, since by the image I don't see any 3 phase equipment in that cabinet.

[BeBuLamar]

The unit that is mounted on the door looks like the power supply but I am not sure. If there is no power supply perhaps the entire cabinet is powered by 24VDC and the power is coming from somewhere else.

[bdunham7]

The MSHA document you posted says he was making a phase to phase measurement and goes on to specifically stress best practices should be phase to ground.

In any case, your point is taken.  A DMM was involved in an injury.  The MSHA determined that the meter did not meet it's IP67 rating, but did not say that was the cause of the failure.  I wonder what the UL report found?

Unfortunately for us rubbernecking meter geeks, we don't have a full record to examine nor was there any EEVBlog-style teardown and video to look at.  There's certainly a lot we don't know, including what the supposed nonconformities were in the meter.  I wasn't able to find much more information at the time.  I only brought it up then as an example of disreputable practices by manufacturers and now as an admittedly rare example of meter-related injuries.  Your statement that arc-flash incidents with a substandard meter as the primary cause are rare is probably true, but I'd say that a major factor in that is that people working on high-energy systems are unlikely to be using crap meters.  There was some chatter on other forums that I remember from that time where some electricians were essentially saying they would walk of the job before testing a 995 volt system with anything other than a Fluke while others were claiming that a DMM was not the proper tool for the job at all, regardless of brand.  I suspect the latter might be true--there are specialized medium and high voltage instruments for this purpose and an underground mine could be a CAT-IV environment which would rule out almost every meter I know of except the Brymens that are CAT IV/1000V (but not MSHA or IP67....)  I don't know if the OP is still around, but I think the question he might want to ask is "do I even want to be having this discussion?" 

As for mistakes by the tech or the mine operator, there may have been some, but that would be speculative unless someone has more info than I do.  Perhaps a DMM was the wrong tool or PPE was required, in which case the employer did not properly train or equip the electrician.  Perhaps the test leads were not appropriate, although I'm assuming from the MSHA statement that the meter failed internally.  The statement by the MSHA regarding phase-to-phase seems unfortunate to me, making a messy legal case even messier if not for the quick dismissal on other grounds.  I have seen this statement before about not doing phase-to-phase measurements, but this is not correct no matter who says it and anyone with experience with 3-phase systems testing could tell you why.  I realize that phase-to-ground will typically be a lower voltage and might be less susceptible to certain transients, but either your meter is rated for the voltage or it isn't. 

In some cases, phase-to-ground testing with a DMM will not spot certain problems.  This is why Fluke sells those very expensive 4-channel Scopemeters--they have high voltage probes and can measure all 3 phases at once, either relative to a common reference or not.  However, if you cannot directly measure the phase angle between your three readings like you can with a scope, your DMM cannot tell you what your phase-to-phase voltage is nor can you calculate it.  This can result in some difficult to understand issues. 

For an unlikely but easy-to-understand example, consider a 480V 3-phase wye supply with a ground-referenced neutral feeding a large isolated delta-wound motor through a remote contactor.  Now imagine the motor is not running and you want to know why.   Two of the wires from the contactor to the motor have gone open due to physical damage of some sort.  First you measure all 3 phases to ground in front of the contactor, you get ~277VAC for each.  Next you activate the motor and measure the phases after the contactor and again you get ~277VAC each time.  Finally, you crawl down some tunnel and measure at the motors junction box and again you get ~277VAC on each phase but the motor doesn't run.  You tell your boss to order a $20K motor and....

[bdunham7]

That product liability middleman law is pretty weird.  Also, I think it varies state by state.

It seems weird, but it is intended to protect hardware store proprietors from being liable for chainsaws that they sell and stuff like that.  The actual legal issues involved are also interesting and quite complex, but the result here would probably be different in many states.  One of the apparently interesting and perverse findings by the court was that if Southwire had taken any steps to inspect and test the meters to verify their quality and compliance, they might be liable.  And since their own statements now reflect that they have consulted with CEM to improve the meters and bring them into compliance, this defense would not work in the future.  This general legal theory is not unusual and may even be reasonable in many circumstances, but when it works in the favor of a company regarding liability for their own branded product, it seems a bit silly. 

[jonpaul]

Bonjour à tous,

Inspired by this discussion, I researched this for my own use.

I  Have 12 handheld DVMs(!),  but old and inaccurate or cheap Chinese junk. Also Keysight 34465a and Fluke 8842A, large 5.5..6.5 digit laboratory benchtop.

Have several Fluke  instrument like clamp on DVMs, line hot sticks, network testers, all great quality, made in USA not ChiCom. 

Decided  on Fluke 87V industrial DVM is the best value for a versatile, long lasting and useful tool. And still current catalogue.  The Fluke lifetime warranty is a big plus.

searching on epay, found several in auction, JUST won it like new condition, w/Fluke leads and yellow silicone wrap, for $240. Missing the  Fluke soft case C25 and thermocouple,  but those are unimportan.

I  will share my notes, calibration, tests and reviews.




Bon Soirée

Jon

[BeBuLamar]

The Fluke 87V doesn't always come with the case unless you buy a kit.

[jonpaul]

For the price, it had no case, just the Fluke leads and yellow silicone wrap , Chinese clone soft cases $10..20. Unneeded for my use.

Most important was excellent condition almost unused.

Jon

[BeBuLamar]

I use the Fluke 87V everyday and it's good for what I do but I do believe it's not good enough for the OP although it's not inexpensive. I think he wants dual display so that he can see voltage and frequency at the same time.

[BillyO]

I  will share my notes, calibration, tests and reviews.

I'm not sure there is much calibration you are going to be able to do on the 87V, unless you have access to a Fluke 87V calibrator.

[BeBuLamar]

I don't think he meant to calibrate it because to calibrate it but rather checking if the meter is within specs and whether will need a calibration or not.

[Fungus]

calibration != adjustment

[BeBuLamar]

calibration != adjustment

I know but I think he meant he would check the calibration and not calibrate. You would need a calibrator that can communicate with the Fluke 87V via ultrasonic.

[py-bb]

I cannot explain the why in much regard.

But this is for us the best time to look into alternatives because:

Fluke's double measurement on 1 display is extremely expensive but the most used/requested feature for vfds and or generator mains failure frequency verification etc.
The fact that we keep extra stock and loan sets when their main equipment is being calibrated. (All our current loan sets are old and broken and some of the engineers main fluke stuff is breaking down as well. Current replacement stock in-office is zero).

I've seen a couple people mention Yogokawa; we use alot of their equipment in office and in other parts of our business.

What I'd do is try it. I'm glad you want to move away from Fluke as this might make them "work harder". As much as I'd love to see that change another "general rule" applies:

All changes disrupt something. Just generally this is true. For example muscle memory could have volts on the meter where amps is on the new ones (obviously a bad thing) - I use two differently coloured meters for this reason.

What I'd recommend you do is some research, buy say 1, 2 or 3 of them and dish them out and ask your team to use them concurrently - this may slow them down a little bit, see if that can be mitigated at least partially, get them on board.

Some have said here that they'd be 'upset' if not given Fluke gear to use, if there's a chance that the people you enlist to help you evaluate new meters could be seen as "the bastards that OKed the new meters" I'd tread carefully, but I've only ever rarely seen such adversarial relationships between managers and work teams. 

[tooki]

I  will share my notes, calibration, tests and reviews.

I'm not sure there is much calibration you are going to be able to do on the 87V, unless you have access to a Fluke 87V calibrator.

The 87V service manual has full calibration instructions. The only equipment required is a Fluke 5500A calibrator or equivalent. It provides references only; the calibration is performed using just the multimeter’s controls.

calibration != adjustment

I know but I think he meant he would check the calibration and not calibrate. You would need a calibrator that can communicate with the Fluke 87V via ultrasonic.

As best I can tell, ultrasonic is a unidirectional data output. That is, if the 87V even has it. The original 87 user manual mentions ultrasonic output only in passing, and the service manual makes no mention of it. For the 87V, neither the user manual nor service manual make any mention of it.

In both cases, looking at the schematics of both the original 87 and the 87V, there’s no way to receive ultrasonic, so at most it exists as an output only, for use in production testing or something.

[Ugur]

Beha Amprobe is a Fluke affiliate brand. Their prices are more affordable than Fluke and are of Fluke quality.

[tooki]

While I have no issues with their build quality, the models I’ve tested had anemic continuity beepers, not the fabulous ones in Fluke meters.

[J-R]

Beha Amprobe is a Fluke affiliate brand. Their prices are more affordable than Fluke and are of Fluke quality.

This is not really accurate as Amprobe has rebrands as well as various products from their past company history.  The Wavetek/Meterman/Amprobe/Beha-Amprobe/Fluke relationship is pretty obnoxious honestly.  Also, as of right now the "Meterman" brand appears to have been sold off and is mostly Uni-T rebrands.

Anyway, the Amprobe clamp and pocket meters that are Brymen rebrands are pretty good, the Amprobe "proper" in-house DMMs such as the Amprobe 38XR-A and similar are OK as well.  The Amprobe 15XP-B and LCR55A I think are from the Wavetek/Meterman days and are interesting but only so-so.  The Amprobe AM-5xx products are questionable as they are imported rebrands.  If you want the lower price/quality, just buy direct.

[MerlijnD]

Hello everyone. I've given thoughts about all your comments. The plan is to acquire two brymen 869s to test in the field.

[MerlijnD]

Hello everyone. I've bought a 789 and a 869s and will be handing them out shortly.
First impressions are that the dial is very stiff to turn, also based on how it feels i wonder if it will survive alot of drops (because the case is flush).

Other than that it feels very nice, and the display on the 869s is an absolute treat to look at!!

[Neutrion]

Actually, if you use it in a heavy glove, than the switch feels just right. Although not sure whether that was the intention with the desigh. So it can be useful in some enviroments.

[souerdough]

Oi there :-p

I'm late into this thread and sort of a lurker on this forum, also this is not exactly on topic.
If you look into brymen meters for service of 3-phase stuffs check out their clamp meters with 3 terminal phase rotation like the BM079 , especially if you have techs that are looking to carry less gear into the field.

A note on brymens is that their probes are good but they have no real options for additional things like magnetic probe-tips or proper sized and safe clamp on probes.

Also for the everyday toss-around and abuse, go fluke t5/t6 if your not already on those.