Products > Test Equipment
Decided to Buy Brymen 869s - Help Me Avoid Buyers Remorse
shapirus:
--- Quote from: HKJ on March 22, 2024, 08:33:34 pm ---Brymen meters are good meters, if BM869 work for you is up to you, read the specifications. It is not a cheap Chinese meter.
I do like Brymen meters, but they are not Fluke. What do I mean by that?
Most Fluke meters have a very good and simple user interface (289 excluded), they are very precise, they have very good specifications and are tested to handle anything you can throw at them. Brymen do not have as good user interface, mostly because they support more functionality, they have even better specifications that Fluke, but they lack the history of reliability that Fluke have.
I like and adore Fluke and wish more brand would make meters that match Fluke, but Brymen wins easily as a advanced meter as long as your do not demand a simple user interface (Again excluding 289).
If I had to equipment a couple of people with meters would I select Fluke or Brymen? If a standard Fluke meter could do it (Not 289), I would select Fluke, because it is much easier to teach people to use a Fluke meter, than a Brymen meter, even though the Brymen is technically best. $100 (or a bit more) is not really significant in that calculation, what is required is a simple meter that can do the job (Fluke excels in that) .
--- End quote ---
You seem to be comparing simpler Flukes to more elaborate Brymens to draw the UI compexity conclusions. That's not a valid comparison, apples should be compared to apples. An adequate, more or less, Fluke model to compare to Brymen BM869s would be the 289.
For a "simple meter that can do the job", look at BM2800 series, for example, or the BM230 series.
Fluke excels in providing stable long-term quality to corporate customers, for whom paying extra for each DMM is cheaper than having to deal with any issues and lose man hours which can potentially happen if they start replacing their Flukes with something else. The value of Fluke is not so much in the DMM itself (which are of course good nevertheless), but in its consistent meeting of the expectations and being a part of long established workflows.
IanB:
Also, as a business purchase, I would say the BM869s is not an expensive tool. Rather than paying for a warranty, buy three 869's and compare them from time to time to make sure their readings align. If one happens to go wrong, recycle it and buy a replacement.
HKJ:
--- Quote from: shapirus on March 22, 2024, 09:20:56 pm ---You seem to be comparing simpler Flukes to more elaborate Brymens to draw the UI compexity conclusions. That's not a valid comparison, apples should be compared to apples. An adequate, more or less, Fluke model to compare to Brymen BM869s would be the 289.
For a "simple meter that can do the job", look at BM2800 series, for example, or the BM230 series.
--- End quote ---
You are in a way correct in this, but only partially. Nearly all Fluke meters are very easy to use and clearly marked, the exception is 289. With Brymen just about any meter looks complex when looking at it. That is not true, but you may need a bit of time to realize it.
To clarify: A Fluke meter only has a secondary function on a few of the switch position, a Brymen has secondary and tertiary (even quaternary) functions on a lot of the selections. It makes Brymen look complicated. In reality the Fluke has the function, but it is not directly marked i.e. the difference is often cosmetic (Or the Fluke do not have the function at all).
--- Quote from: shapirus on March 22, 2024, 09:20:56 pm ---Fluke excels in providing stable long-term quality to corporate customers, for whom paying extra for each DMM is cheaper than having to deal with any issues and lose man hours which can potentially happen if they start replacing their Flukes with something else. The value of Fluke is not so much in the DMM itself (which are of course good nevertheless), but in its consistent meeting of the expectations and being a part of long established workflows.
--- End quote ---
I agree with that, Fluke is probably the best brand to provide long term (10+ years) stability. You have to pay for it, in many cases it is small change compared to other expenses.
If somebody believe I do not like the 289 they are wrong, it is one of my best meters (189 is often better), but it has some faults that makes a lot of other meters look favorable. Other top end meters are CA5293 and Gossen Energy, but they do also have some serious issues.
shapirus:
--- Quote from: HKJ on March 22, 2024, 10:03:21 pm ---To clarify: A Fluke meter only has a secondary function on a few of the switch position, a Brymen has secondary and tertiary (even quaternary) functions on a lot of the selections. It makes Brymen look complicated.
--- End quote ---
Ah, this is what you meant. Yes, totally agree. Having multiple functions crammed into a single position when there's still a lot of room remaining out of the full 360 degrees circle is a UI design failure, that's for sure (OTOH there has to be a limit to how far the switch can be rotated so as not to exceed what a wrist can do in a single movement). Maybe there's a technical reason behind this, the way the contacts are made, or something, I don't know. But while that is true, it's still not an issue in practice. Well, almost: for example, it's counterintuitive to rotate the switch into the mV DC position when you want to measure frequency of a high(ish) voltage signal, as the frequency counter is a secondary function in that position. And there's another Hz function in the AC volts position, too, with the former marked with the square wave symbol. Can anyone tell what's what exactly without a manual?
This can probably can be an issue in some circumstances (such as equipping a number of workers who aren't expected nor supposed to do any thinking outside of a very narrow scope required to do a particilar job).
mwb1100:
I'd say the BM869s is closest to the discontinued Fluke 187 in both functionality and UI. The UI is very similar, with the Fluke perhaps being a small bit simpler by having a dedicated button for selecting frequency and duty (which require additional presses of the general purpose select button on the BM869s).
One thing the 187 (and many Flukes) has is auto hold, which is sadly absent from the BM869s. I believe that the BM78x meters are the only Brymens that have an auto hold feature.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version