Help looking for a decent $100-$150 multimeter

[Peter_G]

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions everyone!

So far I am leaning towards the Brymen BM257S, but I am having a bit of trouble finding it - I can't find it on Amazon at all and there are only two people on eBay with it, one for $145 and the other for $162.  The $145 isn't out of my budget, but I noticed some of you marked it as around $110.  Anyone know of somewhere I can get it for cheaper (In the USA)?

As far as a second meter goes I think I'll start with one.  I will check out the Harbor Freight freebie too, or a cheap pocket multimeter- I remember Dave mentioning that it's nice to have one of those as well.  (Any suggestions for a not completely garbage pocket multimeter?)  I also have a friend I work on a lot of my electronics projects with and he has a (cheapish) multimeter too.

I should also mention that my Arduino/Pi projects are not really all that small.  Currently I am working on rigging up a (somewhat) simple home automation setup (my programming skills are a bit more advanced that my EE skills atm ) which involves everything from controlling some solenoids on the garden sprinklers to controlling the thermostat to (eventually) controlling some light switches.  I (mostly) know what I am getting into so I think that (along with various other miscellaneous things) justifies getting a decent multimeter.

[joeqsmith]

joeqsmith

The UNI-T UT181A, so many things wrong with it.

  What is wrong with it from your point of view?
Well, I do not like DMMs with a color LCD and a special built-in accumulator. I prefer a low-consumption DMM that is powered by 9V battery or AA or AAA 1,5V cells.

Just don't walk across the carpet or pet the cat when holding it. 

Is UT181A fragile or what??

Check out:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hear-kitty-kitty-kitty-nope-not-that-kind-of-cat/875/
Post 890 sums it up.   

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions everyone!

So far I am leaning towards the Brymen BM257S, but I am having a bit of trouble finding it

TME has it for $110.  Looks like it meets the EMC standard.   Plus it has uC and  temperature which the 115 and DT4252 do not.   Not a bad little meter by the looks of it.   

[Fungus]

Continuity on the 17B+ was pretty poor.  I measured a max frequency of 1.7Hz on mine with a 50% DC.

I don't see it as a major problem. YMMV.

Just no good for what I use it for.

Well ... not everybody plays music on their multimeter.   

Looks like both the 115 ($129)  and DT4252 ($115) are on clearance at TEquipment.

Neither of those has a milliamp or microamp range. That's a deal breaker for Arduino work IMHO.

[imidis]

Not just arduino work, I've found it surprisinly handy on my meter for battery powered projects.

[nctnico]

Having instant continuity is a big plus because it works quicker and IMHO gives more confidence in the measurement. When I check continuity between two points -say A & B- I do this with a 3 step process: put both probes on point A, move one probe to point B, move the other probe to point B (both probes on point B). This ensures the probes make good contact during the check. Instant continuity is vital to do this quickly. Also due to soldering flux residu and other contaminents the contact between a PUT (point under test) may not be ideal. I have found that DMMs with a slow continuity check make me doubt whether the probe makes good contact or not. When does the bloody thing starts to beep?

[Fungus]

Having instant continuity is a big plus because it works quicker

According to joe's tests: Fluke 17B+ needs a 20ms contact to make a beep.

I have found that DMMs with a slow continuity check make me doubt whether the probe makes good contact or not. When does the bloody thing starts to beep?

After 1/50th of a second...?

(I couldn't resist - your post gives a whole new meaning to the phrase 'short attention span'  )

[TheAmmoniacal]

This looks feature-packed and cheap https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-trms-uni-t-ut139c-dmm-is-available-now/

Also sold by iloveelectronics http://www.ebay.com/itm/Uni-T-UT139C-True-RMS-Digital-Multimeter-Temperature-NCV-Backlight-/171213085325

[joeqsmith]

Well ... not everybody plays music on their multimeter.   

Looks like both the 115 ($129)  and DT4252 ($115) are on clearance at TEquipment.

Neither of those has a milliamp or microamp range. That's a deal breaker for Arduino work IMHO.

Covered...

I like the HIOKI DT4252 and the Fluke 115 TRMS meters.  They have similar features and both again did very well in the testing.  But no temperature, AC+DC, uA or conductance.

Having instant continuity is a big plus because it works quicker

According to joe's tests: Fluke 17B+ needs a 20ms contact to make a beep.

I have found that DMMs with a slow continuity check make me doubt whether the probe makes good contact or not. When does the bloody thing starts to beep?

After 1/50th of a second...?

(I couldn't resist - your post gives a whole new meaning to the phrase 'short attention span'  )

Try using a slow meter like this to trace out the wiring on a board.  It's common for me to drag a needle across a QFP to trace it out.  The slow continuity of the 17B+ would really slow me down.   This would be interesting to measure and I would guess even 4Hz would cause me grief. 

One thing worth mentioning is that the Fluke 17B+, looking at the data again 50% DC, was 1.7 Hz.  The slowest of the meters I have looked at.  The next test is using a 2Hz signal and dialing back the pulse width until it misses.   I did not document it, but I believe I used the 1.7Hz rather than 2Hz on this meter.  Small detail.

Also, even though there is more detail in the tests than just rubbing the leads together like most reviews, there is still a human part to it.  The max freq 50% is pretty repeatable but the pulse width causes some errors.  Listening to it, did it beep or click.  Do I count it or not.....

[Fungus]

Try using a slow meter like this to trace out the wiring on a board.  It's common for me to drag a needle across a QFP to trace it out.  The slow continuity of the 17B+ would really slow me down.   This would be interesting to measure and I would guess even 4Hz would cause me grief. 

I feel a video coming on... 

[joeqsmith]

Try using a slow meter like this to trace out the wiring on a board.  It's common for me to drag a needle across a QFP to trace it out.  The slow continuity of the 17B+ would really slow me down.   This would be interesting to measure and I would guess even 4Hz would cause me grief. 

I feel a video coming on... 

Maybe use a DSO set to a 1mS sample rate attached to the meter so you have the same audio feedback.   Download the data and pull the stats from that.    Min, max, average, std dev, histograms....   Try an all digital board and all analog.     

[Fungus]

One thing worth mentioning is that the Fluke 17B+, looking at the data again 50% DC, was 1.7 Hz.  The slowest of the meters I have looked at.  The next test is using a 2Hz signal and dialing back the pulse width until it misses.   I did not document it, but I believe I used the 1.7Hz rather than 2Hz on this meter.  Small detail.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious but if a 20ms pulse makes an audible sound then all you need is 20ms of contact with a pin to find a connection.

I don't know how fast you drag your probe across the QFP pins but isn't 20ms fast enough? Does it really matter if it takes the meter 0.6 seconds to 'reset' for the next one?

[nctnico]

One thing worth mentioning is that the Fluke 17B+, looking at the data again 50% DC, was 1.7 Hz.  The slowest of the meters I have looked at.  The next test is using a 2Hz signal and dialing back the pulse width until it misses.   I did not document it, but I believe I used the 1.7Hz rather than 2Hz on this meter.  Small detail.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious but if a 20ms pulse makes an audible sound then all you need is 20ms of contact with a pin to find a connection.

I don't know how fast you drag your probe across the QFP pins but isn't 20ms fast enough? Does it really matter if it takes the meter 0.6 seconds to 'reset' for the next one?

0.6 seconds is an eternity! When I drag a probe across a QFP to trace a connection in a piece of equipment for which not schematics are available I test an entire row of 30 pins or more in one second.

[joeqsmith]

One thing worth mentioning is that the Fluke 17B+, looking at the data again 50% DC, was 1.7 Hz.  The slowest of the meters I have looked at.  The next test is using a 2Hz signal and dialing back the pulse width until it misses.   I did not document it, but I believe I used the 1.7Hz rather than 2Hz on this meter.  Small detail.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious but if a 20ms pulse makes an audible sound then all you need is 20ms of contact with a pin to find a connection.

I don't know how fast you drag your probe across the QFP pins but isn't 20ms fast enough? Does it really matter if it takes the meter 0.6 seconds to 'reset' for the next one?

The latching types can take a fair amount of time to reset.    I would suggest as I have aged, I have slowed down a fair amount.  So let's keep that in mind... 

Looking at a 22 pin DIP, I seem to drag about about 11 pins in a second.  That's not going fast.  Slow and steady.  That's 0.091 seconds per pin. Looking at the pin nearest the plastic package, I would say mechanically, pin width is a little wider than the gap but let's call it 50%.  So we need to detect 0.045 seconds and reset in the next 0.045.   Seem fast?

I still work a lot with QFPs.  Looking at a 144 pin part, 36 pins on a side.   Looks like I drag it in around 3 seconds.  Again, not going fast, just nice and steady.   So 12 pins in a second, or 83mS/pin.  In the 40ish mS range.   

Doubt people who do this sort of thing would be much slower.  Really never thought about it.   

So, 0.6, no way.  The AM510 was about 8Hz which is not too bad but the Brymen I have is more than fast enough.

No they don't all need to be able to play Van Halen's Eruption but I would say for me, 10Hz minimum with a 50% DC.   

[joeqsmith]

One thing worth mentioning is that the Fluke 17B+, looking at the data again 50% DC, was 1.7 Hz.  The slowest of the meters I have looked at.  The next test is using a 2Hz signal and dialing back the pulse width until it misses.   I did not document it, but I believe I used the 1.7Hz rather than 2Hz on this meter.  Small detail.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious but if a 20ms pulse makes an audible sound then all you need is 20ms of contact with a pin to find a connection.

I don't know how fast you drag your probe across the QFP pins but isn't 20ms fast enough? Does it really matter if it takes the meter 0.6 seconds to 'reset' for the next one?

0.6 seconds is an eternity! When I drag a probe across a QFP to trace a connection in a piece of equipment for which not schematics are available I test an entire row of 30 pins or more in one second.

Youngsters!     

[Fungus]

Looking at a 22 pin DIP, I seem to drag about about 11 pins in a second.  That's not going fast.  Slow and steady.  That's 0.091 seconds per pin. Looking at the pin nearest the plastic package, I would say mechanically, pin width is a little wider than the gap but let's call it 50%.  So we need to detect 0.045 seconds and reset in the next 0.045.   Seem fast?

Why does it need to reset quickly? You already found your pin.

[joeqsmith]

Looking at a 22 pin DIP, I seem to drag about about 11 pins in a second.  That's not going fast.  Slow and steady.  That's 0.091 seconds per pin. Looking at the pin nearest the plastic package, I would say mechanically, pin width is a little wider than the gap but let's call it 50%.  So we need to detect 0.045 seconds and reset in the next 0.045.   Seem fast?

Why does it need to reset quickly? You already found your pin.

Two things.   The are often multiple pins attached to one node that I am looking for.  These can be next to each other.   The more interesting one is looking at bus runs.  One probe in each hand dragging down two different connectors, synchronous.     This is going to be a little slower but nothing close to 0.6 seconds....

[Fungus]

Two things.   The are often multiple pins attached to one node that I am looking for.  These can be next to each other. 

Sure, but when it beeps don't you stop, make a note, then restart on the next pin after that?

I just tried some pin-swiping with my incredibly slow Fluke 27.

It works much better than the "bash the probes together" test would suggest. No problem at all in finding a pin.

[Fungus]

I'm not saying faster isn't better, I'm just wondering how much of a factor it is in real life. At what point does it become a "deal breaker".

I guess the answer depends on what you use it for:

If you spend your days swiping probes down long rows of pins then you need the fastest possible.

If you only do it once a month then my "Fluke 27" test doesn't indicate any deal breakage.

[joeqsmith]

Two things.   The are often multiple pins attached to one node that I am looking for.  These can be next to each other. 

Sure, but when it beeps don't you stop, make a note, then restart on the next pin after that?

I just tried some pin-swiping with my incredibly slow Fluke 27.

It works much better than the "bash the probes together" test would suggest. No problem at all in finding a pin.

If I am looking at a bus, not normally.   I'll take a cable for eample, clamp it into a vice with the mating connectors in it and do a quick swipe.  Some times I make a shorting connector for one mate and then buzz it on just the one side. 

If I am looking at an IC, tracing out a design, I will make a mental note and keep buzzing.  I then will go back and count the pins.   We all have our own styles. 

[Fungus]

We all have our own styles.

Sure, I"m just trying to quantify it in my head.

[nctnico]

If you only do it once a month then my "Fluke 27" test doesn't indicate any deal breakage.

Sometimes a piece of testequipment pays for itself with just one paid project.

[Fungus]

If you only do it once a month then my "Fluke 27" test doesn't indicate any deal breakage.

Sometimes a piece of testequipment pays for itself with just one paid project.

Can you come over and talk to the wife?

[nctnico]

I could but maybe it is better if we wait until I have figured out how to explain the benefits of having test equipment to my wife first 

[nanofrog]

So far I am leaning towards the Brymen BM257S, but I am having a bit of trouble finding it - I can't find it on Amazon at all and there are only two people on eBay with it, one for $145 and the other for $162.  The $145 isn't out of my budget, but I noticed some of you marked it as around $110.  Anyone know of somewhere I can get it for cheaper (In the USA)?

That was me.

Greenlee rebadges them for sale in the North American market (DM-810A = BM257S), and Brymen isn't going to shoot themselves in the head (ODM is currently their primary business model). Some show up with Extech branding on them as well. Either way they're generally more expensive, but you do get a warranty in the US (i.e. no need to send it to Taiwan).

The cheapest way to get it with a Brymen label is via TME.eu (here), which is located in Poland (would come to ~$120 shipped). I don't recall seeing lots of people needing to send one back, but there's one review on the DM-810A where someone had to send a DM-810A in, and was pissed there was a 3 week turnaround. Good price on it though; within a couple of bucks actually, so I'd get it from Amazon rather than order from TME if it were me. 

[ez24]

My personal recommendation is the Brymen BM257S. It is a nice handy meter, fast, more than accurate and has all the main features you will need. It is also built very well.

This one usually gets the number one spot.  Do as others suggested and get at least two.  My two cents get the Brymenm, then a lower cost one in your budget, then two cheap meters from Harbor Freight to use for current measurements. That's right - 4 meters

Current readings can blow fuses and meters.  Some HF meters are cheaper than some fuses.
Another consideration - what type of battery do they use ?