| Products > Test Equipment |
| High-end DMM model opinions needed |
| (1/11) > >> |
| alexwhittemore:
Hi all, long time watcher first time poster. I'm looking for some DMM opinions. Here's the full story: I'm an undergrad EE student who works on lots of projects all the time. A few months back I started saving up to a $400 goal so that I could get myself a Rigol DS2052E for my birthday in July. Not too long after I started, one of my professors was getting rid of some old equipment in various states of disrepair, and I managed to snag some of it - a Tek power supply that just needed some new fuses, a 1MHz function generator, and -the best part- a Tek 2221A 100MHz/100Ms/s dual channel analog/digital scope. The scope is as old as I am, to the month judging by the manual's first run date, and it has some quirks like drift in the vertical offset, but in general it's been great to have and it gets the job done. It's missing some things: at 100MS/s, the digital functionality is only 100Mhz in repetitive mode, and being so old it doesn't have built-in FFT or any fancy triggering besides rising/falling/edge/level/so on. So now that I have this pretty good analog/digital scope, I'm less inclined to drop $400 on another that, in many ways, won't be as good. I'll get an FFT and USB connectivity, but I can survive without them, and if I desperately need a better scope for some project, I do have plenty of access through work and school to the right equipment. My DMM on the other hand is not terribly satisfying, and being that I use that more than any other tool on my bench, I'm thinking I'll skip the DSO and spend the money on a handheld meter. The question is, which one? I basically want a DMM in the $200-$400 price range that will make me happy and proud to own for a long time. I'm basing most comparisons on the Fluke 87-V, which is what I'm leaning towards for $310 on amazon. I'm also looking at the agilent U1271A ($340, a little higher in the range I'd like to spend), and the agilent 1242B. My thinking now is that the 1242B is, in lots of ways, sufficient for my needs, and where the other two jockey on some specs, it's basically the floor of either of the others. I do lots of rocket work, so one thing that's important is a good temp range (full k-type, -200-1300C), and j-type would be nice, but only the $370 1272A has that, and I'm not sure I want to spend that much. Both the fluke and the lower-end agilent come up short in this area, while the 1271 has a great temp range. So I'm basically stuck between the Fluke: moderate price, everyone loves it, lifetime warranty, great specs, the $340 Agilent: better temp range, mostly the same specs as the fluke, slightly more expensive, 3yr warranty, and the $210 agilent: alright specs (still blows my current Craftsman meter out of the water), AWESOME price. The other thing I want to make sure of is that I'm not failing to consider any other good meters in this range. If I'm going to be spending $250-$350, are there any lower-end meters that pack in the features I'm looking for? Or do they all basically fall under the won't-last-you-20-years-like-the-fluke-will? Thanks for the opinions! |
| VIPR:
I've been using a Fluke 187 for a long time and have zero complaints. It's now been replaced by the 287. However, you can still find them on ebay within your price limitations. The specs are fairly good on this meter and I am sure will meet or exceed all your requirements. It's K-type temp measurement spec is -200c to 1370c. If you want the data logging capability you go for the 189 (now 289). However, that model might stretch your budget limit even in the used market. That's my 2 cents worth. ;) Here a link to the general specs of the meter: http://www.tequipment.net/FlukeDigital187MultimeterSP.html |
| ElektroQuark:
Both 287 and 289 have datalogging now. |
| alexwhittemore:
Good suggestion, but the (1/2)(87/89) series is pushing my budget both used and new. I see one used 189-II that looks appealing at $370, but by the time I'm ready to buy I probably can't count on there being much there. Also, while the increased accuracy and data logging are nice, the only spec I'd actually make good use of is the increased temp range, and that's not SUPER critical: for high-temp tests like checking ignitor formula burn temp, I DO have access to a dedicated fluke thermocouple meter at work that I can borrow. What I'm really looking for is +- assurance that I'll be as satisfied with the agilent meters as a fluke 87, or alternately suggestions for lower cost meters in the same spec range. This needs to be something that lasts me a very long time without diminishing utility or function, so I'm probably just as happy paying $50 more for the universally-lauded and lifetime-warrantied meter that has a smaller temp range. |
| DaveW:
--- Quote from: alexwhittemore on March 09, 2011, 05:35:02 pm ---What I'm really looking for is +- assurance that I'll be as satisfied with the agilent meters as a fluke 87, or alternately suggestions for lower cost meters in the same spec range. --- End quote --- I've been using a U1242B for a while now and it's a very good meter for the price, the construction is good and it's well within the spec. It isn't as rugged as a fluke for field work, but on the bench it is very good. I do miss the graphical data logging compared to a 289, but you can log with the U1242B and scroll through the logged values. As Dave pointed out with another Agilent meter the continuity check isn't as fast as a Fluke, but it's still pretty good, and if you're not continuity checking all day I wouldn't think it's a big deal. Bear in mind that if you're not buying a Fluke from an authorised dealer, they don't have to honour the warranty (but not unheard of...) |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |