Products > Test Equipment

Is this a real or fake Fluke multimeter?

<< < (7/8) > >>

bdunham7:

--- Quote from: mwb1100 on July 05, 2023, 07:09:29 pm ---While trying to learn a little more about this outlet checking stuff I came across this Fluke Application Note (that is no longer on Fluke's site for whatever reason) that might be of interest to some people here:

  - https://www.transcat.com/media/pdf/power_problems_receptacle.pdf

--- End quote ---

That's good info, but unless you have a large load on the circuit, your neutral drop voltage should be much less than 2V.  And if it is a balanced 'home run' circuit (shared neutral for circuits on opposite phases), it could be close to zero even with large loads.  And if you have a small N-G voltage, the difference between L-N and L-G is going to be tough to spot.  Just to try it, I used a Fluke 27 to check out my garage socket with a fridge and freezer (both running) on a circuit that is a fairly long distance from the panel and even goes through an unbonded sub-panel.  I got 0.23V N-G, 118.5 L-G and 118.2 L-N.  So it works out, but that's only a few counts on the meter.  A little noise, a shorter circuit, less load or a crappier meter and it will be an iffy proposition to detect a problem.  Unless perhaps you carry a space heater around with you.

Reversing N and G would be very unusual in the US context.  You're much more likely to see an open/missing G or the same wire used for N and G because someone installed a grounded plug into an old house without ground wires and figured N was good enough.  But I suppose some fool can manage to make any mistake imaginable.

Someone:

--- Quote from: bdunham7 on July 05, 2023, 03:02:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: Someone on July 05, 2023, 08:09:11 am ---That's pretty much what the OP wrote verbatim. So rather than dismissing any discussion on that basis, why not just as "ok, but perhaps 2 devices would be better for you?". Instead you sure seem to be writing a lot to justify your imagined position for the OP and defend it agains any alternative view points, without actually checking back with the OP as to what they want.
--- End quote ---
The OP originally merely asked whether a Fluke 101 is a genuine product.  I've never seen him state an explicit preference for having only one device.
--- End quote ---
Do we really need to pick apart the OP to such a degree and make several pages of arguing about what they intended? seems like you insist.... so the OP verbatim:

--- Quote from: Pcmaker on July 04, 2023, 10:17:43 pm ---I was looking for a cheapest, small multimeter and I found this on Amazon

its under 50 bucks but it claims to be a Fluke brand multimeter. Not much features, but it's got everything I need. I need it mostly for testing regular batteries, continuity and testing 120v to 240v electrical things.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HE6MIJY

--- End quote ---
OP says they are looking for a cheap and small multimeter, and points to one that has "everything I need". Then goes on to add some context which explains clearly what their routine uses are. A great post that deserves some good replies.

How is that not a request for validation of their choice, based on that information? nowhere is there any hint they are looking for suggestions of other equipment to do the job or that multiple devices are being considered (which is what you have inferred and seem to be intent on doing).


--- Quote from: bdunham7 on July 05, 2023, 03:02:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: Someone on July 05, 2023, 08:09:11 am ---Looks like most of us here see the point in using a single multimeter for these different tasks.
--- End quote ---
Then why not recommend a DMM that will actually do both things properly?  I did, in my first reply.
--- End quote ---
Your first suggestion in a pile of wordiness is for a meter that is (by your own verbosity) not suitable for their tasks. The next suggestion you made is for something behind a geoblock which I cannot even see to make any comment on. Opening with something not suitable is the kind of misleading and meandering nonsense you are filling this thread with, but then come back and claim it was entirely on topic and appropriate.

The problem we are having with you here is the string of "arguments" you make out of thin air, by coming back and trying so say our contributions are somehow invalid/incorrect/misleading/improper.

OP asked if that fluke is real and would do their stated jobs, we agreed it was a good choice. Yet you are individually quoting/replying to specific people with a [imagined] disagreement that is only in your head (and now spewing across the forum and drowning out the content). Other posters have been able to make a similar suggestion to the OP that they could consider alternatives in a polite manner without directly quoting and dismissing others opinions.

But do continue to escalate this for another few pages of noise.

bdunham7:

--- Quote from: Someone on July 05, 2023, 10:09:05 pm ---nowhere is there any hint they are looking for suggestions of other equipment to do the job

--- End quote ---

Sir, this is EEVBlog.  And in any case, even if it were Moe's Pub, is a thoughtful suggestion from somebody specifically experienced in these specific tasks so out of line?


--- Quote ---Your first suggestion in a pile of wordiness is for a meter that is (by your own verbosity) not suitable for their tasks.

--- End quote ---

Please.  First, I actually answered his questions before my egregious barrage of contentious verbosity.  Then, the OP did say "cheapest small multimeter" and I linked one.  I referred to it as an atrocity and it was quite clear that I wasn't actually recommending he get one, but still it can actually do both requested functions as opposed to the F101 which IMO cannot.  I then linked the DMM I actually recommended.  If that is the link you cannot see, it is the Klein MM325, or better yet a kit with that DMM, an NCV tester and a 3-light socket tester for $5 more.  I didn't recommend a non-DMM solution until he listed the two specific tasks he would be doing the most.  He can get the DMM, the Amprobe BAT-250 battery tester and a 3-light socket tester for about the same price as the Fluke 101. 


--- Quote ---The problem we are having with you here is the string of "arguments" you make out of thin air, by coming back and trying so say our contributions are somehow invalid/incorrect/misleading/improper.

--- End quote ---

The factual bases for my objections to the Fluke 101 as the proper tool here are clear enough.  If you want less noise, try responding to those instead of dismissing my "arguments" as thin air.  In case you missed it, the two main issues (based on my experience) are 1) testing AA cells without a load (OCV) can give unreliable results and 2) back-probing US walls sockets (specifically NEMA 5-15R) with standard test probes is awkward, slightly hazardous and sometimes can give false negative readings due to not making a good connection with the internal contacts.   Additionally there is the Low-Z/ghost voltage issue. Sure, you could use the Fluke 101, but IMO the other solutions are much better. Tell me why I'm wrong on any of those counts.

Axtman:
I bought a Fluke 101 the other day off Amazon. The seller was Fluke in Everett Washington (USA). It was a little over $50 with tax.

It is a great meter that I will take to garage sales and swap meets. I wanted a reliable meter with auto-power off and small pocket size. This one fills the bill!

My "daily driver" is a Fluke 87V.

Someone:

--- Quote from: bdunham7 on July 05, 2023, 10:44:04 pm ---The factual bases for my objections to the Fluke 101 as the proper tool here are clear enough.  If you want less noise, try responding to those instead of dismissing my "arguments" as thin air.  In case you missed it, the two main issues (based on my experience) are 1) testing AA cells without a load (OCV) can give unreliable results and 2) back-probing US walls sockets (specifically NEMA 5-15R) with standard test probes is awkward, slightly hazardous and sometimes can give false negative readings due to not making a good connection with the internal contacts.   Additionally there is the Low-Z/ghost voltage issue. Sure, you could use the Fluke 101, but IMO the other solutions are much better.

Tell me why I'm wrong on any of those counts.
--- End quote ---
Because you infer most of that as an issue for the OP when it is your experience (of some other situations) and not clearly applicable to the OP. Say that all you like but coming in and sniping others answers as incorrect without any of that context or explanation is both misleading, and inflammatory. Notice how the OP has returned yet not engaged on that or gone in the direction you are pushing?

Someone (the OP) asking about a $50 meter as they are looking for something budget/cheap:

--- Quote from: Pcmaker on July 04, 2023, 10:17:43 pm ---I was looking for a cheapest, small multimeter
--- End quote ---
... and small, is unlikely to be considering buying a set of probes for $50 or more (like say TP1) or a meter for 2x-3x-4x the price. Mentioning small, they are unlikely to be interested in a bulkier collection of other devices to do the stated task.

Right there stated in the opening post yet you're digging in and insisting or arguing on what you want to talk about as if it affects the OP (your justification). Your issues with the suggestion of a Fluke 101 were not clear and stated up front, they're dripping out as you continue to blather on and pollute the thread.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod