[UglyJoe]

Haven't seen anything about this yet.

Fluke is offering two new high-end DMM's: the 287 and 289. They are basically new versions of the 187/189 with the main new feature being TrendCapture, or something like that, which measures the wave form of the voltage over time, etc. Basically, it look sorta like a hand held oscilloscope.

This of course begs 2 questions:

1.) Are any of the new features that would be specifically useful to diyer's and...

2.) Does anyone know where overstock/discontinued 187/189 models might be purchased from, perhaps at a reduced price point.

Yeah, Fluke is discontinuing 187/189, which means if you want a DMM with a 50,000 count display you'll have to fork over the $400+ dollars for the 287.

What do you guys think?

 

[pinkfloyd4ever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by UglyJoe /img/forum/go_quote.gif Haven't seen anything about this yet. Fluke is offering two new high-end DMM's: the 287 and 289. They are basically new versions of the 187/189 with the main new feature being TrendCapture, or something like that, which measures the wave form of the voltage over time, etc. Basically, it look sorta like a hand held oscilloscope. This of course begs 2 questions: 1.) Are any of the new features that would be specifically useful to diyer's and... 2.) Does anyone know where overstock/discontinued 187/189 models might be purchased from, perhaps at a reduced price point. Yeah, Fluke is discontinuing 187/189, which means if you want a DMM with a 50,000 count display you'll have to fork over the $400+ dollars for the 287. What do you guys think?

I just found that out about the new Flukes last night too and was wondering the same thing. The cheapest I could find a 187 was still $380 (not much of a discount, huh?)

Oh and the prices that I saw for the 287 were more like $500

 

[UglyJoe]

yeah, just more carefully looked tonight and the 287's are going around $499.

I swear I saw one earlier for $438, but now I can't find it.

So here are my questions: Which is best bang for buck, and which is most anyone doing DIY construction and design ever going to need from:

#'s 115-117


#'s 175-179

#'s 287/289

#'s 83-V/87-V


The last 2 are fairly new as well, and have a different screen type, or something. They don't have a count rating, but have an LCD screen.

Oh, and if anyone finds somewhere with the 187/189 reduced, please post!

 

[threepointone]

Looks nice and some of the functions do look like they'd help in troubleshooting a lot and make measurements--but it's probably not necessary unless you're doing a lot of serious DIY work. I mean, if some of us can manage to get things done with a cheap craftsman meter from sears. . .

hmm. . .new features for motor applications. . .seems like a good excuse for me to make them upgrade my 189 to 289 =) maybe i'll be getting one soon =D

 

[meat01]

For $400, I think I would rather build a Beta 22 and use a Harbor Freight meter

 

[tangent]

The key difference between a cheap meter and a professional meter is that the cheap meter can only tell you whether a circuit is functioning. A professional meter can help you decide if it's functioning poorly or not. Here are some of the many questions a cheap meter can't answer:

1. Are these two resistors within 0.1% of each other?
2. What's the current drawn by this section of the circuit, to the milliamp?
3. What's the ripple voltage at this point in the circuit, which is nominally DC?
4. How hot is my regulator getting?
5. What's the value of this tiny little ceramic cap with the cryptic label?

I'm not saying that you must go out right now and buy a Fluke 289. Just realize that there are many good reasons for the 50:1 price ratio between it and the bottom-of-the-barrel meters.

 

[UglyJoe]

so, tangent, what do you think of the 289? I think you could probably get a fairly nice benchtop meter used for around twice the price (which of course has the drawback of being, you know, twice the price).

The question I have about the Fluke's is that I have use for a nice DMM outside of DIY work. I'm a chemistry grad student and the most of my work is done in electrochemistry, where I could use a nice DMM for things like looking at (maybe) solution resistance, temperature of baths and cells, troubleshooting the circuits, etc., plus a lot of other things that I won't really get into here.

How accurate are the temperature measurements? The model I am really looking at is the 179. It doesn't have nearly as high a count as the 287/289, but I am still unsure as to what that actually means. Being able to look at the waveform generated by my potentiostat would be kind of cool, but I'm not going to be in a position to afford a 287 any time soon.

 

[ezkcdude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by UglyJoe /img/forum/go_quote.gif The question I have about the Fluke's is that I have use for a nice DMM outside of DIY work. I'm a chemistry grad student and the most of my work is done in electrochemistry, where I could use a nice DMM for things like looking at (maybe) solution resistance, temperature of baths and cells, troubleshooting the circuits, etc., plus a lot of other things that I won't really get into here.

If you're using this for research, don't pay for this out of your pocket! That's what grants are for.

 

[UglyJoe]

I'd like to think my adviser would fork over $500 for a new DMM for me.... don't really see it happening though.... :sad:

 

[tangent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by UglyJoe /img/forum/go_quote.gif what do you think of the 289?

Not being in the market for a meter, I haven't even looked at the web page for it yet.

Quote:

I'm a chemistry grad student and the most of my work is done in electrochemistry, where I could use a nice DMM for things like looking at (maybe) solution resistance, temperature of baths and cells, troubleshooting the circuits, etc., plus a lot of other things that I won't really get into here.

Then I definitely suggest something with logging capability, and a benchtop if you can possibly afford it.

Why?

1) Data logging is the lifeblood of experimental science; and

2) If your logging meter is battery-powered, you have to either limit your experiments to fit within its 15-minute battery saver timeout, or you have to sit around and "bump" the meter occasionally to keep it awake.

And if you were looking for a third reason, the additional accuracy might not be wasted on such a task, where it very well might be on most hobbyist DIYers.

Quote:

How accurate are the temperature measurements?

All I can tell you is, if you need high accuracy, look to a dedicated instrument. Or, to a truly high end DMM, where being a "jack of all trades" doesn't necessarily mean "master of none".

Quote:

It doesn't have nearly as high a count as the 287/289, but I am still unsure as to what that actually means.

Think of it like a digital audio system, but without most of the audio electronics world's BS specmanship. If a piece of gear is fairly a 16-bit device, that means it can distinguish among 65,536 different values on its inputs.

Similarly, a 6,000 count instrument like the Fluke 175 can distinguish among 6,000 different values in each range. Along with the range sizes, this indirectly tells you the size of the step in each range, which is how I was able to come to the conclusion that a Fluke 175 cannot possibly match 1% resistors to 0.1% in my resistor matching article. There's a lot of material in that article about evaluating the accuracy of a DMM; even though it's focused on just one application, the points are still widely useful.

Quote:

Being able to look at the waveform

Having admitted to not even looked at marketing glossies yet, you may take this with a large grain of salt: I don't trust a DMM that has quiet delusions of being an oscilloscope, too. Or the reverse, for that matter. They have entirely different functions. A DMM strives for accuracy by taking a relatively long time for each measurement. A scope strives for speed, making millons or billions of measurements per second, none of which is particularly accurate.

If it's a good DMM, I predict it will be a weak scope, and vice versa.

Quote:

I'd like to think my adviser would fork over $500 for a new DMM for me

Who says it's for you? It's for the lab. And if they don't want such a thing for themselves, well, that's what the NSF is for.

 

[UglyJoe]

Thanks tangent.... btw, I say it's for me... life in the lab would basically be a troubleshooter and another reason to convince my wife to let me get one. I don't kid myself, it'd mostly be used for my DIY hobby addiction but with the added benefit of having use in the lab.

So the 17x series can't match resistors to 0.1%... yeesh, why spend $240 on them then? I'll have a look at that article.