Alternative DMMs to Fluke?
in [Design]
|
Prev: 555 monostable circuit design
Next: current source
From: Keith on 11 Apr 2006 22:33 On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 16:32:53 +0000, colin wrote: > "DaveC" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message > news:0001HW.C05AB65500439BB9F04075B0(a)news.readfreenews.net... >> Not that there's anything wrong with Flukes, inherently, but I like having >> choices. >> >> Are there other brands that are considered as good quality as Fluke? >> >> Thanks, >> -- >> DaveC > > Ive had quite a few (cheap) multimeters in the past, then I got a second > hand fluke 77 fairly cheap, its far beter than all the others ive had put > together and its lasted ages. probably atualy works out cheaper in the long > run (and the battery lasts ages too). I like flukes and this model in > particular, it was the one to go for at the time at work especialy if you > didnt have to pay the price tag, however im not sure what else is around > that can match it in terms of being nice to use reliable and rugged. I agree. I've had Fluke 77s for fifteen years. The only reason I bought a bunch of $4 HarborFreights was that my Flukes had a habit of taking a walkabout. One hasn't been seen in 12 years. THe HF's can now go walk. BTW, I've only replaced the batteries in the 77s once in those fifteen years. They still work quite well. > Incedently I saw a project for a home made power supply on the web where > the insides of a multimeter were used as the volt/current readout, some > are so cheap they are actualy cheaper than a proper panel mounting > digital meter. Sure. At $3-4 each... -- Keith
From: DaveC on 11 Apr 2006 23:14 Thus spake Keith: > I agree. I've had Fluke 77s for fifteen years. The only reason I bought a > bunch of $4 HarborFreights was that my Flukes had a habit of taking a > walkabout. One hasn't been seen in 12 years. THe HF's can now go walk. BTW, > I've only replaced the batteries in the 77s once in those fifteen years. > They still work quite well. OP, here. I have 73 and 77. Both work quite well, also. The only reason I'm looking for another meter is that neither of these are true RMS reading meters. Mfr of equipment I'm servicing is spec'ing pulsed DC voltage as an RMS value. I can't accurately measure this with these meters. I've been quite happy with these meters, but I need true RMS measurement, and my eyes would appreciate larger display and a backlight. I've been eying the Fluke 87, but would like to at least see what *doesn't* measure up to the Fluke before I plunk down the $$. Thanks, -- DaveC me(a)privacy.net This is an invalid return address Please reply in the news group
From: Smitty Two on 11 Apr 2006 23:15 In article <pan.2006.04.12.02.29.51.824087(a)att.bizzzz>, Keith <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > Let's go back! The OP's bitching because he bought a FLUKE, with Company > B's label on top. He *DID NOT* buy a Fluke. The IBM deal is quite like > the GE deal. They're selling their name as part of the unit sold. The > name is worth money. ...and they're still servicing the products *THEY* > sell. I suppose you don't think GoodYear should sell tires under the > GoodYear name in Sears. Nope, the OP simply asked whether there were alternatives to Fluke, of comparable quality. Someone opined that Omega was good. I offered that Omega doesn't make things. > > > > You're wrong. He was claiming *FRAUD* (until I challenged this > absurdity), which clearly it's not. If you're talking about me, and again, I'm not the OP, you're right, I do think it's fraudulent. Legally fraudulent, maybe not. Morally fraudulent, yes. That's my opinion, and there's not one damn thing "absurd" about me having an opinion, even though it's one you clearly don't share, most of the time, except in certain circumstances.
From: Smitty Two on 11 Apr 2006 23:29 In article <MPG.1ea5b4dbda2d0fa29899a4(a)News.Individual.NET>, Keith Williams <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > No contradiction at all. In the US it is illegal to put a "Made in > &country." sticker on a device that's only &country. content is the > insertion of a battery. I can't imagine this being kosher in the > EU. It has nothing to do with re-branding. > Actually, it seems to me that your logic is flawed, your position is nebulous, and your analogies irrelevant. But just clarify this one issue for me, and then I'll let it drop. Suppose I buy a chassis made in Japan, some electronic components made in China, a blank PWB fabricated in Maylasia, a battery made in Mexico, and a can of spray paint made on the moon. And I put it all together into a product. Now, can I say it was made in America? And if so, where and when do I cross the line to illegality? You say that if all I do is add the battery, I can't claim I made it here. What if all I do is add the battery and spray paint it? What if all I do is add the battery, install the assembled board into the chassis, and paint it? What if all I do is add two components to the PWB, install the board, paint it, and add the battery? And how is this different than re-branding? One company can take another company's product and stick their name on it, but one country can't do that with another country's product? Your standards are indefensible, because they're undefinable.
From: Bud-- on 12 Apr 2006 03:31
Smitty Two wrote: > In article <pan.2006.04.12.02.29.51.824087(a)att.bizzzz>, > Keith <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > >>Let's go back! The OP's bitching because he bought a FLUKE, with Company >>B's label on top. He *DID NOT* buy a Fluke. The IBM deal is quite like >>the GE deal. They're selling their name as part of the unit sold. The >>name is worth money. ...and they're still servicing the products *THEY* >>sell. I suppose you don't think GoodYear should sell tires under the >>GoodYear name in Sears. > > > Nope, the OP simply asked whether there were alternatives to Fluke, of > comparable quality. Someone opined that Omega was good. I offered that > Omega doesn't make things. > Seems to me like an entirely reasonable observation. I was surprised when I figured out some 'Omega' equipment was from other manufacturers and cheaper under the manufacturers name. My impression is that Omega is a convenient source for a wide range of stuff but you pay more for it. bud-- |