Fluke 289 - yet a good investment nowadays?

[BeBuLamar]

I don't think a good DMM will get obsolete. I am still using my Fluke 8050a.

[Fungus]

It's all down to the price/condition, which is still a secret.

Would I buy a 289 for full price? Never.

Would I buy a 289 for $350? Nope.

Would I buy a 289 for $250? I'd think about it, but probably not because I know I wouldn't use it much.

Would I buy a 289 for $100? Yes, but only if it's not too beat up and dirty. I know I won't use it much so it has to look pretty at least.

YMMV.

[BeBuLamar]

If I never had a chance to use the 289 I might buy it by just reading the specs. But since I have used and own (not having to buy) it I wouldn't buy it. If it's cheap I would buy to resell, I wouldn't buy one for use. I really don't like to use it. It has a few features better than the 189 but I would rarely need it. In fact I can't think of any right now. Yes I do use the low Z feature but then I can do it with the much cheaper 113. Lo Ohms sounds good but I don't think I get the accuracy being only 2 wire ohm measurement.  As far as logging I tend to do it with a PC and Fluke View software so the limited memory of the 189 isn't a drawback.

[Fungus]

I own a Fluke 187 (same as 189 but no internal logging) and a Brymen BM857 (159 Euros).

The abilities are about the same. Same counts, same accuracy.... and they agree with each other to within a count or two. The only thing the Brymen doesn't have is dual display.

If I could only keep one of them I think I'd keep the Brymen because the display is so much better. The 187 display is more cluttered (dual display sounds nice but if you hardly ever use it then it's just constant screen clutter) and it's much less contrasty.

The Fluke 289 is notorious for lack of contrast so I'd probably hate it for that. It doesn't seem like a good trade-off just for having the Fluke name.

If you need the 289's features then that's another matter but I have an oscilloscope for when I need graphs or higher frequency signals.

[Veteran68]

Artur, as you are probably aware, DMMs are not consumer products like iPhones, thus the pressure for HW and SW upgrades/updates/new features is not as critical.
...
Over the years it has been quite clear that Fluke's strategy for portable multimeters is to maintain consistency, reliability and quality control to stay ahead of the competition - naturally they fight hard to keep unblemished their brand recognition and perceived value as well (they are not stupid). Innovation and adventurous departures from their established designs, howerver, happen in many areas other than portable multimeters.

Exactly. Fluke is not a consumer goods company, under market pressure to innovate the latest social media or gaming advances in their products. You cannot compare them to iPhones or any other consumer good, especially those dependent on external influences like carrier support, app store and OS support, security vulnerabilities and fixes, etc. Like a shark, those things must keep moving or else they die.

Professional test equipment in general and DMMs especially are almost the opposite. Fluke in particular services a huge industrial segment of the population that demand consistency and reliability over form and function. New features means new bugs to work out. New user experiences means that thousands of people have to be re-trained, and millions of pages of manuals have to be changed and republished -- this is especially true in the government and military sectors which still publishes hardcopy manuals by the millions and have to train a constant influx of new people.

Both Dave and Eddie from Kiss Analog (who has worked and still works for government contractors) have videos explaining that's why Fluke has a near monopoly on those contracts -- for the exact reason that they rarely change their products. The test procedures for a manual written in 1990 are still relevant because the Fluke 87V it was written for can still be bought and it works exactly the same. They make far more revenue from those customers than they do consumer/hobbiest users. Our interests are definitely not their interests.

Brymen is maybe a bit more progressive in terms of their product features and technology, but if you want a pace that's similar to smartphones, you're best served by the cheap gimmicky Chinese brands like Aneng and Kaiweets. Which BTW make some great little meters for the money. They're just not in the same league as a Fluke.

[BillyO]

Uni-t in some models have upped their game ...

Sure they make some neat stuff at attractive prices, but they offer ZERO support or service.  If it dies or has issues, bin it.  Their warranty is not worth the paper it's printed on.

[rsjsouza]

Brymen is maybe a bit more progressive in terms of their product features and technology, but if you want a pace that's similar to smartphones, you're best served by the cheap gimmicky Chinese brands like Aneng and Kaiweets. Which BTW make some great little meters for the money. They're just not in the same league as a Fluke.

Well said overall. Interestingly enough, Brymen has been keeping good quality for at least 20 years (my BM857 meter was built in 2002) and naturally is paving a great road towards long-term reliability and stability. Sure, they are innovating more in the portable DMM arena but it is their core business. I think they are a great contender to Fluke. Older brands such as Mastech and Uni-T are probably as old or even older than Brymen but had a lot of hits and misses that keep being repeated even in modern units.

The cheaper brands, naturally, benefit greatly from the immense manufacturing capacity of China and can take more adventurous routes with very little NRE. My biggest pet peeve is the sheer lying on CAT specifications - otherwise it is as you said: they are great meters for the money.

[Fungus]

Uni-t in some models have upped their game ...

In some, sure, but it's hit and miss. For every good model there's a really bad one.

I wouldn't buy Uni-T myself because they're neither one thing or another.

eg. If you're buying Uni-T because they're "better than Aneng" then you're doing it wrong. Their safety/robustness is borderline, joesmith has killed many Uni-Ts with his most basic tests.

Save up a few more $$$ and get a Brymen.

My biggest pet peeve is the sheer lying on CAT specifications - otherwise it is as you said: they are great meters for the money.

Just accept it.

Treat them like CAT I meters and they're fine for working with Arduinos, batteries, other 5V/12V stuff.

It's much better to buy a $20 meter and use it while you're saving up for a Brymen than to buy a Mastech or Uni-T, IMHO.

(and in the end you'll have two meters for measurements that need that)

[PartialDischarge]

I got a UT181A only for the standalone logging capability, but its also *very* accurate.
However I wouldn't choose it for everyday use (neither a Fluke 289), daily I use a 87V and a Brymen BM839

[arturmariojr]

After reading all comments and thinking a lot, I decided to keep the Fluke 289, as it is really an excellent meter.

My unit is an old one and doesn't get newer firmware versions.

Does anybody know the differences on hardware (on usability too) between both versions of it? I read some post here and there, but nothing conclusive.

Thanks a lot for your precious comments!

Artur

[bdunham7]

Does anybody know the differences on hardware (on usability too) between both versions of it? I read some post here and there, but nothing conclusive.

Having gone from an earlier version to a current version due to a warranty replacement I don't see any substantial differences.  Here are a few minor ones:

1.  Battery life in storage seems much better with the newer one.  They've eliminated the supercap and some related stuff and I think the normal power off drain is less, let alone what the drain of the ones with issues.  I use Eneloop rechargeables and I can take it out after 2-3 months and the batteries are still good.  It will log for over a week on the NiMH cells.

2.  I think the LCD looks better on the new one, but perhaps that's because it is new.  Still, I don't recall that the old one faded or changed, so perhaps they've improved it.

3.  The AC ranges don't have any residual counts on the new one, the old one had 200+.  With my sample size of 1 each I don't know whether that's random luck or perhaps the newer firmware zeroes out at low readings.

The long settling time and instability in the LO-OHMS range has not changed. 

[BeBuLamar]

I have the 289 circa 2017 and 287 2022. The display is no different from each other. I don't use either of them much but for battery drain when not in use they are both OK.

[jchw4]

IMHO the Keysight U1272A is about the best handheld for an electronics engineer, certainly an upgrade from my previous Fluke 87V.
Sometimes you can get the OLED version U1273A or AX for cheap when the display fails and fix it yourself.

I love my U1272A. Clearly the most useful meter that I have.

But it's in a different league. 289 is a graphical one. I guess this allows 289 to have some disadvantage as a daily meter just to shine as a graphical one.  Which is not its strong side either.

[Black Phoenix]

Well I have to check in: Owner of a 289 from the first batch in 2007, supercap replaced under warranty (and motherboard from what it was told me by service) in 2014.

It is a good DMM? Yes it is.
It is the DMM I recommend anyone to get if as their most used DMM? No.

At the time when it was released it was a powerhouse, the replacement of the 189 with a bigger screen who let's you see logs directly in the DMM without downloading to the PC. After all this years owning one I can say that if possible get a 87V or an old 187 or even the 189 if logging is really essential.

It is slow to boot, the screen viewing is not that great, the big advertised function, although useful for fast troubleshooting, is a PITA to use and basically easier to connect directly to the PC and download the data instead of trying to zoom 2 or 3 times the data saved while not being able to see the rest of the data at the same time.

For the price I paid back in the day I would had bought the 189 with the software plus a 87V (I paid, back in 2007, 1400€ for the full Fluke 289 FVF Kit). Pesonally if it could go back I would had instead choose the 189. Heck I would trade my 289 today for a 189 without second thoughts.

Currently I use more my 87V that I got in 2019 than the 289.

[bdunham7]

(I paid, back in 2007, 1400€ for the full Fluke 289 FVF Kit).

 

[Black Phoenix]

(I paid, back in 2007, 1400€ for the full Fluke 289 FVF Kit).

 

Yup. Although since it was company money were I worked for I basically got it for free when I quit later on.

But yes that was the release price for that kit via AresAgante Lda (the authorised seller/distributor for Fluke in Portugal).

[arturmariojr]

Well, playing a bit with my new multimeter, I have to admit:
Fluke 289 is a great meter, although it should have been updated by Fluke for new hardware nowadays available.

Many said it is slow... whow, are they comparing it to HP-3458?
Comparing to my meters: other Fluke, Yokogawa TY-720 (great meter!), it is by far the fastest. Its capacitor measuring functions, even for high capacitances is ultra fast!
Low ohms is also fast. I can't see where it is not the champion!

At home, some few days ago, I could see the energy fluctuating a lot. Yesterday I put the Fluke to logg for 07h30, taking the measurement each 1min and events threshold on 5% variations.

My Yokogawa is a data-logging multimeter too, but it takes measures at the interval you program it. Others meters act in the same way.

Fluke, on other hand, will take the measures at the intervals you programmed it, but, in an event that goes beyond the threshould value, it takes the measuring too.

And this is not the only difference: the display is turned off and only the power button blinks every 1 ~ 2s.

So, after 7h turned "on", its batteries are just like new.

Comproving my suspects, the graph bellow. At 00h30, aprox., one suddenly drop on voltage, and on second picture, some fluctuations. Very good!

[bdunham7]

Fluke 289 is a great meter, although it should have been updated by Fluke for new hardware nowadays avalilable.

What firmware version do you have?

[arturmariojr]

Myne is 1.16. As Fluke states, it can't receive the newer version of firmware.
Thanks!

[BeBuLamar]

Many said it is slow... whow, are they comparing it to HP-3458?
Comparing to my meters: other Fluke, Yokogawa TY-720 (great meter!), it is by far the fastest. Its capacitor measuring functions, even for high capacitances is ultra fast!
Low ohms is also fast. I can't see where it is not the champion!

It takes longer to turn on than say an 87V or 189. If you turn the meter to Ohm and leave in in autoranging touch the probes it would take significantly longer to show 0.xx than others (Fluke 87, 189, 114 etc..).

[jchw4]

So, for a giant of measurement industry, it would be a mandatory slogan: keep products ahead of competitors. Fluke has this capability, for sure. For us, costumers of technology, is the price to pay for - upgrade, upgrade, upgrade...

Artur, as you are probably aware, DMMs are not consumer products like iPhones, thus the pressure for HW and SW upgrades/updates/new features is not as critical.

Moreover, the device is self-contained and therefore does not become obsolete with the passing of years - it still performs its functions as long as it is calibrated and functional.

Over the years it has been quite clear that Fluke's strategy for portable multimeters is to maintain consistency, reliability and quality control to stay ahead of the competition - naturally they fight hard to keep unblemished their brand recognition and perceived value as well (they are not stupid). Innovation and adventurous departures from their established designs, howerver, happen in many areas other than portable multimeters.

Making a lot of money in sales does not make the product great. Finding a way to sell 20-years old design is a huge deal for business.
“Pecunia non olet”. Money does not stink.

But the product does. It rots with time and stinks.

Doing nothing "strategy"? Sure, it helps to make money.

"Let all the engineers go, hire contractors to make another product and sell it for 25 years" - a huge number of products in the world are made like this. There are a many companies that basically consist of CEO, CFO and legal.

Does it make the company great? Sure! Does that product stink? Yes, it does.

[J-R]

Not sure what the logic is behind expecting a company to not want to make money.  They are supposed to lose money and be charities?

The demand and margins are not really there for Fluke to make something different, otherwise they would.  Furthermore, I don't see anything similar to the 28x from Brymen or Hioki for example, so let's go bash them as well and cry about their laziness and corporate greed, yes?  I'll gladly join in and say Brymen is a huge offender here as we still have zero Bluetooth support and a 20 year old Windows app.

Plenty of people use the Fluke 289 as-is, otherwise they wouldn't be selling on ebay for $350+.  Also, older test equipment is still extremely popular for various reasons.  That is actually a slight issue for many companies like Fluke and Keysight.  People aren't looking to replace their gear as soon as something new and shiny comes out because the older product is still great.  So sales are harder to come by.

But as mentioned, there is the UT-181A, but also the CEM DT-9979 & DT-9989.  So they should dry those tears just fine, no?

[rsjsouza]

So, for a giant of measurement industry, it would be a mandatory slogan: keep products ahead of competitors. Fluke has this capability, for sure. For us, costumers of technology, is the price to pay for - upgrade, upgrade, upgrade...

Artur, as you are probably aware, DMMs are not consumer products like iPhones, thus the pressure for HW and SW upgrades/updates/new features is not as critical.

Moreover, the device is self-contained and therefore does not become obsolete with the passing of years - it still performs its functions as long as it is calibrated and functional.

Over the years it has been quite clear that Fluke's strategy for portable multimeters is to maintain consistency, reliability and quality control to stay ahead of the competition - naturally they fight hard to keep unblemished their brand recognition and perceived value as well (they are not stupid). Innovation and adventurous departures from their established designs, howerver, happen in many areas other than portable multimeters.

Making a lot of money in sales does not make the product great. Finding a way to sell 20-years old design is a huge deal for business.
“Pecunia non olet”. Money does not stink.

But the product does. It rots with time and stinks.

Doing nothing "strategy"? Sure, it helps to make money.

"Let all the engineers go, hire contractors to make another product and sell it for 25 years" - a huge number of products in the world are made like this. There are a many companies that basically consist of CEO, CFO and legal.

Does it make the company great? Sure! Does that product stink? Yes, it does.

If your definition of a product that does not "stink" is something that has continuous updates for the ultimate "features" and "technologies" and has a yearly rebranded/reworked user interface, then you couldn't be living in a better time than now. Zotek, Mestek and other OEMs will be able to feed your frantic chase for the novelty.

Also, if you think the product "rots" just because it keeps living in its original form (or with minute changes) over the decades, and can still be valuable and in full operational condition after the terrible state that several units can be found in many eBay and other used marketplaces, then I can imagine that you never had to support a product with such long production run. Do they need the same amount of engineering as a brand new product? Surely not, but that doesn't cast them to a state of decay as you suggest.

If you have not paid attention, Fluke has innovated in some of their other product lines (thermal imagers, for example) and, AFAIK, features the only DMMs with detachable screens for specific environments.

So your reasons to disapprove their strategy (without quotes) lack substance.

[jchw4]

Not sure what the logic is behind expecting a company to not want to make money.  They are supposed to lose money and be charities?

I did not say that. I just said that the fact that a company is making money does not always mean that their product is not outdated.
Their money is good for them. Why is it relevant to the 289 model?

The demand and margins are not really there for Fluke to make something different, otherwise they would.

My little understanding about how a market economy works is that they won't until they really have to.

Furthermore, I don't see anything similar to the 28x from Brymen or Hioki for example, so let's go bash them as well and cry about their laziness and corporate greed, yes?  I'll gladly join in and say Brymen is a huge offender here as we still have zero Bluetooth support and a 20 year old Windows app.

You get the idea.
If it looks like a duck ...

If we believe that "the longest selling model is the best" then everybody should go get Simpson 260.
How many years have they been making it? 70? It looks more like 80.
(I am pretty sure you would consider it a joke.)

Plenty of people use the Fluke 289 as-is, otherwise they wouldn't be selling on ebay for $350+.  Also, older test equipment is still extremely popular for various reasons.  That is actually a slight issue for many companies like Fluke and Keysight.  People aren't looking to replace their gear as soon as something new and shiny comes out because the older product is still great.  So sales are harder to come by.

People weren't looking to replace their phones with touch screens until there was an iPhone.

Actually it's not exactly true. I remember that I dreamed of a mobile Palm computer. So did others around me. There was a feeling that the phones "stink".

But as mentioned, there is the UT-181A, but also the CEM DT-9979 & DT-9989.  So they should dry those tears just fine, no?

I have never seen any of these and I cannot comment whether they are modern meters in any sense.

So, for a giant of measurement industry, it would be a mandatory slogan: keep products ahead of competitors. Fluke has this capability, for sure. For us, costumers of technology, is the price to pay for - upgrade, upgrade, upgrade...

Artur, as you are probably aware, DMMs are not consumer products like iPhones, thus the pressure for HW and SW upgrades/updates/new features is not as critical.

Moreover, the device is self-contained and therefore does not become obsolete with the passing of years - it still performs its functions as long as it is calibrated and functional.

Over the years it has been quite clear that Fluke's strategy for portable multimeters is to maintain consistency, reliability and quality control to stay ahead of the competition - naturally they fight hard to keep unblemished their brand recognition and perceived value as well (they are not stupid). Innovation and adventurous departures from their established designs, howerver, happen in many areas other than portable multimeters.

Making a lot of money in sales does not make the product great. Finding a way to sell a 20-years old design is a huge deal for business.
“Pecunia non olet”. Money does not stink.

But the product does. It rots with time and stinks.

Doing nothing "strategy"? Sure, it helps to make money.

"Let all the engineers go, hire contractors to make another product and sell it for 25 years" - a huge number of products in the world are made like this. There are a many companies that basically consist of CEO, CFO and legal.

Does it make the company great? Sure! Does that product stink? Yes, it does.

If your definition of a product that does not "stink" is something that has continuous updates for the ultimate "features" and "technologies" and has a yearly rebranded/reworked user interface, then you couldn't be living in a better time than now. Zotek, Mestek and other OEMs will be able to feed your frantic chase for the novelty.

No, this is not my definition.

Product is definitely outdated if you can find other products that have features for 1/10 of the original price.

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/motorola-moto-g-play-2023-32gb-unlocked-navy-blue/6525883.p Motorola Moto G Play (2023) (Unlocked) $109.99 .
Specs: https://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_moto_g_play_(2023)-11957.php

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805783498187.html Cubot Note 21 Smartphone 12GB+128GB 6.56"HD+Screen $89 (Free delivery!)
Specs: https://www.gsmarena.com/cubot_note_21-12544.php

A portable computer for $874.99 (https://www.fluke.com/en-us/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/fluke-289) should have one of them inside. No excuse.

Also, if you think the product "rots" just because it keeps living in its original form (or with minute changes) over the decades, and can still be valuable and in full operational condition after the terrible state that several units can be found in many eBay and other used marketplaces, then I can imagine that you never had to support a product with such long production run. Do they need the same amount of engineering as a brand new product? Surely not, but that doesn't cast them to a state of decay as you suggest.

Are you talking about Simpson 260? It can be repaired basically in any condition. Probably even after being hit by a railway car. (I am not sure a railway car has any chances of surving after this collision.)
Much better than 289!

If you have not paid attention, Fluke has innovated in some of their other product lines (thermal imagers, for example) and, AFAIK, features the only DMMs with detachable screens for specific environments.

So your reasons to disapprove their strategy (without quotes) lack substance.

I feel that you did not pay attention to what I said. I am totally fine with their strategy. They are making money and God bless them.

Why does this make 289 a modern meter? Why do their thermal imagers make 289 any better? Maybe It could be used as a souvenir to remind somebody that they also make good thermal imagers. 

[rsjsouza]

So, for a giant of measurement industry, it would be a mandatory slogan: keep products ahead of competitors. Fluke has this capability, for sure. For us, costumers of technology, is the price to pay for - upgrade, upgrade, upgrade...

Artur, as you are probably aware, DMMs are not consumer products like iPhones, thus the pressure for HW and SW upgrades/updates/new features is not as critical.

Moreover, the device is self-contained and therefore does not become obsolete with the passing of years - it still performs its functions as long as it is calibrated and functional.

Over the years it has been quite clear that Fluke's strategy for portable multimeters is to maintain consistency, reliability and quality control to stay ahead of the competition - naturally they fight hard to keep unblemished their brand recognition and perceived value as well (they are not stupid). Innovation and adventurous departures from their established designs, howerver, happen in many areas other than portable multimeters.

Making a lot of money in sales does not make the product great. Finding a way to sell a 20-years old design is a huge deal for business.
“Pecunia non olet”. Money does not stink.

But the product does. It rots with time and stinks.

Doing nothing "strategy"? Sure, it helps to make money.

"Let all the engineers go, hire contractors to make another product and sell it for 25 years" - a huge number of products in the world are made like this. There are a many companies that basically consist of CEO, CFO and legal.

Does it make the company great? Sure! Does that product stink? Yes, it does.

If your definition of a product that does not "stink" is something that has continuous updates for the ultimate "features" and "technologies" and has a yearly rebranded/reworked user interface, then you couldn't be living in a better time than now. Zotek, Mestek and other OEMs will be able to feed your frantic chase for the novelty.

No, this is not my definition.

Product is definitely outdated if you can find other products that have features for 1/10 of the original price.

Outdated is of little importance for products that still perform their original function. Obsolescence is what happens when the original function is not required anymore (or is deliberately forced to cessation of existence).

Also, price and value are two very distinct things. A common mistake is to restrict features to tangible aspects and assume they are the only aggregator of value. Features of a product, especially on the B2B sector which where most of the T&M players are, can also be reliability, track record, documentation, warranty and serviceability (which indeed these meters barely have but that is not exclusive to Fluke).

A portable computer for $874.99 (https://www.fluke.com/en-us/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/fluke-289) should have one of them inside. No excuse.

No, it shouldn't if the existing hardware does the job. That does not make the product "stink", it only makes it overpriced for some, a right price for others.

Also, if you think the product "rots" just because it keeps living in its original form (or with minute changes) over the decades, and can still be valuable and in full operational condition after the terrible state that several units can be found in many eBay and other used marketplaces, then I can imagine that you never had to support a product with such long production run. Do they need the same amount of engineering as a brand new product? Surely not, but that doesn't cast them to a state of decay as you suggest.

Are you talking about Simpson 260? It can be repaired basically in any condition. Probably even after being hit by a railway car. (I am not sure a railway car has any chances of surving after this collision.)
Much better than 289!

I fail to get where Simpson was mentioned in my post, but they are another example of a product that, although quite durable, perfectly meet your exact definition of a product that "stinks" - no "feature updates" and incredibly expensive.

And that is where you reveal that you have an axe to grind with Fluke and its 289 product: I am not defending Fluke, but instead simply pointing what it seems to be their strategy for portable meters, which differs to what we were conditioned to believe is the mark of a quality product: constant flow of new versions with features, timely software updates, quick replacement and obsolescence and so on.

If you have not paid attention, Fluke has innovated in some of their other product lines (thermal imagers, for example) and, AFAIK, features the only DMMs with detachable screens for specific environments.

So your reasons to disapprove their strategy (without quotes) lack substance.

I feel that you did not pay attention to what I said. I am totally fine with their strategy. They are making money and God bless them.

Your prior post hints of contempt for their strategy, so you seem to disapprove of it. Apologies if that was not your intent.

Why does this make 289 a modern meter? Why do their thermal imagers make 289 any better? Maybe It could be used as a souvenir to remind somebody that they also make good thermal imagers. 

Again, I am not discussing if the 289 is modern or not. I am talking about their strategy for portable meters.

Mind you I am not a Fluke fanboy - I like some of their meters, despite others, and recognize that their position in the current marketplace is not of a bleeding edge of portable DMMs.