What do you think of the new Fluke 87 V MAX?

[tooki]

Wait, so you’re saying that the techs preferred the 114 because they were afraid of the 87V because its  features overwhelmed them, but you’re also saying that Fluke should design a new chipset so they can add more features?

[Mr. Scram]

:::whoosh:::

^^ sound of the point zipping right over your head.

It wasn't ging to be a 737 MAX zipping over my head was it?  Do elaborate.

[floobydust]

Wait, so you’re saying that the techs preferred the 114 because they were afraid of the 87V because its  features overwhelmed them, but you’re also saying that Fluke should design a new chipset so they can add more features?

I think you're saying Fluke handheld meters such as 87V are designed for industry and electricians - not for engineers in the lab.
I disagree in two ways- I've found electricians prefer simple, lower cost models, and the 87V was never great for field use, missing a low Z feature. So why add a fat bumper, make it waterproof and tougher for drops, add a few outdoor features... to an indoor multimeter?
I think the 87V is very good in the lab, engineers use and trust them a lot. Many engineers are fans of that model here.


For Fluke DMM's to stay relevant, the next generation DMM's need a new single chip DMM IC. Not that Fortive will get off their greedy, lazy ass and do some real product development. Just sit back and milk the old cash cow, everyone collects a paycheque hoping the stock goes up. These mega-conglomerates kill legendary brands in a slow painful death.

I suspect component obsolescence is the real reason 87V MAX is using the 28II hardware. The 87V might get discontinued as part of the big plan.

[rsjsouza]

Just like many other Flukes, the 87V uses a programmable Flash MSP430 device which is still in production. I am not so sure about the other parts though.

Regarding electricians' requirements, most of the ones I know like the 179, which also does not have LowZ measurements. At the labs I work, 87V and 187/189 are the norm. I have no idea what big contractors such as the various government agencies use.

[Fungus]

They don’t want bells and whistles. They want simple, reliable, and consistent.

So... Fluke 117?

And it’s a good thing you’re not a manager, because you’d fall flat on your face from not understanding what those customers want.

They don't want the Fluke 87V MAX, I know that much.


It’s a good thing you’re not a manager, because you fail to understand there might be other types of customers out there who'd be prepared to pay for a few upgrades.

[Doom-the-Squirrel]

This isn't an electrician's multimeter - No low Z (V or C) so you can't trust readings out in the field. Silly conductance measurement, ±0.05% accuracy is unnecessary.

I worked with plant electricians and they were scared of the 87V, didn't understand all the features and were afraid to damage one. It was too embarrassing to damage such an expensive meter and have all your peers laughing at you and the boss pissed off. This is what they told me. So the 114 (no current measurement) was  popular for them.

Fluke really need a new DMM chipset, to lower costs and increase features. The days of the Linear Tech alliance are long gone, I can't see Analog Devices really giving a shit over high margin, low volume IC fab. Hycon and Cyrustek Taiwan have the leading DMM IC's out there.

The 87V NG will likely have marketing add airbags, so it can survive a very long drop.
The holster offered in hot pink or rainbow colour, for a gender inclusive product.
Probably has MCAS in it, so the 87V MAX behaves just like an 87V despite 28II hardware.

I don't know about that.
I'm told that at the Palo Verde plant, Fluke 87Vs are used.

[Black Phoenix]

(...) other types of customers out there who'd be prepared to pay for a few upgrades.

Unfortunately that kind of customer is a drop in the ocean. It's not the John Doe who likes to mess around with electronics or all the users on this forum who will make a dent when you have the Military/Government contracts who order a lot more. So I understand why Fluke done what we have been talking here, but that doesn't mean that I should feel OK with that. But I can't and don't have the power to change something. I'm just a sale in a sea of bigger contracts that pushes a lot more units.

[tooki]

They don’t want bells and whistles. They want simple, reliable, and consistent.

So... Fluke 117?

And it’s a good thing you’re not a manager, because you’d fall flat on your face from not understanding what those customers want.

They don't want the Fluke 87V MAX, I know that much.


It’s a good thing you’re not a manager, because you fail to understand there might be other types of customers out there who'd be prepared to pay for a few upgrades.

Of course I know such customers exist. What I understand, and you don’t, is that Fluke doesn’t want those customers, because catering to them would make their product less attractive to their core customer group. One NEVER improves a product by trying to make it be everything to everyone. You succeed by focusing a product on a particular customer group and tailoring it for them.

And as I said, Fluke already has models that cater to people who need more features.

[tooki]

Wait, so you’re saying that the techs preferred the 114 because they were afraid of the 87V because its  features overwhelmed them, but you’re also saying that Fluke should design a new chipset so they can add more features?

I think you're saying Fluke handheld meters such as 87V are designed for industry and electricians - not for engineers in the lab.
I disagree in two ways- I've found electricians prefer simple, lower cost models, and the 87V was never great for field use, missing a low Z feature. So why add a fat bumper, make it waterproof and tougher for drops, add a few outdoor features... to an indoor multimeter?
I think the 87V is very good in the lab, engineers use and trust them a lot. Many engineers are fans of that model here.

Ummm... look at Fluke’s branding, advertisement, marketing, etc for handheld meters from the past 30+ years. It’s all for electricians, industrial maintenance, and the like. They’re not designed or marketed for lab work.

As I said, many of us use them for engineering anyway, but it’s NOT what they’re designed for!!! That’s obvious to anyone who’s looked at their communication even cursorily.

The fact that another group of customers buys a product doesn’t mean they are the target market. For example, one can use salt and flour to make play-dough,and it’s commonly done, but that doesn’t suddenly prove that flour mills designed their flour for play-dough makers. It’s just a tangential application.

Why add a bumper to a non-waterproof meter? Ummm, because indoor industrial environments exist? It’s actually possible, as it turns out, to have falls onto concrete indoors.

For Fluke DMM's to stay relevant, the next generation DMM's need a new single chip DMM IC. Not that Fortive will get off their greedy, lazy ass and do some real product development. Just sit back and milk the old cash cow, everyone collects a paycheque hoping the stock goes up. These mega-conglomerates kill legendary brands in a slow painful death.

What’s wrong with the current chipset?? I’ve seen nothing here other than lust for novelty, but nothing even distantly approaching an actual deficiency.


I do agree with you about stupid conglomerates that strip companies of their value and leave their sorry husks behind. (See “corporate raiding”.)

[Fungus]

Of course I know such customers exist. What I understand, and you don’t, is that Fluke doesn’t want those customers, because catering to them would make their product less attractive to their core customer group. One NEVER improves a product by trying to make it be everything to everyone. You succeed by focusing a product on a particular customer group and tailoring it for them.

Maybe so, but all the people saying they can't touch a single feature because procedure/manuals/process are still contradict themselves:
a) The 'V' in "87V" is a roman numeral. Fluke has changed the 87 feature set five times.
b) This new "MAX" model doesn't have the same electrical specifications as the 'V' model.
c) If it were true the US army would still be using the Fluke 27FM.

And as I said, Fluke already has models that cater to people who need more features.

They stopped producing the 189.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Fluke doesn't care about features or making the best possible meters any more. They're run by bean counters and just milking their brand name and existing contracts for all they're worth.

[Bud]

So why add a fat bumper, make it waterproof and tougher for drops, add a few outdoor features... to an indoor multimeter?

Also the screen sucks donkey balls in indoors lighting. Seems to be great in daylight outside, wonder if this is a feature, not a bug.

[floobydust]

Also the screen sucks donkey balls in indoors lighting. Seems to be great in daylight outside, wonder if this is a feature, not a bug.

With the 28II lower compliance voltage, I thought it's due to new silicon or the lowered rails.  It must be the (new) lower battery voltage? From 9V to 3xAA.
ASIC LTC984-1 (SL10327) Fluke 2103969 does the ohms-source and runs off +/-2.5VDC in the old 87V, MSP430 sees 5V to drive the LCD.

If there is no boost-converter to make up for the lower battery voltage, then LCD contrast is also going to take a hit and it explains the lower ohms compliance voltage. Still fishy.

[tooki]

Maybe so, but all the people saying they can't touch a single feature because procedure/manuals/process are still contradict themselves:

It's not a contradiction. It's explaining that you don't want to make gratuitous changes that will trigger major review. You keep changes to a minimum, both in terms of frequency and scope. That way, procedure and documentation reviews, being arduous as they are for those customers, are kept to a minimum. Not to zero, just to a minimum.

It's not that you can't change the product at all, it's that if you do it too much, you will piss off key customers. It makes more sense to instead produce additional models, and that's exactly what Fluke has done over the years. That way, customers that want more features can choose those, and customers who need continuity are also served.

a) The 'V' in "87V" is a roman numeral. Fluke has changed the 87 feature set five times.

Nope.

There have been exactly three "true" 87 models: the original 87 (1988), the 87III (1998), and the 87V (2004). The 87IV (1999) did not replace the 87III, but was sold alongside it, and later became the 187 (2000), and that evolved into the 287 (2008). The 87IV was an additional model, not an actual upgrade.

AFAIK there was no 87II. I think they went straight to III to align the series numbers with the 70 series III.

b) This new "MAX" model doesn't have the same electrical specifications as the 'V' model.

Nope, it's not identical. And that's probably why they're not canceling the 87V. (Though it begs the question of why bothering, since the 28II already existed.)

c) If it were true the US army would still be using the Fluke 27FM.

And why do you think Fluke still makes the 27II? Legacy procedures and manuals are the only plausible explanation, given that nobody else in their right mind would spend that much money on an average-response meter. Changing those procedures to TRMS would require a lot of work, and entail some risk, so those customers would just as soon not change the procedure.

(FWIW, John Fluke was a Navy technician, so military environments are something Fluke has been focused on from day 1.)

And as I said, Fluke already has models that cater to people who need more features.

They stopped producing the 189.

Umm, okay? What's your point. I didn't say the 189 specifically, I said "models", which they do indeed make, like the 287/289.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Fluke doesn't care about features or making the best possible meters any more. They're run by bean counters and just milking their brand name and existing contracts for all they're worth.

**yawn**

[tooki]

:::whoosh:::

^^ sound of the point zipping right over your head.

It wasn't ging to be a 737 MAX zipping over my head was it?  Do elaborate.

Nobody said "MAX" was exclusive to Boeing. What we all expressed incredulity about was that anyone would choose to begin using MAX in a product name after the 737 MAX grounding (March 2019).

Apple, for example, began using Max (in the iPhone XS Max) in late 2018 (just before the first crash), and continued it this year with the 11 Pro Max, in what I consider to be a series of unusually inelegant product names.

[Electro Detective]

Has anyone spotted a "28-11 to 87V MAX upgrade conversion kit" on Ebay or Ali yet? 

$20 to $30 would be reasonable for a decent quality meter shell
and just re-use the same amber/yellow/orange holster that has no markings

The new OHL produced meter shell may feature metal screw posts to entice sales from fence sitters 

and as a side bonus > help to keep the meter fairly intact in a real world CAT 6  styled -BANG!-    

[Doom-the-Squirrel]

Has anyone spotted a "28-11 to 87V MAX upgrade conversion kit" on Ebay or Ali yet? 

$20 to $30 would be reasonable for a decent quality meter shell
and just re-use the same amber/yellow/orange holster that has no markings

The new OHL produced meter shell may feature metal screw posts to entice sales from fence sitters 

and as a side bonus > help to keep the meter fairly intact in a real world CAT 6  styled -BANG!-    

All you need is a label that says "87V MAX True RMS Multimeter" and stick it on the 28II. 

[Electro Detective]

In the meantime, whilst everyone awaits Ebay/Ali sellers to oblige with said 'upgrade' stickers   (6 sticker for 2 dollar FREE POST)   

pop a speck of black electrical tape on the '28-11' part = temporary meter upgrade job done   

and it's a reversible 'hack'   


( )

[rammy]

It seems the 87V Max are now released, who's gonna try first

[Gandalf_Sr]

It seems the 87V Max are now released, who's gonna try first

For $450 US they should be kissing me when trying to sell me an 87V with [IP67] printed on the front.  If you can pick up a 'used' Keysight U1242C for $225 US on the eBay Keysight store then that would be a much better deal IMHO.

[Doom-the-Squirrel]

It seems the 87V Max are now released, who's gonna try first

I'm tempted to get one for work, but only because I don't have a meter like the 28 II.

Still, I have to pay down some debt and pay off the tool truck bills.

[Electro Detective]

It seems the 87V Max are now released, who's gonna try first

Not me, I'll have to sell off both the 28-11 and 87V to afford one 

Perhaps EEVblog host DJ will test drive one soon? 

[tooki]

It seems the 87V Max are now released, who's gonna try first

For $450 US they should be kissing me when trying to sell me an 87V with [IP67] printed on the front.  If you can pick up a 'used' Keysight U1242C for $225 US on the eBay Keysight store then that would be a much better deal IMHO.

As someone who owns both an 87V and a U1252B, it’s a no-brainer: I’d pick the Fluke in a heartbeat even at twice the cost. The Keysight simply cannot compare, despite superior specs. I recognize that the U1242C is a different model designed later, but my understanding is that no Keysight handheld DMMs compare in continuity mode. (The 1252B’s is so slow as to be practically useless.) But above all, there are just the occasional quirks that make me not trust the Keysight 100%, whereas I trust the Fluke implicitly.

[rsjsouza]

Tooki, perhaps the Escort designs were lacklustre in this aspect, but the newer U123x, U127x and U128x are as fast as the Flukes. (I don't know the U124x)

If you talk about the feel of robustness of the rotary switch, however, I don't think anybody was able to replicate the feel of the 87V and the 179 - even my 189 does not feel that robust.

[tooki]

Really? I could be mistaken, but I thought I saw multiple reviews of the U1273A/AX complain that its continuity wasn’t as good as Fluke.

As for the rotary switch, it’s definitely not as nice as the 87V, but it’s not what I was thinking of. More things like occasional readings that don’t agree with the Fluke nor any other meters, sometimes even itself.

[Fungus]

If you talk about the feel of robustness of the rotary switch, however, I don't think anybody was able to replicate the feel of the 87V and the 179 - even my 189 does not feel that robust.

The rotary switch of one of those crumbled to dust after a few thousand turns in joe's switch rotating machine. The Fluke was like new after 50,000.