Difference between fluke 289 and 287 ?  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / beginners

author: fa2ality
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2011, 04:59:21 am
content: As it says in the subject. The only thing I found on google is this:"Both the 289 and 287 have data logging capability. The only additional features of the 289 are a low pass filter to eliminate high frequency interference, a low impedance AC Volts function, and a low ohms range for measuring resistances less than 50 ohms."I will be using it for computer and laptop motherboard probing. Which will better fit my needs?

author: Richard W.
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2011, 01:52:48 pm
content: You already mentioned the only differences. LoZ, LoOhm, 1kHz LowPassLoZ is handy for checking sockets, LoOhm for checking cables, connectors and that stuff, and the low pass filter is good for vf motor drives.Difference in price isn't that much. The extra features are worth it.I'd recommend to buy the kit with the usb-interface, software, bag, ect.

author: Axel1973
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2011, 05:06:15 pm
content: i bought me the 289 as a kit a few weeks ago and must say its an EXCELENT Multimeter. as you statet there are just small differences. like the low ohm range.fluke mentioned it as to be usefull for someone who does lots of "high current motor stuff" going on. well i dont do that, but i found it handy on meassuring cables, low ohm resistors or connections, since it seems this low ohm range is even more precisely as the normal ohms range.to me it was not important, but i just wanted the lil extra "just in case" i would need it one day, and i already used it few times yet.So i thing its more a question of "commitment" (dont know a better word yet), or the question of beeing ready to pay the lil extra.if the extra money is a problem and u do not work with this kind of topics, you will not need it. else i found it usefull and my decicion to select the 289 been correct yet.and im just an "amateur"not a everyday electronics engineer. but i love good tools.best wishesAxel

author: fa2ality
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 05:20:06 am
content: Can it test esr in circuit?Will i still need an esr meter if i have the 289?

author: Axel1973
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 08:59:59 am
content: Quote from: fa2ality on December 28, 2011, 05:20:06 ami didnt checked the manual yet for ESR testing, but as far as i remember, i did not see any feature like that on the datasheets. so i guess NO. Its not cooking coffee neithermaybe after some firmware update.I also need some kind of ESR Test equipment too. but i want to try a simple cheap DIY version. not a "fancy/precise" one for the beginning.OH and BTW: the logging feature and those fancy "curves" that are shown on some datasheet/prospect ARE NOT an equivalent for an oscilloscope! Those are JUST trend graphes of the long term data that has been captured over time.best wishesAxel

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 06:08:42 pm
content: Quote from: fa2ality on December 27, 2011, 04:59:21 amSomeone just has to give that answer :-2

author: ipman
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 06:29:09 pm
content: It will not test in-circuit.An ESR-meter is just an AC ohm-meter, testing with a voltage lower than 0.6 volts and a frequency of around 100kHz. It's very precise for measuring low resistances, compared to my Fluke 189. My ESR-meter can go down to 0.01ohm, so does the 189, but the main thing is AC instead of DC in Fluke DMM. Being that sensitive, I've made a special pair of probes, around 10cm short, with good banana jacks soldered on one end and alligators on the other, which I highly recommend to anyone uses ESR-meters.

author: samgab
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 06:57:03 pm
content: Quote from: BoredAtWork on December 28, 2011, 06:08:42 pmIt already has been answered, both in the original post, and in the second post of this thread.The 3 differences listed are the only differences.

author: Axel1973
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 07:04:16 pm
content: So what ?!

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 08:30:58 pm
content: Quote from: samgab on December 28, 2011, 06:57:03 pmSubtract 287 from 289 ...

author: Axel1973
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 10:29:37 pm
content: duh.. oh realy?!the point is, why do u start arguing about that redundant question and the redundant, but "to the point" anwser? id say its at least "as useless".

author: samgab
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2011, 11:58:31 pm
content: Quote from: BoredAtWork on December 28, 2011, 08:30:58 pmlolDon't I feel like a dunce!