May have a faulty 287 - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 03:32:08 pm
content: Hi All just phoned Fluke, and they said my new 287 may be defective. Seems my free memory won't go any higher than 97%. I deleted all, and still remains at 97%. Robbin at Fluke said thats not right. What do you guys get when you delete everything? The rest of the meter is fine.

author: commongrounder
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 03:41:26 pm
content: I emptied the memory on my 289 and it says 100% available.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 03:52:29 pm
content: 100% here as well.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 03:53:10 pm
content: Have you tried "Secure Erase" option in the Setup menu ?Quoting from the Fluke manual ..."The Secure Erase option allows user-accessible memory to be erased as required by Homeland Security regulations.Meter calibration is not lostwhen this low-level erase is performed."

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 04:01:20 pm
content: No I have not. I'll give it a go is a minute. Can't believe my first Fluke is dud for something so stupid.

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 04:30:22 pm
content: Tried the secure erase, and the meter only goes down to 99%. Bear Bowen at Fluke said then it's definitely defective, and should be returned. My first Fluke a dud. Happenes to me more often then I can believe actually.

author: gaijin
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 04:35:26 pm
content: I have a new 289 that only hits 99% free when the memory is erased.factory cal date was 07/17/13.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 04:38:24 pm
content: Interesting, too bad I can't erase mine cause there are still few recordings that I like to keep, keep us updated on the progress with Fluke.

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 04:46:58 pm
content: Quote from: gaijin on February 06, 2014, 04:35:26 pmMine was calibrated 11-2013! Be interesting to know how many of these are out there with this problem.

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 04:58:06 pm
content: Also noticed what looks like a smear behind the lens! Not impressed with these little defects for a top of the line meter. QC failed on this one.

author: smoothtalker
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 05:25:58 pm
content: Quote from: tony3d on February 06, 2014, 04:58:06 pmFluke seems to be getting a little complacent. My 87V has poor printing on the Fluke logo! the yellow highlighting on the fluke logo has a fading tail..shouldn't the logo their pride? oh well...

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 08:25:26 pm
content: Sent it back today. Now for the wait. Bought the Fluke just so I wouldn't have to do something like this.

author: GiskardReventlov
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 08:40:56 pm
content: Quote from: smoothtalker on February 06, 2014, 05:25:58 pmThis is interesting, I have been doing some searching on ebay (I was looking at their FindIt search API) and I was using fluke as a keyword. I noticed that 87V are like a commodity it seems. There are a lot of them on there and their selling price at auction is pretty consistent.Where did you buy it? Counterfeiting's quite prevalent but only for things that move fast. I recall a long time ago some Cisco routers were counterfeited.

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 08:46:07 pm
content: Quote from: GiskardReventlov on February 06, 2014, 08:40:56 pmNo, I bought it from TEquipment. It's a real Fluke brand new. Sorry wrong post.

author: WVL_KsZeN
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 09:25:16 pm
content: My 289 also shows 99%, not worried, prolly just some miscalculation.

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2014, 09:41:14 pm
content: Quote from: WVL_KsZeN on February 06, 2014, 09:25:16 pmSo now it looks like a super cap problem, and a memory problem on the 287/289? What the hell else is wrong with this meter?

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 07, 2014, 02:36:01 am
content: Like I said in your other thread, Fluke has their problems just like everyone else. The advice given to just replace the super capacitor yourself and forget the guarantee obviously was not good advice. Of course fanboys of any manufacturer will have reasons why their specific object of lust is not at fault but I have never heard of any manufacturer not having something go wrong.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2014, 11:49:53 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on February 07, 2014, 02:36:01 amIn 2-4 years when the cap goes bad, he'd know if he had a reliable unit.

author: Cdngreybeard
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2014, 02:40:33 pm
content: Your 287 may be perfectly fine. My 289 also reads 99% when memory is cleared and I have never worried about it. Calibration is bang on, battery draw is normal, display is updating as it should, and the data trending is working as expected. As for the super cap leak, I don't really care. If, when it goes in for calibration, it looks like it might need replacing, I'll replace it. It doesn't detract from the worthiness of the meter. It is a very useful tool in my arsenal of test equipment.

author: tony3d
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2014, 06:30:50 pm
content: Quote from: Cdngreybeard on February 07, 2014, 02:40:33 pmI was told by Fluke, that it was definitely defective, and should be returned! Mine would sometimes report as low as 96% return of memory. Definitely not right.