[suggestion] 121GW EEVBlog vs Flue 179 - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: alentor
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 02:50:11 pm
content: Hello,I'm in the market for my first multi meter which one would you suggest to buy out of the twoFluke 179 vs 121GW EEVBlogThank you!

author: coromonadalix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 02:55:35 pm
content: The Fluke 179 right awayIm sorry, but the 121gw is not fully debugged and 100% functional even with fw updates ... i still hope one day it will ...Even clean used Flukes 83, 87 series are way better ... it depends on your budget and what you have available in your country.

author: alentor
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 02:59:45 pm
content: Quote from: coromonadalix on January 02, 2019, 02:55:35 pmNew Fluke 83/87 are way out of my budget, didn't find any used ones so, Decided to stick to Fluke 179..Thank you! <3

author: alentor
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 03:42:47 pm
content: Quote from: coromonadalix on January 02, 2019, 02:55:35 pmNinja quote,Just found a great deal for the 87v for the price of 179 from a local supplier, gonna grab it until it lasts!!

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 04:28:45 pm
content: If you can get 189, its even better.

author: coromonadalix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 07:05:57 pm
content: If he's lucky lollAn 87v is already a good pick.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 11:06:03 pm
content: QuoteUnless the funds are burning a hole in your pocket, I would suggest neither - they are both too expensive when you don't know what you're buying.Possibly a better solution would be to purchase a nice mid-range meter, say a Uni-T of good reputation. That way, when you use it you will learn what's important to you: what feature you wish it had, what part of it irritates you, etc. Then you will be able to buy an expensive meter knowing that it perfectly fits your requirements (as opposed to being the unattainable dream of someone else).

author: Terry01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 11:17:16 pm
content: It really depends what you are going to use the meter for.For hobby use or even working use that is not going to mind if measuring a resistor takes an extra second or 2 the 121GW has tons more features than the other 2 if you intend to use it for electronics stuff. If you intend to use it for more car repairs and house type stuff the 87v is probably best.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 06:39:34 am
content: Quote from: Terry01 on January 02, 2019, 11:17:16 pmMy experience tells me that two seconds can feel like a lifetime and starts becoming annoying rather quickly. I vastly prefer the 87V over slower meters for the simply reason I can just get on with it. More features are a luxury, but having the basics work properly and conveniently is very conducive to getting work done. If you want more features, get a meter which is quick too.If you can afford it and get a good deal, the 87V isn't going to disappoint. It's plain and simple and it does the job without fuss.

author: alex-sh
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 09:36:06 am
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on January 03, 2019, 06:39:34 amIt depends, but I would still go for 121GW. I am using the meter to measure low current and given that uCurrent is implemented into 121GW, it is the best meter for me.1-2 seconds delay does not bother me at all and I am sure this will be corrected soon

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 09:52:03 am
content: Rather than giving your favourite brand as an answer shouldn't the first question have been what sort of things did the OP want or need to do with it?Sounds like he has made a choice but if it is missing some of the functionality needed to do the job then time for another meter then join TEA buy a third and a then down the slide into the rabbit hole ......

author: firewalker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 09:56:00 am
content: No, don't buy 121GW. 121GW is a good feature pact DMM but at the moment is not "stable" enough. You will have to second guess it. Not a good thing for your first multimeter. Not good for any DMM.I wouldn;t buy Fluke 179 either.With the same amount of money I would buy 2 or 3 cheaper but reputable DMMs from different manufacturers.Alexander.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 10:07:18 am
content: Quote from: alex-sh on January 03, 2019, 09:36:06 amWhat tells you it can and will be corrected? It has been an issue from the beginning.

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 10:30:41 am
content: Quote from: firewalker on January 03, 2019, 09:56:00 amPlease provide 'evidence' for having to 'second guess it' or not 'stable' I have never had either of these issues? Mine is stable accurate and sits in my on site bag with the only real issue is the over reported auto range time issue. Still haven't found the perfect meter but it suits MY needs at present and it meets or exceeds spec as stated.Modern Flukes are far from what they were and don't represent value for money/features in the current market. Doesn't mean don't buy one but $ can be spent better. Trading on a former reputation to hold up a price for profit has limits.Uni-T is pot luck rather than a good option unless you look at reputable teardowns and abuse of each. Safety on some models is very ordinary if you are playing with mains in particular. Some of the other cheapies of unmentioned brands are downright dangerous and need proper scrutiny.Hence the OP should have been asked their proposed use and needs.Quote from: Mr. Scram on January 03, 2019, 10:07:18 amBeyond firmware updates (it has already had two revisions to the auto range bit as per the changelog) how can it and will it be corrected in the current models? If there is another generation bearing the same name made it would need maybe a new chipset (even a re design with this chipset wont be as quick as some) a complete rewrite of all the current firmware but there is real limits to changes available to the current meters.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 10:35:38 am
content: QuoteHow do you know? Do you have a reference to compare it against all the time?</devils_advocate>

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 10:40:52 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on January 03, 2019, 10:35:38 amCheck this more recent page on the 121GW thread for some tests I ran.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/eevblog-121gw-discussion-thread/1275/Several hours running against two 6 1/2 digit meters against my Fluke 515A portable calibrator showed it sitting very nicely in line with them too. Also compared to page one of that same thread it has remained stable against the same gear from January.So Stable YES. And still not the perfect meter

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 11:00:02 am
content: QuoteA quick glance didn't show anything along the lines of calibration and I have no inclination to browse 1300 posts looking for I don't know what. Maybe a more appropriate message number? But don't bother - I am being serious.Nevertheless, it is one thing to be stable at some arbitrary value and another to be accurateeverytime you whip it out of the hot/cold/damp/dry box and feed it some DC/AC/R. Which, I think, applies to all our kit - we take it on trust that it is going to read correctly but mostly we don't actually know that it will. Or has.I am reminded that I once wrote a cheat detection module for an online game to catch bots, and one iteration was, er, not appropriate. Despite having programmed it and knowing it was telling fibs, it was really difficult to ignore the results it was producing. Raw numbers, particularly with a decimal point, are generally taken as authoritative even when we have suspicions about them.

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 11:15:10 am
content: There is about 3 or 4 posts of mine on that page with spreadsheet data over a range so I didn't list them all here. The 34401a is an order of magnitude better in accuracy and was calibrated a couple of years ago so I have a good level of confidence in what results I got.I did some walk up tests in this post in particular at a range of temperatureshttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/eevblog-121gw-discussion-thread/msg2059510/#msg2059510Far from full characterization but I can't fault the meter against spec.Ambit claims of unstable and second guess with ZERO supporting evidence or data should have way less weight but that is not how humans are wired in the current world it seems.I wouldn't even know how to write Macro cheats for online Games either

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 11:21:57 am
content: Quote from: alentor on January 02, 2019, 02:50:11 pmThey are two very different meters with different feature sets, why compare those two?The 179 doesn't even have the ability to measure uA, as such I don't even class it as an electronics meter, it's an electrical meter.I wouldn't recommend a $200+ class meter as your first meter where you have to ask the question "which meter".

author: alentor
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 11:02:53 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 03, 2019, 11:21:57 amAlright, then which meter do you recommend as a first meter, it's mainly going to be used for automotive application and most likely down the road for electronic stuff as well.I have found a good offering for the 87v, And that is what I'm most likely going to get, unless you convince me not to.Thank you! <3

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 11:51:19 am
content: There are literally hundreds of meters that up to being used on Automotive or Electronics so you in the end need to choose what features you need.Cheap, reasonable accuracy and expendable. DC Clamp meter is very useful for automotive current. Not up to mains voltage with reasonable safety. But a meter that will remain a good second one later on because of the clamphttp://www.uni-trend.com/productsdetail_1999_1111_1111.htmlCheap and more rugged and some more functionality. Pick one of thesehttp://www.uni-trend.com/productscatelist2_1096_1096_1096_1096.html$50 USD or under for a bunch of those above similar safety warning for mains voltages for some of them.Want to burn some money for little if any functionality gain but improved safety and additional accuracy in your case buy the Fluke.Want more Features for Electronics later with good safety buy the 121GW.If you are going to get more serious about Electronics you will need more than one most likely so start cheaper and figure out the better one you really need as you use #1.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 07:23:13 pm
content: Quote from: coromonadalix on January 08, 2019, 11:45:06 amIf you can guarantee the 87V is in good condition and at a reasonable price in your market, I would pick it as well.The 179 is an excellent meter and can be used for a lot of electronics applications, despite not having a µA range (I got a µCurrent to cover this area). It is also built like a war tank and will last you a lifetime.The discussion about other more reasonably priced meters is also relevant, but they are quite tied to the availability of your market. If you can get a Brymen via eBay or another e-business venue, they tend to bring a lot more features for the same price.

author: toastedcrumpets
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 08:23:17 pm
content: You know there's a brand new 179 right here for £140 right?https://www.eevblog.com/forum/buysellwanted/fs-(uk)-fluke-179-meter-new-unused/

author: jayjr1105
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 02:15:47 am
content: IMHO for your first meter grab a UT61E, UT139C, 2709B, or BM235 and a $17 pair of probemasters.