# Fluke 179 or 87V?



## iAmCam

I am wanting to pick up a new DMM. Narrowed it down to the 179 and the 87V. Will the 87V have that many more features over the 179? The price difference is not a concern. Wondering if the 87V triumphs the 179 or is there just minor differences


----------



## wildleg

go to fluke.com 

download the manual for the 87v and you can learn about the differences by reading the manual.


----------



## Electric_Light

Don't pay attention to the 6000 count vs 20000 count. Assume they're both 6,000 count.

I have the 87V. Many 3 1/2 digit DMMs are 2,000 count. The fractional digit, though should not be used in my opinion, because its a confusing notation. Some call 6,000 a 3 1/2, some call it 3 3/4. I would like to call it 3 3/5. 

6,000 count is nice as it gives an extra digit at voltage ranges we like to work with. On a 2,000 count(0.2v, 2v, 20v, 200v and 1,000v) , 121 would switch into 1,000 v range and read as 121v. On the 6,000 ct design, you'll get 1/10v reading until 599.9v 

The 20,000 count mode is enabled by holding down one button and it adds a digit if its under 2,000 cts. So, at 120v, it might read 120.12v instead of 120.1v. At 210v, the button would have no effect. It's not all that useful. 

The 87V has a low-pass filter which allows the meter to see the voltage as if its an inductive machine. This is only useful if you're working with a motor drive. 

The 87V has µA mode. This is useful if you work on electronics or need to work with furnace flame sensors, but if you mainly do HVAC, you might as well get the HVAC model which is designed to be more ergonomically friendly for HVAC techs. 

The 179 has filtered mode which makes it easier for you to see the reading on a highly fluctuating input, but on the 87V, you just push "auto hold" and the meter locks onto a stable reading. 

87V offers duty cycle option. It's kind of hard to get a stable reading on PWM system when there isn't a very strong on and off contrast. It is used by mechanics to test fuel injector and various pump duty cycles. I don't really use it other than just out of curiosity. 

What do you plan on doing with it? Tell me very specifically and hopefully I can help you.


----------



## Electric_Light

Don't pay attention to the 6000 count vs 20000 count. Assume they're both 6,000 count.

I have the 87V. Many 3 1/2 digit DMMs are 2,000 count. The fractional digit, though should not be used in my opinion, because its a confusing notation. Some call 6,000 a 3 1/2, some call it 3 3/4. I would like to call it 3 3/5. 

6,000 count is nice as it gives an extra digit at voltage ranges we like to work with. On a 2,000 count(0.2v, 2v, 20v, 200v and 1,000v) , 121 would switch into 1,000 v range and read as 121v. On the 6,000 ct design, you'll get 1/10v reading until 599.9v 

The 20,000 count mode is enabled by holding down one button and it adds a digit if its under 2,000 cts. So, at 120v, it might read 120.12v instead of 120.1v. At 210v, the button would have no effect. It's not all that useful. 

The 87V has a low-pass filter which allows the meter to see the voltage as if its an inductive machine. This is only useful if you're working with a motor drive. 

The 87V has µA mode. This is useful if you work on electronics or need to work with furnace flame sensors, but if you mainly do HVAC, you might as well get the HVAC model which is designed to be more ergonomically friendly for HVAC techs. 

The 179 has filtered mode which makes it easier for you to see the reading on a highly fluctuating input, but on the 87V, you just push "auto hold" and the meter locks onto a stable reading. 

87V offers duty cycle option. It's kind of hard to get a stable reading on PWM system when there isn't a very strong on and off contrast. It is used by mechanics to test fuel injector and various pump duty cycles. I don't really use it other than just out of curiosity. 

What do you plan on doing with it? Tell me very specifically and hopefully I can help you.


----------



## ilikepez

get the 87V. you won't be disappointed. I recommend the one with the extra test leads set.


----------



## Electric_Light

ilikepez said:


> *get the 87V.* you won't be disappointed. I recommend the one with the extra test leads set.


But why? 
If all he'll use it is for electrical work and use ACV 99% of the time, it doesn't matter. Actually, for electricians, I would recommend something that has the Lo-Z, which allows the meter to load the circuit slightly just like analog meters, so that you don't see capacitive couple voltage from adjacent wires.


----------



## Voltage Hazard

I agree with Electric Light on this. Why the heck does he need something as expensive as an 87V for electrical work? Yes, the 87V has 0.05% DC accuracy, but 99.5% of the time, I'm measuring AC. The AC accuracy of a 87 is only 0.7%. Hell, the $120 Fluke 114 has 1% AC accuracy, and the freaking $60 Klein has the same 0.7% AC accuracy as the Fluke 87. So, there is no need to pay 5 times more for higher accuracy.

As for features, I would rather have the low impedance of the Fluke 117, instead of the conductance feature of the 87V. It's like the 87 is the "status symbol" that everyone aspires to have, but doesn't need. I just don't get it. For me, the Fluke 177 is the most meter that any of us really need. It's made in USA, and plenty durable. But, it needs low impedance too.


----------



## Electric_Light

Voltage Hazard said:


> I agree with Electric Light on this. Why the heck does he need something as expensive as an 87V for electrical work? Yes, the 87V has 0.05% DC accuracy, but 99.5% of the time, I'm measuring AC.


That's only guaranteed if you have it calibrated annually. Back in the days, a master meter in the shop to calibrate other meters was useful, because you can calibrate other meters by turning pots until meters under test reads the same as the mater meter, but these days, the meters ask for a very specific voltage, like 60.00v and you have to provide it and hit next.

DIY calibration is no longer an option. 




> The AC accuracy of a 87 is only 0.7%. Hell, the $120 Fluke 114 has 1% AC accuracy, and the freaking $60 Klein has the same 0.7% AC accuracy as the Fluke 87. So, there is no need to pay 5 times more for higher accuracy.


If you're contesting "voltage out of tolerance" issue with the PoCo, then high accuracy comes into play, but you are at loss if they ask you "how do you know your meter isn't off?" unless you can show them that the meter has a current calibration. 

I have an 87V and a 189. Calibration are expired on both meters, so I'm not going to bother... and at that point... accuracy specs is only for self-satisfaction. If you need to write a letter to the PoCo, you will need to cite the calibration expiry date and serial # for your values to to have any weight. 

I use this cheapo I bought form Harbor Freight when I'm working on my car, which costs like $5. I don't abuse it, but if I get some brake cleaner on it and ruin the case or accidentally drive over it, oh well. Since cars are not high energy circuit, CAT rating is not an issue. 

When you're working on AC line, anything with CAT III 1kV is fine, and CAT IV 600v only if you work on high energy circuit, like industrial machinery, or checking secondary voltage at distribution transformer. 

Only reason to really have a need for 87V is if you need the Lo-pas to measure voltage as seen at the motor on VSDs.


----------



## wptski

Voltage Hazard said:


> I agree with Electric Light on this. Why the heck does he need something as expensive as an 87V for electrical work? Yes, the 87V has 0.05% DC accuracy, but 99.5% of the time, I'm measuring AC. The AC accuracy of a 87 is only 0.7%. Hell, the $120 Fluke 114 has 1% AC accuracy, and the freaking $60 Klein has the same 0.7% AC accuracy as the Fluke 87. So, there is no need to pay 5 times more for higher accuracy.
> 
> As for features, I would rather have the low impedance of the Fluke 117, instead of the conductance feature of the 87V. It's like the 87 is the "status symbol" that everyone aspires to have, but doesn't need. I just don't get it. For me, the Fluke 177 is the most meter that any of us really need. It's made in USA, and plenty durable. But, it needs low impedance too.


A bit bulky but one can use a Fluke SV225 Stray Voltage Adapter with the 179.


----------



## ilikepez

Electric_Light said:


> But why?
> If all he'll use it is for electrical work and use ACV 99% of the time, it doesn't matter. Actually, for electricians, I would recommend something that has the Lo-Z, which allows the meter to load the circuit slightly just like analog meters, so that you don't see capacitive couple voltage from adjacent wires.


Sure I would recommend a meter like a 117 for basic electrical stuff even a T5 will be plenty most of the time for most people. But the question is which is better a 179 or an 87V. I say the 87V.


----------



## Voltage Hazard

ilikepez said:


> Sure I would recommend a meter like a 117 for basic electrical stuff even a T5 will be plenty most of the time for most people. But the question is which is better a 179 or an 87V. I say the 87V.


I guess you can say a 87V is "better" than a 179, but how does it help you do your job better? That is like saying a $4000 espresso machine is better than a $100 coffee pot. But, if all you do is run water through standard coffee grounds through it, and never use espresso features, it is just something cool to say you have, and don't need.


----------



## wptski

Voltage Hazard said:


> I guess you can say a 87V is "better" than a 179, but how does it help you do your job better? That is like saying a $4000 espresso machine is better than a $100 coffee pot. But, if all you do is run water through standard coffee grounds through it, and never use espresso features, it is just something cool to say you have, and don't need.


It's just a tool and the 87V has more features than the 179 but the best tool in the world isn't going to make any better at your job. You have to learn to interpet what any meter is telling you.

The T5 is mentioned above. I've seen a T5 get fooled by by a somewhat distorted sinwave but it didn't fool a Fluke 189.


----------

