# Fluke 73 III multimeter worth buying?



## zwodubber (Feb 24, 2011)

Or is it better to just go with a new model...

I know there are newer models like the 179 but I think i can get a good price from a friend. I'm trying it out tomorrow.

thoughts, opinions?


----------



## crazy electrician (Apr 30, 2011)

If you can get it for a good price buy it. The fluke 73 is a good meter. The only thing I dont like is the lack of true rms. I really like my 179 but it wasn't cheap. One day I'll get a Fluke 87.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Before the T5 came out, that was my every-day meter.


----------



## jefft110 (Jul 7, 2010)

crazy electrician said:


> If you can get it for a good price buy it. The fluke 73 is a good meter. The only thing I dont like is the lack of true rms. I really like my 179 but it wasn't cheap. One day I'll get a Fluke 87.


Skip over the 87 and get a 289.:thumbsup:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

In 2011, Id think about a 117 or 233 instead of the 73III.


----------



## crazy electrician (Apr 30, 2011)

MDShunk said:


> In 2011, Id think about a 117 or 233 instead of the 73III.


I agree with 117. I own the 117 also, it's 1 heck of a meter for the price. Nice and compact for resi work too.


----------



## zwodubber (Feb 24, 2011)

MDShunk said:


> In 2011, Id think about a 117 or 233 instead of the 73III.


Actually I meant to say the 117 and not the 179. I'm going to see what I can get it for, price will be the main factor.

Thanks guys


----------



## crazy electrician (Apr 30, 2011)

zwodubber said:


> Actually I meant to say the 117 and not the 179. I'm going to see what I can get it for, price will be the main factor.
> 
> Thanks guys


Test it against another, newer Fluke meter. If readings are comparable and the price is right, I say buy it. I mean really, they haven't changed the way electrons flow since they made the meter so why not buy it. But you don't want to buy a meter that you have to have calibrated. I understand that can be pretty expensive.


----------



## zwodubber (Feb 24, 2011)

One more piece of information I left out, I mainly do commercial work, (480, 240) and use my Klein simply as a quick test before connecting power analyzers.

The PQ analyzers are extremely accurate, so I'm not sure if I need a TRMS meter, but being a tool geek I was leaning towards a TRMS.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

zwodubber said:


> One more piece of information I left out, I mainly do commercial work, (480, 240) and use my Klein simply as a quick test before connecting power analyzers.
> 
> The PQ analyzers are extremely accurate, so I'm not sure if I need a TRMS meter, but being a tool geek I was leaning towards a TRMS.


That being the case, get the 117. Just a few bucks more than the 73, and true RMS.


----------



## A Little Short (Nov 11, 2010)

MDShunk said:


> That being the case, get the 117. Just a few bucks more than the 73, and true RMS.


I got the 117 with the amp clamp all new off of Ebay about a year ago for $190.00. I really like the meter.


----------



## zwodubber (Feb 24, 2011)

I think I'll go with the 117, just played around with it and i'm gonna go with the True RMS unless I get this really cheap.


----------



## ilikepez (Mar 24, 2011)

Does your work require a minimum CAT rating? Because the only information that I can find for the 73 III says it has a CAT II rating to 600 v. So that might be a deal breaker. But I've used a bunch in class and they work great, are very accurate and are much tougher then most of the newer fluke meters.


----------



## zwodubber (Feb 24, 2011)

It says CAT II 600V on the meter.

I think I'll play it safe with true RMS and a CAT III rating


----------



## j johnson (Jul 20, 2009)

my ever day meter is the Fluke 336 clamp on.
it has ac/dc amps.


----------



## 76nemo (Aug 13, 2008)

crazy electrician said:


> I agree with 117. I own the 117 also, it's 1 heck of a meter for the price. Nice and compact for resi work too.


 
"Disagree" button 

I disagree with you and Shunk, although he's pretty cute:laughing::laughing::laughing:


Fluke marketed the 117 as "the Electricians meter"

The 117 has NCV capabilty and the ability to measure 10A's in series. That alone is supposed to make it an "Electricians meter"? Who came up with that?

The 116 is also dual impedance and has temp. measurement capability, and it's cheaper. The 115 isn't dual input and is marketed as a field technician meter and is more expensive than the 114 which is dual input:whistling2:

I wish I had the pay of a design team.........


----------



## zwodubber (Feb 24, 2011)

76nemo said:


> "Disagree" button
> 
> I disagree with you and Shunk, although he's pretty cute:laughing::laughing::laughing:
> 
> ...


Soooo, go with a 116?


----------



## 76nemo (Aug 13, 2008)

zwodubber said:


> Soooo, go with a 116?


 

If you'd utilize the temp. measurement capabilty with the 116,...YES. Otherwise, see if the 114 won't suffice. The dual input impedance is golden alone, unless you want to go with the 289 for all it's features.


----------

