I bought mine for 50€ delivered from a Alikexpress seller that has/had stock in Germany.
Good pictures. I've never had mine apart. Mine is marked "Fluke" in English as well.
After testing so many meters, I really appreciate Fluke using that large PTC. Some companies will put these little piss ant PTCs. They will typically arc over, damaging the outside layer. Once they arc, they no longer offer a high impedance path. Normally when a company skimps like this, they don't have enough protection to save the parts downstream and the meters are normally non-repairable. One of the first things I did with the UNI-T UT61E, based on my experience was to swap out the piss ant PTCs for some larger parts.
Then look at how well thought out the layout is on the 101. I've seen a lot of crap layouts. Normally it's where they will have loops and when you hit the meter with a transient, there can be enough drops in some of the traces that can damage the meter. The $300 POS UNI-T UT181A is a great example of this. In pure UNI-T style, the grill starter of all things killed it on the first hit.
Sad thing about UNI-T is I am not aware of ANY of their products being certified for safety or EMC. If they went through this process, they may actually learn how to design better products.
The solid performer's during my testing from an electronic design standpoint were the Fluke 101/107/115, Brymen BM235s and Hioki DT4252. Even the Gossen Metrawatt M248B with it's ability to change relay states from the magnetic hanger causing it to read low voltage levels, is still a solid player for robustness. These meters don't have some supper secret techniques that make them so robust, nor did the companies spend a lot of money on the front ends.
Once we get to about 4KV, there are very few meter's that survive and really there is little excuse for it IMO. Of the ones that are damaged, some designs have enough protection to prevent the IC/s from being damaged. In these cases, it can be a matter of just changing a few common parts to bring them back to life. Of the ones I have looked at, this still makes up a very low percentage and most become recycled waste.
We know Dave's stance on the 121GW from his post:
I think it's important to also understand Joe's tests in context.
The Fluke 87V, the most trusted meter on the market, fails every single one of Joe's tests. According to Joe's tests it's one of the worst meters on the market. Yet I doubt there is a single 87V owner ever who has seen their meter die due to any ESD or pulse overload etc.
I agree.. most of the tests are a worst case scenarios (black swan events). 87v is a standard when it comes to rugged meters but has failed many of Joes tests. In fact Fluke 101 has passed more tests then any of the more expensive meters.
For me it's simply a matter of has a meter passed independent safety testing (UL, ETL etc). If so then it's good enough to recommend and use it on anything it's rated for.
Sure, if a meter is failing ESD testing or something that could potentially be common place, then that may be a cause for concern, but even the Fluke 87V has shown no sign of doing that in practice for the 13 years it's been released as the V series, apart from Joe's test.
Which I agree from a safety standpoint but it's also why I try to inform people to look for meters that not only are certified for the 61010 but also for the latest EMC 61326 standard as well. Meters that have passed the EMC standard have typically done well in my tests. The TPI 194II, even though it was UL listed (for 61010-1) never mentions the EMC standard and sadly failed what I consider a very basic test.