Hello there,
So what do you think, is the Fluke 101 meter decent enough to pay around $40 USD for?
It's a basic meter i think it is small enough to carry around that's what i need right now. I have other big meters (including an ancient analog ammeter with a face plate as big as an apple pie and about 8 inches deep).
It's ok if there are not that many functions, but i was hoping the accuracy was up to par with the normal Fluke name
So you think it is accurate or not so much?
It would be great if someone had one they could share their experiences about.
Fluke doesn't lie with their specs. So read the specs and see if it's good enough for you.
Contrary to the popular opinion around here, in my opinion the only highlight of the Fluke 101 is electrical robustness based on what joeqsmith found when tested it under his high voltage generators. Well, that and its small size, but other meters have this as well. Accuracy is ok, but since it is a very basic general purpose meter, it is not something hard to attain.
Outside of that it severely lacks features, is slow and I wouldn't recommend it as I have seen build quality issues with two units coming from different batches (discoloration and contamination on its PCB tracks, and functional faults). This to me evidences a lesser quality control. Tied to the absence of warranty for markets outside of China and the availability of much superior units I don't think it is a worth investment. YMMV.
A higher priced alternative that I have and is worth the extra investment is a Greenlee DM-200A (Brymen BM251). It is a basic meter, very robust but much more featured - depending on where you live, eBay can have some good prices on it if you are patient (I got mine for US$40, but it currently goes for around US$70). I would also recommend the BM231, which is slightly less featured than the BM251 but it can be purchased new for around US$70). If safety is not terribly important and you can live with a smaller sized unit, the Richmeters RM113D is mechanically well built and fully featured. It is priced under US$20.
Good luck in your quest!
So what do you think, is the Fluke 101 meter decent enough to pay around $40 USD for?
It's a basic meter, sure, but it's very small and feels high quality in the hand. The range switch and display are really nice. Mine is accurate to within a digit or so.
There's no current (obviously) and no backlight. I'm not sure where you'd get one for $40, these days it goes for much closer to $50.
It's not huge bang:buck, feature-wise, but if it has the measurement ranges you need then go for it!
As I said above. Read the specs about features and accuracy. It's not impressive of course but you do know what you're getting. Fluke don't lie about the specs.
Hello again,
Thanks for the informative replies.
I am having second thoughts now on this little meter mostly because it is $50 now and it has very few features, much less than any meter i have ever owned including ones from way back in the 1980's. The only thing about it then that i can see is worthy of a purchase is bragging rights (ha ha) "Hey i have a Fluke meter!" ha ha.
This comes especially since i ran into a video right here on this forum that was done by EEVBlog (Dave) that talks about the reason why people and companies buy Fluke instead of other brands. That was very interesting. The key reasons why include these:
1. Military applications often need to buy the same thing over and over again so they dont have to update all their service manuals. I ran into this too when i worked in the industry. We were not allowed to redesign a very very old style frequency meter with thermistors for temperature compensation (which took hours to calibrate in an oven) because the military device it was going into was, well for the military. We could have made a much better one but they would not allow that.
2. Measurement confidence. This is about years and years of production where data has been collected that speaks volumes about the measurement accuracy and repeatability. This gives the meter a bit more clout due to the fact that it had been used for years and is tried and proven and also i think there is data available that proves that the meters are very trustworthy. That means that if you get one it will work as predicted.
There are some other reasons but those two stood out for me.
Although the first one will not pertain to my purchase anymore, the second one is interesting, but not sure it is enough to want to pay so much for a meter that does so little, or pay a huge price for one that does do a lot.
I will be looking at the meters mentioned in this thread as alternatives. It's been several years since i bought a new meter so not sure how things have changed out there, but i see some interesting developments. One that caught my eye is an Owon that is actually an oscilloscope too with either 40, 70, or 100MHz bandwidth (or so claimed). But interestingly, it also has a 22000 count meter which i thought was pretty cool.
Thanks again for the interesting replies.
I'll probably get flamed to hell for this recommendation but it is offered through personal experience! Have a look at the Kaiweets KM601. It's highly featured, so called smart DMM. It auto selects certain ranges by just touching the probes on the circuit being measured. Ultra clear colour display and very compact. Quite well made and extremely competitively priced for the features provided. Well liked by all that have reviewed it on youtube.
Depending what you want to use it for. I have a Fluke 113 which has less functions than the 101 and at least twice as expensive as the 101. But it's perfect for certain uses.
I'll probably get flamed to hell for this recommendation but it is offered through personal experience! Have a look at the Kaiweets KM601. It's highly featured, so called smart DMM. It auto selects certain ranges by just touching the probes on the circuit being measured. Ultra clear colour display and very compact. Quite well made and extremely competitively priced for the features provided. Well liked by all that have reviewed it on youtube.
I think it is quite a valid suggestion. Although most of the automatic meters I tested were too slow to switch ranges, there are a few that are worth. One that is also quite interesting is an "Amazon special" of sorts called Fochanc DM003 - although not terribly protected, it is lightning fast to switch the proper range and very useable. My biggest annoyances are with the lack of a kickstand and the power button sometimes takes two or three presses to turn it on. I did a test on my channel (albeit in Portuguese) and it performed well.
Love the Fluke 101. Bought two a few years back. One went to my dad. I know that no matter he connects it he will not hurt himself. The second one is just a beater to carry in my car etc(leaving good stuff on the bench).
This comes especially since i ran into a video right here on this forum that was done by EEVBlog (Dave) that talks about the reason why people and companies buy Fluke instead of other brands. That was very interesting. The key reasons why include these:
None of those reasons apply to the 101. The 101 is an "oriental market" Fluke.
If you want a
small,
very robust meter then the 101 is hard to beat.
I will be looking at the meters mentioned in this thread as alternatives.
First you have to accept that
you can't have everything.
What are your priorities? Size? Robustness? Price? Features? Do you need to measure Amps? If so, are you prepared to pay $12 for fuses?
I'll probably get flamed to hell for this recommendation but it is offered through personal experience! Have a look at the Kaiweets KM601. It's highly featured, so called smart DMM.
No, they're awful.
This comes especially since i ran into a video right here on this forum that was done by EEVBlog (Dave) that talks about the reason why people and companies buy Fluke instead of other brands. That was very interesting. The key reasons why include these:
None of those reasons apply to the 101. The 101 is an "oriental market" Fluke.
If you want a small, very robust meter then the 101 is hard to beat.
I will be looking at the meters mentioned in this thread as alternatives.
First you have to accept that you can't have everything.
What are your priorities? Size? Robustness? Price? Features? Do you need to measure Amps? If so, are you prepared to pay $12 for fuses?
I'll probably get flamed to hell for this recommendation but it is offered through personal experience! Have a look at the Kaiweets KM601. It's highly featured, so called smart DMM.
No, they're awful.
Hi,
Yes i agree and an old chess master i used to play chess with many years ago always used to say that. When you make a move in a chess game there are good points about it and bad, and you have to accept that there may be no perfect move in some positions.
I have to say though that i have given up on this meter because i really do need more functionality cant do anything about that. I realized that it had limited functionality before this but now that i think about it and read reviews and all i realize that i need more. Even if i went to a bigger meter and figured out a way to carry it when i needed it that would be better i think.
Thanks for the replies on this.
If so, are you prepared to pay $12 for fuses?
Which leads me to a second point:
My Fluke 37 has two fuses on the low current range. A cheap-ass 600mA fuse and a big expernsive 2A HRC fuse.
It seems like an awesome idea to me. I wonder why it was discontinued. You could even have the cheap fuse accessible from the outside for user serviceability.
(my understanding is that Fluke, etc., deliberately make maters that you have to disassemble to change the fuse so that corporate types can seal them up and know which meters have had their fuses blown)
[
Yes i agree and an old chess master i used to play chess with many years ago always used to say that. When you make a move in a chess game there are good points about it and bad, and you have to accept that there may be no perfect move in some positions.
I have to say though that i have given up on this meter because i really do need more functionality cant do anything about that. I realized that it had limited functionality before this but now that i think about it and read reviews and all i realize that i need more. Even if i went to a bigger meter and figured out a way to carry it when i needed it that would be better i think.
Thanks for the replies on this.
I have a big Fluke 289 and it has a lot more functions than the 101 but I would much rather use the 101 for quick checking because the 289 takes so long to start up and although it has the backlight I have to almost always turn on the backlight to see the low contrast display. So yes nothing is perfect for everything.
If so, are you prepared to pay $12 for fuses?
Which leads me to a second point:
My Fluke 37 has two fuses on the low current range. A cheap-ass 600mA fuse and a big expernsive 2A HRC fuse.
It seems like an awesome idea to me. I wonder why it was discontinued. You could even have the cheap fuse accessible from the outside for user serviceability.
(my understanding is that Fluke, etc., deliberately make maters that you have to disassemble to change the fuse so that corporate types can seal them up and know which meters have had their fuses blown)
I think that is obvious: removing 12 $ fuse is 12 $ more profit for Fluke. They are not in business of making dream meters, but making money...
Which leads me to a second point:
My Fluke 37 has two fuses on the low current range. A cheap-ass 600mA fuse and a big expernsive 2A HRC fuse.
It seems like an awesome idea to me. I wonder why it was discontinued. You could even have the cheap fuse accessible from the outside for user serviceability.
(my understanding is that Fluke, etc., deliberately make maters that you have to disassemble to change the fuse so that corporate types can seal them up and know which meters have had their fuses blown)
There was a recent discussion on this subject in this thread...
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/fluke-179-multimeter-fuse/
...
My Fluke 37 has two fuses on the low current range. A cheap-ass 600mA fuse and a big expernsive 2A HRC fuse.
It seems like an awesome idea to me. I wonder why it was discontinued. You could even have the cheap fuse accessible from the outside for user serviceability.
...
Maybe they learned that once the non-safety fuse came apart it started a reaction that could not be stopped. I could see it (expanding plasma) bypassing the safety fuse all together. It seems like a stupid idea to me.
....
I would love to see Joe Smith put a Fluke 25 / 27 through it's paces, I think the closest he has come is the Fluke 77, but that used spark gaps rather than 5 MOVs. Even then, he does not have the capability to test high current fault clearing. It would probably be one for Photoinduction! Comprehensive testing would require a large pile of expensive fuses anyway.
....
This may be the only statement I read on the internet today that is true!!
20J or even 600J is nothing. Photonicinduction with his cap bank would be closer. Best to let the pro's run these tests:
https://www.ecmag.com/magazine/articles/article-detail/safety-lets-blow-it-arc-flash-testing
...
My Fluke 37 has two fuses on the low current range. A cheap-ass 600mA fuse and a big expernsive 2A HRC fuse.
It seems like an awesome idea to me. I wonder why it was discontinued. You could even have the cheap fuse accessible from the outside for user serviceability.
...
Maybe they learned that once the non-safety fuse came apart it started a reaction that could not be stopped. I could see it (expanding plasma) bypassing the safety fuse all together. It seems like a stupid idea to me.
Small, cheap HRC fuses exist. A meter can be designed so that the small fuse can't create a chain reaction.
I have to say though that i have given up on this meter because i really do need more functionality cant do anything about that. I realized that it had limited functionality before this but now that i think about it and read reviews and all i realize that i need more. Even if i went to a bigger meter and figured out a way to carry it when i needed it that would be better i think.
If price is an issue you can get cheap, good meters from other brands, they just won't be very small.
eg. A Brymen 805s is only about $10 more than a Fluke 101 but has current ranges and even beep-jack warning to let you know the cables are in the wrong holes.
https://brymen.eu/shop/bm805s/
...
My Fluke 37 has two fuses on the low current range. A cheap-ass 600mA fuse and a big expernsive 2A HRC fuse.
It seems like an awesome idea to me. I wonder why it was discontinued. You could even have the cheap fuse accessible from the outside for user serviceability.
...
Maybe they learned that once the non-safety fuse came apart it started a reaction that could not be stopped. I could see it (expanding plasma) bypassing the safety fuse all together. It seems like a stupid idea to me.
Small, cheap HRC fuses exist. A meter can be designed so that the small fuse can't create a chain reaction.
With everything humans have accomplished, we certainly could design such a meter assuming that the standards allow for it and there were a need. But why? The fact we don't see it, I doubt there's much of a need. It could also be that it adds some level of complexity to the certification that exceeds the costs of just using a single good fuse designed for the job.
I don't know what cheap means to you but if you're an idiot and are wanting to save some $$ you could:
1)Be like the Canadian YTer who blabbed non-stop about safety, all the while showing the wrong fuse installed in their Fluke meter that looked like it came from the local hardware store.
2)Jumper the blown fuse with wire like we have seen members here do.
3)Don't pay for an expensive CAT IV certified meter to work on your toaster (RC toys, home audio, cars ....)
4)Modify your meter add a different current limiter.
I doubt any of the people doing the above actually work in an environment where it would be a concern.
I don't have the 101 but for most of the things I do it has enough features for me. Perhaps the only thing I feel missing is the CAT IV rating as I do have to work in high power environment. I rarely need features beyond what the 101 can do and its accuracy is sufficient.
I don't have the 101 but for most of the things I do it has enough features for me. Perhaps the only thing I feel missing is the CAT IV rating as I do have to work in high power environment. I rarely need features beyond what the 101 can do and its accuracy is sufficient.
It outperformed many CAT IV meters in joe's little tests. It may well be that it's CAT IV but Fluke is marking it down for marketing reasons (they want to sell expensive meters). That's just speculation and not something you should bet your life on though.
The cheapest CAT IV Fluke is the
Fluke 113. It's medium-sized and has a fairly idiot-proof user interface (only three switch positions).
For about the same money you can get a CAT IV 1000V Brymen but it will have current ranges.