They dont pick up reception as good as LG's and Nokia's do.

Call quality isnt as good eather.

Motorolas get the best reception

😳 where did you get that from? 🤨

LG's have always been known for picking up the best reception on Verizon's Network.

I agree

User experience. We have bad signal in the part of Fairfax, VA I work in.

Don't go by the signal bars on your screen. When it comes to calls not being dropped, Motos have consistently been the best.

That is not the truth. Motorolas are and always have been the best for reception. I'm not a big motorola fan but you can't beat th reception. LG's today are very very close.

Go look at the CNET videos.

I see all LG's with 4 bars of EVDO and 1X, on Motos i see 3 with EVDO, and some with 4 on 1X.

Motorola W755:

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-w755-pu ... »

Motorola Krave:

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-krave-z ... »

LG VX8360:

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/lg-vx8360-verizo ... »

LG Dare:

http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/lg-dare-verizon- ... »

You can't pay attention to bars. You have to pay attention to what works. 1 bar of service on CDMA will give you the same quailty call as 4 bars of service. Motorola will pick up the fringe signals where others won't. The manufacturers can make those bars show whatever they want. They probably don't all use the same signal numbers for the same amount of bars. Some phones even have different amounts of bars to be able to be displayed.

Who even said all those phones were tested in the exact same place?

I agree. LG's work great in areas with already good coverage. When in fringe areas they're worth nothing compared to Motorolas. I speak from experience as I've only had LGs and Motos on Verizon's network.

Signal indication doesn't account for much. The true test is whether or not the phone is able to hold onto a call when there is minimal network coverage.

Amen

"1 bar of service on CDMA will give you the same quailty call as 4 bars of service. "


-------------------

true true!

i live in a fringe area and my LG Dare has one bar everywhere in my house, but my calls are always crystal clear and drop calls maybe once every other month at the most.

Bars really dont indicate the call quality!

i wonder if this is exactly why Verizon started to show their phones' signal indicators with bars of the same size and stopped using the shortest-to-biggest bar that all the other carriers still use.

I love Verizon service bars on how they are set up.

Its sooo much better to see.

I don't need a video from CNET. I've had MANY phones with VZ over the years. LGs are good, don't get me wrong, but I worked in a bomb shelter brick building a few years back and the only phones that picked up a signal were the Motos. And I had an LG at the time. You are wrong when it comes to Moto and reception. They are KNOWN for reception.

I initially thought that and i recommended a motorola to my sis-in-law. I got the LG. Side by side....I can make a call and she can't. Battery life is horrible for her. She's always asking why my phone has better battery life and I use mine more... I tell her I'm sorry I didn't know ☹️ This is MY experience. Other ppl may have better luck but I'm not a believer in motorola anymore.

This is true, I have had a 5 line account for a long time and have had a number of Motorolas, many LGs, several Nokias, a few Samsungs and a Blackberry on these lines. I live and work in a fringe area. There is no comparison for signal and sound, the Motorola phones are the best.

Says who? Where are you coming from? I've been with Verizon since 1994 (Bell Atlantic Mobile then...) and I had a Moto BAG phone. Where are you getting your information from? An opinion is an opinion is an opinion, but you state this stuff as absolute fact? C'mon...please

No, not really.

You're probably either

a.) Judging all Motos by the V3c RAZR

b.) Have good enough reception where all phones can hold calls without dropping them and you're comparing phones based on what you see on your screen for signal bars.

c.) Tying in the reception claim because you're sick of dealing with simple customers who can't figure out how to get around Motorola's software issues.

d.) An LG rep 😛

e.) Listening to what a VZW manager tells you. The corporate stores make more off selling LGs compared to Motorolas since Motorola charges them more for comparable phones.

No, were saying this because we know this.

As for me, ive been in very very rural areas where Motos wont pick up, but LGs will have 2 bars and makes and places calls fine.

That's really strange because I get better signals with Motorola in the Fairfax/Burke area in Virginia. I actually drop calls with LG and Samsung but Motorolas hold on better here. My customers have confirmed my findings too since I push Motorolas on anyone that complains about reception in this area.

This also applies to initially getting a call connected.

And are you and jessicad friends?

Actually lets try this. Which models are you saying is good for LG? Here's the models that have done well for Motorolas for my customers and I:

E815
V325
V325i
W315
K1m KRZR
W385
W755
VU204
VU30 Rapture
ZN4 Krave

I forgot the V750 Adventure. That one gets particularly high marks for call clarity and reception from my customers.

I've had good luck with 1X reception with my Motorola W755, but EVDO is another story. I could be near the tower, and that phone gets a weak EVDO signal, and the phone won't connect. If I'm far enough from the same tower, then EVDO increases a bit, but almost never get full reception. I never got a chance to try out EVDO on my Samsung a930 from 2006, but that phone would get good reception near any tower, including EVDO.

The Motorola 120c was what made me jump to Samsung. That phone had the worst reception I ever had. My Samsung a650 & a930 have done well with reception. The only reason I didn't stay with Samsung was because phones I considered, the u550 & u540 are ugly looking phones. That's when I went back to Motorola, and so fa...
(continues)

dave, you made the right move.

The Samsung U540 and U550 got all sorts of complaints when it came to reception and I concur that the a930 was really good in that area.

I also agree with you about EV-DO. LG's do get better EV-DO. My Motorola KRZR gets inconsistent EV-DO performance.

Krzr not the best phone. Razr not the best phone. But if you do your homework on Motos, there are plenty that are made well and get great reception. Again, it varies with phone model. And for all the lag and freezing issues with the Razr, I never dropped a call with it, and I could always make the call with it.

You don't place the RazorMax on your list; a great Moto phone.

It probably belongs there. I don't really have much experience with it. I hear the RAZR 2 wasn't too bad, just too expensive

I'm with you. Motorolas have aways had better reception. Areas where nothing else will pick up a Motorola will a lot of times. I'm really over this guys know it all attitude. He gives false information a lot of times.

Actually none of the above. We make more money from the motorola's but I've had many customers VERY unhappy with them. I've owned Motorola and my sis-in-law owns one now. The battery life is horrible in our LOW SERVICE AREA (1 tower in a 50 mile radius). LG works very well here. Samsung as well. And it's from my own personal experience that I form my opinion.

Are you kidding me? Motos beat LG and Nokia for reception, clarity, RF, hands down. They may lock up and freeze and sometimes are so slow you want to throw them, but for a basic flip, nothing has come out for Verizon to rival the Moto E815 and certainly no LGs or Nokias. I have a W755 (that I use as a spare) and there are times I just need a flip, and it's a tank. It works well, it's durable, and I'll endorse it. LG is plastic, lighter, not as well made imho, but a lot of people love them. Nokias are OK on other networks, not so great on Verizon.

That's funny. 🤣

Prior to my other post I read all the positive reviews of the Moto Krave, so I got one. And promptly returned it because either it was defective or my car's bluetooth just didn't like it. The bluetooth would drop off constantly.

My main issue is I'm poor right now. lol So I'm trying to upgrade without spending too much.

its 29.99
then your 2 year discount would be free after that.

I'm a tard and can't wait 2 years to upgrade my phone. So I'm doing the one year upgrade where I can still get 2 year pricing. Also, I thought Verizon messed with the 2 year price anyway?

lol

you still get the 2 year discount tho.

yea,

You are automatically enrolled in our New Every Two program when you sign up for a two-year agreement on a calling plan with a monthly access of $34.99 or higher. If you maintain service on a calling plan of $34.99 or higher and fulfill 20 months of your two-year term, you could potentially qualify for a free phone.
If your calling plan monthly access is $79.99 or higher for the entire three months prior to completing your New Every Two phone upgrade, you will get up to $50.00 toward the purchase of that phone.
If your calling plan monthly access was between $34.99 and $79.98 at any time during the three months prior to completing your New Every Two phone upgrade, you will get up to $30.00 toward the purchase of that phone.
Wh...
(continues)

i dont think they ment it was a downgrade, but the 8700

I was actually talking about the lg 8360 being a downgrade atleast a lil. The chocolate was my bet for best phone.

I cant wait for them to take that phone away.

I think it was one of Samsungs first touch screen phones wasnt it?

It was definitely the first one released for Verizon Wireless. I can't tell you how many times I've seen where you touch one part of the screen and a whole other part gets activated.

I'll agree with that. I see very few warranty issues with Samsungs overall. The reception seems to be not quite as good as the others. Not sure how the reception on their PDA's compares to their phones though. I had the i760 and had no issues.