S7 Active Fails Consumer Reports Water Test

LonestarROB

Well-known member
Feb 21, 2013
539
0
0
Visit site
I hope we hear something soon from Samsung regarding the CR test. I really want this phone and dont plan on taking it under water but also want to know that if I do, there wont be any issues.

Agreed. Want this phone bad but I'm holding out for some kind of response by SOMEBODY on the reported issues with the phone.
 

Phoneguy108

Well-known member
Nov 14, 2012
759
0
0
Visit site
Picked up a Gal S7 Active 4 days ago. Didn't know about the CR test until after I purchased. I love the phone. For me it was either Galaxy S7 Edge or S7 Active. They both have the same water resistant stats so I went with the active because it had a shatter proof screen. Now I feel uneasy as I chose the phone for extra durability, but it seems it's less durable. Should I return it for the S7 Edge?

Thx
Phil

Might not be a bad idea. Just get a top of the line case for the edge.
 

tkuhe

Well-known member
May 6, 2016
89
0
0
Visit site
Might not be a bad idea. Just get a top of the line case for the edge.

I have really put a lot of thought into getting either the s7 or the s7e and getting a rugged case, and I still might however I would really like the s7a. I like how it looks/feels, it's light but "rugged", and fits in the pocket. Form factor really isn't much bigger than the regular s7. If it lived up to how it's advertised, it's really the perfect phone for me. So that said, I am going to wait a little longer and hopefully, hopefully Samsung & Att can deliver on this product.
 

ndhusmc

Member
Jun 27, 2016
11
0
0
Visit site
I have really put a lot of thought into getting either the s7 or the s7e and getting a rugged case, and I still might however I would really like the s7a. I like how it looks/feels, it's light but "rugged", and fits in the pocket. Form factor really isn't much bigger than the regular s7. If it lived up to how it's advertised, it's really the perfect phone for me. So that said, I am going to wait a little longer and hopefully, hopefully Samsung & Att can deliver on this product.

I agree. I love the phone and it legitimately disappoints me that it's not living up to the claims. I just wanted to have a thin case and screen protector to keep it looking new while feeling confident that I could rinse it off if it got dirty like I have with my previous phones in a LifeProof case (all iPhones, I actually changed from iOS to Android for this premise).
 

Phoneguy108

Well-known member
Nov 14, 2012
759
0
0
Visit site
I have really put a lot of thought into getting either the s7 or the s7e and getting a rugged case, and I still might however I would really like the s7a. I like how it looks/feels, it's light but "rugged", and fits in the pocket. Form factor really isn't much bigger than the regular s7. If it lived up to how it's advertised, it's really the perfect phone for me. So that said, I am going to wait a little longer and hopefully, hopefully Samsung & Att can deliver on this product.

I feel the same exact way
100%
 

tkuhe

Well-known member
May 6, 2016
89
0
0
Visit site
Only thing tempting me to diy an active would be the Unlocked(no bloatware) version that they are selling now.
Whats holding me back would be smaller battery and the active key. I am coming from windows phone and having a dedicated button for whatever I want is very desirable for me. Current my WP uses it to launch camera and shutter button. Also, the fact that I wouldnt be able to take advantage payment plan that ATT offers. which isnt a huge deal except that my work pays for my bill.
 

tkuhe

Well-known member
May 6, 2016
89
0
0
Visit site
both my wife and my phone are compltetly water proof. sorry guize looks like they tested 2 probably defective devices.
Thanks for sharing. There are reports here on this forum about others that have had faulty phones, similar to what was reported by CR. Yes, they were probably defective and that is why Samsung has officially stated on there corporate website that they are looking into it.
We are all hoping to here something soon.
 
Apr 2, 2016
5
0
0
Visit site
Thanks for sharing. There are reports here on this forum about others that have had faulty phones, similar to what was reported by CR. Yes, they were probably defective and that is why Samsung has officially stated on there corporate website that they are looking into it.
We are all hoping to here something soon.

my best guess is there will be a recall and a fix, worst case scenario this gets swept under the rug and the s8 active comes out quickly.
 

Slade8525

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2016
118
0
0
Visit site
So, some issues i have with the CR test. Not that i doubt their good intentions, and i am not defending Samsung, BUT if you intend to conduct a test of a product, and intend to be perceived as a credible source, then scientifically reproduceable standards and procedures should be followed.

Please be aware that to properly test ANY device, ALL of the following criterion SHOULD be met to ensure correct scientific testing methods. Frankly i was disappointed in what they showed vs what they had to say.

Firstly, they used a pressurized chamber test vs depth test; air compresses much more evenly; water does not compress as such, but pressure increases with weight as a function of depth (assuming gravity is present). A 1.5m (or more) clear tube filled with clean fresh water would have been the proper way to test design specifications.
Secondly, no time lapse, single shot was performed (or at least shown); this would further prove their point; instead its a cutaway.
Thirdly, lack of standardization in testing; typically some adherence to STP laws (standard temperature and pressure, or deviations thereof) are used in a truly scientific study.
Fourthly, no concurrent test with 'passing' S7 and S7 Edge in the same chamber at the same time (and their videos on the S7 and S7 Edge show the same glaring faults in the scientific method).
And lastly, no static timer present that is clearly visible, which combined with the above methods, would clearly indicate either a passing or failing grade in the hardware.

I'm not saying i dont trust their results, but i am saying my 6th grade science teacher would have flunked them immediately, and for such a large organization that purports to represent consumers, i was appalled at the lack of professionalism, and the suggested 'scientific' manner in which the test was conducted.

I have conducted more scientific tests on used spark plugs to analyze lubrication effects vs carbon deposit efficiency on various spark plugs for my RX-7's and RX-8's, accounted for and adjusted for variables far more accurately than CR; let alone DAYS of testing sensors and lenses for various camera systems and issues such as 'jello'/CMOS line read speeds, dynamic range, ISO noise vs sensitivity, etc etc, and i am not a scientist by any means.
 

tkuhe

Well-known member
May 6, 2016
89
0
0
Visit site
Editors' note (July 10, 2016): Consumer Reports has stated the Galaxy S7 Active failed that publication's waterproofing tests. We are conducting our own tests, and will update this review with the results soon.

CNET is conducting a follow up test. They did say that the test unit that they beat the crap out of failed in less than 1' of water, but that's to be expected. They are performing new tests with brand new phones in there CA office.
Sure wish Samsung would say something soon. Quick search for S7 Active brings up 100's of stories all pointing to the CR piece.
 

FLTimmyB

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2016
140
0
0
Visit site
There was a pretty lengthy discussion on the CR facebook page, I was surprised to see they actually monitored it and gave input. I suggested they do the same test with two different ways. Method one get a container that is the max depth that they say it will take and put the phone in at one foot for 30 min then dry and go to two feet etc, and monitor for fail time. Then do the same test in the pressurized dunk tank they used and monitor for fail. The big thing I would like to see is a tear down report stating how the water got in and at what point, to which they said they liked the idea and would bring it up to the testers. I spoke with an AT&T rep they said the logs they have show the power port is the weak spot on the phone, so AT&T knows there is an issue as well. If CR can document the fail again both ways I think Samsung may have to do an extended warranty or offer replacements with a warranty. Right now I have mine in a supcase pro with ports covered and I don't even let it hear the word water, LOL. As a whole I am very happy with the phone, just wont take it near water. I think the IP68 rating will be the undoing of Samsung on this issue, that is how it was advertised and if people are having issues with splashes of water then there is a issue that needs to be corrected....just my two cents and I'm probably over charging at that rate. Thanks all have a good weekend.
 

PLaBar

Active member
Jul 13, 2016
30
0
0
Visit site
If it is a manufacturing issue and the IP68 rating is false I think they would have to offer refunds. I don't think just offering an extended warranty would cover them legally (I know nothing about the law, just from a layman's point of view). If not refunds, then they would need to recall the phones to make them IP68 complaint.
It's my first Android and Samsung phone so no personal experience but I think they'll do the right thing. They are a really good company.
 

Slade8525

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2016
118
0
0
Visit site
If it is a manufacturing issue and the IP68 rating is false I think they would have to offer refunds. I don't think just offering an extended warranty would cover them legally (I know nothing about the law, just from a layman's point of view). If not refunds, then they would need to recall the phones to make them IP68 complaint.
It's my first Android and Samsung phone so no personal experience but I think they'll do the right thing. They are a really good company.

my GF is a trial attorney and i work in advertising having studied law extensively; we both agree it would be a huge issue.

it is pretty funny to send a company an official registered letter over something petty with a complete legal analysis and threat of legal action over relatively minor issues, such as when kumho wouldnt honor a tire warranty for a $70 tire that was within the 30 day return period. our friend got 4 brand new tires out of it. $100 each continentals, not even kumho's lol.
 

Trending Posts

Forum statistics

Threads
942,404
Messages
6,913,920
Members
3,158,397
Latest member
Chelrie