"Motorola Radios are the best"

[mightyfacundo]

This is in no way a critique of the Turbo and its radios.

For as long as I've had an Android device, I've always heard that Motorola radios are the best. Is this still the case or have the other OEM's stepped up their game? I'm coming from the HTC Droid DNA, and I get the exact same data speeds from my Turbo from a few places around town where I have historically tested my phones' speeds. Right or wrong, I expected the Turbo to be better than the DNA, which was really good in its own right. So, are Motorola Radios still the best? For those of you coming from LG, Samsung, etc, are you seeing improved radio performance? Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[Golfdriver97]

When I changed from an S3 to the 2013 Moto X (both Sprint), I noticed a radio range and call quality difference. Better than the S3.

 

[bizzyqu]

My Z30 had a much better radio, but I think that is in part to its paratek antenna.

 

[Fable]

I have had Moto OG Droids, a Bionic (don't get me started on this one), and now the Turbo. In addition I am coming from a Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy S4.

My experience has been that Samsung is closing the gap as the S4 was much better than the Nexus, but I still think my signal is better with the Turbo than it was on the S4. I am not sure you can compare bars between phones, but signal strength seems better with the new Droid (course it could be it's a new phone with a lot more juice available too..).

In essence I still prefer Moto build Quality and Radios. On the other hand, Sammy makes the best Screens out there.

Again this is completely Opinion. A lot of factors go into how well a radio is going to perform, but I have never been let down by a Moto Radio (even on the Bionic - although again - my Doctor told me to try to forget that time in my life... )

 

[vzwuser76]

I don't think getting faster speeds is what they mean when talking about better radios, but getting signal in more places than other OEMS can. Going by my history with phones, I ranked them as Motorola on top, then HTC, then Samsung. I never had any LG phones so I can't speak to them. But with Samsung I always had more trouble using it in low signal areas than other OEMS phones in the same area. And they also have issues with GPS taking forever to lock on. HTC was always somewhere in the middle, better than Samsung, worse than Motorola. But that's not to say that Motorola will get signal absolutely everywhere either, just that it seems to pull in signal better than the rest.

 

[udazavlanje]

By far they are still superior - on Verizon wireless. I'm always on the road or miss signal areas and spent a lot of time doing side to side comparisons - not Kipling at the bars or even dB (more " accurate" visual comparison) but just ability to stay connected to a tower or easily reach one. As vzwuser said, it's about phone call radios - not data speeds ,where Motorola is dominating, but you will also see it connected for longer to LTE. One of the reasons I'm selling wife's note 3 is that it's absolutely useless in our house (2nd replacement) - fluctuating and dropping to 3g and 1x all the time and eventually completely losses t the signal and stock there, whereas my moto is perfectly fine - only occasionally dropping to 3g. I can always make a call and that's what should be the most important feature in the phone Again we are talking about poor signal areas where you notice the difference. Now, my experiences are with RAZR maxx, droid maxx and moto x, so I can't speak for the turbo yet. Will test it once the note 3 is sold.

via AC App on VZW Moto X DE/N7

 

[zobog]

Above is correct. Motorola's tend to get signal when others do not. Hopefully the turbo has continued the tradition.

 

[wolf_walker]

I haven't noticed much diff from the S4 to the DT in LTE signal, but I've not done any exhaustive testing.
I have however done so for wifi, and the DT has come up lacking. Not bad, just not as good as I expected.

DT 4' from my router..





S4, sitting next to it.




I've been in contact with Moto support and sent them debug logs and such, hopefully they find a software solution and I commend them
for contacting me over the support/complaint I logged about this.
Of note is the 5ghz sig strength is the same, as it should be, over the two devices when the 2.4ghz is much weaker than it should be on the DT.
It get's worse as you move away from the router naturally. It's plenty fast when it's connected as far as throughput, but staying connected to a
useable degree is a problem at some distance. You can see above the S4 is even registering other local wifi AP's that aren't even on the DT's radar further illustrating the issue. Seems not all devices may be affected by this, but among the folks I'm seeing that say "mine is great"
none of them have any data or comparison tests to back it up so I take it with a grain of salt. I've had the same results with my S4 and a Nexus 7 tablet, and I haven't compared to my laptop, chromebook or wifes iPhone 4S, anecdotal observation says it's the same bit. The DT G band wifi reception is weak. It's not a deal breaker for me I decided, but it is annoying and disappointing, in my backyard or in my shop where I've previously had moderate signal on other devices it's marginal on the DT. I'll probably end up buying another router, the Asus I have is pretty decent but has no external antennas so I should be able to make up the difference to a degree.

 

[PowrDroid]

I haven't noticed much diff from the S4 to the DT in LTE signal, but I've not done any exhaustive testing.
I have however done so for wifi, and the DT has come up lacking. Not bad, just not as good as I expected.

Which Asus router are you running? I've got the RT-N56-U. With my Maxx HD I get -25 dBm from about 4 feet away on 2.4 gHz band.

 

[wolf_walker]

RT-N65R

Been a decent router last year or so, full of BS-ish software and apps and such but beyond that the hardware seems ok.
I was still on an old blue wrt from ages ago before this so it was an upgrade.

If I put the S4 on the same horizontal plane as the router, at 4' I see -20 to -25 as well, previous tests are on my desk which is
4' over and two or three foot down so that accounts for the signal strength variance I believe. It isn't so much the actual value as the
difference between the two phones that catches my eye. With the Turbo on the same plane 4' away the S4 is -20-25, the DT is
-30-35. 5ghz still seems about the same between the two. Moto emailed me earlier and said some engineers will contact me
so hopefully they'll make me feel dumb and figure something out.

 

[PowrDroid]

I've got readings off my RMHD from months ago for several areas around my house. When I get the Turbo I'll do a thorough comparison.

 

[scottysize]

My experience has been improved stability on week signals with the Turbo. No phone will stay on 4G at my desk because the signal is -115 dBm, however, the Turbo remains on 4G and is usable at my desk. I'd say that is a step in the right direction. Now if VZW would just put up a stupid tower behind our office, I'd be a happy camper, but for now I'd say the Turbo radios are at least more stable.

 

[wolf_walker]

I've got readings off my RMHD from months ago for several areas around my house. When I get the Turbo I'll do a thorough comparison.

I'd be interested to see how it does for you.

 

[Premium1]

This is in no way a critique of the Turbo and its radios.

For as long as I've had an Android device, I've always heard that Motorola radios are the best. Is this still the case or have the other OEM's stepped up their game? I'm coming from the HTC Droid DNA, and I get the exact same data speeds from my Turbo from a few places around town where I have historically tested my phones' speeds. Right or wrong, I expected the Turbo to be better than the DNA, which was really good in its own right. So, are Motorola Radios still the best? For those of you coming from LG, Samsung, etc, are you seeing improved radio performance? Thanks for your thoughts.

You're only going to get so much for speeds. Where moto shines is in the low signal areas where they hold signal where other devices do not. Now if you have a friend or someone with another device, if you test and they are getting faster speeds in the same spots, that may be an issue.

 

[mspace81]

My Z30 had a much better radio, but I think that is in part to its paratek antenna.

The Z30 had awesome reception and clarity...it's what I miss most about that phone is the antenna lol.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[Rukbat]

15 years ago, even 10 years ago, I not only would have agreed with the topic title without thinking, I would have applauded it. The 7868 was probably the best phone ever made. My V551 (about 10 years old) is still my standby phone. Even the original battery is still almost as good as the day I first charged it. And it got good usable signal where most other phones didn't (like the insides of steel-frame buildings).

Today? It's not the same company, it's not the same factories and it's not the same business model. The phones are good, no question. But the best? In all categories? Hardly.

 

[vzwuser76]

No one's saying it's the best in all categories. If you've read the comments, all anyone's saying is that Motorola has a history of holding signal in low areas where others don't, that's all. They are also in the top of the heap in build quality & updates, but they are lacking in areas like their cameras for instance, but even there they've made strides after switching sensor suppliers from Omnivision to Sony. But there isn't any company that puts out perfect devices, even Apple has their share of issues.

 

[Eclipse2K]

Compared to the S5 and Note 3 the Turbo is superior. So yes, still the best from my experience.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo

 

[Randino77]

This is in no way a critique of the Turbo and its radios.

For as long as I've had an Android device, I've always heard that Motorola radios are the best. Is this still the case or have the other OEM's stepped up their game? I'm coming from the HTC Droid DNA, and I get the exact same data speeds from my Turbo from a few places around town where I have historically tested my phones' speeds. Right or wrong, I expected the Turbo to be better than the DNA, which was really good in its own right. So, are Motorola Radios still the best? For those of you coming from LG, Samsung, etc, are you seeing improved radio performance? Thanks for your thoughts.

For what it's worth, I feel like the DNA had great radios, but the Turbo is equal or better than the DNA in radio quality. Just my two pennies.

Posted via the Android Central App

 

[mightyfacundo]

Thanks for the feedback everyone! I guess I was under the impression that Motorola radios would give me better data speeds from my couch (due to better radios), where I typically don't have a great signal. I live in the hills, and on my DNA I got 3-4 down and less than 1 up, which is exactly what I get with my Turbo. I'll have to go to a few spots where I know cell reception has been poor and see how it does there. Thanks again guys and gals!