Motorola T42 Test

[Inell Krolick]

The goal was to stream the test until the wee hours of Friday morning when we planned to hit 100,000 folds. As soon as the test started, however, we noticed the FoldBot was having some trouble closing the phone all the way each time. During our 4 p.m. check-in, I noticed the hinge was very stiff and resistant to being closed all the way, almost as if something had come loose and was blocking it. After flexing the hinge a few times by hand, however, it started to loosen up some. It was definitely not functioning as intended, but still usable.

I tried putting the Razr back into the FoldBot one more time, but the machine was unable to overcome the stiffness of the hinge, and wouldn't fold the phone any more. So, with around 27,000 folds on the counter, we stopped the test and called it a day.

As of Friday morning, the Razr's hinge is still a little stiff, but it still opens and closes. One new thing I noticed upon closer inspection was that there are two new visible "creases" in the plastic screen. To my eye, they seem to correspond with the steel plates behind the screen that are part of the folding mechanism. They're subtle, but they're there.

Just like when we tested the Samsung Galaxy Fold, we borrowed the FoldBot machine from SquareTrade, a San Francisco-based company that offers warranties for consumer electronics and appliances. The FoldBot was originally created to open and close the Galaxy Fold repeatedly, thousands of times over.

SquareTrade modified the FoldBot to accommodate the new Razr, and it's been gracious enough to let us borrow it again, even before the company gets to test the Razr itself. As it turns out, the company may need to tweak its design a bit, but hopefully our test will provide good data for it.

So, do the results of our test indicate that the $1,499 Razr won't last a full year of regular wear and tear? No. Besides our concerns about the FoldBot's design modifications to test the Razr (not to mention that the rapid open-and-close mechanism doesn't truly mimic real-world use), the stats on average daily phone checks were all thus far collected from nonfolding phones. Who's to say if foldable phone users might actually check their phones more frequently because of that satisfying click? (We certainly found that with the Huawei Mate X.) Or perhaps many foldable users' daily phone checks will not even involve an unfold-fold maneuver at all, as the Razr's 2.7-inch outer screen already displays the time, notifications and basics such as signal and battery life, as CNET's Jessica Dolcourt found in her hands-on preview of the Motorola Razr. You'll be able to use the outer screen to respond to texts through canned messages or your voice, without ever unfolding it, she found.

[The] razr is a unique smartphone, featuring a dynamic clamshell folding system unlike any device on the market. SquareTrade's FoldBot is simply not designed to test our device. Therefore, any tests run utilizing this machine will put undue stress on the hinge and not allow the phone to open and close as intended, making the test inaccurate. The important thing to remember is that razr underwent extensive cycle endurance testing during product development, and CNET's test is not indicative of what consumers will experience when using razr in the real-world. We have every confidence in the durability of razr.

And honestly, I have confidence in the Razr too. Being a former owner of the original Razr (mine was hot pink), I was definitely looking forward to trying out the new one in person. And now that I have, I'm pretty impressed with the design and the functionality. Did it survive 100,000 folds? No. Does it feel like a durable, resilient phone that will stand up to extended real-world use? To me it does.

We put the Motorola moto g34 5G through our rigorous DXOMARK Battery test suite to measure its performance in autonomy, charging and efficiency. In these test results, we will break down how it fared in a variety of tests and several common use cases.

Equipped with a 5000 mAh battery, the Motorola moto g34 5G provided an autonomy of 58 hours and 51 minutes when used moderately, which is an above average showing. In outdoor use cases, the overall autonomy performance was relatively modest, except for the weak showing in social apps browsing. In individual use-case testing, watching videos in airplane mode and listening to music were challenging for the device. However, the autonomy was quite commendable in calling and watching videos in 4G connections.

The efficiency score of the Motorola Moto g34 5G was in the lower half of our database. The overall charging efficiency was less than 70%, meaning that more than 30% of energy is wasted in the charging process. However, the residual power drain of the charging adapter is among the lowest that we have tested. On the other hand, the discharging currents of different use cases were generally higher than average, except for calling and watching videos under a 4G connection.

About DXOMARK Battery tests: For scoring and analysis in our smartphone battery reviews, DXOMARK engineers perform a variety of objective tests over a week-long period both indoors and outdoors. (See our introductory and how we test articles for more details about our smartphone Battery protocol.)

The following section gathers key elements of our exhaustive tests and analyses performed in DXOMARK laboratories. Detailed performance evaluations under the form of reports are available upon request. Do not hesitate to contact us.

Autonomy score is composed of three performance sub-scores: Home / Office, On the go, and Calibrated use cases. Each sub-score comprises the results of a comprehensive range of tests for measuring autonomy in all kinds of real-life scenarios.

For this series of tests, the smartphone returns to the Faraday cage and our robots repeatedly perform actions linked to one specific use case (such as gaming, video streaming, etc.) at a time. Starting from an 80% charge, all devices are tested until they have expended at least 5% of their battery power.

Charging is fully part of the overall battery experience. In some situations where autonomy is at a minimum, knowing how fast you can charge becomes a concern. The DXOMARK Battery charging score is composed of two sub-scores, (1) Full charge and (2) Quick boost.

Full charge tests assess the reliability of the battery power gauge; measure how long and how much power the battery takes to charge from zero to 80% capacity, from 80 to 100% as shown by the UI, and until an actual full charge.

With the phone at different charge levels (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%), Quick boost tests measure the amount of charge the battery receives after being plugged in for 5 minutes. The chart here compares the average autonomy gain from a quick 5-minute charge.

The charge up sub-score is a combination of four factors: the overall efficiency of a full charge, related to how much energy you need to fill up the battery compared to the energy that the battery can provide; the efficiency of the travel adapter when it comes to transferring power from an outlet to your phone; the residual consumption when your phone is fully charged and still plugged into the charger; and the residual consumption of the charger itself, when the smartphone is disconnected from it. The chart here below shows the overall efficiency of a full charge in %.

Transmissions with the DTR radios are very clear and they have about the best range possible with any VHF/UHF portable radio. (Like any VHF or UHF portable, they are basically line-of-sight, so distance evaluations are always subjective.)

The clarity is the same or better than any high-end business radio, and the mil-spec build quality and weatherproof design makes them expensive but easily worth it in my opinion if you are seeking this level of quality, reliability and readability.

Because they are a FHSS radio, there is no licencing required in either Canada or the U.S. They transmit on the 900 MHz band, which is shared with millions of cordless phones and other electronic devices but the Motorola only stays on one frequency for 90 milliseconds, and would not cause noticeable interference with anything else. One cannot eavesdrop on a conversation with consumer-level scanners either.

All Motorola accessories designed for the radios fit well. It is important to note that not all third-party accessories fit properly. There is very little clearance in the socket for mic/headset accessories, and one MUST use the two-prong Motorola plug that fits these tight sockets. There are two versions of two-prong plugs designed for Motorolas, so I would highly suggest that before you use a non-Motorola product, you test them first.

The reason is actually quite simple. The one version has SLIGHTLY shorter prongs than the other style. One CAN make them fit by some judicious trimming under the prongs with a razor knife, but it is better to get the proper plug on your accessories in the first place.

Accessories such as speaker mics and two-wire surveillance kits work fine and the clarity is great. It is important to note that one can adjust both the volume and microphone sensitivity of the internal mic and speaker AND external accessories attached to the radio separately.

At the time of this review, the support from Motorola and the user manuals needed work. The manuals have contradictory and missing information and it took DAYS of working with the radios in one hand and the manuals in the other to try to figure out how to program them.

On page 2-18, it also explains how to adjust the microphone sensitivity to the ambient noise of the environment. In the first paragraph, it states that a LOW setting means the setting for low ambient noise areas and increases the sensitivity of the microphone to high for good clarity of sound. (On low, even a soft whisper comes across clear and understandable.)

In the very next paragraph, it contradicts itself, and says that setting the ambient noise setting to low is designed for HIGH ambient noise environments and DECREASES the sensitivity of the microphone. When I tested it in very windy conditions, and the first paragraph is correct; the second paragraph is wrong. If you are using them in a high noise environment, set the ambient noise setting to HIGH, and if the ambient noise is low, set it to LOW. When set to LOW, it increases the mic sensitivity so you can clearly hear a whisper. When set to HIGH, it decreases mic sensitivity so high ambient noises like wind and running machinery do not overwhelm the signal.

3a8082e126