Coverage Question

Sprint's coverage with roaming partners included is actually the largest out of any carrier. They also have other roaming agreements besides Verizon. They also roam on Western Wireless/Alltel/US Cellular (to name a few) and even some GSM carriers that have 800 Mhz AMPS service.

 

The Sanyo Vi-2300 is a good budget phone. The LG PM-225 is also a good phone with good sound quality. The Samsung A840 and A920 are good to but a little more expensive. If you want a non-flip (candy bar style) look at the Sanyo RL-4930.

 

Sprint tends to have "whisper thin" coverage along interstates in the west. Travel a few miles east or west of I5 and you'll be roaming. Roaming is included with most rate plans so that doesn't tend to cost you any money. You will, however, drop phone calls when traveling between Sprint native areas and roaming areas. If one of these boundaries is on your commute, Sprint can become a bad choice.

Also note that all of the major providers include roaming at this point. The only national carriers with narrow native coverage are Sprint and T-Mobile. Verizon and Cingular have massive amounts of native coverage comparatively, and similarly massive roaming. Having larger native coverage means less boundries to drop calls, and more consistent features.

Of course, there's always other factors too (like quality of service where you are, data support, data roaming, feature transparency when roaming, and customer service etc.)

Sprint's a good option for many, but you need to understand that their "most generous roaming" isn't signficantly better than say Verizon with their roaming partners, or Cingular with their roaming partners. In Oregon, Verizon will roam on Ramcell of Oregon, and Sprint cannot. Geographic coverage between Sprint and Verizon here in Oregon is similar, but Verizon actually wins. Note too, Verizon roams on Inland Cellular in Washington, and Sprint cannot.

To be fair, Sprint can roam on Cingular and Verizon will not. Verizon and Cingular's footprint here in Oregon is so similar, there's really not much geographic coverage gained roaming on Cingular. i.e. One 20 mile stetch on highway 58 above oakridge is about it.

-Dan

 

Wirelessly posted (MOT-8720_/00.62 UP.Browser/6.2.3.4.c.1.104 (GUI) MMP/2.0)

With a no roam plan and a sprint phone that can force digital roam depending on where you are you may actually be able to get great coverage with roam with a cheap sprint plan like the sero plan. Just keep in mind that unlimited m2m calls dont apply when roaming and things like vision and sms may not work.

 

I'll disagree with that statement. Too generalized to be accurate. Coverage along the interstates in the largest state in the West (California) is very solid from north of the Sacramento area all the way to the Mexican border.

 

Unless this has changed recently (I haven't looked at Sprint PRLs in a while), roaming on Verizon isn't a given, as they don't here in my market. they roam on uscc. Now, USCC has a great network, but it has some holes that VZW works in, so therefore sprint users would have a hole.

 

On a nationwide plan with Alltel, Sprint or Verizon, you're basically going to have the same coverage area because they all use each other's networks. The network priority in the specific PRL can lead to different coverage by different providers in certain areas as can roaming agreements with smaller local or regional carriers that not all CDMA carriers may share. (Say Verizon has an agreement with USCC for roaming coverage in area A while Sprint does not have an agreement with USCC for that area.)

 

Sprint's roaming on Verizon has never been a given. It varies from market to market depending on who gives Sprint the best roaming deals. Here in the So. Cal area Sprint has always had their preferred roaming agreement with Verizon/Airtouch. On Hwy 395 and Bishop along Inyo & Mono Counties Sprint has shuffled their roaming agreement back and forth between Verizon and Cellular One (Alltel). Right now it's back with Cell One and I'm happy about that as they have the better coverage of the two in that market.

 

Exactly. I'm just trying to say that there's no guarantee that a sprint phone will roam on a verizon signal, so people shouldn't assume they'll have access to it. And it works the same the other way. Verizon users shouldn't assume that they'll be able to use the sprint signal if they need it.


The OP asked if a sprint user would have coverage everywhere a verizon user does. I was just answering.

 

Hello Larry and All-

With regard to my statement that Sprint has whisper thin native coverage mostly on Interstates:

1st- agreed that Sprint has much better coverage in California.

2nd- My statement about whisper thin coverage is still true in virtually every other western state.

-Dan

 

I believe his statement was generalized about the western U.S. and in quite a few areas, he does have a point.

 

Well since Verizon is the only other CDMA carrier in most parts of Southern California if they chose to have a roaming partner it would have to be Verizon, since they can hardly have people roam on Cingular AMPS as I doubt their network is that great anymore either.

 

I agree with you with this statement. However, with the NEXTEL takeover and Sprint adding CDMA to NEXTEL installations, expect their coverage to get better too in the West, but as of right now, you are correct.

 

Hmm perhaps there is a correlation between interstates and population. Why not let a roaming agreement cover the deer in the Wasatch since it is much more ROI efficient?

 

If you think it's only mountain areas that Sprint doesn't cover that would be beneficial to them, then okay, I won't argue. Fact is, if people here wouldn't have to roam so much with Sprint, a lot more outdoor people would use Sprint(and there are quite a few here). Why do you think Verizon is number one in my market? Their network here has brought thousands of people to them.

 

I used the Wasatch as an example (one that is brought up frequently) but did not state that mountain areas are the only areas not covered by Sprint. As you know networks are built out to provide a return on investment with the areas with the highest returns built out first. Eventually it may come if the cost of roaming in the area outweighs the cost of a new network setup.

I know that Verizon is #1 in Utah- it's stated about once a month.Another statement was made that there is whisper thin coverage in virtually every other western state along highways which to me might be considered an exaggeration. Debateable for sure and very subjective. As stated in another post I believe that with roaming agreements (and inclusion in plan minutes) it is not such a factor as it once was.

Also I am an outdoors person and do roam at times with Sprint in the mountains and desert with the only detriment being the inability to check email. The point could be made that is it such an issue to not be able to check email in the middle of nowhere? I don't consider it an issue at all.

 

In many areas of the west, it's not an issue of being in the middle of nowhere to not use your home features. It's right as you leave the city limits type of a thing.
You are right, if you have free roaming on your account, the only thing you would miss is the ability to read emails and use free m2m minutes and send/receive SMS depening on the network you're roaming on. For some people, though, that's huge. Honestly, I feel good knowing that I can use my phone the way I do sitting at home when I am out enjoying nature or at the outskirts of town, but you certainly did make a great point in your post.
The poster that mentioned thin coverage does have a point in quite a few Western States... Utah, Nevada, Wyoming to just name a few without even looking at coverage maps.

 

And that is your opinion. I know there is another wireless coverage guru (T-Prophet) in the Pacific Northwest area and he ranks Sprint right up there at or near the top for coverage. It's all subjective.

 

Yes he does because of the good urban coverage Sprint offers and the roaming he receives when outside the urban areas.

 

Come Andy who cares about Wyoming. LOL As for Nevada they cover everywhere it counts. I can't speak for Utah since I've never been there.

 

Lol, you have a point with Wyoming. Sprint does cover urban areas and corridors, yes, but they don't cover much outside of those areas for various reasons and various good points made in this thread in a lot of areas. I don't think Sprint in Idaho is that extensive either, but they probably cover the major 'ubran' areas good and that's where the money returns so that's all they care for. I do see yours and Gman's points and they are excellent.

 

The Sprint/Ubiquitel network in ID is pretty thin.

 

But user dalbrich was claiming they have "whisper thin" coverage ALONG interstates (not away from them) and I totally disagree with that. It's too generalized and in my opinion it's just a typical exaggerated remark from someone who doesn't like Sprint for whatever reason. Sprint has been very good along the interstates here in CA and Arizona and they make it a point to provide good coverage there because that's where the money is.

 

Maybe he ment that it's only along interstate highways with his 'whisper thin along major interstate highway' comment. I guess it depends on how you look at it.
Fathead also has a point about their ID network- so now we have idaho, Utah, Wyoming(lol), Nevada although I guess you could argue all of them either way.

 

Not to argue, but to clarify:

My claim about "whisper thin" native coverage is specific to Sprint's native network, and not Sprint with included roaming partners.

My meaning is to say Sprint's coverage on Interstates and even most major highways is good. The trouble can be if you travel off the interstate. In the case of I5 say in Oregon, Sprint has almost no coverage east or west of I5 outside of town, or north or south of I84.

Verizon and Cingular have "fatter" footprints at least for the counties they serve. For example, a Verizon phone has native coverage with all features via several routes over to the Oregon coast, and fairly far east into the foothills of the Cascade mountains.

In many places, Sprint only covers the area immediately around the Interstate.

The reason this can be an issue is that you will drop an existing call when traveling from a native area to a roaming area. Granted you can force roaming before placing a call. This presumes you unset or reboot your phone sometime later and I consider this somewhat unpractical if this is a frequently recurring situation, and does not help you for an incoming call received on the native network as you head away from town.

Many people living in Eugene commute from Lorane, Creswell, or other surrounding areas that lack native Sprint service. This is also common for communities around Corvallis, Salem etc. The point being is that these surrounding areas are well covered by Verizon. Cingular also has fat coverage in most areas.

I do have a very low opinion of Sprint in Oregon based on my travel patterns. They're worse than every other national carrier in the areas I travel in Oregon. Notably, Sprint doesn't have great coverage in Eugene, Salem or Portland.

-Dan

PS: I'm in Tucson this week, and Sprint has been surprisingly good here. Perhaps Arizona can be added to the western states Sprint does well.

 

That's odd considering how many Qwest towers Sprint took over in those very cities and also in the state of Oregon to improve coverage.

 

did they take over just as many towers there as they did in my area???
You knew this one was coming.