LGVX6000 reception is horrible!

might be a bad phone mines great pretty much everywhere

 

sometimes the demos are not properly programmed.

 

Comparing our LG phones to the T720/730 is like comparing a Ferrari to a Volkswagon Rabbit The LG must have been programmed wrong like djtonye said.

 

Can't even believe he was looking at the t730..........lol

 

I have to disagree also about the reception. I went from the V60i which had phenomonal reception to the VX-6000 which is just as good if not a litle better. In places where my V60 went in and out of service my VX-6000 actually holds a signal more often then the V60 did. So I personally have been impressed with the signal on the VX-6000.

 

My VX6000 reception is horrible! It sucks soo bad! I can't believe how many calls get dropped, not even mentioning how many calls never even connect! What a bummer. But i do think it has the best reception of all other cellphones when i am outside the bombshelter.

 

I live in Los Angeles Gamer, and yes, it did occured to me that it depends on your coverage area, that's why it should occur to you that that's the reason why the 6000 you were looking at was not at full signal, or that the phone was not updated with the current prl for that area.
The times that i've gone to my local Verizon store i've noticed that the 6000 they had as a demo did not have full signal like mine did, when i question the sales rep, he told that sometimes they turn them on and forget to update the prl. but hey, you go ahead and get the T730 you were looking at, good luck.

 

the current prl for americas choice plan is 50110

 

you can update your prl by dialing *228 option 1
i wouldn't update to the current one just yet, this current prl does not cover you as good as 50096 in some areas, so i would wait 'til further noticed .

 

Yes, LG phones suck for RF in my area too. My 4400 is a nightmare that makes me want to quit Verizon. My friend just got the 6000, says its great...but he misses a lot of calls and drops a lot more calls compared to his old Kyocera 2235. Blah, nicer the phone, the worse the reception. I live in a rural state...and Verizon just doesn't have enough towers. If this is a surprise to everyone, search on here and at hofo....I have been upset with Verizon for a long time now.

 

So, is really not the 4400 or 6000 that like you say, "sucks", is the rural area you live in.
Here in California, LA to be exact, it's full signal most everywhere, so you can't really judge a phone's performance in area where reception lacks.

 

Folks, understand that there is a known problem with some VX6000s. The pin connection to the antenna has been coming lose. A group of us bought 9 of these phones and 2 had this problem.

Simply return the phone for a new one. The new one should blow away everything.

 

That would be true if ALL Verizon phones sucked in the area. But according to Airb, the Nokia 3585i worked fine, the Kyocera's work fine, so it does seem to be the LG's that are the problem, at least in this instance.

 

The Nokia? He doesn't mention any Nokias, especialy the 3585i, but regardless, if lets say 99 % or even 90 % of users are happy with the 4400 and 6000, i still think that makes a pretty good phone, compare to some KYOCERAS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPLODING.
Here read about how great the Kyocera is.
I'm not even gonna go into the exploding Nokias.
Now i know this could be due to either generic batteries or chargers, but so far we haven't heard of something like this happening to our awful Lg's, but then this is another subject that has nothing to do with RF.

 

Well, he mentions the Nokia in a different thread...says it worked fine. I was not trying to make this into some immature argument about LG's vs. Nokia's vs. Kyocera. I was also not saying that all LG's suck. I simply commented that Airb says the Nokia and Kyocera perform well where the VX4400 and VX6000 do not. Nothing more, nothing less. I used the VX4400 and never had a reception problem. Perhaps LG's have trouble in "rural" areas but are just fine in urban settings? I don't pretend to know. I do know that your comments are completely off-base and not even related to RF, which is the subject at hand.

 

I agree with you, this is not an immature argument about anything, but if you read my final statement, it says that some of my comments have nothing to do with RF, and i'm simply pointing out some defects on the phones being compared. I don't pretend to know, i think that if we were all experts, we wouldn't need to come to these forums.

 

Yeah, but you added that "nothing to do with RF" thing after I posted (or rather as I was posting, but after I quoted you) my reply

 

i wasn't adding anything, i was editting. If you read the time on my post, it shows edited a minute before you posted.

 

Why do i feel like i'm in a court room, i've seen so many threads around that have nothing to do with what's being discussed, at least i was talking about cell-phones.

 

Umm, as I just said, you edited your post (by adding the line about RF) AFTER I quoted you, but BEFORE I submitted my post.

 

I think this thread needs a group hug! lol


me like lg6k reception!

 

Only if this thread is full of women.

 

LOL

 

Hey....The display BARs aren't always a good reflection of the coverage anyway...put the phones into test mode...or making calls is the only real way to see what type of reception a phone has.

 

Agreed, how about a nice cold Corona to go with those waves

 

I concur. We are talking about wireless here. Honestly, if I were in the sticks and it was all Sprint towers...I'd use Sprint. And My 6000 functions flawlessly, has the best reception I have ever heard, and gets great signal. It sounds better than a landline call IMO. Don't get pissed at Verizon if you live in a town with 250 people and they don't find it worth putting up 50 towers.