Comparing Nokia 6010 to Motorola v551

A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
Called Cingular, and they swapped phones with me for no charge. The
Rep. couldn't seem to understand why I wanted to swap, but I finally
convinced him to . Nokia vs Motorola, no contest. Nokia ( even an
older one ) wins hands down.

---

› See More: Comparing Nokia 6010 to Motorola v551

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005 23:02:12
GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:

>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>[SNIP]

Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the *same* SIM
and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
MY HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
<http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005
> 23:02:12 GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>>[SNIP]
>
> Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the
> *same* SIM and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.
>

Agreed. I have a family plan. I use a 6010 and my wife has a V551. We
use our phones in the same areas. There is no difference in reception.

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 03:23:40 GMT, Stu707 <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005
>> 23:02:12 GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>>>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>>>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>>>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>>>[SNIP]
>>
>> Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the
>> *same* SIM and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.
>>
>
>Agreed. I have a family plan. I use a 6010 and my wife has a V551. We
>use our phones in the same areas. There is no difference in reception.

I would have to give the 6010 a slight edge in marginal areas, like in
the mountains, but they are so close as to not matter. I do think the
audio quality inbound on the Nokia is better than that on the V551
which sounds a little tinny to me. I sure wouldn't trade my V551 for
my wife's 6010.

Dick

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:24:14 -0700, Dick <LeadWinger> wrote:

>On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 03:23:40 GMT, Stu707 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>>
>>> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005
>>> 23:02:12 GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>>>>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>>>>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>>>>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>>>>[SNIP]
>>>
>>> Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the
>>> *same* SIM and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.
>>>
>>
>>Agreed. I have a family plan. I use a 6010 and my wife has a V551. We
>>use our phones in the same areas. There is no difference in reception.
>
>I would have to give the 6010 a slight edge in marginal areas, like in
>the mountains, but they are so close as to not matter. I do think the
>audio quality inbound on the Nokia is better than that on the V551
>which sounds a little tinny to me. I sure wouldn't trade my V551 for
>my wife's 6010.
>
>Dick
I used the chip from the 551 in the Nokia 6010. Same chip

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sun, 20 Nov 2005 04:32:10
GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 21:24:14 -0700, Dick <LeadWinger> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 03:23:40 GMT, Stu707 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005
>>>> 23:02:12 GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>>>>>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>>>>>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>>>>>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>>>>>[SNIP]
>>>>
>>>> Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the
>>>> *same* SIM and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Agreed. I have a family plan. I use a 6010 and my wife has a V551. We
>>>use our phones in the same areas. There is no difference in reception.
>>
>>I would have to give the 6010 a slight edge in marginal areas, like in
>>the mountains, but they are so close as to not matter. I do think the
>>audio quality inbound on the Nokia is better than that on the V551
>>which sounds a little tinny to me. I sure wouldn't trade my V551 for
>>my wife's 6010.

>I used the chip from the 551 in the Nokia 6010. Same chip

Then the V551 may have been defective.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"For" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
> reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
> v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
> this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
> Called Cingular, and they swapped phones with me for no charge. The
> Rep. couldn't seem to understand why I wanted to swap, but I finally
> convinced him to . Nokia vs Motorola, no contest. Nokia ( even an
> older one ) wins hands down.\


haha, you swapped out a 200$ V551 for a 25$ 6010? or did you mean 6101?

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005
> 23:02:12
> GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>>[SNIP]
>
> Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the *same*
> SIM
> and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
> MY HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
Not what I've seen. I went through several v400 then a v551. Swapped the
sim to a Nokia 6230 and the performance was much better. Same SIM same
area.

Don

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Mon, 21 Nov 2005 08:38:49 -0500, "Don
Udel \(ETC\)" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 19 Nov 2005
>> 23:02:12
>> GMT, For <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>>>reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>>>v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>>>this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>>>[SNIP]
>>
>> Likely homed on different networks. Compare the phones with the *same* SIM
>> and you'll find that there isn't a significant difference.

>Not what I've seen. I went through several v400 then a v551. Swapped the
>sim to a Nokia 6230 and the performance was much better. Same SIM same
>area.

[shrug] I've tested the V551 against the 6230, and found the performance to
be roughly the same. Regardless, this thread is about the 6010, not the 6230.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:02:35 -0800, "Aaron" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"For" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> A buddy of mine let me use his old Nokia 6010 for a few days. The
>> reception on this plain-jane phone is 10 times better than my Motorola
>> v551. Not near as many dropped calls either. Hard to understand why
>> this older phone would outperform this newer ( more expensive ) one.
>> Called Cingular, and they swapped phones with me for no charge. The
>> Rep. couldn't seem to understand why I wanted to swap, but I finally
>> convinced him to . Nokia vs Motorola, no contest. Nokia ( even an
>> older one ) wins hands down.\
>
>
>haha, you swapped out a 200$ V551 for a 25$ 6010? or did you mean 6101?
>
I got the 551 for free with activation. Lost no money on the swap.
Nokia products seem to be better ( reception ) wise than the Motorola
products. I went through 3 551 phones before finding something with
much better reception.

"For" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I got the 551 for free with activation. Lost no money on the swap.
> Nokia products seem to be better ( reception ) wise than the Motorola
> products. I went through 3 551 phones before finding something with
> much better reception.

You got this phone?
http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-NOKIA-6010-C...QQcmdZViewItem

Buy it now for 55 bucks free shipping, and all you had to do was give them
a v551 that you could have sold for 190 plus shipping


http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-MOTOROLA-V55...QQcmdZViewItem

It must be nice to be so oblivious.

Bernard

Don Udel (ETC) wrote:

> Not what I've seen. I went through several v400 then a v551. Swapped the
> sim to a Nokia 6230 and the performance was much better. Same SIM same
> area.

I've found the same thing with the newer GSM Motorola phones, they
aren't nearly as good as the newer GSM Nokia phones. I also have an
older GSM Motorola, tri-band, that is fine, but it lacks 800 Mhz, so it
isn't much good in the U.S. anymore.

As far as CDMA goes, Nokia isn't much of a player in CDMA, so it's
tougher to compare. I have a niece with a CDMA Nokia and it seems okay.
She got it because she likes the bowling game!