Jump to content

Motorola IHDT56QC7 (LTE Moto E)


lilotimz

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Well this little guy just popped out into the mobile world sometime in the last few days, found it on BestBuy's website.

Sprint Prepaid Motorola Moto E 4G LTE

  • Qualcomm quad-core processor @ 1.2GHz
  • Android 5.0 Lollipop out of the box
  • 1GB RAM
  • 4.5'' qHD 540 x 960 screen
  • 8GB of memory, expandable to 32GB with SD card

Link provided below.

 

Sprint Prepaid Motorola Moto E 4G LTE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this little guy just popped out into the mobile world sometime in the last few days, found it on BestBuy's website.

Sprint Prepaid Motorola Moto E 4G LTE

  • Qualcomm quad-core processor @ 1.2GHz
  • Android 5.0 Lollipop out of the box
  • 1GB RAM
  • 4.5'' qHD 540 x 960 screen
  • 8GB of memory, expandable to 32GB with SD card

Link provided below.

 

Sprint Prepaid Motorola Moto E 4G LTE

 

Ran the IMEI of the test device through IMEI checker on swappa.. and lo and behold

 

yEx357R.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Can this new Moto E LTE be activated on a Family Share plan or will it be Sprint Pre-Paid only?  Looks like a nice device for a great price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is now available on Boost and Sprint Prepaid. Virgin coming soon. I'm really interested in picking one up, however, is it Band 41 compatible? I can't find a good answer anywhere on the official materials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is now available on Boost and Sprint Prepaid. Virgin coming soon. I'm really interested in picking one up, however, is it Band 41 compatible? I can't find a good answer anywhere on the official materials.

Yep the Moto E is tri-band, Bands 25, 26, and 41 Spark capable.  

 

http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/shop/phone_details.jsp?deviceSKUId=89000409

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep the Moto E is tri-band, Bands 25, 26, and 41 Spark capable.  

 

http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/shop/phone_details.jsp?deviceSKUId=89000409

 

I am sorry.  But that thing is a fat, fugly, low res piece of plastic.  I guess that is what $99 buys.

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For $99, it is a great phone to try out Sprint for someone that doesn't currently have Sprint. Then, if I do decide to get it: I can give it to a member of my family that uses it for calling only basically while I grab something more high end. Plus, it runs stock and has great radios that Motorola is known for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also a great phone to downgrade a teenager to who has destroyed his more expensive phone being careless.  :)

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also a great phone to downgrade a teenager to who has destroyed his more expensive phone being careless.   :)

 

I wholeheartedly agree.  But I believe that is called punishment.

 

;)

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry.  But that thing is a fat, fugly, low res piece of plastic.  I guess that is what $99 buys.

 

AJ

Its not ugly, hogly, its fugly!  I agree 100% there are better options out there for a little bit more cabbage.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool! Last time I checked the only model anyone knew anything about only had AT&T bands.

 

Good to know it'll probably be on Sprint. Now the question is whether it will be allowed on postpaid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool! Last time I checked the only model anyone knew anything about only had AT&T bands.

 

Good to know it'll probably be on Sprint. Now the question is whether it will be allowed on postpaid.

Went into a local store, only on prepaid & Boost.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to understand the logic behind not offering this phone for post-paid customers.  Given the move away from subsidies, you would think a nice low cost post-paid option would be encouraged.  They obviously did all the work to make it available on the network.  Why cut off half your potential users?  Doesn't make sense...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to understand the logic behind not offering this phone for post-paid customers. Given the move away from subsidies, you would think a nice low cost post-paid option would be encouraged. They obviously did all the work to make it available on the network. Why cut off half your potential users? Doesn't make sense...

Yeah, they did it with the Sharp Aquos Crystal, both prepaid and post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I got the "Unlocked Universal" version of this very device from Amazon.  The FCC indicates it does indeed support Sprint frequency bands.  No reason why it really couldn't work other than Sprint not wanting to whitelist the stupid thing.  

 

I made a nice comparison on XDA Developers about the *C7 and *C8.  

Compiled from FCC information and Wikipedia for two of the Moto E LTE models:

FCC ID IHDT56QC8 (XT1528) -
This LTE transceiver supports high-speed wireless data communications within LTE Bands 2, 4, 5, and 13, with channels up to 20 MHz in bandwidth.

FCC ID IHDT56QC7 (XT1527) -
This LTE transceiver supports high-speed wireless data communications within LTE Bands 2, 4, 5, 12, 17, 25, 26, and 41, with channels up to 20 MHz in bandwidth. 

From Wikipedia:
2 = 1900Mhz (PCS)
4 = 1700Mhz (AWS)
5 = 850 (Cellular?)
12 = 700 a
13 = 700 c
17 = 700 b
25 = 1900 g
26 = 850 (SMR?)
41 = 2500 (old WiMax)

So, the Verizon model (1528) will technically support LTE on AT&T and T-Mobile bands 2 & 4. It has all three Verizon LTE bands (obviously) - 2, 4, 13. You would be missing LTE on AT&T band 17 and LTE on T-Mobile band 12.

The other model (1527) will support LTE on AT&T in 2, 4, and 17. Will support Sprint on 2, 25, 26, and 41. Will support T-Mobile on 2, 4, and 12. Technically it might also support Verizon on 2 and 4. (Verizon is currently using 4 as part of XLTE in certain markets, and I don't know if think are running LTE on 2 at all. )

It appears that the 1527 model is the better one to get for band coverage, unless you want Verizon LTE on band 13.
Found a third model. From FCC docs:

FCC ID: IHDT56QC1.
This mobile device is also equipped with an LTE transceiver. This LTE transceiver supports high-speed wireless data communications within LTE Bands 2, 4, 5, 7, 12, and 17, with channels up to 20 MHz in bandwidth. 

This particular variant will work on LTE on AT&T in bands 2, 4, and 17. It will work on LTE on T-Mobile in 2, 4, and 12. It will work on Verizon's LTE on 2 and 4, but is missing Verizon's core band 13 (700c). Not sure which provider is using it with on band 5 (850). This model apparently (compared to QC7) is missing the Sprint LTE bands completely (25, 26, 41).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FCC ID: IHDT56QC1.

This mobile device is also equipped with an LTE transceiver. This LTE transceiver supports high-speed wireless data communications within LTE Bands 2, 4, 5, 7, 12, and 17, with channels up to 20 MHz in bandwidth.

 

This particular variant will work on LTE on AT&T in bands 2, 4, and 17. It will work on LTE on T-Mobile in 2, 4, and 12. It will work on Verizon's LTE on 2 and 4, but is missing Verizon's core band 13 (700c). Not sure which provider is using it with on band 5 (850). This model apparently (compared to QC7) is missing the Sprint LTE bands completely (25, 26, 41).

 

AT&T also uses LTE B5 in places (like around here). So it will work on ATT B5 too.

 

 

 

Using Moto X² on Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Tl;dr the Verizon LTE (gen2 XT1528) model can be GSM-enabled if you have access to a computer even after the 5.1 patched update.

 

Story time: My friend's unlocked Moto X broke so he decided he wanted a Moto E to tide him over until he could get the X fixed. The Cricket model you can purchase in a retail store is listed at $30 but after fees and stuff its about $60. So I told him I could take a shot at convincing the Verizon Prepaid model to take a Cricket SIM. (Verizon phones are supposed to be unlocked, right?)

 

So we grab one from Walmart for $35 and then we realize we need a nano to micro adapter. We track one of those down and then I get to work on the radio side of things. Of note, this is model XT1528; not the Boost model. Some old articles on the internet indicate you just have to run a couple shell commands over adb to restore the GSM/LTE option to the settings menu and everything should work from there. We run the commands a couple times and nothing happens. Then I started to realize all of these articles were written back when the phone shipped with 5.0. Apparently Verizon patched the menu in the 5.1 update. I found another old forum post on XDA by someone in the same situation who gave instructions for flashing the old modem. A couple hours later (all of the stock firmware repos only have the 5.1 and 5.1.1 files) I found someone hosting the original 5.0 files. The fastboot modem flash worked, and the commands enabled the LTE/GSM option! I'm still not sure how Verizon was able to manipulate a UI feature (admittedly radio-related) with a modem update, but the rollback worked so I'm not gonna complain.

 

The model supports 2 and 4 (among others) but all I've seen it connect to so far is AWS. My point in posting is that the Verizon model is the cheapest way to get a Moto E at the moment and it can be made to accept any SIM if you're willing to put an hour into it.

 

Working with this thing made me wish even more that Sprint carried it on postpaid. For normal tasks it's just as good as my 5X and it would make a great backup. And it's cheap enough that I wouldn't be worried about losing it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • On Reddit, someone asked (skeptically) if the US Cellular buyout would result in better service.  I'd been pondering this very issue, and decided to cross-post my response here: I've been pondering the question in the title and I've come to the conclusion that the answer is that it's possible. Hear me out. Unlike some of the small carriers that work exclusively with one larger carrier, all three major carriers roam on US Cellular today in at least some areas, so far as I know. If that network ceases to exist, then the carriers would presumably want to recover those areas of lost service by building out natively. Thus, people in those areas who may only have service from US Cellular or from US Cellular and one other may gain competition from other carriers backfilling that loss. How likely is it? I'm not sure. But it's definitely feasible. Most notably, AT&T did their big roaming deal with US Cellular in support of FirstNet in places where they lacked native coverage. They can't just lose a huge chunk of coverage whole still making FirstNet happy; I suspect they'll have to build out and recover at least some of that area, if not most of it. So it'd be indirect, but I could imagine it. - Trip
    • Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...