Verizon Dropped Call List: An
Updated List of Locations, Places, Areas and Roads where Calls on Verizon
Wireless Drop, are Disconnected, have Poor Coverage, or Experience Service
Difficulties
Last Update: 03/20/2022
This list is intended to provide a consolidated reference to a series of
posts, messages, and other observations as to Verizon Wireless dropped
calls, disconnects/poor handoffs, feature issues, and overall cellular
service problems.
(This page previously contained a list of Verizon Data (previously branded
as "Express Network") 1XRTT/EvDO(3G)/LTE(4G) drops, handoffs, and service
issues, but as the combined list was getting too long due to the
unfortunately increased incidence of Verizon voice call drops, we have
decided to move the list to a separate page, which covers only Verizon Wireless 3G/4G Data
Connection Drops and service problems. )
[ Wirelessnotes Home
| Interpage
| Cellular Carrier Comparison
| Verizon Problems/Drops Overview/General
| Criteria for Inclusion
| Disclaimer
| Verizon Cellular Drops List
| Corrected/Remedied Issues
| Verizon 3G/4G Data Drops
| Verizon DC Metro Drop Map
| Verizon Analog Drops
| Sprint Dropped Call List
| Nextel Dropped Call List
| AT&T Wireless Call Drop List
| TMobile Dropped Call List
| Cellular Audio Delay/Latency
| Contact WirelessNotes ]
In our experience with regular use of the 4 nationwide US cellular
carriers for the past 20 years, we've generally found that Verizon
Wireless' coverage and service suffers from the fewest call drops,
disconnections, audio distortions and other voice call difficulties
(hereinafter collectively refered to as "drops" unless otherwise
specified), and has the most extensive and penetrating network for
wireless voice and data services.
Even in 2019, when for some reason which we don't fully understand (LTE
conversion?), we've noticed a dramatic increase in drops while
driving on roads which were previously problem free, the overall
incidence of these drops is still appreciably less than the other major
carriers. (Although on some roads, Verizon has ceded its lead and AT&T or
even Sprint have superior coverage - but overall and on average, Verizon
still suffers from the fewest dropped calls despite the unusual and
atypical pattern of increasing drops along previously drop-free roads.)
Verizon's superior coverage is of particular note outside of urban areas
(which tend to be more densely covered by all major carriers and even some
regional ones). In many rural areas, there are really only two carriers to
choose from: Verizon and AT&T, as Sprint and T-Mobile appear to have
little interest in covering exurban and rural markets outside of
high-traffic road corridors or places which are flat and topographically
unchallenging. Thus, both Verizon and AT&T thus are the only two choices
for reliable and generally uninterrupted (ie, "drop free") calling. And
while AT&T Wireless has made dramatic progress in recent years in exurban
and rural areas, Verizon still (generally) offers superior service, on
average, in such areas.
This is not to say that Verizon's coverage is without its faults -- quite
to the contrary: Besides the apparent and inexplicable degredation of
services (read: more drops) starting in 2018 and continuing into 2019 at
an increasing rate, some fundamental aspects of Verizon's voice cellular
service are less than stellar.
For one, the sound quality of the CDMA protocol which Verizon currently
uses is in our experience, on average, worse than GSM (which is utilized
by AT&T and T-Mobile) and suffers from greater distortion and delays in
conveying normal-sounding coversation (see the Digital
Cellular Latency Page for a discussion of voice delays and latency in
cellular telephony). And LTE, as of yet (2019) doesn't seem to have helped
much - Verizon calls, even in areas of good coverage, still have a
"tin-can", distorted, "twang" to them which immediately screams out "CDMA
cellular call!" to the called party (if the call is received on a
traditional, non-Voip landline), as compared to AT&T's GSM protocol.
(T-Mobile also uses GSM but as of 2017 or so has sounded very "processed"
- are they using Voip or some sort of extreme compression for the
backhaul? (e.g.,the connection from the cell tower to the telephone
network)).
In addition to the above voice sound/tone issues with CDMA,
there is also the issue of latency, which is the delay
imposed by digitization (and to a lesser extent by how long it takes the
electrical signal pass through the air, and then via trunk wires, and then
via a local phone "loop" or cellular connection to the destination phone)
from the time that a person speaks a word to the time the person on the
other end of the line hears it. We've found that customers with CDMA
service (Verizon and Sprint) will have a somewhat lengthier delay from the
time a caller says something into a phone to when the recipient hears it
as compared to the (somewhat) faster/lower-latency GSM counterpart. This
effect is even more noticeable on mobile-to-mobile calls and
mobile-to-VoIP calls (for more details, see this discussion of cellular and
Voice-over-IP latency/voice delays. Thus, if you like/need your
cellular service to closely approximate landline (or good analog cellular)
service, with no noticeable delay and/or no less distortion, choose a good
GSM carrier as CDMA will likely prove more of a disappointment.)
(As an aside, a number of people familiar with digital cellular protocols
have written to us to suggest that while CDMA is more "managed" and
"metallic" sounding than GSM, the codecs (or modems) in newer CDMA phones
are not well-made, and that CDMA sounded a lot better with early Verizon
digital CDMA phones (like the Sony/Qualcom Digital QCP-800). As users of
the QCP-800 (even in 2018!), we agree there may be some validity to the
point (Verizon CDMA calls do sound somewhat better and less
"metallic" on the QCP-800), overall, AT&T's GSM and their generally
high-quality backhaul from the cell tower to the telephone network offers
a superior audio profile than anything Verizon currently offers.)
A second issue, which seems to date back to the inception of cellular
service, is Verizon's segregation of markets. In the 1990's, when cellular
networks were being built out, there was lack of integration between the
various markets (calls wouldn't be delivered from one market to another -
unheard of now in 2019), voicemail didn't work outside of a person's
"home" market, and other features and services didn't function or worked
differently while roaming. Most of these problems have long since been
corrected, but for some reason, Verizon has in many cases never
fixed many drops between markets.
We have raised these issues on the drop list and complained long and often
as to these drops between Verizon markets (ex: I-84 between the CT/00119
"A-side" market and the NY/00022 "B-side" market at the CT/NY line), and
yet, still in 2019, some of these drops still occur! Many of
these are detailed in the Verizon dropped calls section, listed state by
state, below.
Additionally, Verizon's customer service and upper management can be at
times ossified and stodgy, and suffers from parochialism and in-fighting
between the various (seemingly Balkanized) companies which were absorbed
into Verizon during the Verizon/GTE/PrimeCo merger, as well as with
subsequent mergers with carriers such as Alltel (which seems to have
been a much smoother transition than with GTE).
This internecine feuding and bickering can manifest itself in the outward
customer service experience which customers receive, which can make the
resolution of otherwise relatively simple issues more protracted and
complex as the case meanders through the rough waters of the various
departments within Verizon fighting amongst themselves.
More generally, Verizon seems to feel that there is no one better than
they in terms of reliable service and coverage (which in our experience is
true generally, but, as noted above, as of 2019, becoming increasingly
less and less so), and thus they don't have to try 'as hard' to retain
customers who are disatisfied with some aspect of their Verizon service
and/or charges.
Thus, based on our experience in terms of their technical
proficiency, Verizon Wireless offers generally and on average more
reliable coverage and larger effective service areas. Unfortunately,
Verizon's provenance and foundation from as one of the old "wireline"
carriers in most markets which they serve (explained below) which result
in their superior coverage due to the 800 MHz frequencies which they were
effectively given in the 1980's at the inception of cellular service also
serve as the basis for their "We're the phone company and we know
what you need!" biases and institutional impediments to better, more
responsive and flexible customer service.
In part, this appears to be due to their long-standing presence in most of
their markets and initial mandate to build out their analog systems to
cover their licensed areas, which led to significantly broader and better
(RF/dB-wise) coverage than many of their digital-only competitors. BAMS,
GTE, Airtouch, etc., all had regional service areas to cover, and spent
their assets and time covering these areas to become the (generally)
superior carrier in their respective markets.
As noted above, when cellular licenses were handed out in the 1980's, the
FCC opted for the older, non-cellular model, with the "wireline" (Bell,
GTE, or other independent local exchange carrier, or local "phone
company") getting half on the 800 MHz spectrum, and some "non-wireline"
carrier getting the other half to "compete" with the wireline carrier
(but which effectively formed an uncompetitve duopoly until Sprint,
Nextel, and regional PCS carriers came online in the mid-1990's).
The 800 MHz frequencies are particularly valuable as they penetrate
buildings well, can travel for long distances, bounce reasonably well off
mountains so covering valleys is easier, and have other Radio Frequency
(RF) and propogation benefits. Verizon (comprised many of landline/wireline
carriers) and AT&T Wirless (also with a good number of landline/carriers,
as well as many initial non-wireline carriers who received the "other
half" of the 800 MHz licenses) have a majority, if not all, of the
original 800 MHz licenses, which is why they tend to have
superior/broader coverage, work better in buildings, and manage to have
their signal penetrate into rural areas and those which are
topographically challenging as compared to Sprint and T-Mobile.
(This leads to another question which we've never had properly answered:
As Verizon and AT&T were given these highly valued 800 MHz licenses,
effectively for free (there were no auctions in the 1980's when the FCC
assigned the 800MHz cellular band to a "wireline" and "non-wireline"
carrier in each market) by virtue of Verizon and AT&T (or
their predecessors) being the landline carrier in a given
market, why do they get to keep said 800 MHz licenses if
they opt to abandon wireline service in a given state? For example, New
England Telephone was the local, wireline, Bell Operating Company in
southern New Hampshire, and was assigned 800 MHz licenses for the 00428/B
market. New England Telephone then quickly became NYNEX after the Bell
System divestiture, which after a merger of the mobile division into Bell
Atlantic Mobile also merged their landline services under the same name,
and then later became Verizon/Verizon Wireless. After Verizon (landline)
opted to leave the northern New England market, and abandoned local
service in NH, VT and ME to Fairpoint in a disasterous transaction which
local residents are still paying for many years later, why was
Verizon wireless allowed to keep its 800 MHz licenses for Nashua,
Manchester, etc? New England Telephone received them in the 1980s
because they were the local/landline carrier, and if Verizon
opted to stop being the local/landline carrier and abandon the
northern New England markets, why should they keep the free windfall of
the original 800 MHz licenses if they aren't the landline/wireline carrier
there anymore?)
Finally, the length and extent of the list (as compared to other lists which we
maintain) should not be construed as evidence of more
drops/inferior coverage by Verizon Wireless - quite to the contrary - it
is due to their generally superior coverage that we utilize them
extensively as our primary carrier, and thus have more experience with
them than with other carriers as to where their service experiences drops
and other difficulties.
Overall, the Verizon Digital Cellular Dropped Call List will hopefully
serve as a central source where such drop information may be collected,
posted, and utilized in furtherance of future service improvements by
Verizon.
The criteria for a drop being "worthy" :) of getting posted are:
Certain subway systems (such as DC Metro) are organized by line and are
considered subcategories within the primary city in which they
are contained.
Please feel free to submit your dropped call experiences with Verizon
Wireless which meet the above guidelines so that we can provide a more
comprehensive list. Contact information for this list is provided at the
end of this page.
Additionally, if you feel that an item is incorrect, please let us know
the specifics of your experiences in the given area so we can test it and
modify the list accordingly.
Thanks!
Disclaimer/Note: The authors have nothing to do
with Verizon other than using a few of their phones and/or data products
as paying subscribers. While we will try to keep these lists current,
you should test them out for yourself and not use this as a dispositive
and authoritative source of information as to Verizon's cellular service
(or lack thereof). In other words, these are just our and/or other's
observations -- we try to be accurate, but we make no representations
other than what we have observed (and if others notice we are wrong about
a given drop, please mail us so we can test the drop and modify the list
accordingly.)
Verizon Cellular Dropped Call List by State
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Virginia
Washington DC
Note: Voice coverage on Metro, although never great, was in many ways
better when analog service was available, and "through coverage" from
station to station generally worked well in many segments of the system.
Additionally, ATT Wireless customers could drop to analog and utilize the
Verizon Wireless DC Metro system. After analog was removed, no roaming
(even on Sprint postpay it seems) occurs on the Verizon system, and calls
tend to drop in all cases in the tunnels between systems. There does not
seem to be a single case of coverage not dropping between any of
the underground stations/segments in the DC Metro any longer, and reliable
voice coverage is generally relegated to stations only, like most of the
other carriers. Effectively, Verizon Wireless' voice coverage in the DC
Metro system has taken a step _back_ under digital-only coverage, and
despite repeated inquiries with them about large segments of the
northwestern leg of the Red Line which used to have coverage between
stations and now does not, nothing has been done. It is (or was)
possible to cover the tunnels properly and have decent "through" coverage
as evidenced by Verizon's analog service, so it is unclear why they are
not willing to provide that level of service currently as of late 2014.
Corrected Problems
The following were problem drop areas but have apparently been
corrected and/or no longer suffer from regular/repeated drops.
Connecticut
Contacting WirelessNotes.org
We may be reached via:
Back to Main Wireless Notes Page
Last modified and ©: 03/20/2022
     
Ordering Note: Lists are alphabetically organized, first by state
and then by counties within states. In some cases, large Metropolitan
areas which span a multiple set of counties, states or boundaries are
listed as separate entities (such as New York City).
...or click here for
additional details.
NOTE: Somewhat atypically, AT&T Wireless, Sprint and T-Mobile do NOT drop
on I-70 at the Myersville Rest Area/hill apex, and offer continuous
coverage from Frederick westward to (at least) JCT I-81 in Hagerstown, and
then northwards along I-81 into Pennsylvania (where the
Verizon/Scranton/00096 system kicks in). This may be due to there being a
roaming market which Verizon has to deal with (US Cell/01794) while AT&T,
Sprint, and T-Mobile do not, and thus Verizon may have drop/disconnect
issues during the roaming handoffs between the Verizon and US Cellular
markets, but roaming handoffs are an old issue which should have been
corrected a decade ago.
Last observed with a Verizon postpay account/phone: 05/18/2017
Last observed with a Verizon MVNO account/phone: 05/18/2017
New York City 5-Borough/Counties:
New York State Counties other than New York City:
West Virginia
Delaware
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Jersey
New York
Vermont
Washington DC
Comparison of Cellular Carriers
Interpage NSI Main Page