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: 08/12/2024
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. )
A more modernly formatted (but textually identical) version of this page is available at the scripted Verizon Wireless Call Drops List page.
See also the Annoying Verizon page for an ongoing and updated list of annoying, silly, aggravating, and penurious Verizon Wireless (and landline) practices.
[ 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 Annoyances
| 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 (and as of mid-2022, 3)
nationwide US cellular carriers for the past 25 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 with the recent (post-LTE/2019) increase in Verizon drops, where 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 somewhat less than ATT, and appreciably less than T-Mobile (TMO/Sprint). While there seems to a be trend of a greater-than-before incidence of Verzion drops on some roads and corridors where Verizon has curiously ceded its lead to AT&T, or in fewer instances to T-Mobile (which in a few cases seems to have reduced its many drops after the acquisition of Sprint), overall and on average, despite service improvements on the parts of AT&T and T-Mobile, Verizon still suffers from the fewest dropped calls, even when taking into account Verizon's apparent increase in 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 T-Mobile/(& ex-Sprint) 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, Verizon and AT&T (and their resellers and MVNOs) are
effectively the only two choices for reliable and generally uninterrupted
(ie, "drop free") calling, with Verizon currently (Jan 2023) having a
slight edge on AT&T.
This is not to say that Verizon's coverage and overall service 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 2023 at an increasing rate, the implemtation of 4G/LTE and the
removal of 2G/3G in Dec 2022 does not seem to have, as of yet, yielded
dividends in terms of more long-range, penetrating frequencies being
re-farmed to 4G/LTE bands, and service in many areas where 2G/3G service
was acceptable has now become poor to non-existent.
In fact, in January 2023, after the 3G shut down, when ostensibly
more frequencies and/or spectrum would be made available for 4G/LTE
devices, in tests performed with phones provided by Verizon,
coverage appears worse, and drops more frequent, than with 2G/3G equipment
which worked fine for 15 years! We hope this situation is temporary and a
result of some transitional lag while frequencies/spectrum are re-purposed
for 4G/LTE, but so far there is no evidence in any improvement of
coverage in terms of 4G to replace the lost coverage which 2G/3G devices
enjoyed.
The Verizon Cellular (Voice) dropped call list below notes such cases, eg,
where 4G/LTE service post-2G/3G/CDMA shut down was tested Verizon-provided
phones, and which dropped and/or had other service difficulties using
4G/LTE, as are so noted at the end of each given drop's/problem's
description with a specific reference to 4G/LTE drops using
Verizon-provided equipent.
Additionally, some fundamental aspects (other than the continuity of
coverage) of Verizon's voice cellular service are less than stellar, even
with the supposed "improvements" of 4G/LTE.
Prior to the 3G shut down in early Jan 2023, the sound quality of the CDMA
protocol which Verizon used was, in our experience, worse than GSM (which
was/is (in part) utilized by AT&T/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).
Verizon's 4G/LTE, as of yet (2022/3 and going forwards) 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 screamed
out "CDMA cellular call!" (and as of 2023 "Verizon cellular call!") to the
called party (if the call is received on a traditional, non-Voip
landline), as compared to AT&T's GSM and newer LTE protocol(s) which have
somewhat better tonality and less latency. In fact, when comparing
Verizon's 4G/LTEvoice audio quality and latency with that of ATT, ATT
Wireless sounds cleaner and more immediate than Verizon's. ATT Wireless is
getting closer to sounding like a traditional landline call,
while Verizon, even with 4G and LTE, still more or less sounds like a
"cell phone call".
(Note: With some limited calls on Verizon's fastest 5G frequencies, call
audio quality does sound better, but 4G/LTE still sounds almost bad as
CDMA, while AT&T's 4G audio sounds significantly better. T-Mobile also
uses GSM (in 2017), and is in 2022 mainly on LTE (but 2G/GSM is still
available), but in either case, their audio has for the past few years
(2017-2023) sounded very "processed" and "Voip-ish" - 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 Verizon,
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 in the past that
customers with CDMA service (Verizon and Sprint) had a somewhat lengthier
delay from the time a caller said something into a phone to when the
recipient heard 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. Unfortunately, 4G/LTE/VoLTE has
not made much of an improvement, as currently, as noted above, there seems
to be somewhat more latency with voice conversation via Verizon's more
modern protocols (4G, LTE, etc.) than with similar protocols on AT&T.
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, AT&T Wireless may be a better choice of
carrier, as Verizon and T-Mobile will likely prove more of a
disappointment due to their inabilities to make any improvement (except
with certain 5G bands) towards landline-like audio and conversational
call quality.
(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 2022!), 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 cotemporaneous 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.)
Other than call drops and audio quality, another 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 weren't
corrected fully until 2018 or so), and yet, still in 2023, 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.
Verizon also appears to aggresively push customers away from calling
Customer Service, with an IVR that makes it difficult to reach someone
without useless self-help (read: stupid computer-based delaying tactics),
to call hold times which can reach 30 minutes or more, and to non-US based
call centers staffed by people who do not either have the tools and/or the
inclination to provide the phone support which wireless issues often
comport. At every step of the process it seems that Verizon is trying to
save money and not properly support its customers by effectively telling
customers "Even though YOU pay US, and technically YOU are customers, we
don't want to see it that way, and we are going to make YOU do more work
and take more of YOUR time by making it so difficult for you to deal with
us via 611/(800) 922-0204 that you will just give us and use the
(effectively cost-free, for Verizon, of course!) web site instead!"
Verizon either knows (or should know) of the readily apparent deficiencies
of most of it's non-US based support, and instead of realizing that it
just doesn't work well and obtaining better-trained, dedicated US-based
support reps for ALL customer calls, they seem to maintain the offshore
(Philippine?) center(s) as a way to make customers so disgusted that they
just don't bother calling support anymore, and move over to the web.
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 2023, 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,
support, and/or charges.
Finally, Verizon, coming from a body of carriers which were primarily old
"wireline" service ("B") providers in most markets which they served, were
assigned (now very valuable) 800 MHz frequencies in the 1980's at the
inception of cellular service, which helps facilitate their somewhat
better coverage -- the 800 MHz frequencies can pentrate buildings, travel
long distances, fit in the countours of mountan valleys, etc., and provide
carriers which were assigned 800 MHz bands (mainly Verizon, ATT, and some
regional/local carriers) a distinct advantage over those which weren't
(TMO and Sprint). These early valuable frequency assignments in part may
also serve as the basis for Verizon's (and to a lesser extent AT&T's)
"We're the phone company and we know what you need!" biases and
institutional impediments to better, more responsive and flexible customer
service, since their alost exclusive use of 800 MHz allows them to
provide service in a manner which non-800 MHz carriers can not.
Verizon's (and to a lesser extent AT&T's via SW Bell, Pacific Bell, and
Ameritech) long-standing wireline/landline presence in most of their
markets and initial mandate to build out their analog systems to cover
their licensed areas, led to significantly broader and better (RF/dB-wise)
coverage than many of their non-800 MHz/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, using 800 MHz frequencies
assigned to them by virtue of they're being he "landline" carriers in the
respective markets which they served.
(When cellular licenses were handed out in the 1980's, the FCC opted to
distribute them via the IMTS (Improved Mobile Telephone Service)
pre-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).
As noted above, 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 "B" carriers) and AT&T Wirless (also with a good number
of landline/carriers, as well as many initial non-wireline carriers who
received the "A"/"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 T-Mobile (+Sprint).
(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"/B and "non-wireline/A"
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
(or any licenses?) if they opt to abandon wireline service in a given
state?
For example, New England Telephone served as the local/wireline Bell
Operating Company in Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire, Mass, and Rhode
Island, and as such was assigned some of the 800 MHz licenses in those
states for the original A/B 1980's analog ("AMPS") services, which Verizon
currently uses for cellular service (along with more recently assigned
bands). Yet when New England Telelphone decided to abandon the Maine, New
Hampshire, and Vermont markets (which was a costly fiasco for ratepayers
of those three states in having Fairpoint take over and quickly go
bankrupt (which New England Telephone/Verizon was forced to pay for in
2011)), they were able to keep their 800 MHz cellular licenses,
which they obtained by virtue of being the "B"/wireline carrier, even
though Verizon was leaving Maine, NH, and VT, and thus was no longer the
wireline/B carrier.
More specifically, take the 00428/B cellular market for Manchester,
NH: After initiating analog cellular service there in the late 1980's, New
England Telephone's mobile division (NYNEX Mobile) then became Bell
Atlantic Mobile (after a merger of the mobile division with Bell Atlantic
Mobile). Later on, NYNEX and Bell Atlantic also merged their landline
services under the same name, and then after the GTE merger, became
Verizon/Verizon Wireless. Thus, via a string of acquisitions and mergers,
Verizon became the landline operating company for the Manchester market,
and thus (rightly) the holder of the landline cellular licences which it
first obtained 25 years earlier as New England Telephone.
But, after Verizon (landline) opted to leave the northern New England
market via the aforementioned abandonment of 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 in Manchester as part of their abandonment of
their northern New England markets, why should Verizon Wireless keep the
free windfall of the original 800 MHz licenses if Verizon (landline) isn't
the landline/wireline carrier there anymore?
At any rate, nonwithstanding the provenance and legitimacy of Verizon's
wireless licencing in markets which they have abandoned, Verizon has and
continues to maintain generally technically competent wireless network,
and offers acceptable levels of service in a few areas where AT&T
wireless, even in 2023, still does not, but the gap between the two is
closing quickly, and in most cases, there is now parity between the two in
terms of coverage, and ATT has superior voice quality for most calls.
(We're not even bothering to consider TMO's much less robust service - or
lack thereof - in more challenging areas.)
While customer service is stodgy, and billing practices are laughable (in
2023, it's still amazing that a $50 Verizon plan ends up with an "out the
door price", eg, what you are billed for, of $79, which includes all sorts
of fees and surcharges, including Verizon's "administrative
charge" (the fee they charge for charging all the fees!)), and audio
quality less than stellar, Verizon offers, by a slight margin, a fewest
drops and call interruptions over AT&T Wireless.
(Note: If the billing nonsense, fees, and annoying customer service makes
dealing with Verizon seem to much trouble, consider dealing with an MVNO
(essentially a reseller) of Verizon, where the underlying network is
Verizon's, but the billing and customer service is performed by a company
more interested in your business and willing to effectively act as a
"buffer" between the customer (you) and Verizon - for better or worse!
:) )
As a final note, 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
Verizon 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
Note: In the early 2000's Verizon acquired this 01001 system, and branded
it as the rest of the CT-A system with "00119". However, as of late 2014,
drops between the two systems still occur in some areas (CT/MA/NY border
area along and west of US-7 for example). Data Service (3G/4G) drops also
occur along the ex-01001/00119 demarcation which may (or may not) still be
related to the vestigal separation of the markets; please see the Verizon 3G/4G Data Drops List
for details.
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 ©: 08/12/2024
     
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