Which Phone Case Brand Wins?

heaviest of the brands tested up to that point

second heaviest of the brands tested up to that point

by far the heaviest of the brands tested up to that point

by far the heaviest of the brands tested up to that point

pretty light

by far the heaviest of all 16 brands tested

baseline without case: side 9 oz / volume 10 oz; with FNT case: side 13 oz / volume 15 oz

side 17 oz / volume 20 oz, made buttons very stiff and unresponsive

side 12 oz / volume 13 oz, the best (most responsive) result up to that point in testing

side 11 oz / volume 16 oz

side 11 oz / volume 15 oz

side 9 oz / volume 12 oz, the best result up to that point, credited to cutouts around the side button

side 16 oz / volume 18 oz

side 18 oz / volume 15 oz

side 9 oz / volume 12 oz, performed the same as the Tocol, described as pretty good

side 11 oz / volume 12 oz, trails the Tocol and Ridge

side 27 oz / volume 20 oz, the most unresponsive buttons of any of the 16 brands tested

side 10 oz / volume 12 oz, performed even better than most of the other brands

side 14 oz / volume 16 oz, less responsive than the Caudabe

side 10 oz / volume 11 oz, described as very responsive

side 12 oz / volume 18 oz

(out of 16) in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

last place, 16th of 16, in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

transcribed as 'Toku', in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

transcribed as 'mirror case', in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

winner of the side/angle-iron drop ranking ('the winner of this category is the very affordable ESR case with a very small amount of damage to the phone')

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking, described as a really good finish considering the case's compact size

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking, described as performing incredibly well with a very small dent

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

in the side/angle-iron drop ranking

quite a bit of damage but screen cover did not break; 24 in: still not enough damage to fail; second corner-drop series (18/24/30 in): performed better than no case at 18 and 24 in with some corner screen damage, but could not prevent catastrophic damage (broken glass, broken phone) at 30 in; finished last (16th of 16) in the final corner-impact ranking

performed better than the FNT case at 24 and 30 in but still showed damage and separating glass; finished 9th place in the final corner-impact ranking

struggled badly: a crack appeared by 24 in and there was a lot more damage than the Mkeke by 30 in; finished 13th place in the final corner-impact ranking

in the corner-impact section this brand's first result is mislabeled 'Spigen' in the transcript (see note); finished 10th place ('the budget sub fine finished just ahead of the Apple case') in the final corner-impact ranking

small crack in the plastic; 30 in: a lot of damage to the phone; finished 12th place in the final corner-impact ranking

some breakage and screen beginning to separate; 30 in: phone 'completely totaled' and 'folded like a lawn chair'; finished 14th place, transcribed as 'Toko', in the final corner-impact ranking

performed relatively well: 24 in caused only a small fracture, 30 in showed the glass beginning to separate but with much less damage than the Tocol; finished 3rd place ('the very affordable mirror case') in the final corner-impact ranking; in an extended 36-in test alongside the top two finishers (ESR and Rokform), this brand 'ran out of luck' with a lot of damage to the phone

no visible damage at 24 or 30 in; tied for 1st place with Rokform in the final corner-impact ranking; in an extended test taken to 36 in (glass separated slightly) and 42 in (still looked surprisingly good with only a small amount of damage), ESR beat the Rokform head-to-head at 42 in ('definitely a win for the ESR')

some visible damage from 24 in; the 30 in drop caused notable damage ('entered the auto body shop territory'); finished 7th place, transcribed as 'Reds', in the final corner-impact ranking

struggled from the side impact test onward; the phone inside was badly damaged by the 30 in drop; finished 11th place in the final corner-impact ranking

struggled at 24 in and especially at 30 in ('that damage is not going to buff out'); finished 15th place in the final corner-impact ranking

performed better than average, described as 'not the worst and not the best either', with some damage to the phone corner; finished 6th place in the final corner-impact ranking

little bit of screen separation but phone still in very good shape; 30 in: phone became cracked; finished 5th place in the final corner-impact ranking

performed better than average through 24 in with minor screen separation, but 'did not adequately disperse the impact force' at 30 in, leaving the corner badly damaged; finished 8th place, transcribed as 'Taurus', in the final corner-impact ranking

no visible damage at 24 or 30 in, tied for 1st place with ESR in the final corner-impact ranking; in the extended test, still in pretty good shape at 36 in but lost the head-to-head against ESR at 42 in with more damage

no measurable raised-bezel gap, worst of all 16 brands tested

good protection from a raised bezel

worse than average

a pretty small buffer

the best (largest) buffer of all 16 brands tested

tied for the worst buffer of all 16 brands tested (with Apple)

tied for the worst buffer of all 16 brands tested (with Ridge)

third best buffer of all 16 brands tested

less protection than average

more protection than average

not much of a protective buffer

described as very good protection

second best (highest) of all 16 brands tested

the best (highest) of all 16 brands tested

the weakest (lowest) grip of any brand tested up to that point

the weakest grip of any brand tested up to that point

a little below average

the weakest grip of any brand tested up to that point

a little better than average

described as not offering a good grip on the phone

the weakest (lowest) grip of any of the 16 brands tested

a lot better than the OtterBox

a little above average

better than the Dbrand

trails the Torras

pull-off / 6 lb shear (not marketed as MagSafe compatible)

pull-off / 0.6 lb shear, not designed for MagSafe

pull-off / 0.7 lb shear, not designed for MagSafe

pull-off / 7.7 lb shear, described as by far the most holding strength; winner of the overall MagSafe holding-strength ranking at an average of 7.2 lb

pull-off / 8.5 lb shear, second place in the overall MagSafe holding-strength ranking behind Supfine

pull-off / 6.1 lb shear, transcribed as 'Toku' in this section

pull-off / 3.4 lb shear, below average, transcribed as 'Myro case' in this section

pull-off / 6.3 lb shear, better than average

pull-off / 7.4 lb shear, better than the ESR; third place in the overall MagSafe holding-strength ranking

pull-off / 4.9 lb shear, trails the Ridge

pull-off / 3.4 lb shear, gave up sooner than most other brands

pull-off / 4.9 lb shear, better than the OtterBox

pull-off / 4.6 lb shear, about average

pull-off (let go early) / 6.2 lb shear (good)

pull-off / 5.9 lb shear, better than most other brands

China

China

China

China

China

China

China

China

China

China

China

China

Canada

China

China