Sprint now has 43 LTE markets after 11 new ones are turned on

Sprint now has 43 LTE markets after 11 new ones are turned on
Sprint started turning on its LTE signal in July of this year. Now, after four months, the carrier has 43 markets where it offers its 4G LTE signal. The new locations include Anderson, Ind.; Clarke County, Va./Jefferson County, W.Va.; Harrisburg/Carlisle/Hershey, Pa.; Hagerstown, Md./Martinsburg, W.Va.; Harrisonburg, Va.; Muncie, Ind.; Peabody, Mass.; Salina, Kan.; Shenandoah County, Va.; South Bend/Mishawaka, Ind. and Winchester, Va.

In addition to the faster speeds that Sprint customers using 4G LTE see, Sprint's Network Vision build out improves 3G signals in certain areas, giving users better wireless signal strength, improved in-building penetration and fewer dropped calls. Sprint customers in cities like Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, L.A., New York and Washington, D.C should already see these improvements. Even those customers of Sprint's prepaid carriers like Assurance Wireless, Virgin Mobile and Boost Mobile, should notice improvements in 3G call quality including improved coverage, network reliability and voice quality.

Verizon currently leads the way in LTE coverage in the U.S. with over 400 markets served, followed by AT&T and then Sprint. For a complete list of all markets currently covered by Sprint's LTE signal, click on the link.

source: Sprint



1. switza93

Posts: 19; Member since: Nov 26, 2012

Coverage is still horrible......

2. elandrumiii

Posts: 109; Member since: Mar 20, 2010

Coverage got better in parts of metro atlanta

3. Android4u

Posts: 456; Member since: Aug 16, 2012

coverage in the Sacramento area is awful. ... I still don't get why sprint started it's lte rollout in places where population is nearly 0....not literally, but you catch my drift.

4. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

"I still don't get why sprint started it's lte rollout in places where population is nearly 0....not literally, but you catch my drift." So they could claim LTE coverage while not having to actually provide it to a bunch of consumers?

15. KFear

Posts: 170; Member since: Feb 06, 2012

You are not informed...but that's OK. When it comes to rolling out networks for any carrier, we have to remember that building permits and allll the regulations that have to do with radio frequencies and FCC regulations play into affect. It's not as easy as picking a city and saying..."lets start here!". I'm not sure of all the mumbo-jumbo myself (I need to do more research!)...but there are a lot of laws and regulations at play here. It will come. Until then, you don't need LTE...you'll survive.

16. hellt1M

Posts: 20; Member since: Oct 10, 2012

why start where its good already? some of the areas mentioned in the imporvments have been known areas to need it. i live in washington state and i hear people complain all the time about how s**tty their service is. its funny because i have been all over the state and have not had one single dropped call. i love my service. i have been to several states with my phone and have only had one issue with reception. which was when i went to arkansas. but still was able to send and recieve calls on their free roaming. which reminds me. one of the listed of LTE rollout and network vision within the next few months is arkansas. they really need it. we dont here in washington. im perfectly happy waiting for the rollout while they take care of the areas that need it first

19. deathyyy

Posts: 101; Member since: Dec 20, 2011

If you can get the Sacramento area government to approve zoning for a cell tower, be my guest.. Otherwise you'll just have to wait. There isn't a rollout map because it's affected by things like that. End of next year, 90% will be done.

5. XPERIA-KNIGHT unregistered

it'll get there guys be patient...

6. Mr.Mr.Upgrade

Posts: 474; Member since: Aug 30, 2011

1.Verizon .... ..................................................​............................... and nothing else matters....... you pay for what you get......

11. tuminatr

Posts: 1141; Member since: Feb 23, 2009

Unless you live in West St. Paul, MN where Verizon won't work in building. Or south saint Paul, or Inver Grove Heights, MN I could go on ... I had Verizon for years it honestly depends on where you live my side of the city Sprint works better

7. GeekMovement unregistered

Waiting patiently on the west coast (=

8. Droiddoes unregistered

VZN>/=AT&T>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>T-Mob​ile>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>a fresh dog turd>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>a dried up dog turd>>>>>Sprint

17. hellt1M

Posts: 20; Member since: Oct 10, 2012

this made me laugh. did you know that tmobile has lost more customers to sprint than any other carrier?

9. tuminatr

Posts: 1141; Member since: Feb 23, 2009

Gotta say I read that LTE will launch in Minneapolis about April. The 3g has improved big time mostly on the western half of the city. Before I would get a pathetic 80 to 200k speed now its around a 800 to 1000k speed thanks sprint for making my internet usable. I am still on SERO plan so I am a customer for life basically. With my galaxy nexus the internet is not bad, my work phone is a Verizon iPhone 4s and I think with the improvements sprints network will be on equal playing field in Minnesota

18. Orbitman

Posts: 110; Member since: Oct 09, 2011

i agree, speeds on the U's campus are pretty decent, even wimax works pretty well here. and downtown mpls' speeds have always been above average

10. jaydirt

Posts: 7; Member since: Nov 13, 2012

best thing i ever did was leave for verizon. The coverage is insane. It will take sprint a decade to even come close to what verizon is.

12. jaydirt

Posts: 7; Member since: Nov 13, 2012

so you have coverage in all these little towns they are turning on, but if you step foot outside the township your phone is dead. What is the point of that? As soon as I leave chicago and go into the rural areas I have no service at all. With verizon, I am constantly on LTE. When I am not, I am on their 3g service which is still great.

21. lsutigers

Posts: 832; Member since: Mar 08, 2009

I have traveled to many remote areas with my personal phone (Verizon) and my work phone (Sprint) and they work in many of the same places. Verizon coverage is only slightly better, and only in the most remote areas. Data speeds are getting better in many markets in anticipation of LTE and Sprint will blanket LTE nationwide, as it is going on every 3G tower. That's been my experience.

13. tuminatr

Posts: 1141; Member since: Feb 23, 2009

I don't think it will take them that long they originally said the LTE upgrade will be completed by end of 2013/ early 2014 and it looks like the are on schedule

14. tuminatr

Posts: 1141; Member since: Feb 23, 2009

Jaydirt Saint Paul is the capital of Minnesota dumbo. I am a traveling salesman my territory is Minnesota , Wisconsin, the upper peninsula of Michigan, and North Dakota. Frankly the only place my sprint does not work is d**kinson and williston ND. In fact I am in Iron Mountain, MI right now Sprint works better than most people say

20. maddashell

Posts: 8; Member since: Aug 07, 2012

Coverage still sucks, the west coast is still booty. (cali, AZ, Tex, etc) sucks, sucks, sucks. Most of the coverage is on the east and mid west. I don't know how they select what city to turn on, but it sucks, sucks, sucks. Reminds me of the TV series Revolution, turn the power on.

22. jaydirt

Posts: 7; Member since: Nov 13, 2012

yea sorry tuminatr. I work for directv and I travel all over the place installing satellite. I have been everywhere imaginable and sprint is the worse...sorry d**knose.. Even cricket was better.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.