The Motorola L702BT scored the lowest out of all the phones we tested, earning an overall score of 34 out of 100. It earned a below average score in every rating metric, and we could recommend against buying this model. Instead, consider our Editor's Choice, the AT&T CL84202, or our Best Buy, the VTech CS6719.
Motorola L702BT Review
Pros: Excellent battery life
Cons: Poor range and lacking features
Our Analysis and Test Results
The Motorola scored decently well in our set of sound quality tests, meriting a 6 out of 10 for its performance. Our panel of judges felt that this model phone had nice volume and good clarity, there was just a little bit of that background static that has been dragging down the scores of the other phones.
The Motorola performed the worst in our range test, earning a 2 out of 10. This phone became completely unintelligible at 700' from the base in the open range test, compared to the top performers remaining clear at 840'. It also began breaking up 100' from the base in the obstructed range test, 80' before the next closest scorers, the Panasonic KX-TGE272S or the AT&T TL86103 and 215' before the top scorer, the AT&T CL84202
Ease of Use
The Motorola tied with our Best Buy winner, the VTech CS6719 for the lowest score in ease of use, with both phones earning a 4 out of 10. One of our largest complaints with this phone was the complete lack of any backlit buttons, making operation in a dark environment extremely difficult.
We also found the labeling and function of some of the buttons unintuitive, as well as a confusing menu system, and a clunky interface for adding speed dial numbers.
Continuing its lackluster performance, the Motorola earned a 3 out of 10 in our features evaluation. It really only received points for having an answering machine on the main base, and the ability to link-to-cell, as well as the ability to use an auxiliary headset.
This phone cost about $15 dollars less than the average cost of all the models we reviewed, the AT&T CRL82212 cost the same, and scored close to double, earning a 57 compared to the 34 of the Motorola.
All in all, we felt this phone fell short of the competition, and based on its performance in our tests, we would recommend considering alternative options.
— David Wise and Austin Palmer