The Pixel 11 Pro Fold durability test revealed valuable data about the device’s physical structure. Tests conducted by the popular technology channel JerryRigEverything show some weaknesses in Google’s new foldable model.

Unlike last year, there was no battery explosion this time, but the structural integrity of the device raises significant questions again. Although Google claims to have increased overall durability in the Pixel 11 Pro Fold model, the device’s performance in the bending test falls short of expectations.

Structural Problems and Antenna Line

As usual, the phone breaks in two at the point where the antenna line is located. This situation stands out as a design flaw that Google has encountered in previous models and hasn’t fully resolved yet.

The ceramic coating used on the device’s outer screen performs quite well. The screen, which shows no signs of scratching up to level 6 on the Mohs hardness scale, encounters deep grooves at level 7.

The material used on the back panel, called glass composite fiber, is actually quite hard plastic. This material can be easily scratched with a knife, weakening the device’s premium feel.

What Happened During the Bending Test

During the bending test, the device’s modules are practically separate from each other. The front panel comes off as a result of applying force only with bare hands, without using any tools.

The back panel, however, is observed to be quite easy to remove. Google had stated that the back of the device was virtually impossible to break, but test results do not support this claim.

Priced at $1,899, this model struggles to inspire confidence in terms of durability. Considering Google’s design refresh cycle every two or three years, it’s clear that this model needs a significant structural overhaul.

The sensitivity of the hinge and body junction points in foldable phones directly affects users’ long-term experience. How the company will address these chronic issues in its next generation of devices remains a matter of curiosity.

Resistance to accidents encountered in daily use is as important as the aesthetic appearance of the design. A device offered by Google at such a high price point is expected to offer more adequate structural integrity.

Do you think this kind of fragility is acceptable in a $1,899 foldable phone?