JerryRigEverything’s Zack Nelson found the premium foldable’s inner screen vulnerable to scratches, dust ingress and bending, while its titanium frame survived the ordeal.
Apple’s iPhone Duo has stumbled in a durability test by JerryRigEverything, with Zack Nelson’s latest teardown-style examination highlighting the vulnerability of foldable hardware even in a premium device. In a video published on 23 October US time, Nelson put the handset through his usual sequence of scratch, dust and bend checks, concluding that the phone did not fare as well as many competing foldables he has tested over the years.
The exterior display held up broadly as expected for a modern flagship. According to MacRumors and other reports on the test, the cover screen with Ceramic Shield 2 showed only faint marking at level seven on the Mohs hardness scale, with deeper grooves appearing at level eight. The internal flexible panel was less resilient: scratches appeared at level two, and fingernail pressure was enough to leave visible marks. Nelson noted that the matte nano-texture finish helps hide some blemishes when the display is lit, but it does not prevent permanent damage.
Dust turned out to be a more serious problem. Despite Apple’s IP68 dust- and water-resistance rating, particles worked their way into the hinge through multiple ingress points, according to the test results reported by MacRumors and Notebookcheck. The debris interfered with the magnets that keep the phone shut, leaving the device unable to close properly. Nelson also said that dirt seemed to enter through the hinge rather than around the screen edges.
The bend test then caused more obvious failure. Once flexed, the inner display developed a permanent green line, and after a second bend it became unresponsive. Reuters-style reporting on the video described how the folding screen appeared to suffer irreversible damage while the titanium frame survived the stress. Nelson said the result was unusual for a foldable he has handled, adding that most such phones do survive his testing, though he stressed that the outcome reflects a single unit under extreme conditions rather than a broader failure rate.
Disclaimer: This content is intended for informational purposes only. Readers are advised to exercise their own judgement, conduct due diligence, or consult a qualified expert before acting on any information provided.
