When Motorola officially announced the Moto G, we couldn’t help but be impressed. A quad-core handset with reasonably solid specs for as little as $179? Calling the handset a total steal would be an understatement.

Of course those in the United States have known for a while now that they would be waiting a while to get the Moto G, with Motorola instead focusing on international markets first. Previously it was believed the handset wouldn’t arrive until sometime in January, but no longer.

Not wanting to miss the 2013 holiday season completely, the Moto G is available for order right now with a shipping date slated for December 2nd! As expected, the handset will be offered in an 8GB model for $179, or a 16GB version for $199 – no contracts required.

So what exactly does the Moto G bring to the table? The handset is powered by a 1.2GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 CPU with 1GB of RAM. Other specs include a 4.5-inch HD display, a 5MP rear cam, 1.3MP front cam, a 2070 mAh battery and Android 4.3 with an upgrade to Android 4.4 expected sometime in January.

How about it, anyone planning on picking this one up? We’d probably act quickly, as there’s no telling how long the handset will be available before its initial stock is snatched up.

Andrew Grush
Andrew is one of the three Managing Editors of Android Authority, primarily responsible for the overseeing of US team of writers, in addition to several other projects such as VR Source and more. He loves tech, gaming, his family, and good conversations with like-minded folks.
  • mustbepbs

    That price is really compelling for the reasons listed in the video. It’s amazing that they gave it the specs they did for the price. I hope it works out well for them.

  • Balraj

    Why would Motorola have manufacturing problems?

    • AbbyZFresh

      It costs money for the materials needed for the phone. Duh.

      • Balraj

        You mean to say Google has money issue…
        Nice nice

  • Doug


    • Jesus

      How are you find it, “Doug” (lol) ?

  • Wait, do my eyes deceive me or does the US model support HSPA+ on the AWS band? Fully WIND / T-Mobile compatible, sweet!

    • Piterson Massenat Desir

      I don’t see the 2100mhz band :-/

      • Tuấn Ankh

        1700mhz is what he was talking about, I guess.

      • Whoops, yes, we need both! Doesn’t AT&T also need the 2100 MHz band? Maybe it’s an error…

    • NeedName

      I’m not seeing the 1700/2100 for T-mobile, thus it may only use their refarmed 1900MHz band for HSPA+ which would. . . well, suck.

      My understanding was it would support HSPA+ on carriers in the USA. . . maybe they were being a little liberal with that statement?

      • You’re right, that’s weird… Don’t all US carriers use 2100? T-Mobile is 1700/2100 and AT&T is 1900/2100, AFAICR.

        No 2100 listed at all – maybe it’s an error?
        US GSM Model: GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)
        UMTS/HSPA+ up to 21 Mbps (850, 1700 (AWS), 1900 MHz)

        • NeedName

          I hope it’s an error. but I’ll be holding off till I find out for certain.

          • So AT&T is 850/1900, so it’s fully compatible there. But T-Mobile needs either 1700 / 2100 or 1900 / 2100 (in some areas). Seems weird to include 1700 but not 2100, as nobody uses 1700/1900.

          • NeedName

            I’m not really sure what is going on. AWS is LTE and T-Mobile and AT&T need the 1700/2100 for it, but the 850 & 1900 MHz frequencies can be used for HSPA+ — T-Mobile has been refarming that frequency to work with HSPA+, but it’s not very ubiquitous outside major cities.

            So, maybe they are sticking with 850 & 1900 MHz for HSPA+. . . . which makes me wonder why they even have the 1700 AWS.

            If that is the case, it wouldn’t be the best HSPA+ service on T-Mobile. However, it does look clear that AT&T & T-Mobile are trying to break HSPA off to the 850 & 1900 MHz while keeping LTE on 1700/2100 MHz, as much as possible.

          • I didn’t think T-Mobile used 850 for HSPA at all, only 1700 or 1900 and 2100.

          • NeedName

            T-mobile doesn’t use 850, AT&T does and they also use 1900 for HSPA.

            T-Mo just started using 1900 for HSPA, while 1700 up and 2100 down for “LTE” therefore, I think the “LTE” bands are being left out, and they will force the phone onto 1900 or edge, and on AT&T it will be forced onto 850 or 1900 HSPA networks.

            Therefore, T-Mobile service is probably not going to be the best HSPA+ for this phone. AT&T will probably be much better.

          • NeedName

            You know, after looking at the Moto G specs again, I really don’t get it. From the specs the global version should be just as good in the US as the US version. . .

            Global GSM Model: GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)
            UMTS/HSPA+ up to 21 Mbps (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz)

            US GSM Model: GSM/GPRS/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz)
            UMTS/HSPA+ up to 21 Mbps (850, 1700 (AWS), 1900 MHz)

            If the specs are correct I’m not sure what 1700 AWS for the US version gets me, as the 1700 is up and 2100 is down. . . therefore it will go to the 1900 or edge.

            Makes no sense to me. . . guess we’ll find out shortly if it is an error.

          • I asked on Google+. Maybe I should try Twitter too.


          • NeedName

            Phone arena has 1700/2100 on the spec list. . .


          • So apparently listing “AWS” means 1700 transmit and 2100 receive, which is distinct from listing 2100 as a supported band, as many European carriers use it for two-way communication.

            So with the US GSM model, you lose 900 and 2100 support for European carriers and gain AWS compatibility for T-Mobile and WIND.

  • Shark Bait

    does this mean its not selling abroad as well as they hoped?
    Now they just need to bring the moto x to europe

  • Mystery Man

    How’s the camera

    • Balraj

      Okay..don’t expect too much
      For the price it’s ok

  • Groud Frank

    Naturally, Motorola has picked up Google’s trolling ways. I like this kind of trolling though.

  • dogulas

    Ordered. Motorola is making their phones very well lately.

    • Jesus

      How are you finding this ‘phone’ thing?

      • dogulas

        It is great. I don’t like the way it vibrates (it makes a cheap rattling noise) but other than that the phone is fantastic.

        • Jesus

          Any lagging? Also how’s the camera – satisfactory? etc.

          • dogulas

            I think the camera is good enough and I don’t notice lag. Just buy it and return it if you don’t like it. They offer free returns.

          • Jesus

            …i’m asking for a personal review, ‘douglas’

  • Brian Shieh

    that $20 difference for double the capacity. Motorola is smart (even the Moto X has only $50 difference) compared to other ones who charge $100 for double the amount

  • adrian strozier

    Moto G is an american made phone like the Moto X right?? So why did america get it later??

    • NeedName

      no, and the Moto X is only “assembled in the USA” not ” made in.”

  • Brian Peter

    I wish we could buy direct from Motorola in Canada. We’re getting ripped off here with availability only on the 8gb model from 2 exclusive carriers that I refuse to deal with.

    • NeedName

      aren’t there some places that you can ship it to and they will forward it on?

  • Luka Mlinar

    So on my B-day. Damn i wish it would arrive in Europe sooner.