| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Ultra-thin and lightweight build | No built-in MagSafe magnets |
| Smooth aramid fiber finish | Fails face-first drop protection |
| Excellent screen access | Edges feel sharp and noticeable |
| Adequate corner-drop results | Below-average camera-lump performance |
We have been reviewing iPhone 17 cases for months now and today we’re taking a closer look at the Latercase. Yes, the same ultra-thin aramid fiber case that basically hasn’t changed in years. If you’ve ever wondered whether a minimal case can still keep up in a world of MagSafe accessories and real drop data, here’s the deal: we’ve tested it, dropped it over 30 times, and the results tell a pretty clear story.
How We Test
30+ drops per case | 6+ metrics recorded per impact | 100% independently tested
Our goal is to find out what cases are actually best for your iPhone. We don’t base our reviews on any of the marketing a company wants you to believe. We’re reviewers, not influencers.
Our case testing procedure for the iPhone 17’s:
- Buy the case ourselves
- Measure all the physical dimensions of the case:
- Weight
- Size
- Back rigidity
- Corner/Back Thickness
- Corner compression
- Rank the handling and access of the iPhone in the case
- Perform magnetic strength tests using a force meter
- Perform audio tests (if needed using a DB meter)
- Perform 30 corner, face and camera lump drop tests. This data is collected from the iPhone’s accelerometer and gyroscope. We’ve built custom drop rigs to ensure every drop almost identical. To gauge the iPhone’s protective abilities, we measure:
- Average peak deceleration
- Average decay rate
- Average impulse
- Average max rotation
- Average angular displacement
- Average settling time
- After we collect all the data, we then run it through or scoring formula to figure out how well the case ranks.
We’ve got a few more ideas to implement for the next round of iPhone’s including more data collection during drops as well as high speed camera photos of the initial impacts.
Design
| Metric | Value | Average |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 17 g | 45 g |
| Added Case Thickness | 23% | 51% |
| Added Overlook Bulk | 26% | 66% |
The Latercase is tiny so thin it almost feels like holding a naked phone. And honestly, it hasn’t changed in years. This is probably the last time we’re spending money on it, and here’s why. The case uses aramid fiber, the same material that used to be marketed as Kevlar, and the smooth finish feels cleaner than many textured aramid products we’ve tested. One standout detail is how the case fully forms over the camera lump, which looks great but raises questions about how that affects drop protection. On a Pro Max, it only adds 17 grams but still bumps the overall bulk by 26%.
The case measures just 0.6mm thick across the board. It’s noticeably more flexible than most aramid fiber cases because it uses thinner 600D fibers. Flex isn’t necessarily a flaw here, but it does reflect the overall structure. It only took 13.5N to bend the case 8mm, which is 51% below average, though this metric isn’t a deal-breaker because these edges offer almost no face-drop protection anyway.
Accessibility & Handling
| Metric | Value | Average |
|---|---|---|
| Grip | Soft rubber coating; minimal grip but cutouts act as anchors | – |
| Buttons | Cutout buttons; camera control button works | – |
| MagSafe Strength | Pull — / Push 5.0 N | 10.1 N |
Handling is decent thanks to the soft rubber coating, which adds just enough grip to keep it from feeling slippery. The button cutouts act like tiny anchors, and unlike the Pitaka case we recently tested, this one keeps the camera control button fully accessible. Screen access is excellent because the edges are low, but that also means those same edges feel sharp. Port access is wide open, so any cable fits.
But here’s where the Latercase completely loses us: MagSafe. In 2025, a premium iPhone case should not require an extra charge just to get basic magnets. Pitaka does it. Mous does it. Almost everyone does it. Latercase is still stuck in 2020. Buying an ultra-thin case without standard MagSafe feels like buying a brand-new car with no infotainment system or backup camera. It makes no sense anymore.
Protection
| Metric | Value | Average |
|---|---|---|
| Back Thickness | 0.5 mm | 2.4 mm |
| Corner Thickness | 0.5 mm | 2.9 mm |
| Air Pockets | Present | 10.1 N |
| Rigidity | 13.5 N | 29 N |
| Initial Impact | 8.664 G | 10.3 G |
| Rotation Rate | 47.62°/s | 300°/s |
| Time to Settle | 0.420 s | 0.53 s |
| Settling Rate | 0.174 s⁻¹ | 0.24 s⁻¹ |
| Total Force | 1.466 Ns | 1.5 Ns |
For corner drops, the Latercase logged 8.7G, which is 15% better than average. Rotation after impact was extremely low at 82% below average, meaning the phone shoots upward rather than rolling. However, its ringing-settling rate was 24% below average, resulting in an overall force that lands roughly at the average mark.
Face-first drops? It failed instantly. No surprise given the ultra-thin edges.
Camera-lump protection is a mixed bag. The full aramid coverage absorbs impact well, but in testing, the initial hit was 7% higher than average. It slowed the ringing quickly but rang for nearly twice as long. That resulted in a total force 14% higher than average.
Value
If this case included built-in MagSafe, offered modest protection, and cost less, we’d probably look at it differently. But at its current price, with no magnets and below-average drop performance, the Latercase sits in an awkward premium tier without premium features. You’re paying more for less.
Verdict
If we weren’t reviewers testing 50 cases this year, would we buy the Latercase? Even as fans of thin cases, the answer’s no. The lack of built-in MagSafe and below-average protection are deal-breakers in 2025. It’s a sleek case with great hand feel, but everything that matters falls short.