Product comparison · 2 tablet cases

Case Logic SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red vs Targus THZ67603GL tablet case

Add a product
  • 21specifications compared
  • 17differ
  • 4identical
  • 17known for one product only

Key differences

The Case Logic SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red has 110 mm more width than the Targus THZ67603GL tablet case (135 mm vs 25 mm). The Targus THZ67603GL tablet case has 175 mm more depth than the Case Logic SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red (195 mm vs 20 mm). The Targus THZ67603GL tablet case has 40 mm more height than the Case Logic SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red (260 mm vs 220 mm). Maximum screen size: 22.1 cm (8.7") on the Case Logic SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red, 26.7 cm (10.5") on the Targus THZ67603GL tablet case. Case type: Cover on the Case Logic SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red, Folio on the Targus THZ67603GL tablet case.

  • Maximum screen size
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:22.1 cm (8.7")
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:26.7 cm (10.5")
  • Case type
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:Cover
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:Folio
  • Brand compatibility
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:Samsung
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:Apple
  • Compatibility
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:Galaxy Tab A9 8.7"
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:iPad Air iPad Pro
  • Closure type
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:Snap closure
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:Magnetic closure
  • Width
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:135 mm
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:25 mm
  • Depth
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:20 mm
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:195 mm
  • Height
    • SnapView CSGE2196 Sienna Red:220 mm
    • THZ67603GL tablet case:260 mm

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only (on)
Comparison of CSGE2196, THZ67603GL
38 specifications
Features5 differ
Maximum screen sizeDiffers22.1 cm (8.7")26.7 cm (10.5")
Case typeDiffersCoverFolio
MaterialKnown for onePolyurethane, Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU)Unknown — not stated by the source
Brand compatibilityDiffersSamsungApple
CompatibilityDiffersGalaxy Tab A9 8.7"iPad Air iPad Pro
Number of stand modesKnown for one1Unknown — not stated by the source
Closure typeDiffersSnap closureMagnetic closure
Protection featuresKnown for oneScratch resistantUnknown — not stated by the source
GenderKnown for oneUnisexUnknown — not stated by the source
Country of originKnown for oneChinaUnknown — not stated by the source
Weight & dimensions4 differ
WidthDiffers135 mm25 mm
DepthDiffers20 mm195 mm
HeightDiffers220 mm260 mm
Interior dimensions (W x D x H)Known for one125 x 8 x 211 mmUnknown — not stated by the source
WeightDiffers200 g350 g
Packaging data3 differ
Quantity per packKnown for one1 pc(s)Unknown — not stated by the source
Package widthDiffers135 mm25 mm
Package depthDiffers20 mm200 mm
Package heightDiffers245 mm295 mm
Package typeKnown for oneBoxUnknown — not stated by the source
Package weightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source410 g
Technical detailsidentical
Warranty periodKnown for one25 year(s)Unknown — not stated by the source
Logistics data5 differ
Master (outer) case widthDiffers240 mm340 mm
Master (outer) case lengthDiffers96 mm437 mm
Master (outer) case heightDiffers151 mm335 mm
Master (outer) case gross weightDiffers1.03 kg9.56 kg
Products per master (outer) caseDiffers4 pc(s)20 pc(s)
Shipping (inner) case widthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source15.9 cm
Shipping (inner) case lengthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source20.3 cm
Shipping (inner) case heightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source31.4 cm
Products per shipping (inner) caseKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source5 pc(s)
Shipping (inner) case net weightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source2.2 kg
Products per palletKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source400 pc(s)
Other featuresidentical
Quantity per boxKnown for one1 pc(s)Unknown — not stated by the source

A dash means the value is not stated by the source. Unknown values are never counted for or against a product, and there is no overall score.

More tablet case comparisons

All tablet case comparisons