Product comparison · 2 tablet cases

Kurio 22871 tablet case vs Targus THZ751GL tablet case

Add a product
  • 21specifications compared
  • 21differ
  • 0identical
  • 18known for one product only

Key differences

The Targus THZ751GL tablet case has 5 mm more width than the Kurio 22871 tablet case (20 mm vs 15 mm). The Kurio 22871 tablet case has 95 mm more depth than the Targus THZ751GL tablet case (275 mm vs 180 mm). The Targus THZ751GL tablet case has 55 mm more height than the Kurio 22871 tablet case (285 mm vs 230 mm). Only the Targus THZ751GL tablet case has stand mode. Maximum screen size: 25.4 cm (10") on the Kurio 22871 tablet case, 26.7 cm (10.5") on the Targus THZ751GL tablet case.

  • Maximum screen size
    • 22871 tablet case:25.4 cm (10")
    • THZ751GL tablet case:26.7 cm (10.5")
  • Case type
    • 22871 tablet case:Sleeve case
    • THZ751GL tablet case:Flip case
  • Material
    • 22871 tablet case:Neoprene
    • THZ751GL tablet case:PU plastic
  • Product main colour
    • 22871 tablet case:Turquoise
    • THZ751GL tablet case:Black
  • Stand mode
    • 22871 tablet case:No
    • THZ751GL tablet case:Yes
  • Closure type
    • 22871 tablet case:Zipper
    • THZ751GL tablet case:Magnetic closure
  • Width
    • 22871 tablet case:15 mm
    • THZ751GL tablet case:20 mm
  • Depth
    • 22871 tablet case:275 mm
    • THZ751GL tablet case:180 mm

Side by side

Differences highlightedShow differences only (off)
Comparison of 22871, THZ751GL
39 specifications
Features7 differ
Maximum screen sizeDiffers25.4 cm (10")26.7 cm (10.5")
Case typeDiffersSleeve caseFlip case
MaterialDiffersNeoprenePU plastic
Product main colourDiffersTurquoiseBlack
CompatibilityDiffersKurio 10"Samsung Galaxy Tab S4 10.5" (2018)
Built-in speaker(s)Known for oneNoUnknown — not stated by the source
Stand modeDiffersNoYes
Closure typeDiffersZipperMagnetic closure
Protection featuresKnown for oneScratch resistantUnknown — not stated by the source
Brand compatibilityKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceSamsung
Country of originKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceChina
Batteryidentical
Built-in batteryKnown for oneNoUnknown — not stated by the source
Weight & dimensions4 differ
WidthDiffers15 mm20 mm
DepthDiffers275 mm180 mm
HeightDiffers230 mm285 mm
WeightDiffers140 g360 g
Packaging data4 differ
Package widthDiffers15 mm20 mm
Package depthDiffers275 mm180 mm
Package heightDiffers180 mm290 mm
Package weightDiffers155 g360 g
Logistics data6 differ
Harmonized System (HS) codeKnown for one84733080Unknown — not stated by the source
Products per intermodal container (20ft)Known for one23000 pc(s)Unknown — not stated by the source
Products per intermodal container (40ft)Known for one47900 pc(s)Unknown — not stated by the source
Products per intermodal container (40ft, HC)Known for one55600 pc(s)Unknown — not stated by the source
Master (outer) case widthDiffers480 mm255 mm
Master (outer) case lengthDiffers580 mm405 mm
Master (outer) case heightDiffers420 mm330 mm
Master (outer) case gross weightDiffers16.7 kg8.27 kg
Master (outer) case volumeKnown for one116900 cm³Unknown — not stated by the source
Products per master (outer) caseDiffers100 pc(s)20 pc(s)
Pallet gross heightKnown for one183 cmUnknown — not stated by the source
Products per palletDiffers800 pc(s)720 pc(s)
Minimum order quantityKnown for one2000 pc(s)Unknown — not stated by the source
Shipping (inner) case widthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source12.5 cm
Shipping (inner) case lengthKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source18.9 cm
Shipping (inner) case heightKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the source31.2 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 source1.94 kg
Other featuresidentical
BluetoothKnown for oneUnknown — not stated by the sourceNo

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