iPhone 18 Pro Scratch Test: Hammer Results

The iPhone 18 Pro scratch test run by TechRax on September 18, 2026 ended with a split result: the burgundy aluminum frame scuffed within seconds of knife contact, while the front glass survived hammer drops from roughly two feet before anything gave way.

What TechRax Tested and Why It Matters

TechRax, a YouTube channel known for destructive device testing, published a four-minute iPhone 18 Pro scratch test on September 18, 2026, using a burgundy unit he describes as having a variable aperture camera and the same generation of front glass as the previous year's model. The test used two tools only: a standard knife and a hammer.

The video matters to buyers because it isolates two surfaces that fail differently. The anodized aluminum frame and the front glass do not share a material, so a knife result on one tells you little about the other. TechRax's channel, which you can find on YouTube, has run the same format on prior iPhone generations, which gives his comments about year-over-year differences some baseline.

He notes up front that the burgundy finish looks much darker in person than he expected, with visible crystalline flecks in the paint that he says he did not see on last year's cosmic orange unit. That cosmetic detail frames the whole video: he expected the darker color to hide wear better, and set out to check whether the frame would scuff as fast as the cosmic orange did, which he says scuffed up quickly last year.

Knife Test: The Aluminum Frame Scuffs Fast and Badly

The aluminum frame failed the knife test within seconds. TechRax dragged a standard knife along the rail with light pressure and got what he confirmed was a permanent scuff, not something erasable. His verdict in the video: it is just another aluminum phone, and you need to throw on a case.

He then moved to the front screen and produced a visible mark with only a little pressure, calling the result a bit disappointing before conceding the obvious: a knife is a knife, and no consumer phone glass is designed to resist a hardened steel blade. This matches the general physics of the materials. Corning, the company behind Ceramic Shield, the glass Apple uses on iPhone front surfaces, engineers for drop and scratch resistance against everyday materials like sand and keys, not knife steel.

The practical takeaway for a buyer is narrow but useful. Frame scuffs from keys, sand, or table edges are a realistic daily risk because the anodized coating on aluminum is a thin surface layer. TechRax's knife result exaggerates that mechanism rather than simulating it, but the direction is consistent: bare aluminum rails show wear early, and his report that last year's cosmic orange scuffed quickly suggests the finish behavior carried over to the burgundy unit.

Hammer Test: The Front Glass Held Through Repeated Drops

The front glass performed noticeably better. TechRax dropped a hammer on the screen from increasing heights and found no crack even from roughly two feet, which he describes as pretty impressive and stronger than he anticipated for this generation.

The sequence went roughly as follows:

1. A standard low hammer drop, which the glass absorbed with no visible damage. 2. Escalating drops from about 10 inches, then nearly a foot, still with no crack. 3. A two-foot drop on the screen area, again with no crack reported. 4. A shift in target to the camera housing, where the outcome changed.

Two caveats belong next to those numbers. First, the heights are spoken estimates from the video, not measured distances. Second, a hammer drop tests localized impact resistance on a flat surface lying down; it is a poor proxy for a real pocket-height drop onto concrete, where edge impacts and torsion do most of the damage. TechRax himself says a drop test is coming as a follow-up video.

Where the Phone Actually Broke: Camera Glass and a Sudden Shutdown

The camera area was the weak point. When TechRax aimed hammer strikes at the camera housing, the glass there shattered, and in the same sequence the phone shut itself off completely, something he says has never happened in his years of doing these tests. He speculates he hit it enough times that the phone simply wanted to sign out.

He also mentions feeling the phone heating up during the sequence and references Apple's new vapor chamber cooling, while admitting he does not know its role in what happened. That detail should stay a speculation, as the video offers no temperature measurement and repeated hammer impacts can damage components in ways unrelated to thermal design.

The shutdown is the most interesting single data point in the test. A phone dying before its back glass fully failed suggests a protective behavior or battery/logic-board damage from the impact, but a single unit and a single trial cannot distinguish between those explanations. What is confirmed on camera: shattered camera glass, an intact-looking back panel with heavy impact scarring, and a device that refused to power back on during the recording.

His summary verdict: the front glass did a good job, the aluminum frame scuffs quickly and badly, and the camera cluster is the part that gives. For the specific question of whether the burgundy iPhone 18 Pro survives a hammer, the answer is: the screen yes, repeatedly, up to about two feet of hammer drop; the camera glass no.

How Much Weight One Destructive Test Deserves

A single-unit torture test is evidence about one phone, one tool angle, and one hand applying force. It is reproducible in spirit but not in measurement: TechRax did not use a force gauge, a fixed drop height, or multiple samples, and the video is entertainment-first.

That said, the results line up with what the materials predict. Apple's official iPhone pages position the front glass for improved drop performance, and independent labs have historically found that screen glass outlasts aluminum rails and exposed camera covers in scratch and abrasion exposure. TechRax's camera-area failure is also consistent with prior years: rear camera housings concentrate impact stress on a small, raised, glass-covered area.

The honest conclusion for a prospective buyer of the burgundy iPhone 18 Pro is that this test supports three scoped statements, and only these: the frame finish marks easily under sharp contact, the front glass resists localized hammer impact better than expected, and the camera cluster is the most fragile point under repeated blunt strikes. Wait for his planned drop test, and for multi-unit lab testing, before drawing broader durability conclusions.

FAQ

• Did the iPhone 18 Pro screen crack in TechRax's hammer test? No. TechRax reports no crack on the front glass through hammer drops reaching roughly two feet, which he estimates in the video. The measured failure point was the camera housing, not the display.

• Did the burgundy iPhone 18 Pro scratch easily? The aluminum frame scuffed immediately under a standard knife, and TechRax confirmed the mark was permanent. He recommends using a case, echoing his experience with last year's cosmic orange finish.

• Why did the iPhone 18 Pro shut off during the test? The phone powered off during repeated hammer strikes on the camera area, which TechRax says he had never seen before. The video does not establish whether impact damage or something else caused the shutdown.

• Who is TechRax? TechRax is a YouTube creator who publishes destructive durability experiments on smartphones. His channel is linked on YouTube, and he has run similar hammer and knife tests on prior iPhone generations.

• Is the iPhone 18 Pro available in burgundy? The burgundy color shown in the video is the finish TechRax tested, described in the video's own description as a burgundy flavor. For the full current color lineup and configurations, check Apple's official iPhone page.

Turn Your Own Video Footage Into a Written Record

A four-minute test like this one contains a surprising amount of usable knowledge: which surface failed first, at what height, and with what tool. That structure, question, method, result, caveat, is exactly what makes a written article more retrievable than a video, and exactly what most creators never extract from their own uploads.

If you publish videos with that kind of locked-in knowledge, Skala blog lets you paste a YouTube URL, transcribe the video, and turn it into a structured written article your audience can search and cite.

Source video