G500 TXi vs G3X Touch

[GeneralT001]

I definitely am going to go Garmin glass. But the more I'm reading the more confusion is setting in...are there redundancies and overlaps among all the different components (G3X Touch/G500 TXi/GTN570 Xi/G5's -AI's HSI/GTX 345/GNC255/etc)

The more I'm reading on these 2 panels, in particular, the more I'm confused? Are they doing the same thing? Are they both a PFD and a MFD?

What separates them from each other...why would I choose one or the other...or are both good to have side by side?

 

What would be the bare bones minimum Garmin glass items would I need to to be IFR capable?

I'm sold on definitely getting the GFC 500 and at least one GNC 255 (a or b?) so far, what else minimum?

[donkaye]

We don't know what the future holds in avionics.  While the G3X is a very capable glass display, its interface capabilities are rather limited.  The interface of the G500TXi has more flexible capabilities for future developments.  Those capabilities do come at a price, though.  The TXi is more expensive than the G3X.

For me, even though the G3X wasn't available when I did my installation, I'd have still gone with the G500 TXi.  Since I wasn't going to upgrade to a turbine airplane, I decided that I would go all in for the best that Garmin had to offer.  With the TXi, GTN 750 and 650 there is overlapping of data, but I find I can make use of all of it by putting different data in the various data fields on the different products.

Unlike the G1000 where upgrades are either expensive or unavailable, I took advantage of the ability to upgrade my system from the GTN 750 and 650 to the Xi versions.  It was simply an exchange and system upgrade.  The connectors were the same. The upgrade from the G500 to the G500 TXi was a little more extensive, but only took a couple of days and a new left panel to adjust for the increase size of the TXi.  Garmin also gave a discount for the upgrade if the display was returned.

In regard to the G5 vs the GI275, the G5 has some additional data displayed, but the GI275 has a brighter display.  That wasn't enough for me to want to upgrade to the 275.  I'm very happy with the G5.

A lot of people go with the GNC 255 in lieu of the GTN 650 as a second radio.  I like the flexibility of having the second GPS.

So, if you want to be a minimalist, go with 2 G5s.  If you want a little more, then go for 2 GI275s; little more then the G3X.  And finally, for the top of the line, go for the G500 TXi.

 

[Z W]

It is a little confusing.  The G3X started out available only for experimental aircraft.  They later got it certified to go in aircraft like the Mooney.  The G500 and later the G500Txi were built from the ground up to be certified-only.  Initially there were quite a few differences between the two, and when we did our panel, we chose the G500Txi.  Today, I'm not sure if the decision would be the same.  Both are extremely capable, far beyond anything available to us even 5 years ago.

Same with the G5 and GI275.  The G5 came first, and was initially the only option for driving the GFC500 autopilot.  Now, either the G3X or the GI275 can drive the autopilot.  The GI275 can also be configured to show engine data and do other things and is generally more capable, although it has a slightly smaller screen.

In my opinion, you can't go wrong with any of this stuff.  It's all great.

If you need a com and a 2nd GPS, consider the GNC 355.  It's a nice unit and adds a certified WAAS GPS at very little cost over the GNC255.  

[rbp]

On 12/5/2021 at 4:39 PM, donkaye said:

The interface of the G500TXi has more flexible capabilities for future developments

although its true that the G500 has more flexible capabilities, they are retrospective, not prospective. So if you want to keep those decades old WX-500 and SkyWatch, you'll need the G500.

[rbp]

I decided on: 
 

G3X 10" PFD/MFD (include Fuel Flow, Manifold Pressure, Oil Temp & Fuel Pressure), GNC355, GMA35C, GTX345R, GTN750Xi, GI-275, GFC500 with pitch, roll, pitch trim and yaw, GAP26 Micro kit 100-B Landing Height system and CIES Fuel senders

about $100K

[LANCECASPER]

9 minutes ago, rbp said:

although its true that the G500 has more flexible capabilities, they are retrospective, not prospective. So if you want to keep those decades old WX-950 and SkyWatch, you'll need the G500.

The WX-950 has never interfaced with anything. It is stand-alone. Some versions of the old WX-1000E interfaced with some EFIS systems. The WX-500 still interfaces with nearly anything (Garmin, Avidyne, Aspen, etc, etc)

SkyWatch 497 will still interface will almost anything as well (Garmin, Avidyne, Aspen, etc, etc). If you have a Garmin GTX345,  traffic from the SkyWatch is routed into the GX345 and blended with ADS-B traffic before it's displayed.

[Davidv]

The 500txi is newer technology but doesn’t have the same amount of features “out of the box”.  The G3X also lets you control other Garmin devices such as radios or transponders from the screen vs. the txi that just lets you view the information from them.  

[rbp]

15 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

The WX-950 has never interfaced with anything. It is stand-alone. Some versions of the old WX-1000E interfaced with some EFIS systems. The WX-500 still interfaces with nearly anything (Garmin, Avidyne, Aspen, etc, etc)

SkyWatch 497 will still interface will almost anything as well (Garmin, Avidyne, Aspen, etc, etc). If you have a Garmin GTX345,  traffic from the SkyWatch is routed into the GX345 and blended with ADS-B traffic before it's displayed.

that's exactly my point. the stormscope and skywatch have old-school interfaces, so if you want to keep using them, you need the G500.

they won't interface with the G3X. you'll need the more modern GTS800 TAS for the 3GX. I don't know if there's a compatible stormscope for it

[LANCECASPER]

3 minutes ago, rbp said:

that's exactly my point. their interfaces are backwards compatible, so if you want to keep using them, you need the G500. they won't interface with the G3X

There is no interface for the WX-950. If you have one, it is standalone. https://www.stormscopes.com/stormscopes.html

If you want to keep using it you have to leave the WX-950 display in place whether you use the G500, G500 TXI, G3X, Aspen, Etch-A-Sketch or whatever. 

 - - - -

SkyWatch 497 will work with the G3X or G500 or G500TXi if you run it through a GTX345 or GTX345R transponder and let it blend the Active Traffic with the ADS-B Traffic.

[rbp]

sorry, I wrote WX-950, but I meant WX-500. Data from the WX-500 will not display *directly* on the G3X, only the G500. 

[LANCECASPER]

Just now, rbp said:

sorry, I wrote WX-950, but I meant WX-500. Data from the WX-500 will not display on the G3X, only the G500

Yes the WX-500 will display on the G3x

http://www.lambert-aircraft.com/eng/avionics-intsys-garmin-aircraft.htm

[donkaye]

14 hours ago, Davidv said:

The 500txi is newer technology but doesn’t have the same amount of features “out of the box”.  The G3X also lets you control other Garmin devices such as radios or transponders from the screen vs. the txi that just lets you view the information from them.  

That may be true, but why would you even need to control anything else when the GTN 750 controls everything that you mentioned and more with an elegant interface.  From the GTN 750Xi you can change: 1. Transponder 2. All Radio frequencies from all radios, 3. Weather sources (XM, ADS-B, Stormscope).  The TXi also has a GPSS roll steering guidance bug and displays height above terrain to 2500 feet adjacent to the altimeter.  If you so choose, a field exits to display DME from a remote box such as the KN 63.  I kept my KN 63 for that purpose.

[rbp]

that's what the avionics shop said. maybe they were wrong. 

I do know for a fact that the G3X does not have ARINC429, so there must be some intermediate box 

[LANCECASPER]

10 minutes ago, rbp said:

that's what the avionics shop said. maybe they were wrong. 

I do know for a fact that the G3X does not have ARINC429, so there must be some intermediate box 

Thankfully you don't need ARINC429 for a WX-500 Stormscope, only RS-232 or 422.  A lot of people display it on their navigator anyway rather than the G3X. In fact to Clear Strikes whether it's in a G500 TXi or G3X I think it has to be controlled by a page on the navigator. 

[rbp]

11 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

RS-232 or 422

does the G3X have these interfaces? 

[kortopates]

The Wx-500 maybe old technology, but its the most modern spheric device out there and hasn't been displaced by satellite weather IMO since its real time. I know I don't want to leave home without it!

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, rbp said:

does the G3X have these interfaces? 

RS232 for sure. but if it was me I would put it on the GTN750Xi and it will give you the choice of overlaying on the map or viewing it on a separate page.

[PT20J]

Maybe this will help. Keep in mind that RS-232 is a physical layer interface and Garmin utilizes a plethora of proprietary and some industry standard protocols with RS-232.

 

[PJClark]

9 hours ago, rbp said:

that's exactly my point. the stormscope and skywatch have old-school interfaces, so if you want to keep using them, you need the G500.

they won't interface with the G3X. you'll need the more modern GTS800 TAS for the 3GX. I don't know if there's a compatible stormscope for it

Uhhh...IDK who you're  talking to but they're  wrong about this.  I have a WX-500 Stormscope and it displays just dandy on my G3X Touch