Current install cost of Garmin 650xi and 750xi

[Tim-37419]

22 hours ago, OR75 said:

the 650 requires a full re-wiring (if i understand correctly) while the 440 does not 

wondering what benefit you get with the 650 ? (that you would not get with the 440). I am assuming both units have about the same life runway (since they came up about the same time more or less) 

It’s a 650xi not the old 650. 
 

I really wanted to go with avidyne but they getting long in the tooth from a technology perspective. 

[OR75]

1 hour ago, Tim-37419 said:

It’s a 650xi not the old 650. 
 

I really wanted to go with avidyne but they getting long in the tooth from a technology perspective. 

I asked chatGPT what the difference was ... looks like a faster processor and touchscreen between the 650xi and 650

but the avidyne already has touchscreen (I am actually not a fan of a touchscreen but thats a personal preference)

I would have to test them in real life to sense if the rewiring is worth it 

[EricJ]

1 minute ago, OR75 said:

I asked chatGPT what the difference was ... looks like a faster processor and touchscreen between the 650xi and 650

but the avidyne already has touchscreen (I am actually not a fan of a touchscreen but thats a personal preference)

I would have to test them in real life to sense if the rewiring is worth it 

A nice feature on the Avidynes is that nearly everything done with the touch screen can be done just as easily on the buttons/knobs.   It's a nice feature in turbulence.

[PeteMc]

3 minutes ago, OR75 said:

I am actually not a fan of a touchscreen but thats a personal preference

You can use the knob to enter a LOT of info into the GTN.  And I've never really had a problem with the Touch Screen in turbulence.  Sure, sometimes it takes an extra touch, but I've also had trouble hanging on to the knob with the old Kings.

 

[vik]

2 hours ago, EricJ said:

There are different TSOs, ranging from C129 for non-WAAS (which doesn't seem to exist any more), to C144

There is a lot of useful information in this document: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC20-138A.pdf

It talks about C129a and C144 etc, how 2 degree, 5 degree and 7.5 degree horizon mask should be used in the solution etc. Some C129a antennas were reclassified to C144 without any changes in hardware, firmware or part number. I guess simply because C144 included receiver compatibility requirements, which was not part of C129a.

Using RAIM predictions outside of WAAS area is required for flight planning if the receiver is used under C129 for non-precision approach. It is available here: https://sapt.faa.gov/outages.php?outageType=129001450&outageResolution=0.5

In short, older antennas and cables will work given that it is a 5V active antenna with 26-27 dB gain. All I have seen that are used with Apollo, BK etc receivers, including popular KA-91 and 92 are. Now, as it was already mentioned here, the legality of the installation is a different issue. The antenna must be listed in the installation manual as approved. Technically, all C144 (and C129a reclassified as C144) antennas should be approved under C144 umbrella, but who the hell reads the entire manual! The details are usually listed on page XXXX in a small font note to a confusing table At the end, the IA who signs the installation is the final authority! If he says that the antenna/cable/whole airplane needs to be changed so be it!

 

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, vik said:

There is a lot of useful information in this document: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC20-138A.pdf

It talks about C129a and C144 etc, how 2 degree, 5 degree and 7.5 degree horizon mask should be used in the solution etc. Some C129a antennas were reclassified to C144 without any changes in hardware, firmware or part number. I guess simply because C144 included receiver compatibility requirements, which was not part of C129a.

That's not unheard of in standard progression, that a new incremental standard may still be met by older equipment that may have been designed well or just wasn't too awful to meet the new standard.   Another way to look at it is that the new standard may just be to weed out equipment that would be marginal in some cases that are needed to work well (like LPV, etc.). 

It's like the old days of chip production when there were separate military, industrial, and commercial temperature specs.   Usually there was only one product and one production line, they just screened the parts in testing to see which passed mil spec, screened the rest for industrial, and the rest were commercial.  

1 hour ago, vik said:

Using RAIM predictions outside of WAAS area is required for flight planning if the receiver is used under C129 for non-precision approach. It is available here: https://sapt.faa.gov/outages.php?outageType=129001450&outageResolution=0.5

In short, older antennas and cables will work given that it is a 5V active antenna with 26-27 dB gain. All I have seen that are used with Apollo, BK etc receivers, including popular KA-91 and 92 are. Now, as it was already mentioned here, the legality of the installation is a different issue. The antenna must be listed in the installation manual as approved. Technically, all C144 (and C129a reclassified as C144) antennas should be approved under C144 umbrella, but who the hell reads the entire manual! The details are usually listed on page XXXX in a small font note to a confusing table At the end, the IA who signs the installation is the final authority! If he says that the antenna/cable/whole airplane needs to be changed so be it!

I think the differences may be subtle so that examples of the old antennas may work, but I wouldn't count on all of them working at the same level of performance.   I suspect the issue was there was concern that some wouldn't be sufficient for the tightest performance cases, but that's just me speculating based on having been involved in similar standards stuff a lot in the past.

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, vik said:

At the end, the IA who signs the installation is the final authority! If he says that the antenna/cable/whole airplane needs to be changed so be it!

 

He's not the final authority in this case since the TSO specs are called out in the installation manual. If he decides to go against that,  it's still not a legal installation.

[NotarPilot]

On 11/1/2023 at 5:52 PM, OR75 said:

I asked chatGPT what the difference was ... looks like a faster processor and touchscreen between the 650xi and 650

but the avidyne already has touchscreen (I am actually not a fan of a touchscreen but thats a personal preference)

I would have to test them in real life to sense if the rewiring is worth it 

I’m not a big fan of touchscreen either but the Avidyne IFDs function using both touchscreen and knobs/buttons. I’d say I use the knobs and buttons for just about everything except for inputting waypoints and flight plans. I see you’re based in Livermore. If you ever come down to SoCal I’d be happy to take you up in my plane to play with the IFDs. I have dual 440s in my plane and I’m very happy with them.
Do yourself a favor, don’t listen to the guys who trash one product over the other and don’t listen to a guy who flew behind an IFD once and have him tell you Garmin is better. See for yourself, then make an informed decision. 

Edited November 3, 2023 by NotarPilot

[DCarlton]

10 minutes ago, NotarPilot said:

I’m not a fan of touchscreen either but the Avidyne IFDs function using both touchscreen and knobs/buttons. I’d say I use the knobs and buttons for just about everything except for inputting waypoints and flight plans. I see you’re based in Livermore. If you ever come down to SoCal I’d be happy to take you up in my plane to play with the IFDs. I have dual 440s in my plane and I’m very happy with them. 

Do you find the IFD to be superior, easier to use or more capable than the older GNS units or is the IFD just an equivalent newer replacement.  I’m considering a GNS to IFD swap.  

[EricJ]

9 hours ago, DCarlton said:

Do you find the IFD to be superior, easier to use or more capable than the older GNS units or is the IFD just an equivalent newer replacement.  I’m considering a GNS to IFD swap.  

The IFD is a huge leap over the GNS.   It's as good or better than anything comparable, imho.

[EricJ]

9 hours ago, NotarPilot said:

I’m not a big fan of touchscreen either but the Avidyne IFDs function using both touchscreen and knobs/buttons. I’d say I use the knobs and buttons for just about everything except for inputting waypoints and flight plans. I see you’re based in Livermore. If you ever come down to SoCal I’d be happy to take you up in my plane to play with the IFDs. I have dual 440s in my plane and I’m very happy with them.
Do yourself a favor, don’t listen to the guys who trash one product over the other and don’t listen to a guy who flew behind an IFD once and have him tell you Garmin is better. See for yourself, then make an informed decision. 

Another nice thing with the IFD is the little keyboard, which I use from time to time, especially if I have a long flight plan to load.   I don't think there's any control input you can't do with the keyboard, so using it in turbulence might be easier than anything else, although I haven't really needed to try it.   That might be something to try if I think of it in the future.

[DCarlton]

42 minutes ago, EricJ said:

The IFD is a huge leap over the GNS.   It's as good or better than anything comparable, imho.

What's the process for updating the database?  Any issues?  Reliable?  Easy?  Thanks.  

[EricJ]

4 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

What's the process for updating the database?  Any issues?  Reliable?  Easy?  Thanks.  

Super easy.    D/L to a thumb drive, insert thumb drive, power up, select what you want updated, wait about ten seconds for it to do the copy, done.    It's super easy and quick compared to the G1000s I take care of.

I've done a couple of significant software updates on it as well, which were more involved but not bad.   They've all gone smoothly.

[DCarlton]

10 hours ago, EricJ said:

Super easy.    D/L to a thumb drive, insert thumb drive, power up, select what you want updated, wait about ten seconds for it to do the copy, done.    It's super easy and quick compared to the G1000s I take care of.

I've done a couple of significant software updates on it as well, which were more involved but not bad.   They've all gone smoothly.

And it interfaces with the GI 106 without issues?  I think it’s going to be the right solution for me.  

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, DCarlton said:

And it interfaces with the GI 106 without issues?  I think it’s going to be the right solution for me.  

I don't have any personal experience there, but the IFDs are plug-in replacements for the GNS530 and GNS430, and I've not heard of people having much trouble with that.   So I'd surmise it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[LANCECASPER]

8 hours ago, DCarlton said:

And it interfaces with the GI 106 without issues?  I think it’s going to be the right solution for me.  

No issues

[NotarPilot]

On 11/2/2023 at 11:11 PM, DCarlton said:

Do you find the IFD to be superior, easier to use or more capable than the older GNS units or is the IFD just an equivalent newer replacement.  I’m considering a GNS to IFD swap.  

Like Eric said, the IFD is way ahead of the GNS and is some ways, IMHO, even better than the GTN products. I have time behind my IFD 440s and a GTN 650 at work. I definitely prefer the IFD over the GTN. The IFDs are newer, have Wifi and BT built in, they have knobs and buttons to do everything so you’re not relying on touchscreens. One minor detail I like is that Avidyne actually spells out the name of the controlling facility for a particular frequency such as “Portland Tower” while the GTN says “PHX TWR.” Minor detail but I like that. Funny thing, the GTNs didn’t originally even have that feature and only implemented that after Avidyne already had it in their IFD product line. 

[NotarPilot]

9 hours ago, DCarlton said:

And it interfaces with the GI 106 without issues?  I think it’s going to be the right solution for me.  

I previously had the GI-106 before my Dynon upgrade and had no issues with the IFDs not working with the 106.