What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Would you do it again - EFIS?

What did you install?


  • Total voters
    275

FasGlas

Well Known Member
With thousands of EFIS systems being sold and installed over the last 15 + years... Would you do it again?? Not, would you install a glass cockpit.. Would you install the same EFIS? Take into consideration the quality, the features, the installation, the service, the company, price, in warranty and out of warranty support, documents, etc. Would you buy the same or go a different path? And why......
Garmin
Dynon
AFS
Chelton
MGL
Grand Rapids
Aspen
Other
 
Last edited:
Garmin G3X Repeat Offender

We are building a RV14A now with a full Garmin Touch / GTN panel. This is my 3rd Garmin G3X RV panel, and I had the Garmin Perspective system in a Cirrus as well.

Here are my top "baker's dozen" reasons for selecting Garmin again in no particular order. I'm sure these many of these are not unique to Garmin, and I'm glad that there is good competition in the market!

1. The product is produced by a large, publicly traded company that has a long, excellent reputation for making certified aviation products. The G3X team has access to those resources to develop their experimental products.

2. I like having my certified GPS navigator (GTN) and other components (MFD/PFD, radios, transponder/ autopilot, audio panel, etc.) all from the same company.

3. I like the tight integration of these products with each other and the CAN bus architecture.

4. Excellent support from both Garmin and Steinair who built my panels both during and after the warranty period.

5. Very high quality products with great reliability in my experience.

6. Great documentation and iPad / PC trainers (GTN and Perspective).

7. Ease of updating databases.

8. Ease of updating the software on the LRUs.

9. My personal familiarity with Garmin products and their user interfaces.

10. Similarity of the user interfaces of the certified GPS navigator (GTN) and the PFD / MFD (G3X).

11. Tight integration of the G3X / GTN and iPad / Foreflight.

12. Continuous updates for all of the components.

13. Direct, fast access to the very knowledgeable G3xperts team and their direct participation on this forum.
 
Dynon in one plane, GRT in the other. Both have been solid as a rock.

The next panel I build will likely have GRT equipment. I like how one can get a big 10.1" screen in a drop-dead-simple installation - the Sport 10.1 is, to my mind, the ultimate VFR "quick and easy" solution.
 
RV 10 had GRT, twice if you consider the upgrade when I went to the larger HX.

The new plane is getting triple GRT screens. Two brand new, one first gen WS.

Highly recommend them, and unlike other brands they play nicely with the other kids.
 
I installed an early Dynon D10, I was going to replace it with an D10A but I decided to go with the Garmin G5. I was happy with both but the Garmin isn't as deep so it takes up less room behind the panel, and it costs less. I am considering putting in a G3X in the future.
 
GRT and Garmin

I bought a 2007 RV-9A with a GRT Horizon WS, the old AHRS, the old analog magnetometer, and an EIS 4000. IFR gear was a 430W.

I added a Garmin G5 as a backup attitude indicator, and to drive a Garmin autopilot with the 307 controller.

I decided to upgrade the Horizon WS system to a Horizon EX with the new adaptive AHRS and the digital magnetometer. The AHRS was truly a plug and play swapout. The magnetometer needed very minor work to install (I had to create a new d-sub connector that was female and that used fewer wires, basically). The EFIS box itself is the last part of that project and will require a bit of surgery since the mounting screws for the WS and EX are in different places (goodness knows why).

I'll also lose the VOR/ILS indications that I currently get on the WS unless I spring for an additional AIRINC module and do the necessary panel spelunking and wiring. Probably won't do that because I'll still be getting GPS from my 430W indicated on the EX, and because the G5 indicates everything.

Anyway, the upgrade process (combined with my ignorance....) has regularly exposed me to GRT technical support, which I would rate as EXCELLENT. Their manuals, etc., are not quite as good but have shown very marked improvement lately.

Bottom line, I would go with GRT again in a heartbeat.

Garmin... Well, I am a huge fan of the Garmin G5. It's enormous bang for the buck, and the backup capabilities are outstanding, especially with the integrated battery (which I had to make use of one night, long story). Quality of manuals etc. has been very good.

My experience with the autopilot, and Garmin customer support for that hardware, was *considerably* less pleasant. Long story short, I'm convinced that I and others in the experimental world paid Garmin for the privilege of beta testing that system. The best that can be said is that it's working now.

Given that experience, and Garmin's policies with respect to repairing 430Ws, I don't think I would go with Garmin again.

Unless I needed another G5. :)
 
Everyone likes what they bought. Very few will say, ?Well, I just spent $20K and it was a mistake...?. It?s just human nature.
I went with GRT. I like the ability to choose among various accessories (e.g., adsb?I?m not locked into one brand). I like the fact that it will find an attitude solution without gps or airspeed. I want (and have) a backup efis from a different manufacturer (Dynon) that is not connected to anything else. I have an autopilot (Trio) that works flawlessly with the Hx, but can work independently should the efis fail. And of course, there?s money. When you add up all the boxes, I think I got what I wanted at the lowest total price.
 
The strong headway that Dynon and GRT are making against Garmin in the glass panel market is fairly impressive and tells a story there.

Garmin may still be the leader, but they are certainly not a majority leader any longer.
 
Love my Garmin panel

When I first built my 7A, I had dual GRT WS's, a Garmin 480 and an SL 40, PS Engineering audio panel and TruTrak AP.

I still had the original avionics in my 7A when I built a 12. I did the full Garmin G3X (10" screens) avionics suite including Autopilot and GMC AP controller in the 12 and I loved it!

When I sold the 12, I did a full avionics upgrade on my 7A. I pretty much copied the setup that I had in the 12, plus I added a GTN 750 and a G5.

One thing that I love about the Garmin panel is the seemless integration of all the components. My original panel had very little integration between components. I had to do a lot of manual "mode and input" switching which increased workload and introduced opportunities to make mistakes.

I know there is a whole other discussion on single vendor vs multiple vendor to increase reliability. I've never had a reliability issue with my Garmins but whichever vendor you choose, I'm a strong believer using a single vendor to maximize integration.
 
My first RV7A (2005) had GRT legacy EFIS technology. Never had any issues and played nice with the 430 and TT autopilot. This was before GRT was selling their own A/P. I really like Greg and he was in the same town, made the decision easy. Was also sold on open architecture.

I purchased an RV10 with Dynon equipment, 2 Skyview Classics, AP, D6. Also had a GTN 650, etc... I was skeptical at first as I'd been flying behind GRT for 10 plus years. I have to say the Dynon was no less functional than GRT once I got use to the buttonology. When it came time to upgrade the transponder (Garmin 327) it was a snap to install the Dynon (Trigg) unit, ADSB in and configure. Same when I installed the remote AP/AT and Knob panels. Just upgraded both Classics with the HDX units. Also ditched the D6 for a G5. My point is everything just works. Yes you do lose the open architecture but since everything is so integrated the documentation is easier to follow. The integration with Foreflight is seamless. Not a lot of options. I assume Garmin in similar in this respect.

I have a GRT SportEX in my Highlander and it was stone simple to install and configure. No nav source, no AP, no backup instruments to the EFIS other than an ALFA AOA. Perfect for the way I fly it, VFR only.

Gary
 
I have had experience with GRT, Dynon and G3X.
In terms of functionality, reliability and ease of integration with other vendors, hands down GRT is my first choice.

I went with Garmin G3X largely as fear of protecting my investment and possibility of GRT not be able to stay in competition/business since they are much smaller.
 
I installed a dual MGL iEFIS system. I was attracted to the iEFIS since it can be configured just about any way you want and can be expanded. I have a very unusual setup on my screens.. That being said, MGL has the absolute worst to non existent support or service and worthless documentation. Rainier couldn't care less about bugs, failures or suggestions. I would never purchase another MGL product again.
 
The strong headway that Dynon and GRT are making against Garmin in the glass panel market is fairly impressive and tells a story there.

Garmin may still be the leader, but they are certainly not a majority leader any longer.


Curious...is that really true? Are Dynon and GRT really nipping at the heels of Garmin and making such strong headway? I haven't heard that.

Put GRT in the first -8...some of their earliest stuff and it was good. The programming was a bit cumbersome but doable and the kit worked well and was advanced compared to existing products. This time around I looked hard at GRT but being completely Android based, it was a deal breaker for me...just a preference but I like my iPad to talk to the kit. Just easier.
 
The strong headway that Dynon and GRT are making against Garmin in the glass panel market is fairly impressive and tells a story there.

Garmin may still be the leader, but they are certainly not a majority leader any longer.

Just curious if you have any data to put a little weight behind that claim. I think that?s a bold statement since neither Dynon nor GRT have an organic WAAS GPS navigator while Garmin dominates the market with numerous offerings. I would say it?s hard not to justify them as the industry leader when other systems still rely on a Garmin (or avidyne) product. Not very scientific, but next time you go to an experimental fly in take a look at the number of Garmin vs others. I?ve installed 16 G5?s in customer aircraft over the last 2 years and haven?t had a single request for the Dynon offering.
 
14 hours in so far with my dynon, helped some install another dynon on a subsonex jet, I have no complaints at all.

With Dynon, GRT, and others I am a believe Garmin would still be charging "bend over" prices, competition is good for every industry for both price and features.

Yes Dynon doesn't have a WAAS, but lets face it 80% or so of RV's are probably VFR, or at least flown that way.
 
The strong headway that Dynon and GRT are making against Garmin in the glass panel market is fairly impressive and tells a story there.

Garmin may still be the leader, but they are certainly not a majority leader any longer.

I, and I'm sure others, would be very interested to see the facts that you base your opinion/comments on. Also, the OP's question was "what would you choose and why" which you didn't answer.

IN MY OPINION, your answer to the OP's question would be much more relevant, and accurate, than your PERSONAL OPINION on Garmin's (or any other manufacturer's) popularity or position in the market.

Also, how you can accurately measure the "headway" any manufacturer is making against another in this market is a mystery to me. I'd love to know how you came to that conclusion / statement of fact.
 
Yes Dynon doesn't have a WAAS, but lets face it 80% or so of RV's are probably VFR, or at least flown that way.

Sorry, but again baseless. I know 6/8 Rv?s on my field are flown IFR routinely. These are facts. Perhaps a small percentage of the 10k+ rv?s flying, but I don?t think either of us can say with any authority what the real numbers are. And yes, 5 of those RV?s have a Garmin navigator and the 6th one has an Avidyne.
 
Sorry, but again baseless. I know 6/8 Rv?s on my field are flown IFR routinely. These are facts. Perhaps a small percentage of the 10k+ rv?s flying, but I don?t think either of us can say with any authority what the real numbers are. And yes, 5 of those RV?s have a Garmin navigator and the 6th one has an Avidyne.

My number is surely a guess, and based on the 6 RV's I know of directly on my field, 0 are flown IFR. So we are both guessing or making assumptions based on our personal exposure to the RV world.
 
I went with DYNON back in late 2012 and with 500+ flying with it, I would do it again without hesitation.

23f2.jpg


As somebody commented on another forum, it has more displays than your local Sports Bar. :D
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but again baseless. I know 6/8 Rv?s on my field are flown IFR routinely. These are facts. Perhaps a small percentage of the 10k+ rv?s flying, but I don?t think either of us can say with any authority what the real numbers are. And yes, 5 of those RV?s have a Garmin navigator and the 6th one has an Avidyne.

The navigator is not the EFIS and the question was about the EFIS.

To legally fly IFR a certified nav source is required. Pretty much all the EFIS's in the poll can interface with either the Avidyne or Garmin, so doesn't impact the decision either way.
 
This is one of those never ending debates and in truth, we buy what we are comfortable with.

That comfort level may be influenced by word-of-mouth, magazine articles, or a perception that one brand sells more than another.

I'm in the word-of-mouth category.

A friend who works in the defense industry commutes with his OTRV (Other Than RV). He is an electronics designer by trade and one smart guy when it comes to aircraft electronics. I asked him why he selected the suite of electronics he installed in his OTRV and his response was pretty straight forward. It went along these lines: They all have pretty much the same capability and if something is missing, it will probably be added by the next software release. It came down to the "look" and the hardware architecture.

My friend dove into to hardware like no one I have ever heard do before and made his selection because he felt the hardware he bought had the best chance of keeping the displays displaying.

Note, I purposely did not mention which brand he went with and I will not divulge his selection, which I guess makes this post a waste of time for me to write and for you to read. However, the point is, you need to do your homework before you layout the cash to buy your EFIS and make sure you can live with your decision.
 
Last edited:
The navigator is not the EFIS and the question was about the EFIS.

To legally fly IFR a certified nav source is required. Pretty much all the EFIS's in the poll can interface with either the Avidyne or Garmin, so doesn't impact the decision either way.

I agree.

But.... the original question from the OP was, and I quote, was.....

"With thousands of EFIS systems being sold and installed over the last 15 + years... Would you do it again?? Not, would you install a glass cockpit.. Would you install the same EFIS? Take into consideration the quality, the features, the installation, the service, the company, price, in warranty and out of warranty support, documents, etc. Would you buy the same or go a different path? And why......"

So, what are YOUR answers to the original questions?

I think that the original question was a very good one, and although that I have my own opinions and personal preferences, which I've expressed, I think if everyone will answer these questions without getting sidetracked that will be very beneficial to anyone trying to decide which avionics system to purchase / install.

There's no right or wrong. There's no better or worse. There are are MANY good choices. ALL of these choices, ALL OF THEM, are really good choices. The reasons that we each made the choices that we did may help others make more informed choices.
 
This is one of those never ending debates and in truth, we buy what we comfortable with.....

And I must respectfully disagree... this is not a "never ending debate".

This particular post clearly asked "what did you choose and why", not "why is my choice better than yours". The first is a a question which, if answered as asked, can possibly be very helpful to others.

If this post was about "which is the best choice for my avionics" I would agree with you 100%. But it's not.

My choices aren't better than yours, or anyone else's. They're based on MY personal preferences, criteria, limitations, experiences, etc. But, sharing my choices, and the reasons for them, are not "debates".

These are personal choices, with personal reasons behind them. They will hopefully be very be valuable to other people contemplating the same choices. I think that was the intent of the OP's original post.

Otherwise, I would not have responded.

There is no right or wrong choice, nor a better or worse one . ALL systems have their pros and cons. THEY. ARE. ALL. GREAT. CHOICES!!!

WHY that we made the choices that we did IS the subject of this thread, NOT "what', in MY OPINION s the best avionics system!"
 
I'm using a full Garmin "set-up" in my -9A.

The reason is, That's what the guy I bought the project from was planning. He had a panel cut for it, had a wiring harness made up and that's what our new Sling 2 has in it.
 
A bit testy on this thread, aren't we ;-)

I went with Garmin because I wanted to deal with a single source for any troubleshooting, and I wanted minimal issues on compatibility.

I priced out what I wanted with several vendors and found the prices within $2K on a $33K total bill. I didn?t see that as a deciding factor.

I am still looking forward to my first flight, so can?t comment on how much I like flying behind them. It?s such a vast improvement over the circa 2001 factory panel I have been flying behind, I can?t imagine not being amazed with what I have.
 
We are building a RV14A now with a full Garmin Touch / GTN panel. This is my 3rd Garmin G3X RV panel, and I had the Garmin Perspective system in a Cirrus as well.

Steve nailed it for me. Had G1000 in the DA40, went with a Stein-built panel in the RV-7A and doing the same on the RV-10 under construction.

Too old to learn a whole new system and why bother if you like what you have.
 
AFS 5600T and would do it again

I like having buttons and knobs rather than endless drop-down menus. Also, AFS plays nice with all Dynon boxes and third-party stuff!

Ron
 
I went with Garmin because I wanted to deal with a single source for any troubleshooting, and I wanted minimal issues on compatibility.

I priced out what I wanted with several vendors and found the prices within $2K on a $33K total bill. I didn?t see that as a deciding factor.

SNIP.

This is ~$5K over the price I paid for my new project; dual SkyView HDX displays (with all the associated modules), Dynon radio for Comm #2, transponder, dual axis autopilot, ADS-B receiver, EMS, PS Engineering audio panel and the clunky (but TSO certified) GTN-650.

I have a lot of RV-10 IFR hours flying with the SkyView system - and recommend it.

Carl
 
Just curious if you have any data to put a little weight behind that claim. I think that’s a bold statement since neither Dynon nor GRT have an organic WAAS GPS navigator while Garmin dominates the market with numerous offerings. I would say it’s hard not to justify them as the industry leader when other systems still rely on a Garmin (or avidyne) product. Not very scientific, but next time you go to an experimental fly in take a look at the number of Garmin vs others. I’ve installed 16 G5’s in customer aircraft over the last 2 years and haven’t had a single request for the Dynon offering.



I, and I'm sure others, would be very interested to see the facts that you base your opinion/comments on. Also, the OP's question was "what would you choose and why" which you didn't answer.

IN MY OPINION, your answer to the OP's question would be much more relevant, and accurate, than your PERSONAL OPINION on Garmin's (or any other manufacturer's) popularity or position in the market.

Also, how you can accurately measure the "headway" any manufacturer is making against another in this market is a mystery to me. I'd love to know how you came to that conclusion / statement of fact.

I voted in the poll - so you've got my opinion there, thanks for asking. Anyone who pays the slightest bit of attention to these boards knows that I run all-glass Dynon, with a G430W for IFR. The thread is about EFIS - not IFR GPS - so the poll is the data I'm using for the statement. The trending is concerning our EFIS installs, as requested by the OP - not IFR GPS boxes.
 
Emphatically YES!

Dual AFS 5600T EFIS installed.
Yes, I would do it all over again in a heartbeat. For me - AFS is local; service was never required under or out of warranty; customer support is fantastic and only a phone call or email away.
Quality of build is top-notch; operability is easy - even for non-pilot wife, who is iPad aware (touch screen operation became intuitive for her).
I really like the Left - Right - Left scan while under IFR conditions. No "V" scan required as everything is on the same horizontal plane.

So, emphatically YES, I would install dual EFIS again, and the first choice would be Advance Flight Systems.
 
So, emphatically YES, I would install dual EFIS again, and the first choice would be Advance Flight Systems.

Which is part of Dynon now, so actually those two poll choices should be combined. And they certainly have taken a chunk out of the Garmin EFIS market, regardless of what some Garmin fanboys would like to believe.

I'm not against Garmin products - I have their 430W in my panel and it works great. I'm not going to cheerlead for them though, just as I don't cheerlead for Dynon or anyone else. They have different features and we have different missions. Pick the ones that work for you.
 
Where is the choice for both Garmin and Dynon? Those owners converting older steam gauge panels might not want the expense of a total conversion to to a 10 inch screen or 2 7 inch screens. I have a Garmin G5 for the EFIS and a Dynon D10 A for the HSI for the Garmin 430 W and Dynon autopilot. The D10 A is also a backup EFIS totally independent if needed. No more vacuum pump, DG or Attitude indicator to fail.
 
I installed a dual MGL iEFIS system. I was attracted to the iEFIS since it can be configured just about any way you want and can be expanded. I have a very unusual setup on my screens.. That being said, MGL has the absolute worst to non existent support or service and worthless documentation. Rainier couldn't care less about bugs, failures or suggestions. I would never purchase another MGL product again.

I have an MGL iEFIS Explorer (the 8.5? screen) and would?ve put in a Challenger (10.4? screen) except for the fact it won?t physically fit.

I love it. These things are so customisable in terms of screen layouts and peripherals but to redesign the screen needs a bit of familiarity working with windows style file managers etc and veering from default setups is not for the faint hearted. The CAN bus design is excellent and the engine monitoring setup is pretty easy and flexible.

Rainier..... I think he sometimes gets a bad rap. This guy is the founder and technical genius behind MGL stuff and writes his own software code, does all of the hardware design and integration, etc. He arguably may bite off more than he can chew and I?d be surprised if he finds time to sleep but he most certainly does correct software/firmware bugs. It is simply untrue to suggest otherwise. But the best guy to turn to when ?I can?t get my sensor x to work? or ?I need help with the setup menu? is at MGL USA, Matt Liknaitzky. Put a support request in there and you?ll get quick and accurate help. Or the online forum can work sometimes too. For failures, I had one input fail on an RDAC (engine monitoring box) and a replacement was sent, no questions asked.

Suggestions are very subjective. Try suggesting a change to how something works on Garmin hardware and see how you go. If only one or two people suggest it but everyone else is happy, it is not worth the development time for the designer who will say ?thanks for your input? (if you?re lucky) and ignore it.

The MGL documentation is a problem. It?s getting better on new devices now but seems to have been quite haphazard in the past (including the iEFIS) and is spread across multiple online documents. If you want to see confusing documentation, try flying an Airbus jet.

I don?t work for them. I have an MGL iEFIS Explorer, V16 VHF Com, and SP12 2020 compliant GPS connected to the Trig transponder via the MGL-Trig interface and it?s hard to beat on cost vs functionality, but just doesn?t have the ?brand name? following and is a pretty small company relative to the other players.
 
My number is surely a guess, and based on the 6 RV's I know of directly on my field, 0 are flown IFR. So we are both guessing or making assumptions based on our personal exposure to the RV world.


Just another base point.
Of the other 11 very active RV?s I flew with all 12 of us flew a bunch of IFR all the time. Still do.
 
I have an MGL iEFIS Explorer (the 8.5? screen) and would?ve put in a Challenger (10.4? screen) except for the fact it won?t physically fit.

I love it. These things are so customisable in terms of screen layouts and peripherals but to redesign the screen needs a bit of familiarity working with windows style file managers etc and veering from default setups is not for the faint hearted. The CAN bus design is excellent and the engine monitoring setup is pretty easy and flexible.

Rainier..... I think he sometimes gets a bad rap. This guy is the founder and technical genius behind MGL stuff and writes his own software code, does all of the hardware design and integration, etc. He arguably may bite off more than he can chew and I?d be surprised if he finds time to sleep but he most certainly does correct software/firmware bugs. It is simply untrue to suggest otherwise. But the best guy to turn to when ?I can?t get my sensor x to work? or ?I need help with the setup menu? is at MGL USA, Matt Liknaitzky. Put a support request in there and you?ll get quick and accurate help. Or the online forum can work sometimes too. For failures, I had one input fail on an RDAC (engine monitoring box) and a replacement was sent, no questions asked.

Suggestions are very subjective. Try suggesting a change to how something works on Garmin hardware and see how you go. If only one or two people suggest it but everyone else is happy, it is not worth the development time for the designer who will say ?thanks for your input? (if you?re lucky) and ignore it.

The MGL documentation is a problem. It?s getting better on new devices now but seems to have been quite haphazard in the past (including the iEFIS) and is spread across multiple online documents. If you want to see confusing documentation, try flying an Airbus jet.

I don?t work for them. I have an MGL iEFIS Explorer, V16 VHF Com, and SP12 2020 compliant GPS connected to the Trig transponder via the MGL-Trig interface and it?s hard to beat on cost vs functionality, but just doesn?t have the ?brand name? following and is a pretty small company relative to the other players.

There are advantages to MGL's iEFIS, mostly it's ability to add just about anything to it, and the price... Matt is a great guy but his technical knowledge is limited. Then you have to deal with Rainier, the one man band. I installed this dual iEFIS some years back (G2 / now G3) and there's still problems with it, problems I have discussed with both Rainier and Matt and all I ever get is "Crickets". Fuel Flow never worked, EGT's read way below actual temps, just to name a few issues. MGL is made for people who's willing to do without documentation and support. I learned to design screens, figure the math and trick the iEFIS into doing all kinds of stuff but I expect it will never fully function and I'll eventually have to toss it. Had I known about MGL support, or lack of, I never would have bought this system. I wish someone posted a poll like this when I was looking to upgrade.
 
Well..... your experience is not my experience and I've got a pretty unique setup.

I don't think there are too many people asking the MGL EFIS to measure 18 thermocouple inputs, a fuel flow from zero up to 150 litres(40 US Gal)/hour, and numerous other parameters. We've had minor glitches here and there but nothing unsolvable.

You know, avionics problems causing major dramas can happen with any vendor. Including Boeing and Airbus. Maybe one day I'll tell you about what happened to one of our Airbus aircraft recently. Caused a significant inflight emergency. Suffice to say a number of electrical control panels and related items got stripped out of the plane and sent back to the manufacturer to try to figure out what happened (and still no-one knows why). It doesn't mean it's the "norm".
 
Loving my GRT Sport SX and would buy another in a heartbeat. Perfect for my day/night VFR -9A.

What sold me was the straightforward, readable presentation of instruments/information; the Dynon stuff has a little too much "Tokyo by night" clutter going on, IMO. Also, AHRS built into the unit makes mounting simple.
 
As everyone knows Dynon absorbed AFS. I have both of them in my panel so I believe I can be completely impartial. My opinion based on my first hand real world experience is that the Dynon EFIS is very good value for money but that the AFS EFIS is a better, more solid product. One is now the “Econo” model and the other is the “Premium” model for Dynon. The fact that more Dynon units are sold than AFS units largely reflects the difference in price.

I’ve flown behind Garmin equipment as well, including the G1000. Garmin is terrific quality too...no doubt. But Garmin is a gobbling commercial monster and they are a very real threat to everyone else producing non certificated avionics in the experimental category. It wouldn't surprise me if, right at this moment, Garmin corporate types are pondering whether to strangle Dynon/AFS slowly or take them over and bury them quickly.

If builders in the experimental category want to have competition in the avionics market and enjoy the lower prices that the competition brings then they’ll need to support that competition.
 
Last edited:
15 years ago I upgraded my first plane to a Dynon D-180. I was quite happy with it for the value. My latest plane came with a Dynon Skyview, and I'm quite happy with that too. Haven't flown behind the others, I'm sure they're all nice, but given the great service I've always received from Dynon I won't be running out and switching to another brand.

One thing I really like about the Dynon line is their bus architecture. Add more items / features? No big wiring challenge, simply hook up the new component to the bus and register it. I may someday add a second Skyview (I'm only flying VFR at the moment, when I have time for serious flying I may start flying SE IFR again), and it is nice to know that I can plug the newest model into the existing hole and simply move the other over to the other side with almost zero wiring).
 
I have an AFS 5600 EFIS with all the bells and whistles, very nice gear and excellent service.
I'm an older pilot so my learning is not as quick as it once was. Steam gauges were stamped in my brain and it sure was an interesting transition to ribbon tapes and more information than I'd ever had before.
It took me between 30 to 40 hours to really feel at home with this new system and earlier on I wondered if I should have just stuck with steam gauges
Now of course I wouldn't go back, these new systems are really wonderful.
 
I'd do Dynon Skyview again in a heartbeat, but rather than using the Classic again I'd certainly use their more recent offerings.
As for the Garmin GTN650, it is phenomenal! If my only choice was to install another 650, unchanged from today's version, **** yes I'd use it! :cool:
 
Dynon Quick Panel

I have installed a full dual-screen Dynon IFR glass panel with an Avidyne IFD-540 and a backup Garmin G5, based on the Dynon QuickPanel. I'm getting close to Phase 1, so I don't have actual flight experience.

I priced out Garmin and Dynon before Oshkosh 2018 and found the two systems were nearly identical in price (~45k for everything) and feature set. I had a small preference toward Garmin because of past experience in certified aircraft, confidence in their longevity, and because their screens look a little nicer in the ads.

I then went to the booths at Oshkosh. Garmin would barely give me the time of day and I waited a while, then the guy who would talk to me only knew the software.

At the Dynon Booth, Rob Hickman, president of AFS, spent an hour with me going through their whole system with both Dynon and AFS options. In person, Dynon looks just as good as Garmin. I think Garmin needs serious competition to keep them nimble, and so I went with Dynon. Rob also talked me into the QuickPanel, which was scarcely more expensive than me fabricating a bunch of harnesses myself, and is nicely done.

Now that I've been through the installation, I can say Garmin's manual is good, and Dynon's is terrific. The AFS quick panel installation manual is not good, but Rob Hickman returned at least a dozen of my emails, usually within minutes, and all my questions were resolved painlessly. The Dynon panel is working great on the ground and I'll soon get to fly with it.

I'd looked at putting in similar glass to a Bonanza I used to fly, but at the time, I would have spent more than $100k for the PFD, MFD, IFR GPS, autopilot, and related boxes.

David
 
I am in the process of completing a Dynon HDX install. I am also going Avidyne for the GPS. I just couldn't bring myself to support "The Man":); although Garmin did get a radio purchase and future G5 purchase from me. I have also heard too many great customer service reports from Dynon to ignore them. Although Garmin has a REALLY good presence here on the forum as well as better installation support like YouTube videos and more detailed installation manuals (in some areas).
 
I did a full Garmin setup dual G3X setup. After 100 hours of flying I can honestly say I would do nothing different on my Avionics be it different gear or layout.

The support I've gotten from Garmin G3X group has been top notch. They helped me with some things both from an installation standpoint as well as some initial flight troubleshooting. All this mind you is in their manual and usually they would point me in the right direction, but they never told me to RTFM.

They're continued support has been amazing as well. I've had a component issue the last few flights, they helped me narrow down the possible culprit and sent me out a new part that I'm going to install later today.

I've flown behind some of the others mentioned here and still prefer my Garmin setup. Could be because that's what I have or because that's what I'm used to. Either way I'm happy!
 
Trutrak

I went with a Trutrak IV EFIS 7 years ago.I'm just sorry they got out of the EFIS business. The screen is so sharp and it boots up immediately. It's dead simple and flies nice coupled approaches off my Garmin 400W.

The main squawk I have is that the screen will get stupid if corrosion gets into the screen ribbon cable connection. A little dielectric grease seems to have solved the problem, but I carry a spare EFIS on trips and can change them out on the ground in minutes if necessary. There's a "straight and level" button and backup instruments to get us down if I ever lost the screen in the air.

I don't have synthetic vision and engine functions are not recorded by the EFIS, but I'll keep it going as long as I can. I'm leaning toward the 7" Garmin when I have to upgrade. John
 
Dynon vs AFS

Need your opinion please. It appears functionality is very similar in the HDX versus the AFS 5000 series. In terms of sharpness (contrast) and brightness of the displays, how would you rate the Dynon HDX versus the AFS 5000 series?
 
Back
Top