VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #1  
Old 05-27-2010, 05:21 AM
Mr Charles's Avatar
Mr Charles Mr Charles is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Near Springfield, MO
Posts: 120
Default 396 vs 496

Help,
I am considering purchasing a used GPS to replace my very outdated 195 in my RV-4. Am considering 396 or 496, but can't remember all the features/differences between them...could someone give me a quick primer on each, and advantages/disadvantages?
Thanks
Charles
ckj@choctawtel.net
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-27-2010, 05:43 AM
terrykohler terrykohler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,010
Default Garmin has taken the 396 Out of Production

If you're looking at used units, either would be good (I have a 396). That said, the 496 has a faster processor and also has taxiway diagrams. I believe the 496 also comes with road mapping built in as well as an AOPA airport directory. Personally, I'd like to have the taxiway capability, but I normally fly with NOS diagrams on my kneeboard anyway. The road mapping I could do without as I leave a cheaper GPS in my car ready and available for would be thieves. Not sure about the impact of a faster processor, unless you're using the Instrument Panel page on the GPS. Also not sure of the benefit of the AOPA directory (the NEAREST AIRPORT function gives me all the data I need), unless you're looking for specific FBOs. If price isn't much different, I'd go with the 496. Otherwise, the 396 should give you everything you really need.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-27-2010, 07:04 AM
Brantel's Avatar
Brantel Brantel is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Newport, TN
Posts: 7,496
Default

I would get the 496 since the used prices are really good for them right now.

It is my understanding that the 496 has better audio output isolation in case you want to connect it to your audio panel.

The faster processor is a real improvement over the 296-396.

The 496 has higher terrain resolution which makes the screen look sharper when you have terrain shading turned on.

Have you considered the Aera? I have a new 510 that replaced my 296 and I am lovin it!!!

Like stated above, the 496 has all the detail road maps and points of interest for the entire US preloaded. The 396 has basic maps but not the detail maps or points of interest. The safetaxi charts and AOPA stuff are just fluff....
__________________
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
Check out my RV-10 builder's BLOG
RV-10, #41942, N?????, Project Sold
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB
Lyc. O-360 carbed, HARTZELL BA CS Prop, Dual P-MAGs, Dual Garmin G3X Touch
Track N159SB (KK4LIF)
Like EAA Chapter 1494 on Facebook

Last edited by Brantel : 05-27-2010 at 07:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-27-2010, 07:54 AM
jeff beckley jeff beckley is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 192
Default

I have the 396 and If to do it again I would get the 496. I use the weather function alot and also use the zoom to take a closer look. The processing speed is painfully slow. If speed of the unit is of no importance then both would be fine.
__________________
Jeff Beckley
Des Moines Iowa
Van's RV-7A
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-27-2010, 08:03 AM
flyeyes's Avatar
flyeyes flyeyes is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 804
Default

I regularly fly behind one of each, and frankly don't find that much difference in usefulness. We have on of each that pretty much stay in a given airplane.

The taxi diagrams are useful on the 496, especially at night at unfamiliar fields (I rarely fly the 396-equipped airplane at night)

The weather, music, and mapping have similar functionality.

FWIW. our 496 has had much more trouble with the battery than the 396--I suspect this is due to the more powerful processor. The 496 does get used about 50% more often, and is in a plane with a 24v electrical system so those may be factors as well.
__________________
James Freeman
RV-8 flying
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-27-2010, 08:14 AM
mburch's Avatar
mburch mburch is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northwestern USA
Posts: 1,209
Default

Compared to the 396, the 496 has a little over 10x the amount of terrain detail, 5x faster GPS update rate, SafeTaxi airport diagrams (US), private airports in the database (US and western Europe), AOPA airport directory (US), and preloaded City Navigator road maps.

The 396 and 496 have the same processor and screen.

mcb
__________________
Matt Burch
RV-7 (last 90%)
http://www.rv7blog.com
VAF #836
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not those of my employer.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-27-2010, 10:25 PM
jeff beckley jeff beckley is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mburch View Post
Compared to the 396, the 496 has a little over 10x the amount of terrain detail, 5x faster GPS update rate, SafeTaxi airport diagrams (US), private airports in the database (US and western Europe), AOPA airport directory (US), and preloaded City Navigator road maps.

The 396 and 496 have the same processor and screen.

mcb
Are you sure about that? I thought I read that the processor is faster on the 496 and the screen is higher rez.
__________________
Jeff Beckley
Des Moines Iowa
Van's RV-7A
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-28-2010, 05:11 AM
Brantel's Avatar
Brantel Brantel is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Newport, TN
Posts: 7,496
Default

Screen is the same rez per the specs...Not sure where that rumor ever came from unless it is the higher terrain resolution giving the impression that the screen is higher rez.

Not sure on the processor. I have always been told it was faster. It sure acts faster when you zoom out and pan the map!!!

Might just be a difference in the compression technology used for the databases???
__________________
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
Check out my RV-10 builder's BLOG
RV-10, #41942, N?????, Project Sold
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB
Lyc. O-360 carbed, HARTZELL BA CS Prop, Dual P-MAGs, Dual Garmin G3X Touch
Track N159SB (KK4LIF)
Like EAA Chapter 1494 on Facebook

Last edited by Brantel : 05-28-2010 at 05:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-28-2010, 05:23 AM
mburch's Avatar
mburch mburch is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northwestern USA
Posts: 1,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff beckley View Post
Are you sure about that? I thought I read that the processor is faster on the 496 and the screen is higher rez.
Well, I have been wrong before, but on this particular item I'm pretty sure...

mcb
__________________
Matt Burch
RV-7 (last 90%)
http://www.rv7blog.com
VAF #836
Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and not those of my employer.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-28-2010, 09:44 AM
rvmills's Avatar
rvmills rvmills is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,125
Default 396 v 496 v Aera?

Questions on 396/496/Aera:

So do you guys that have used both a 396 and a 496 feel it would be worth the $$ to sell my 396 and upgrade to a 496? I believe the 496 would be an exact plug and play (same connections is what I mean...I know it'll fit in the dock the same!), and my XM antenna would work fine and not miss a beat. The taxi diagrams sound nice (perhaps fluff as you mentioned Brian), but I just added an Adventure Pilot iFly 700 to a Ram mount, (moving sectional, approach plates and airport diagrams), so that feature is not really a factor. However, increased terrain rez and screen rez sound appealing. Is it noticable enough to warrant a change? I know the 396 is no longer fully supported, but I was still able to do recent FW and database updates, so a 396 seems viable for the near future.

Brian, sounds like you have used both an X96 and your new Aera. I recently played with a friend's Aera (on the ground), and found it to have a very nice screen...but I had a harder time navigating to various pages than I do with my 396. Probably a lack of familiarity...but do you find that you can navigate among screens as easily as with an X96? I can cycle and hop between map, flight plan, wx, terrain and settings with quick hits of the toggle and menu buttons on the 396, while it seemed that I had to go back to menus on the Aera to select between various pages. Seemed more arduous, but again, it could be just lack of familiarity. Can you describe your experience with your 510 so far? I really like my 396...but the new tech is inviting! Also, to your knowledge, does AirGizmos make an Aera dock that would fit in the same spot as my 396 dock? (Will look on their website too!)

That might be a little thread drift, but it might be a valuable adjuct to the discussion...call it 396 v 496 v Aera.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Bob
__________________
Bob Mills
RV-6 "Rocket Six" N49VM
Reno-Stead, NV (KRTS)
President/Sport 47/49, Sport Class Air Racing
President, Formation Flying Inc (FFI)
Flight Lead, Lightning Formation Airshows

Last edited by rvmills : 05-28-2010 at 09:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:07 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.