Garmin 696 - big toy?

I'm messing around with a new instrument panel for my next RV. Mission x-country IFR.

I really like the idea of having the 696 for approach plates but isn't the rest just a fancy toy? I still need another IFR capable GPS (430W likely since that is what I use now) in order to have the ability to shoot GPS approaches. The 430 has terrain (although not as cool), ability to display XM and traffic.

For a strickly VFR aircraft the 696 offers only size as compared to the 496?

Anyone convince me that the pretty GPS 696 is more useful then existing units?

Steve
7A Flying

sjhurlbut said:

Anyone convince me that the pretty GPS 696 is more useful then existing units?

Click to expand...

The ability to "split" the screen. This allows you to check a lot of info, change flight plans, etc., while still monitoring the map for terrain, restricted areas, Class B, weather, etc.

L.Adamson

Heck... owning an RV is just a big toy, so nothing wrong with filling it with more cool toys

But, until I redo my panel I just don't have enough room for the 696 unless I wear it on my leg, so for now I'm really quite happy with the 496.

But I'd still love to have the 696 !

I just read the 696 will not display approach plates that are 180 days old. Interesting. But it is legal to fly with year old charts if you check the updates. Doesn't seem reasonable to me.

That, and not having any road data / turn by turn guildance out side the cockpit makes it a "no sale" for me.

Do you NEED a 696? Heck, no one does, not really....but it sure can relieve a lot of the workload of cross-country flying! I didn't think I really needed a 396 until I used one, and then I found I didn't want to go anywhere without XM weather. The 696 brings a big screen - much easier to see the big picture, and able to display that much more information at one time. The user interface is much improved, and there is more data available. And yes, it is a great EFB. Of course, none of that is necessary - you just have to decide if you want it, and it is high enough on your priority list to fit the budget.

Personally, flying an -8 on long cross-countries, I want an EFB, as well as a unit with XM weather. If I total up the costs of those features in other units, it comes close to what I'd spend on the 696, and having them all integrated makes the price worthwhile.

Yup, it's a lot of money to pay for a gadget - and every individual has to decide for themselves if the gadgets are worth the price for them.

Auto mode? Heck, you can buy a discounted Street Pilot for $200.....carry that and leave the clunky 696 in the cockpit! If you can afford 3 airplanes, you can afford the extra road box...

The 496 is a bit better than the 396 with a faster processor, smart taxi, AOPA database and smart airspace. So for some the $600.00 premium is worth it for the extra features. (396 - $1795, 496 - $2395)

The 696 offers a bit more in the way of charts and and screen size but even better, the display is a totally different technology. The resolution will be much better with WVGA TFT. What's really different about the 696 is the user interface. The joystick and softkeys are a big reason I chose to go with the 696. Is that alone worth the $3295 price tag, I don't really think so. But I do think the charts, screen size, better display and new interface is worth the extra $900 for the upgrade. (Haven't received it yet but has been on order for a couple of weeks now.)

As I see it that's what it boils down to. If you are going to buy a 496, is it worth 900 bucks for the upgrade. You can't really compare it to a 430 as that's a different animal altogether. However, I know a Bonanza owner that has two 430's in his panel. They're right above his Airgizmo mounted 496 that he claims to use just as much as if not more than the 430's as the display is better.

All of them, 396, 496, 696 as well as the 430 will display XM weather and traffic. The portables will give you XM radio and audible warnings where I don't think the 430 will, at least not out of the box. The 396 and 496 are "car friendly" for street navigation. If that's really important to you, you probably already have a portable unit or you can pick up a Nuvi for under 100 bucks.

I can't convince anyone that the 696 isn't just an expensive toy. Heck, my RV is a really expensive toy. It just goes with the territory.

696

For you guys thinking of the 686....this was just posted on the Canard Aviators web site.



I was waiting for the last few years for Garmin to come out with the
696 as I wanted to have the charts, approaches and weather in one
unit. Then I found out the approaches are not geo-referenced (the
plane does not move on the approach plate) and if you do not keep up
the subscriptions, the approaches and charts will stop working after 6
months. Plus the unit is now quite large.

So I ended up going to eBay and purchased a used 496 at a great price.
Lots of fliers are dumping them to buy the 696 and it is a great time
to pick one up. The difference in cost between the two will pay for
XM weather and music for a number of years. I would have loved to
buy a 696 and would have if the subscription issue wasn't there I
probably would have. ...oh well.....

>
> I've just returned from a trip to California from my home in Miami. While in California I purchased a Garmin 696 unit, installed it in my Long and flew home.
>
> The unit has many great features, a large bright screen, excellent user interface and the ability to display many custom bits of information. While it is a bit heavy, it is still simple to install and use.
>
> Now the bad news, my unit powered off twice while I was using it and completely locked up once, not something you want or need while flying cross country, were presumably you will be generally using the unit. I contacted Garmin and was told to update to the new software version. The Garmin support person told me that they were aware of the problems I had experienced and the new update would resolve the issues.
>

sjhurlbut said:

I'm messing around with a new instrument panel for my next RV. Mission x-country IFR.

I really like the idea of having the 696 for approach plates but isn't the rest just a fancy toy? I still need another IFR capable GPS (430W likely since that is what I use now) in order to have the ability to shoot GPS approaches. The 430 has terrain (although not as cool), ability to display XM and traffic.

For a strickly VFR aircraft the 696 offers only size as compared to the 496?

Anyone convince me that the pretty GPS 696 is more useful then existing units?

Steve
7A Flying

Click to expand...

If you need the 430 to shoot approaches then you also need approach charts something not available on the 396/496. So your options are:

430 plus 496 plus charts or another efb or
430 plus 696

If you are getting on in age then as the bowflex commercials suggest "size matters"

If you have not yet built your IFR panel I would think about the following.

Granted with the above 696 based panel you cannot legally do GPS approaches but for the same cost of adding an annunciator panel, charts, and plates to the 430 install you can as, Brantley suggests in another thread, add an older IFR GPS and be good to go with the 696 based panel still at far less total cost.


So for VFR only you are correct only size is the only significant difference but for some of us size reallty matters.

For an IFR ship then there is the benefit of size, cost, and charts.

Another , less expensive option, is the flight cheetah 210 that offers size, charts, weather, traffic, and decreased cost (purchase price as well as subscription/update cost)

I have used the Cheetah and 396/496 a lot asnd always preferred the Cheetah but the 696 may just win me over.

Because Jeppesen & Garmin are bedfellows

Geico266 said:

I just read the 696 will not display approach plates that are 180 days old. Interesting. But it is legal to fly with year old charts if you check the updates. Doesn't seem reasonable to me.

That, and not having any road data / turn by turn guidance out side the cockpit makes it a "no sale" for me.

Click to expand...

Declaring that a device is VFR only, then disallowing old IFR charts makes no sense at all, unless you want to be sure and get your subscription dues.

They had the same policy written into the software the MX20 I had in my last airplane even though the unit is specifically designed to be used "for situational awareness only"

The data bases and approach plates are public domain and available form the government for a reasonable fee, yet we have to pay Jeppesen multiple times for each box we use it on.

Very annoying.

Declaring that a device is VFR only, then disallowing old IFR charts makes no sense at all, unless you want to be sure and get your subscription dues.

Click to expand...

This is the main issue that is causing me to consider sticking with the Flight Cheetah as opposed to the 696.

You must, however, consider our societie's propensity for litigation.


We are, after all, the society where you can sue McDonalds for hot coffee burning your thighs when you place the cup between your legs and drive away.

Or Sue your local hospital because a CT Scan caused loss of Psychic powers.

Also remember Arlington and strapped rear seat controls or the vacuum pump suit.

While these decisions are usually overturned or the awards reduced the cost of the litigation is tremendous.

Just visualize someone flying their Pober Pixie into the school bus full of children while using the 696 with out of date plates for their IFR approach.

I am rather surprised they do not lock out the charts on their expiration date.

Milt,
Just curious as to how you came up with those cost figures. They seem way high as my reshearch has shown that a brand new 430W can be had for around $7100, an SL30 for $3400, and a GL69 for $3400. Not cheap but a lot less than what you quoted.

Auburntsts said:

Milt,
Just curious as to how you came up with those cost figures. They seem way high as my reshearch has shown that a brand new 430W can be had for around $7100, an SL30 for $3400, and a GL69 for $3400. Not cheap but a lot less than what you quoted.

Click to expand...

For planning purposes I usually use the Eastern Avionics guidebook

http://www.avionix.com/guide.html

for pricing then, go bargain hunting. I agree you can find them for less but for comparative purposes the 430 based panel remains quite expensive.

Nice unit

One of my neighbors got a 696 a few weeks ago. I was surprised at how heavy it is. For a RV it would be a tough add on. I wouldn't want is a knee board because of the weight and the looking down aspect. As an addition to a new panel it would be great. The screen size is very nice but have never really found the 496 to be deficient in this area. After all it is less than 2 feet away.

Pardon me if it has been covered, but I don't think the 696 charts, even current, meet the needs for legal IFR. I believe you have to have the paper chart with you and at least the narrative to be legal. I have a subscription for these and get the updates when they come out.

He has also had a lockout on his which concerns me. Hope they have a fix for this.

No matter what it is, if a 796 came out tomorrow, many would dump their weeks old 696 for the latest and greatest. We're gadget people, heck we built our own planes!!!

Back to one of Steve's original questions:

"For a strickly VFR aircraft the 696 offers only size as compared to the 496?"

For strickly VFR, the IFR charts don't mean much. That being said, other than size, what does a 696 bring to the table for a "strickly VFR aircraft"?

Tom
RV-7A N175TJ Flying

696 in my panel

I've no one GPS, I planned to buy a 496 but now with 696 ..... it's another story, another panel brainstorm. Tell me your opinion about

http://www.rv8.it/immagini/2.tiff

Luke, panels are very subjective. However, if that is a glove box right above your radio and transponder, at the least I would move the glove box BELOW those two avionics. In other words, have the radio and transponder just below the EFIS.

If the 696 can go horizontal, what does it look like horizontal below the EFIS, radio and transponder on the left side (assuming you change them with left hand) and engine instruments on right?

I just read an AOPA article on the 696 and horizontal placement probably is a no-go.

Consider which hand you will use to operate it. If the left then switch the 696 to the left side versus right.

Pardon me if it has been covered, but I don't think the 696 charts, even current, meet the needs for legal IFR. I believe you have to have the paper chart with you and at least the narrative to be legal. I have a subscription for these and get the updates when they come out.

Click to expand...

The 696 does meet the AC-120-76a and AC 91-78 requirements for a Class 1 and 2 EFB. IAW FAA notice N 8900.17 if operating under part 91 and the EFB meets Class 1/2 criteria, paper charts are not required.

Whether a paperless cockpit is the way to go is open to debate, but it is legal to do so.

Up for debate ;-)

Certainly as you mention.. it is "debatable".
I was actually just thinking yesterday about my 496 and how much reliance i put on it., running off a cigarette lighter. I was thinking it because several travel items in my car had gone kaput over the years, specifically the 12v power portion that plugs into the receptacle. It does have a pretty good battery though if I did lose power.

There are certain things that just lend themselves better to paper. Not sure if approach plates are one of them...but I would always have the paper as a backup no matter what. I can imagine that one time where the battery wasn't charged, and the power went down. If it were hard wired, I would feel a little better.

I have particularily had bad luck with garmins design of the power cord that plugs into the 496 itself. Several replacement cords later, I stopped unplugging it as much as I could.

Just found this old thread. Is the chart issue still the same, where they quit working after so much time has passed?

flyingriki said:

Just found this old thread. Is the chart issue still the same, where they quit working after so much time has passed?

Click to expand...

A really old thread!

The 695/696 supports Garmin FliteCharts or Jeppesen ChartView charts.

As stated on page 179 of the current manual, "FliteCharts® do not expire and will remain viewable after the expiration date".

Page 171 discusses ChartView expiration and states "ChartView is disabled 70 days after the expiration date and is no longer available for viewing".

Thanks,
Steve

Thank you Steve. Pardon my ignorance, what is the difference between the two?

695 has no XM option. 696 does.

I meant the difference between what expires and what doesn't...
Flight charts and Flight view. I don't have a manual to see what he's talking about.

One is NOS charts, the other Jepp charts. Religious wars have been started over which one people prefer. I find they have the same information that I need....

RV7Guy said:

One of my neighbors got a 696 a few weeks ago. I was surprised at how heavy it is. For a RV it would be a tough add on. I wouldn't want is a knee board because of the weight and the looking down aspect. As an addition to a new panel it would be great. The screen size is very nice but have never really found the 496 to be deficient in this area. After all it is less than 2 feet away.

Click to expand...

The 695 fits superbly well in an RV7 just above the fuel valve. Quick bracket, power from above, aerial on the coaming - perfect position and not in glare.

I bought one for the 8 panel but Mark messed around and came up with the fit in the 7, so our 430 is almost redundant now. 695 has approaches and airfield data. We even now have a cloudbreak approach to our strip - with printed version !!

One thought about the 7xx series.

It is touch screen.

At the speeds we fly around getting that 'fickle finger of fate' to hit the right spot can be tricky.

Don't tell me you are too young to remember that either.....

mike newall said:

At the speeds we fly around getting that 'fickle finger of fate' to hit the right spot can be tricky.

Don't tell me you are too young to remember that either.....

Click to expand...

You bet your sweet bippy I remember that and now, back to your regularly scheduled programming.....

Ironflight said:

One is NOS charts, the other Jepp charts. Religious wars have been started over which one people prefer. I find they have the same information that I need....

Click to expand...

Thanks Paul.

I've never updated my -396 as often as I should but the updates are overpriced in my view, at least compared to charts that have to be printed, shipped, stored etc. etc vs. just the digital data. Seems Jepp has figured out how to force you to keep buying their updates....

Have been trying to use a tablet but the vis just isn't good under a canopy without a big, awkward shade. Thinking of a used 696 and the ADS-B receiver for the best (yet still pricey) combo, long term.