[prkaye]

I'm comparing the GRT Sport (with Engine package) and the Dynon D180. About the same functionality and about the same price (total about 4K for GRT Sport incl engine pkg, Dynon including probes is a couple hundred less).

Advantage of Dynon seems to be slightly larger screen (7" vs 6.5" for GRT Sport) and a couple hundred dollars lower cost.

Advantages of GRT sport (with engine package) seems to be moving map capability (internal database), internal GPS option ($400), and not dependent on pitot for attitude.

My analysis suggests GRT sport is the better value. Any opinions?

 

[Brantel]

Depends on what else you want out of the integrated system as a whole....

Add an autopilot to the mix and all of a sudden the Dynon starts to look really good price wise!

Also GRT uses aiding on their EFIS as well, just not the same as Dynon does.

The thing that bothers me about the Sport is the fact that everyone in the know strongly reinforces to me that the Sport is very "different" inside than the Horizon system and that I should take the latest feature list posted on GRT's website as a grain of salt. The other thing is that I have been researching the documentation for the Sport for over a year and it seems the documentation is way behind the posted feature list for it. One needs to see how the man and machine will work together on features and a ton of them are not in the manuals.

As others have pointed out recently, the moving map on the current GRT's looks like a 1980's Atari game and can be quickly replaced by a 296 or better GPS and you will have a superior map to boot.

The Sport has some connectivity limitations that you really want to research to ensure the rest of your gear will work with it and work the way you think that it will.

I was . close to making my mind up to go with a dual screen Sport setup until understanding more about them, talking to people in the know and prior to Dynon announcing their AP.

I would not be afraid to go either way, just make sure you know what your getting and that everything will play together the way you want it to.

 

[GEM930]

Did you rule out the Odyssey? If so, why?

 

[bullojm1]

Phil-

I decided to go with the GRT Sport route for my IFR panel. In my end analysis, dual Sport's were less than Dynon and AFS with similiar configurations.

For a price comparison, the Dynon S180 with BrightScreen, Internal Battery and EMS sensors (fuel flow) is $4330. A GRT Sport S200 and engine monitor is $4000. Now, you could get the $400 GPS option, or you could buy a $69 Byonics WAAS Gps (http://www.byonics.com/tinytrak/gps.php) that does the same thing. The GRT doesn't have an internal battery, but it does allow for a second power input. You can buy a sealed lead acid battery for under $100. So the GRT Sport still comes out shy of the Dynon D180.

The GRT Sport unit is really great. I haven't flown behind it yet, but it is wired up on my bench. The display is really sharp. I like the different layouts I can give it - engine on the bottom, PFD on the top left and map on the right. Or had a HSI/CDI overlapped on the map, or just a CDI and no map. Check out all of the screenshots at http://grtavionics.com/product.aspx?productno=1&featureno=28.

The GRT unit does have two knobs which I really like. If you want knobs with the Dynon, thats a $650 option for the HS34 box (which also gives you ARINC capability -- GRT ARINC option is $450).

The Dynon does have some advantages over the GRT -- one of them is the built in AOA sensor that will work with their pitot (although GRT is expecting to have their own AOA feature relatively soon). Also, if you plan for a autopilot, with the Dynon its only $750 per axis.

What I also like about the GRT system is their EIS. That thing boots up in no time flat! Plus its independent of the EFIS. So if you lose the EFIS, you still have EMS. If you lose the EMS, you still have EFIS. No other EFIS provider has that!

With GRT, if you ever want to add a second sport screen (without AHRS), its only $1800. Plug the two units together and BOOM - you just doubled your real estate!

Obviously there is some bias in my review of GRT. I went to all the vendors at Oshkosh and the GRT system impressed me not only with the capability of their EFIS, but also the great, enthusiastic people working there. That has continued in my weekly calls to them. They are always very pleasant to work with. Out of all the companies I have dealt with on my project, GRT is without a doubt the best IMHO.

 

[prkaye]

Did you rule out the Odyssey? If so, why?

No no, nothing ruled out, but wanted to keep this thread focussed on a specific comparison between two options that are very similar in terms of both functionality and price. That being said, Odyssey is in a higher price bracket by about $1500 (but it is superior in some ways).

 

[prkaye]

another advantage of Dynon may be easier installation/configuration. I've heard the GRT EIS is not particularly intuitive to set up...

 

[bullojm1]

another advantage of Dynon may be easier installation/configuration. I've heard the GRT EIS is not particularly intuitive to set up...

I can't speak for the GRT EIS, but the EFIS's are a piece of cake to setup. Plus, would you rather have something that is easy to setup or something that has a better interface? Last time I checked, you will only set it up once!

 

[N941WR]

I have only flown behind the GRT once or twice and can't really comment on them, other than to say, I don't like their little black digital display that is required. It can be hidden but it is still required.

On that note, the Dynon's boot up very quickly and you won't miss any engine info on startup.

The other major advantage to the Dynon is the use of an external GPS. As that technology grows, you can just replace one item to get the latest upgrades. For example, if I were to buy a 696, it would replace just my 496, not the screens.

The other advantage to the Dynon / handheld GPS is that when you get to your destination, you can remove your 496 from the panel and use it to guide you to your hotel. (Then again, you could always buy a tom-tom and put that in your flight bag.)

 

[bullojm1]

The other major advantage to the Dynon is the use of an external GPS. As that technology grows, you can just replace one item to get the latest upgrades. For example, if I were to buy a 696, it would replace just my 496, not the screens.

The other advantage to the Dynon / handheld GPS is that when you get to your destination, you can remove your 496 from the panel and use it to guide you to your hotel. (Then again, you could always buy a tom-tom and put that in your flight bag.)

The GRT Sports can use an external GPS as well (as I pointed out in my first post), so I don't see this being an advantage for the Dynon unit, since the GRT's pricing is still less with a built in map.

As a side note, if you go with the internal GPS on the GRT Sport, you lose one of the serial ports on the unit forever. So not only is a third party GPS puck less expensive, it also gives you an extra serial port down the road.

 

[Radomir]

I'm biased... so take my opinion with a grain of salt

Brian, I'm afraid you were given a lot of FUD by the "in the know" for unknown reasons ...If you know that GRT is being deceptive in the list of features, I'd strongly recommend you post those thoughts here.. Competitive forces will pressure them into removing things that are not true. (I have dual Sport and I can't think of any features listed that are not there... I do not feel that I was lied to...) However, I do suggest using that list for comparative purposes.. check off what competition can and can't do... Different "internals" are simply not an issue and I'm not even sure why "in the know" would even bring that up... Connectivity is not an issue either, at least not any more than the competition...


Either way... I've got plenty of time (and distance ) on dual Sports and I am VERY happy with my choice. yes.. I've played with others enough to see small differences that are hard to pick up when doing intial research... If I'd wanna change anything it'd be do get HX/HS Horizon for *additional* capabilities that I actually don't need for my VFR flying...

But back to the original post.. it's kinda tough decision in a weird way.. because you'd wanna/need to evaluate the whole SYSTEM, not just one screen... and the system may include AP, GPS, radios etc.. Price of one screen is just not the driving force in that equation...

Dynon + their AP -- price-wise, no one can touch 'em... GRT has more features/capabilities than Dynon but a full system will probably cost more... so I'm not sure there's a clear winner here as they're kinda different kinds of apples


The usual disclaimer at the bottom is that I'm not a paid actor nor do I get any kickbacks from GRT (you guys gonna do anything about that?? hehe)... just a happy user that had a chance to play with other systems too... though I'd refrain from calling myself "in the know"

 

[Brantel]

Don't think anyone is saying that the Sport won't do what is listed on the feature list, only that it does it differently than the Horizon and that in some cases very differenty in regards to speed and operator interfacing.

Different internals can be an issue with people who want or need high performance, fast update rates etc.

Connectivity might be important to someone when they are trying to figure out were to connect their AP, GPS, Traffic Monitor, Transponder, Engine Monitor, Weather etc. Finding enough interfaces for all of this might be difficult and can the processor handle some or all of that effectively without long refresh times?

Look I am not arguing against the Sport, I am just saying do your homework to make sure that whatever you choose fits your mission and will do what you think it will so there are no surprises. If it were not for the Dynon AP coming on the scene, I would most likely have my mind set on the Sport solution. The overall integrated system of Sport vs Dynon to give similar to equal features puts the Dynon and Sport in a neck in neck race as far as features but the edge goes to Dynon for overall price value.

Brian, I'm afraid you were given a lot of FUD by the "in the know" for unknown reasons ...If you know that GRT is being deceptive in the list of features, I'd strongly recommend you post those thoughts here.. Competitive forces will pressure them into removing things that are not true. (I have dual Sport and I can't think of any features listed that are not there... I do not feel that I was lied to...) Different "internals" are simply not an issue and I'm not even sure why "in the know" would even bring that up... Connectivity is not an issue either, at least not any more than the competition...

 

[Radomir]

I'm just trying to clarify this implication of performance... My sports *never* hicked up nor dropped frame rate. Granted I do not have it fully decked out (only AP, GPS, transponder, and engine monitor... nothing else ). So those inferior internals did not affect me that bad.. (it's worth noting that you are technically right.. Horizon for example has more internal memory... so when you go record data it'll store more.. but that's a far stretch from "slow refresh" etc..)

Talking about connectivity -- my point is that it's got no less inputs than competition (it has 4 serials per screen... how many does Dynon have? How about AFS?)..

Don't get me wrong.. I'm only clarifying some implications that are made here by relaying my direct experience with the system flying for about a year now.

Where's Newport, TN (airport identifier)? I'll give you a ride so you can see this bad performance that Sports have I need an excuse to go fly anyways.. haha..

 

[Ironflight]

I really can't comment on the Sport, because I haven't used it, but I can bring up one experience on the GRT vs. Dynon architecture. Our RV-6 is all Dynon, with a D180 and D10, and when we had some initial teething problems with the D180, the airplane was grounded until the new one came because we had no engine instruments. (On the plus side, Dynon had us a new unit in 24 hours!) The other airplane, with the GRT system has the EIS that can be used if the EFIS goes belly up. Granted, we are still talking a single box between you and your engine data (EIS vs. D180), but the EIS is pretty much bullet-proof and has 20 yeas of history behind it.

Just a datapoint to think about. I agree with the idea that in the end, you need to list all the features that you can get on either system, and see which fills YOUR mission.

Paul

 

[Brantel]

KMOR is the closest...

I would love to take a ride and see it for myself, I hate relying on someone else's opinion even if I do trust them to know what they are talking about.

By the way I never said the Sport had bad performance, just different and maybe not as quick as other options one would use to build a comparable Dynon solution. Refresh rate of the map and or weather/traffic/terrain is what I am refering to not the framerate of the PFD. (granted Dynon has no features for this but the comparable integrated system would).

Where's Newport, TN (airport identifier)? I'll give you a ride so you can see this bad performance that Sports have I need an excuse to go fly anyways.. haha..

 

[grjtucson]

Stein?

I'm going to weigh in here and hope that Stein will to. I had this same decision and asked him for the comparison - he basically told me the Sport is more bang for the buck than the Dynon solution for my mission.

I want IFR "light". Save the lectures, I've heard 'em. I'll fly mostly VFR but with occasional IFR to penetrate a layer up or down. I'm in Southern AZ so the only IFR I'm likely to fly here is practice (IMC in AZ pretty much means stay on the ground), but I'll fly to California regularly and the marine layer there is my issue. I don't intend to plan for enroute IFR.

I want:
- dual axis autopilot
- dual screen efis (solo from right or left)
- IFR GPS
- TIS traffic (like to have, costs more)
- single panel comm
- single panel nav (vor/loc/gs)
- handheld backup GPS + XM weather (tied into panel)
- handheld backup comm (tied into panel)

That said, here are some of MY pros & cons:
- Dynon appears simpler (one stop shop for efis/ap/ems and one less box) and probably a tiny bit cheaper top to bottom
- GRT has moving map + HITS, can do TIS
- GRT wins for robustness/non-single source solution IMO (sep. EMS, diff brand independent autopilot, TruTrak in my case)
- AP is my AI backup and TruTrak has a stellar rep.
- GRT has a better / deeper upgrade path
- The EMS for GRT is butt ugly and takes up serious panel space, but can serve as a backup and is on instantly. I may bury it, I may not. Deciding is the downside here, with Dynon there are no hard choices to make
- I am nervous that GRT's ARINC for the Sport doesn't seem to be out, but I may not be up-to-date on that.

Most other things for me are a wash, including what I perceive to be excellent customer service & support from either.

Here is my RV-7 panel as currently planned, click for larger image:


Notes:
- this is Van's stock panel.
- that will be a Garmin 430W + Garmin 330 Xpdr + TruTrak DII VSGV (pic probably not 100% right)
- Garmin 496 on ball-mount movable to either side and still tied in (pic is a 396)
- plane to be setup for solo right or left, I'll solo right mostly
- sticks have PTT only
- Icom A6 + all Headset/Mic Jacks just aft of fuel valve
- LRI is homebrewed and totally electron free
- elevator trim tied into trim monitor, manual aileron trim
- all lighting switches on right side are off to the left, on to the right
- GRT EMS presently buried, I may try to integrate it, I may just put the alert light on the panel

I welcome discussion/comments.

George

 

[bullojm1]

- I am nervous that GRT's ARINC for the Sport doesn't seem to be out, but I may not be up-to-date on that.

True, GRT's ARINC module isn't out quite yet. I heard end of '08 or early '09. I did dig out of them it has a passthrough serial port on it, so using it doesn't eat up a serial port on the Sport.

- LRI is homebrewed and totally electron free

I also dug out of GRT they are coming out with their own AOA system. I heard they are close to doing it derived (without external sensor) and they are also thinking about a external box that will interface to the Dynon pitot. You might want to consider that option before you cut your LRI hole!

 

[SteinAir]

I'm likely not going to get engaged in this conversation to a detailed level because every persons requirements are little bit different, and again these are somewhat apples to oranges comparision. Each product has it's own set of pro's and con's, and depending on each persons overall set of circumstances different systems will apply better to different people. It usually takes a bit of discussion with the individual person to determine what system I feel applies to them. For many people it's going to be Dynon, for many it'll be something else.

There is absolutely no reason to say one product will work for everyone in every circumstance - because that's just not true.

I know Paul Dye will tell you that each set of systems has it's place - heck, those two fly one of each. If I truly felt one prodct were superior to others, I'd only push that particular brand of product. But as a data point, on the benches right now getting assembled are the following EFISes.

Garmin 900X
Chelton
Advanced Flight Systems
Grand Rapids
Dynon

That pretty much covers the spectrum! Just goes to show you that for each of those people and their own set of circumstances, desires, experience, tastes, budget, equipment, etc.. that a different system worked best for each person. My goal is to tailor a complete panel to what the customer desires taking into account all those things I just mentioned. I will never start out from a product and go backwards by trying to justify it...I start the other way around.

Anyway, I've given no real usefull information here I know....so I apologize. But, I can say that I've dealt with all of them and they all have their place. Individual people can often be biased by what they purchased (or have some link to a particular company). Me, I sell-service-install them all so I pretty much don't have a particular mfgr that I put above others. If I think they have good products that will fill a need (and I like the product) then I'll sell it. If the product doesn't for some reason fit all of my criteria I won't sell it (MGL for instance). What I won't do is ever say that one is squarely better than the other. If that were the case I'd just tell everyon, go buy a G900X and be done with the debate!

My 2 cents as usual.

Cheers,
Stein

 

[penguin]

I think George and Stein have it right - you need to figure out what you will use the airplane for. Then you can decide what to put in the panel. VFR only, ever, Dynon might suit. Want to be able to cope with light IFR, then I think GRT. I have asked Dynon & GRT to describe what is going on inside their boxes (in general terms), GRT did with sensible answers; Dynon didn't reply. I am likely to go with GRT.

Personally I wouldn't touch a "new out of the box" autopilot. They are just too difficult to make work well, so that fact that Dynon offers an autopilot would not enter my calculation. From my perspective, most of the manufacturers offer just about the same functionality as the rest. Once you discount Garmin, Chelton & Avidyne I don't think anyone stands out on a price vs functionality comparison. However, more important to me is the reliability of what is going on behind the glass, I think that GRT (and possibly Blue Mountain) are the best from that point of view.

Just one man's opinion.

Pete

 

[Dan Langhout]

Inquiring Minds Want To Know!

<snip>
If I think they have good products that will fill a need (and I like the product) then I'll sell it. If the product doesn't for some reason fit all of my criteria I won't sell it (MGL for instance).
</snip>

Perhaps you'd rather not say - but I'd like to know what criteria MGL doesn't fit?

 

[grjtucson]

ARINC / LRI

True, GRT's ARINC module isn't out quite yet. I heard end of '08 or early '09. I did dig out of them it has a passthrough serial port on it, so using it doesn't eat up a serial port on the Sport.

I also dug out of GRT they are coming out with their own AOA system. I heard they are close to doing it derived (without external sensor) and they are also thinking about a external box that will interface to the Dynon pitot. You might want to consider that option before you cut your LRI hole!

Mike,

Thanks for the good news on the ARINC and serial port. As to the AOA, I've already made the probe and fab'ed it into an inspection cover. Here are the plans I've followed. I like the electron-free portion of it too so am happy to have it standalone. In fact, if I could get an electron-free accurate 2.25" altimeter, I'd ditch the MGL alt/airspeed combo for it.

BTW, for those considering building an LRI, the link above is good, it is easy to do, and I just ordered the Dwyer gauge from a surplus house (new stock) for $11.95. http://www.surpluscenter.com, they show 433 in stock. Elsewhere they are $51.50 and up.

George

 

[SteinAir]

Perhaps you'd rather not say - but I'd like to know what criteria MGL doesn't fit?

Don't get too worried...it's nothing major. I happen to really like Ranier, Nicole and the guys at MGL and Sportflying shop. I also continue to use some of their other products and did in fact display one of their EFISes at OSH. There are some sticking points I have with parts of their EFISes... Ranier knows what they are, and once he fixes/changes the parts I (and the other FAA certified shops) don't like, we'll probably be selling and installing them. Don't take it as a condemnation of their entire product line. Just a few little things are keeping me from throwing my support behind it at the moment. I'd rather not drag it out publically, because MGL & Ranier have been so darned good to deal with that I don't want to ruin that. Still, I won't sell you one just yet. I tend to hold mfgrs to a pretty high standard, because Dynon, GRT, & AFS all have set the bar at a certain height....

Cheers,
Stein

 

[Dan Langhout]

MGL

Thanks for the response, Stein. There are a lot of features of the MGL EFISs that I like and I have been giving them serious consideration. Given your experience and expertise, obviously your opinion carries a lot of weight. I'm a ways off from having to pull the trigger on this so I guess I'll look to see if you're selling it or not when it comes time to make a decision!

 

[prkaye]

Thanks for all your comments and discussion guys. This is very helpful. It sounds like people are suggesting Dynon might be a better approach for my mission. For the near future (probably at least 5 years) I can't see myself getting an IFR rating. So my mission really is day/night VFR x-country. For now (at a later stage of life I'd like to get into more/different stuff, but that's probably far enough away that it would be reasonable to upgrade at that time, if necessary).
That being said, safety is important to me, so I want to have a certain amount of reliability/redundancy. So I'll have a backup 2.25" steam airspeed and single-pointer altimeter for emergency backup.
My main goal right now is to get the aircraft finished, but nicely equipped, as quickly and inexpensively as possible without compromising too much. It sounds from what I've read above that the Dynon D-180 would be the better bet for this (between that and the GRT)... did I interpret this message correctly?

 

[frankh]

Hmm

well of course its your airplane and if you see yourself flying the bird IFR at some point then a Dynon would make sense.

Having said that if your mission is strictly VFR then the best attitude indicator are the ones in the front of your head..I.e look out the window.

If funds are limited a better way might be to go with a trutrak autopilot, not have an AI/DG at all and a couple of steam guages.

having said that, combining all your engine instrumentation etc then a Dynon might make financial sense. Its just not necessary for VFR thats all.

If the EFIS is the platform of choice then I personally would not bother with steam gauges for backup.

If the EFIS goes phut you can easily estimate your airspeed from the GPS and the AWOS.

I bet i could land mine without referring to the instruments at all if I had to.

Frank

 

[ddurakovich]

I bet i could land mine without referring to the instruments at all if I had to.

Frank

Standard requirement for the FAA Checkride in gliders.

 

[Sticky1]

hummmmmm x 2

"So my mission really is day/night VFR x-country"

Might be time to re-think. If anyone is considering night time VFR then you better think light IFR. Most of my hours are at night in the north east. Many times I have done 180's after getting into a cloud at night (in my younger days). I now do it with an IFR rating. Night time is not something to be battered about lightly.

 

[breister]

I'm comparing the GRT Sport (with Engine package) and the Dynon D180. About the same functionality and about the same price (total about 4K for GRT Sport incl engine pkg, Dynon including probes is a couple hundred less).

Advantage of Dynon seems to be slightly larger screen (7" vs 6.5" for GRT Sport) and a couple hundred dollars lower cost.

Advantages of GRT sport (with engine package) seems to be moving map capability (internal database), internal GPS option ($400), and not dependent on pitot for attitude.

My analysis suggests GRT sport is the better value. Any opinions?

Hi Phil,

You didn't say what point in your building process you were at.

One other thing to consider as a possibility if you are at least 6 months out and you like Dynon - buy the EMS sensor kit and the connectors for the EMS. It will take you a while to get all of those installed anyway, and by then their next gen may be out to cause you some additional confusion - err, choices...

 

[prkaye]

Thanks guys,

You didn't say what point in your building process you were at.

My auto-sig does... "firewall forward" (engine is hung). In the last week I've also fabricated my modular panel frame and panel sections, and my custom centre-console.

Regarding night VFR, I don't actually plan to do much intentional late night flying, but I am night rated and this comes in handy when trips take a little longer than planned and I end up landing after dark. Single-engine at night is not something I like to do a lot of.

 

[Rainier Lamers]

Stein,
you are not doing anybody any favors here.
If there is something you don't like - say it. Don't do vague remarks causing everybody to think up all sorts of weird stuff about standards...

You don't like our connectors.
We do.

We don't like elaborate wiring harnesses.
You do.

Sound about right ? Anything I have left out ?

Based on feedback received from our customers (and we get a lot of that), it is unlikely that we will move to large multipin DSUB or similar connectors as this would counteract the flexibility we have purposfully designed into the current solution, even though this makes our instruments more expensive and time consuming to produce.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

Don't get too worried...it's nothing major. I happen to really like Ranier, Nicole and the guys at MGL and Sportflying shop. I also continue to use some of their other products and did in fact display one of their EFISes at OSH. There are some sticking points I have with parts of their EFISes... Ranier knows what they are, and once he fixes/changes the parts I (and the other FAA certified shops) don't like, we'll probably be selling and installing them. Don't take it as a condemnation of their entire product line. Just a few little things are keeping me from throwing my support behind it at the moment. I'd rather not drag it out publically, because MGL & Ranier have been so darned good to deal with that I don't want to ruin that. Still, I won't sell you one just yet. I tend to hold mfgrs to a pretty high standard, because Dynon, GRT, & AFS all have set the bar at a certain height....

Cheers,
Stein

 

[Dan Langhout]

MGL EFIS Connectors

Stein,

<snip>
You don't like our connectors.
We do.

We don't like elaborate wiring harnesses.
You do.
</snip>

<snip>
Based on feedback received from our customers (and we get a lot of that), it is unlikely that we will move to large multipin DSUB or similar connectors as this would counteract the flexibility we have purposfully designed into the current solution, even though this makes our instruments more expensive and time consuming to produce.
</snip>

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

Since I asked Stein the original question, I thought I'd weigh in here. Without Stein saying so, I kind of suspected that the "connectorization" was one of the issues. I'll have to admit - the RCA connectors are not one of my favorite things about the MGL EFISs - particularly for something so critical as the AHRS and magnetometer. There is something to be said about the robustness and security of the DSUB connectors (or other positive locking connectors). MGL's experience in the field may well show that the RCAs, etc. work just fine with no problems but I personally would like it better if it was something else.

Disclaimer: I am not an EFIS or Avionics expert, I never played one on TV, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night! Just a customer (for somebody) trying to sort all this out.

 

[Brantel]

Not so confused anymore.

I have seen the more detailed pics and looked at the manuals and now see that the RCA's are used on the connection of the AHRS to the EFIS.

I'll have to admit - the RCA connectors are not one of my favorite things about the MGL EFISs - particularly for something so critical as the AHRS and magnetometer.

 

[Rainier Lamers]

???? ????

All the pics I see of these products have 9 pin D-sub connectors? Don't see any RCA connectors??? Hard to see but there might be some on the audio outputs but not sure.

The AHRS and magnetometers show having 9 pin D-subs as well???

We have four RCA female connectors on each of our EFIS rear-panels.
Two of these are audio outputs (for voice alerts etc) and a further two are our airtalk LAN which uses standard RCA cables as simple and easy transmission medium.
As you can well imagine, we do get comments on these (Yes, Stein is the most prominent critic - that I don't mind at all and I welcome it, just not underhanded).
Fact of the matter is that we now have somewhere in the region on 2500-3000 EFIS systems with these things in the field and as long as you use at least reasonably good quality connecters - they stay put and have a firm grip.
Don't forget where we come from - ultralights ! Bad runways, no suspension, open installations, lots of vibration. Honestly - the RV is pure luxury for an EFIS compared to that environment, and still we don't have problems with RCA connectors.
It seems a bit of a "storm in a teacup" for nothing...

We will probably put the single connection required in some future instruments on a spare D-9 pin - but in parallel to the RCA's so we can keep compatibility.

You don't really need to use RCA's anywhere else but nothing stops you from doing so anyway.

Another type that has attracted criticism - we use a type of screw terminal on the rear panel as well (to connect the engine monitoring system and Rotor RPM for helicopters).
These look quite similar to many similar screw terminals that have a simple problem: The wire slips out eventually, no matter how much you tighten the screw. Reason: Temperature fluctuations combined with vibration.
Our terminals do not do that. They are made by the German company Wieland (read: Expensive) and they do not let go. They have a simple but very effective friction lock that prevents the screw from turning on its own, in addition to a moving cage design that grabs the wire very securely.
We love these terminals for the convenience during installation.

So where does this leave us ?

Well, to tell the truth, we have done some quite promissing work to get rid of the connecters anyway. Most of them. No, we are not going to replace them with other types.
We're going to go wireless ! And yes - before you ask, it's bullet proof.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

 

[SteinAir]

Jeez Ranier, I wasn't trying to be underhanded...I was trying to let people know that my issues weren't with the core product and weren't with any of you as people. I didn't want to make a Laundry list of issues I had, because you were already aware of them, so I thought no need to dump them out publically.

Now that you've taken offense I apologize, believe me that wasn't the intent. Every single product out there has things that are good and things that I don't like - you're not alone there. I was going to type a long diatribe about my specific issues, but that gets nobody anywhere and does no good for anyone. If I had a big problem with your EFISes as a whole I'd say so outright, but I don't.

My natural defense mechanism makes me want to go in to minute detail, but that also does nobody any good. I'm showing restraint because I know I inadvertantly have offended you so I apologize. Builders can make up their own minds without us arguing back and forth about things like connectors.I happen to no like any connectors on avioncis that do not have a positive lock. I happen to not like RCA jacks for data connections, you do. Each of us has our own reasons and experience for the basis of our opinions, and it makes us both right in some ways.

To date, my experience with MGL has been good overall. I happen to not like some of your hardware on the EFIS and I'm not alone there. I never have had an issue with the core product or the people - just some of the hardware. I have used and will continue to use some of your other units, just not the EFISes. You told me some time ago you were going to change the connectors - I believe you but was dissapointed that the new generation EFISes still had the assortment of connectors on the back. I'm in a bit of a different position than most as I'm both a multiple aircraft builders as well as running an FAA certified avionics shop. I'm forced to keep things to certain standards as part of my business, and "positive connectorization" of components is a big one. I think you'll find similar opinions for other professionals in my line of work.

Anyway, hopefully everyone can take it for what it is and realize nothing was intended to be hidden or underhanded. I still see no reason for me to go into boring minutia of detail.

Best Regards,
Stein

 

[prkaye]

wiring harnesses

Getting back to the original comparison, D180 vs GRT Sport+EIS, I know that Dynon offers wiring harnesses (made by Stein I believe). Are ready-made wiring harnesses available for the Sport/EIS? Didn't see any on their website.

 

[SteinAir]

Just like Dynon, GRT has a complete wiring harness for their system. (Both EIS and EFIS) including the engine probes/sensors.

Cheers,
Stein

 

[Dynon]

The GRT doesn't have an internal battery, but it does allow for a second power input. You can buy a sealed lead acid battery for under $100.

...

What I also like about the GRT system is their EIS. That thing boots up in no time flat! Plus its independent of the EFIS. So if you lose the EFIS, you still have EMS. If you lose the EMS, you still have EFIS. No other EFIS provider has that!

...

With GRT, if you ever want to add a second sport screen (without AHRS), its only $1800. Plug the two units together and BOOM - you just doubled your real estate!

Just a few notes:

The Dynon units have an external battery input as well. If you have an externally managed and charged battery, you can hook that up to us instead of the internal battery as well. Of course, lead acid weighs a lot more and doesn't charge itself like the internal lithium ion battery does. If you have a battery in a D180, even your EMS is backed up.

You can add a second screen to a Dynon system for $1200. A D180 is $3200 and a D100 + D120 is $4400. Plugged together, they will each do exactly the same things.

If you buy the D100 and D120 seperatley, they are independent. Loose your EFIS and you don't loose EMS, and vice versa. Just like GRT.

All of our units boot in seconds, so the D120 or D180 are viable engine monitors right away. They can also be turned on before you even crank the engine and left on through engine start.

 

[N941WR]

...All of our units boot in seconds, so the D120 or D180 are viable engine monitors right away. They can also be turned on before you even crank the engine and left on through engine start.

My Dynon D10 EMS is wired to my main buss and comes one as soon as I turn the master on and stays on through the engine start cycle. In face, it is giving me a low oil pressure and fuel level warning tone the instant the engine catches and then they go away. It is a great reminder to look at the instruments.