What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Garmin G3x vs G900x

GusBiz

GusBiz

Well Known Member
Guys,

I am new to Van's but not new to aviation and I am planning my Panel. (or more to the point my budget for the panel, I like to know what I am going to be spending before I start a project with all my cash in)

I have been comparing the G3x and the G900x by garmin and to be honest, other than screen realestate I don't really see any differences. The 900 has more coms integration but if you buy the G3x and a garmin radio stack then thats integrated anyway.

It looks like the G3x, when purchased with a whole bunch of other equipment that is compatable with it basically acts like a G900x anyway.

I spoke to the guys at Garmin here in Australia (or their reps here in Australia, Peter Lapthorne over at Avionics 2000 in Essondon Airport Melb, for all the Ozzies here) He is pushed to find the difference between them other than screen size.

Personally screen size does make a difference, if not TVs would have stayed small, its easier to see I feel, but the G3x has all the unit broken up into different hardware items and that offers diverse points of failure.

Has anyone faced this purchase before?
 
GUSBIZ,

I have a flying rv-10 with the G3X system. I love it but I would say the G900 is more streamlined for IFR flying. You have to program through the 430W (or whatever else is TSO'd like the new touch screen stuff) to fly IFR and fly ARR/DEP/APPROACHES. The G900 would be a bit easier by using the same buttons for VFR. Actually the G900 would show traffic from my GTS800 too. My G3X does not. It will soon but not right now. I probably would have bought the G900 if money was no object but it is and probably always will be.
 
430W compatability

Thank you Sean,

I was told that the 430 was actually integrated and basically I could operate it from the G3x, so your saying that isn't true?

I was also told that the GTS800 was compatable as well but they may have meant going to be.

I plan on doing IFR and island hopping around the South Pacific at altitude, about FL18 to FL20.

I think that I will be needing excellent IFR capabilites so perhaps the G900x is a better direction.
 
GusBiz,

The G3X has it's own internal gps/Waas receiver installed but only for VFR. You have to enter through the 430 if planning IFR and to see the ENTIRE arr/dep/appr. I believe the G3X has monitoring waypoints but not the whole procedure.
The GTS800 is compatible with the GNS4xx/5xx and I'm sure the new touch screens but it does not show on the G3X yet. Garmin has told me it will.

I would ask a rep what the difference is in setup procedure during IFR/VFR with the system. I only have 12 hours on my bird and it just went in for paint for a month.

I love the system and the $20,000 US cheaper price tag.

Sean
 
GusBiz said:
I was told that the 430 was actually integrated and basically I could operate it from the G3x, so your saying that isn't true?
Click to expand...

Well, it's like this... since the GNS 430W does not accept flight plan data from an external source, to navigate with a 430/G3X panel you have to enter the flight plan on the 430. Of course it then shows up on the G3X displays, but the 430 won't allow you to enter a flight plan using the G3X controls, you have to use the 430's knobs and buttons to do it.

The G3X also has its own set of controls and a nice user interface for flight plan editing, but in the current software they are only used when you don't have an external GPS navigator (i.e. 430) hooked up. Now, for those times when you just want to fly VFR and skip the 430, a G3X software update is planned that will give you the choice to enter a VFR flight plan using the G3X controls and skip the 430 entirely.

Hope that helps. Regarding the original question (G3X versus G900X) I will point out that all the components in the G900X system are fully certified/TSO'd, since it's an adaptation of the G1000 system.

mcb
 
Last edited:
mburch said:
Now, for those times when you just want to fly VFR and skip the 430, a G3X software update is planned that will give you the choice to enter a VFR flight plan using the G3X controls and skip the 430 entirely.
Click to expand...

Yesssss!!!!!:D
 
GusBiz said:
...I have been comparing the G3x and the G900x by garmin and to be honest, other than screen realestate I don't really see any differences.
Click to expand...

I have flown behind the G1000 in my previous airplane (Bonanza G36), and I currently have a 430W in my 7A. Here's my opinion....

Consider going with the G3X - GTN750 touch screen combination. That's the way I'm going (with a SL30 as well so I have a backup IFR nav radio.)

The GTN will be MUCH easier to enter information into, it's IFR certified, it's integrated as well or better with the remote audio panel and transponder as the G1000/900 is, it's MUCH more intuitive than the G1000/900, and it integrates with the GTS800 if that's what you want to do.

With this combo you also can have your weather, approach plates, etc. up on your G3X MFD while still viewing your map, changing your flight plan, etc. on the 750. Also, as far as redundancy goes, you can tie your GX Pilot autopilot to both the G3X and the 750 through a switch and if the G3X were to fail for any reason you can switch to the 750.

I am a HUGE Garmin fan but in my opinion the user interface on the 430 / 530 is very unintuitive, and the G1000 isn't much better. The user interfaces on the G3X, and especially on the new GTN series are LIGHT YEARS better in my opinion.

Now, if we had a touch screen G1000 for Experimentals...... my bet is this isn't far down the road! :)
 
Last edited:
If you can afford it, go with the 900. The G3X is still an eye watering setup over traditional steam, and the money you save over the 900 will pay for a LOOOOT of gas.
 
Apple meets Garmin

I have a feeling that Touch screen is the next evolution for the G1000/G900xthat is being worked on now. Not that this kind of interface is going to make it so much better but the software up grade that comes with it will be the leap forward.

Hopefully it will be coming at us at a simlar price.

Thank you for your advice guys. Much appreciated.
 
Hi guys,

First of all, I need to mention I'm new register on the forum and it's my first post, but I do read the forum for a moment now because of my interest in the -10, including glass cockpit for the -10 :)

Like many people, I found the screen size of the G900x was appealing (such for the 10" Dynon Skyview), but, even if I'm not familiar with the devices, I notice one thing by searching everywhere on the net... the user interface looks outdated in comparison of the new devices such the G3X, or even the new GTN 750. And the price difference is also noticeable...

So I came to a "personal" thinking about usage of PFD/MFD in the cockpit... I could simply use the G3X & GTN over the G900x. And instead to use a 3 Displays G3X and a GTN 750/650 combo for full-IFR redundancy, I could simply use two GTN 750 as Nav/Com devices AND MFDs!

In that case, I would only need a two display G3X setup, for PFDs, to complete the setup and I'd have reversionary mode and full redundancy. With the new Garmin PilotPak I could even have a single license Chart subscription and get it on the four units.

Size wise, the GTN 750 isn't much different from the GDU 370/375, so having 3 GDUs and one Nav/Com stack, or having two GDUs and two GTNs is pretty much the same...

Price wise, the $4K difference between a GTN 750 and a GTN 650 will be close to the $3200 difference between a two displays G3X setup or a three displays G3X setup. And it will still be under the G900x cost and save some money for gas, even with the GMA-35 audio and GTX-33 Transponder modules. (Without counting on other options such GDL-69A XM Weather, GTS 800 Traffic, etc... also required with the G900x)

Ergonomics/Workflow wise... There's the benefit to have a "Touchscreen" MFD for both the Pilot and Co-Pilot, with easier way to enter values, select procedures, change Flight Plan, faster graphic rendering, etc... It's like having a G600 with a touchscreen MFD...

And regarding the PFD, the G3X do have a lot of included (or free optional) features (such the G900x) than even a G500 doesn't have (or required paid option) such: Synthetic Vision, Terrain, Charts, Vertical Power Support, Engine Monitor, Autopilot and WAAS support, SafeTaxi, etc... I've even read somewhere it could support dual ADAHRS, but I'm not sure and I still need to dig on that :)

In few words, I do believe a dual display G3X with a dual GTN 750 would be a more appropriate, affordable and efficient setup than a G900x. We can also build the panel as we go, and start with a G3X with one display and one GTN only and add more stuff step by step.

My long 2 cents about the G3X, G900x and GTN.

Phil
 
I agree

Now the final arrangement I decided upon was;

Dual x 10" Dynon Skyview
VP 200 Duo
GTN 750
and three steam guages for back up.

The GTN 750 is now confirmed to interface and integrate with the Dynon Skyview.

This combination provides all that is needed for IFR/IMC with full electroincs emergency automation.

The GTN 750 is certifed and has the integrtaed audio panel, GPS, Flight planner and comms.

The Dynon has its own integrated transponser, autopilot, AoA, G-Meter, dual batter backups, Dual ADAHARs, it has Audio annunciation... and comes with a nice minty smell. (Australians will know what that means ;-)

All the screen size, all the integration and all of that installed for $50k


PS. I just had to show this :)
Consider Garmin as being a "Big Company" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeZicMZAScw
 
Last edited:
It will be the last to be purchased

My girlfriend will not let me put the cash down on it all till we are married start of next year.

And besides its the last bit I am doing. Who knows what will pop up in the next year. I would prefer 15" screens personally but hey that is the IT side of me talking. (don't know what they are not there already honestly )

The point is I do not stumble across $50k investments without serious planning. When I get an investment property it costs me $50k deposits, stamp duties, all fees etc. It usually takes me 3 to 6 months to make that happen. It has taken me 4 months just to understand what all the EFIS sets have to offer let alone compare them properly.

In that rocess I can say this, the VP200 as a task unloading applicance/safety applicance is greatly under rated. I would advise anyone to really have a look at this piece of hardware in depth. It can manage so much in an easy to access manner without taking control out of the pilots hands.

It even presents you your checklists for each stage of flight automatically and asks you to acknowledge it before it will proceed to the next stage.

For long haul IFR/IMC over big water with lots of AUX fuel which is what I am building my RV7 for, it fills in a good deal of task management if things get nasty.

If your thinking "no pictures then it didn't happen" yeah so it didn't happen yet.... I am also getting a form fitted dash layout in 3D print to create a luxury car interior. That hasn't finished either but first design was created ( and failed) but the second one will be closer... its all coming together.

All good things take time.
 
G900 only

Gus,

I have a G900X with synth vis, effectively it's TSO'd all but in name. I have flown it at night, across the ITCZ, over very long legs (1800nm). The Storm scope is integrated as an extra as is the autopilot and the EIS (don't forget engine monitoring) which is linked in terms of range and endurance on the MFD. If you need a great interface fit a GCU 476. The G900 makes the RV7 when it comes to long range IFR operations. When you are alone at night or in bad weather your girlfriend will be very happy to know that you are sitting behind a certified proven EFIS.... if she really loves you!

I am in Sydney on the evening of 23rd of August if you would like to chat and if you are close by. Pm me if you need more info

Cheers :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top