GNS 430W vs GNS 480

I'm going to add either the GNS 430W or GNS 480 to a Beach Bonanza and am
wondering if any of you who fly with these GPS units have a recommendation?
I'd like a very capable IFR GPS with integrated NAV/COM abilities, which
I'll couple to my S-TEC 50 Autopilot with GPSS. Both the 430W and 480 are
WAAS capable. Either will fit into my panel. (I consider the 530 out of my
price range and I'm not going to tie WX or Traffic into the GNS.)

Do you have any recommendations? Which unit is the most capable? Whichever I
get, I'm going to work diligently to learn, including any quirks.

Thanks in advance for your comments!
-Ron Gordon

Ron Gordon wrote:
I'm going to add either the GNS 430W or GNS 480 to a Beach Bonanza and am
wondering if any of you who fly with these GPS units have a recommendation?
I'd like a very capable IFR GPS with integrated NAV/COM abilities, which
I'll couple to my S-TEC 50 Autopilot with GPSS. Both the 430W and 480 are
WAAS capable. Either will fit into my panel. (I consider the 530 out of my
price range and I'm not going to tie WX or Traffic into the GNS.)

Do you have any recommendations? Which unit is the most capable? Whichever I
get, I'm going to work diligently to learn, including any quirks.

Thanks in advance for your comments!
-Ron Gordon


Go with the 430W.

The 400/500 series is where Garmin is doing all their work.

The 400 series are the nav/com engines for the G-1000.

Sam Spade wrote:
Go with the 430W.

Well, this deserves a counterpoint: Go with the 480!

Actually, if I was not familiar with either one, I would carefully evaluate both of the units using their
downloadable simulations. The big difference in my mind between them is the user interface. I find the
480 to be much more logical and intuitive, however others have said they think it's too rigid and "FMS-
like". The other big difference is that the 480 has airways. If you get a lot of airway clearances, they are
MUCH easier with the 480. This was not added to the 430 as part of the WAAS upgrade.

Mike

I found several reasons to prefer the GNS 480 over the GNS 430W. I was
hoping to get some specific feedback from the group about the two units,
rather than just personal preference or anectodal comments. I've worked with
the software simulators for both and have studied the downloadable PDF
manuals and literature. I have prepared my own list of factual differences
between the two units and my comparison leads me to favor the GNS 480.
Here's my current comparison list below. Perhaps those of you who have a
chance to fly with both can provdie additional points of comparision between
the two (GNS 430W and GNS 480) and double-check my work. Since the software
and feature set of the GNS 430 was changed in going to the GNS 430W, a
comparison of the GNS 480 with the GNS 430W may be difficult, because few
have had a chance to really explore the GNS 430W new features.

Here are my specific comparison points:

1. Using the software simulators for both units, I felt that the GNS 480
user interface was easier to use and easier to update when a change to the
planned flight plan was required. See also the review article
http://philip.greenspun.com/flying/garmin-gps. In my simulator experience, I
prefer the "soft keys" of the GNS 480 rather than the pop-up menu selections
of the GNS 430W. The soft keys make many procedures easier to accomplish in
the GNS 480, and fewer button clicks are needed. I don't mind the FMS-like
structure of the GNS 480 user interface and feel that it will be easier to
master and use in a single-pilot IFR environment. (My unit is going into a
Beach Bonanza with S-TEC 50 and GPSS.)

2. The GNS 480 can provide full guidance through a hold, and can easily
accept ad-hoc holds. See the following article for information on how this
is done using the unit. When coupled to your autopilot with GPSS, the plane
is automatically flow through the entire hold.
http://freightdogtales.blogspot.com/...h-gns-480.html

3. With the GNS 480 you can listen to both NAV frequencies at the same time
(Approach and ATIS, for example) or both NAV frequencies. Only one unit is
needed! That's not the case with the GNS 430W.

4. The GNS 480 includes the Victor airways. Almost every one of the IFR
clearances that I receive includes a Victor airway portion, and these have
to be manually entered, turn by turn, into the GNS 430W.

5. The GNS 480 provides audio prompting when reaching a waypoint, when the
localizer comes alive, at 500 feet above the runway, and at the missed
approach point. See http://www.garmin.com/products/gns480/voicePop.html. The
GNS 430W does not provide any audio prompting.

6. The GNS 480 can control a remote transponder. So no panel space is needed
for the transponder if you use an appropriate unit like the GTX 33.

7. With a GPSS the GNS 480 can fly the aircraft through all approach
procedures, including DME arcs, holds, procedure turns, etc.

8. The GNS 480 provides a NAV page with a full compass rose CDI depiction.

9. The GNS 480 has a physically larger screen than the GNS 430W and higher
pixel resolution. The GNS 480 screen refresh rate is much faster than the
GNS 430/530. The GNS 480 screen is nice to look at and easier on the eyes
than the GNS 430W.

10. For IFR navigation, the GNS 480 appears to provide more assistance and
more capabilities than the GNS 430W. Perhaps this is what people mean when
they say that the GNS 480 is more FMS-like than the GNS 430W.

Have I missed any features? (Note, that I am considering the GNS 480 to be a
full Gamma 3, TSO C146 certified box, because Garmin will resolve the
current SAIB issue by the time I install the unit. So we don't need to go
through that discussion as part of this message thread.)

Ron Gordon wrote:

Ron, I have been flying a lot of IFR in a Bonanza equipped with the GNS430
and GPSS over the last two years in the very busy Northeast US airspaces
(including many flights into Boston, Teterboro, and Philadelphia) and will
be upgrading my unit to the WAAS model sometime this spring. I do not have
any experience at all with the GNS480.

The only two points I would toss in here a

7. With a GPSS the GNS 480 can fly the aircraft through all approach
procedures, including DME arcs, holds, procedure turns, etc.

After playing with the GNS430W simulator I am fairly confident that the
GNS430W coupled with GPSS will also fly published holds/procedure turns/DME
arcs, etc. However, I don't see the GPS430W doing ad-hoc holds, at least
based on my work with the sim.

10. For IFR navigation, the GNS 480 appears to provide more assistance and
more capabilities than the GNS 430W. Perhaps this is what people mean when
they say that the GNS 480 is more FMS-like than the GNS 430W.

I find the GNS430 a very capable unit for IFR flight. While the airways
feature would make life easier, the lack of this feature does not mean the
unit is any less capable than the GNS480, just a touch more tedious. Same
goes for the lack of ad-hoc holds.

Additionally, I have never experienced a GPS failure over about 600 hours
of IFR flight using the GNS430. Can't speak for the GNS480, but in over
500 hours using a Bendix/King KLN94, I experienced three different GPS
"crashes" during flight, with two occurring during approaches. (The B/K
experience thrown in here only as an example of a GPS crash.)

Ultimately I believe the issue between the two units boils down to this:
There have been many in this group who have speculated that Garmin bought
the GNS480 from UPSAT to a) capture working WAAS experience and talent and
b) corner the market of GPS WAAS. Some have concluded, therefore, that
Garmin will abandon the GNS480 unit for the GNS43x/53x line, once these
models are fully WAAS-capable, given the popularity of these models.

As a pilot who has already been burned twice by installing new avionics
that are now being left behind (a WSI weather receiver and a Mode-S
transponder for traffic), I am once bitten, twice shy when it comes to
current avionics models that may also be left behind.

It already seems as if you have done some excellent research. The problem
you will have is having a GNS430W pilot add his/her experience to this
thread, since the units are just starting to trickle out now. Please post
a follow-up here, as I know I would be interested in reading your
experiences in whatever you install.

--
Peter

Mike Adams wrote:

Sam Spade wrote:

Go with the 430W.


I was advocating the 430W in the context of the original poster.

Actually, the 530W is a whole lot better, just like the 530/500 is a
whole lot better than the 430/400.

That is why those who have the bucks stack a 530 over a 430.

As to no airway database, I find that a minor issue in a slow light
aircraft. You don't have to build the entire airway on the fly.

I have to agree with Sam.
You really should include the 530 in your analysis to determine which unit
to install.
I understand that cost is a major factor but you might just find that the
additional features, screen size & resolution put the 530 ahead of the 430
or 480.
[The 480 has the smallest screen area of all 3 units]
I went through the same dilemma 6 months ago, the 530 came out on top for my
mission [without WAAS at that time]
I took a deep breath, called the bank and don't regret a single dollar of
the additional cost [Or the cost to now upgrade it to WAAS]
Although you are not currently interested in interfacing the purchase with
some of the other equipment available, this is also an area that should be
evaluated closely so you are aware of the limitations of all units.
I also said I was not interested in interfacing beyond roll steering, that
opinion is changing daily as I consider now what other equipment I might now
add to the panel. Never be sure that your finished !!

I am also a firm believer that Garmin will not invest further in developing
the 480 beyond its current ability.

Roy




"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
Mike Adams wrote:

Sam Spade wrote:

Go with the 430W.

I was advocating the 430W in the context of the original poster.

Actually, the 530W is a whole lot better, just like the 530/500 is a whole
lot better than the 430/400.

That is why those who have the bucks stack a 530 over a 430.

As to no airway database, I find that a minor issue in a slow light
aircraft. You don't have to build the entire airway on the fly.

There is a Version 3.0 of the firmware in progress for the 480, Garmin
AT is and will continue development and support for the 480.

Also,
The 430/530 ARE NOT FAA certified for PRIMARY ENROUTE navigation. The
480 is.

Go with the 480.

JD wrote:

There is a Version 3.0 of the firmware in progress for the 480, Garmin
AT is and will continue development and support for the 480.

Also,
The 430/530 ARE NOT FAA certified for PRIMARY ENROUTE navigation. The
480 is.

Go with the 480.


That will change with an update very soon.

The 480 is a dead product.

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
arcs, etc. However, I don't see the GPS430W doing ad-hoc holds, at least
based on my work with the sim.


Not sure of your exact meaning of "ad-hoc" holds, unless you mean
unpublished holds. I don't see any problem with the 430 in performing holds
on any course at any fix or at present position. It won't provide any
positive course guidance except on the inbound leg at any hold, published or
unpublished.

I'm still not convinced of the value of steering around a hold given a
strong crosswind.