trade a GNS430 for the 480?

[CutEmUp]

Here's the deal.

Currently have a 430 and like it a lot. Everything else on the panel is standard older equipment and we are looking to upgrade. As of now we are definately getting a GMX200 MFD w/traffic, GTX330 mode S transponder, Wx subscription, and possibly Jeppview subscription.

Should we trade in the 430 for the 480?

With the MFD, what are the advantages of having the 480, and is it worth the price? (a few thousand bucks)

 

[gkrangers]

Shot in the dark, but I thought the 480 was pretty much the 430 with VNAV?

 

[Groundpounder]

Nope, the 480 is what used to be called the GNX 80 and was made by UPS/AT. We looked into getting a pair for the airplane, and while they are a bit different to use than a 430/530, it is a much more powerful box. More like an FMS than a plain old GPS. The only thing that killed the sale for us was it can't display datalinked weather, but since you are getting an MFD anyway, this isn't a problem for you.

I had started a thread long ago about the 430 vs the 480, try to do a search for it, there was some pretty good info.

 

[cptsesso]

Probably the biggest difference is the 480 has the ability to program airways into flight plans where as the 430 does not.

I would go with the 480 for this reason.

 

[YankeeEcho]

In addition to having airways in the database (important only to high-altitude pressurized folks) it also has the ability to serve as the remote control head for a remote transponder - saving panel space. Originally the GNX 80 could channel a remote transponder but not a Mode S remote transponder. I understand that has now changed. SO - forget the 330 and get the remote version.

 

[cptsesso]

Why is having an airway database only important to high-altitude pressurized folks?

I have my boss's personal Baron 58 at my home airport for the summer to use at my will and I would much prefer to have an airway database than just the 430 which is in it.

I was out yesterday doing some flying and had to drag out the low chart several times to make route changes atc gave me.

 

[YankeeEcho]

Why is having an airway database only important to high-altitude pressurized folks?

I have my boss's personal Baron 58 at my home airport for the summer to use at my will and I would much prefer to have an airway database than just the 430 which is in it.

I was out yesterday doing some flying and had to drag out the low chart several times to make route changes atc gave me.

I fly both heavy jet and C310 - and typically, at low altitudes, we get direct or just VOR fixes as part of our flight plans -(compared to high altitude clearances) and rarely have to get a chart out for airway fixes. Just my experience. I'm not putting down the 480 - would probably do it if faced with that decision today. However - if you grew up with garmin products - the 480 keystroking logic is still Apollo's logic - not Garmin logic - most find it takes some getting used to.

 

[cptsesso]

I guess it depends where you live. Here in the northeast, you fly fixes and airways a lot more than in other parts of the country. In the jet, once away from the northeast, I rarely ever end up flying airways. It is always direct to some fix hundreds of miles away or direct destination.

I agree with the keystroke logic of the 480. I downloaded a demo before and the 430 was much easier to use

 

[Diesel]

I am about a step away from ripping my 430 out of the panel for a 480.

I hate the 430. It's great for a 172 but has no place in IFR airplanes.

 

[clickclickboom]

480

I am about a step away from ripping my 430 out of the panel for a 480.

I hate the 430. It's great for a 172 but has no place in IFR airplanes.

I have a 530 and 430 in my cessna 310.. In addition it has 330,340,327 etc...

I have used the 480 and once you have it figured out it is great..

On a flight from FL to NY IFR it will literally take you 15-20 mins to load in all the fixes on the route.. plus once you get to dc they reroute you anyways..

The 480 is a no brainer..