From Garmin 296 to 496

[Cherokee]

This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new Garmin
496, I would appreciate any thoughts.

[Jim Macklin]

Faster, color, better graphics, a lot more money.



"Cherokee" <u30624@uwe> wrote in message
news:6ba9d0fe741cb@uwe...
| This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm
located in Central
| Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up
to the new Garmin
| 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.
|

[Cherokee]

Jim Macklin wrote:
>Faster, color, better graphics, a lot more money.
>
>| This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
>| Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new Garmin
>| 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.

Jim, is there a better unit for the price anywhere.

[Jim Macklin]

No... Not at this time anyway.



"Cherokee" <u30624@uwe> wrote in message
news:6baa0d908d584@uwe...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| >Faster, color, better graphics, a lot more money.
| >
| >| This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm
located in Central
| >| Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving
up to the new Garmin
| >| 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.
|
| Jim, is there a better unit for the price anywhere.
|

[Bob Noel]

In article <6baa0d908d584@uwe>, "Cherokee" <u30624@uwe> wrote:

> Jim Macklin wrote:
> >Faster, color, better graphics, a lot more money.
> >
> >| This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
> >| Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new
> >| Garmin
> >| 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.
>
> Jim, is there a better unit for the price anywhere.

What are your needs wrt handheld GPS?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Dan Luke]

"Cherokee" wrote:

> This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
> Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new
> Garmin
> 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.

The 496 looks a lot like the unit you already have, but it is better in a
lot of ways. It has a synthetic instrument panel page, terrain/obstacle
page and airport diagrams. Best of all, it gives you all kinds of satellite
weather. Flying in thunderstorm country as you do, you will find this
makes it worth the price. Beware, though: there is a subscription cost for
the XM weather, plus database update costs for aviation, terrain and
airports.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Marco Leon]

I agree with Dan's thoughts on the 496. From the 296, the big thing of
course is the XM weather in the 496. If you're an IFR pilot that flies
in weather even occasionally, I think it's worth it. Although, you may
want to look at purchasing a new or used 396 if that's all you need.
The big differences between the 396 and 496 are:

1) faster processor and map updates (5 per second versus 1 per second)
2) Included auto kit
3) AOPA directory
4) SafeTaxi taxiway maps

If you think you will use/appreciate these differences, go for the 496.
Otherwise save the $600-$1,000 and go for a new/used 396.

Marco

Cherokee wrote:
> This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
> Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new Garmin
> 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.

[Cherokee via AviationKB.com]

Marco Leon wrote:
>I agree with Dan's thoughts on the 496. From the 296, the big thing of
>course is the XM weather in the 496. If you're an IFR pilot that flies
>in weather even occasionally, I think it's worth it. Although, you may
>want to look at purchasing a new or used 396 if that's all you need.
>The big differences between the 396 and 496 are:
>
>1) faster processor and map updates (5 per second versus 1 per second)
>2) Included auto kit
>3) AOPA directory
>4) SafeTaxi taxiway maps
>
>If you think you will use/appreciate these differences, go for the 496.
>Otherwise save the $600-$1,000 and go for a new/used 396.

I am Instrument pilot that does very little IFR due to having only the 296.
In our area, during this season you have to be very careful at night, so easy
to get into weather quickley.( even in the day )
I would enjoy the XM radio also.
I have been unable to pull up subscription price page thus far. I want to
make sure this is the most popular unit you guys are using. Just installed
new KT-76C or would consider the Garmin mode S trans. Traffic is no big
threat while in a PA-28-180.
Anyone have a web site I can look at prices for XM subscriptions.
>Marco
>
>> This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
>> Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new Garmin
>> 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[john smith]

In article <6bb46329f70ed@uwe>,
"Cherokee via AviationKB.com" <u30624@uwe> wrote:
> Anyone have a web site I can look at prices for XM subscriptions.

$29 and $49.
More charts with the $49 option.
Some people on this group pay the $49 for the months they do the most
flying, then drop back to the $29 rate for the months they fly less
(winter).

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Cherokee" <u30624@uwe> wrote in message news:6ba9d0fe741cb@uwe...
> This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
> Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new
> Garmin
> 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.

Check your settings, and make sure you are posting using plain text for
newsgroups, instead of HTML.
--
Jim in NC

[Marco Leon]

Cherokee via AviationKB.com wrote:
>
> I am Instrument pilot that does very little IFR due to having only the 296.
> In our area, during this season you have to be very careful at night, so easy
> to get into weather quickley.( even in the day )
> I would enjoy the XM radio also.
> I have been unable to pull up subscription price page thus far. I want to
> make sure this is the most popular unit you guys are using. Just installed
> new KT-76C or would consider the Garmin mode S trans. Traffic is no big
> threat while in a PA-28-180.
> Anyone have a web site I can look at prices for XM subscriptions.

I fly in the Northeast so while not to the extremes of other areas, we
pretty much have it all (fog, mountains, icing, snow, rain, and the
occasional hurricane). I believe I would fly more as well in my PA-28
(albeit a -161).

What helped me justify my purchase is the fact that only a handful of
years ago (5+ let's say) it would have cost over $25K to get similar
capability. Even then, the weather was limited (radar, while real-time,
was limited by attenuation).

John posted the prices but here's the link for more detail:
http://www.xmradio.com/weather/av_service_pricing.xmc

They have a "seasonal" package where you can suspend your subscription
but out of five different people I talked to, I got six (yes, six!)
different stories on how it worked. One girl gave me two different ways
in the same call so use caution if you want this deal.

Marco

[Pixel Dent]

In article >,
john smith > wrote:

> In article <6bb46329f70ed@uwe>,
> "Cherokee via AviationKB.com" <u30624@uwe> wrote:
> > Anyone have a web site I can look at prices for XM subscriptions.
>
> $29 and $49.
> More charts with the $49 option.
> Some people on this group pay the $49 for the months they do the most
> flying, then drop back to the $29 rate for the months they fly less
> (winter).

I think the $49 also adds lightning strike data.

I bought a 396 used (but in more or less mint condition) with auto
package for $1500 a couple months ago and have already found it
extremely useful for IFR flights.

On my last flight I launched when my destination was reporting 100'
ceilings. It was really nice to be able to watch the METARs come in over
the course of the flight as the ceiling raised to match the forecast.
Nothing I couldn't do before with regular calls to flight watch, but
it's so much more convenient to have a graphical view of the conditions
at all the airports in the region when you're on a flight like that.
Well worth $50/month.

[Cherokee via AviationKB.com]

Morgans wrote:
>> This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
>> Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new
>> Garmin
>> 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.
>
>Check your settings, and make sure you are posting using plain text for
>newsgroups, instead of HTML.

Morgans, I don't quiet understand how to check to see if I am using plain
text or HTML. Remember I am a pilot not a computer expert. I am open to learn,
though. Everything looks finr on my end.

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200701/1

[Peter Duniho]

"Cherokee via AviationKB.com" <u30624@uwe> wrote in message
news:6bc204bd0ed5c@uwe...
>>Check your settings, and make sure you are posting using plain text for
>>newsgroups, instead of HTML.
>
> Morgans, I don't quiet understand how to check to see if I am using plain
> text or HTML. Remember I am a pilot not a computer expert. I am open to
> learn,
> though. Everything looks finr on my end.

You *are* using plain text. It just happens to be set to "UTF-8" encoding,
which in Outlook Express causes the message to be displayed with a different
font. This makes Jim think you posted in HTML (since he's only looking at
how the message looks, rather than paying attention to the actual format of
the message).

You probably don't have control over the posting format anyway, since you're
using a web site to post to the newsgroup. Personally, I think that's a bad
idea, but some people have no direct access to an NNTP server. Perhaps
you're one of these people. In any case, in this situation I don't see
anything about your use of a web site instead of a newsreader that is
causing actual problems for the rest of us.

In other words, don't worry about it. :)

Pete

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote

> You probably don't have control over the posting format anyway, since
> you're using a web site to post to the newsgroup. Personally, I think
> that's a bad idea, but some people have no direct access to an NNTP
> server. Perhaps you're one of these people. In any case, in this
> situation I don't see anything about your use of a web site instead of a
> newsreader that is causing actual problems for the rest of us.
>
> In other words, don't worry about it. :)

You are right, I didn't check. To me, his message is readable, but id about
25% smaller print, which makes it hard for my farsighted eyes to see. Is
there a way to make it larger? I'm no computer geek, either (as you
guessed) so I don't know.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter Duniho]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
> You are right, I didn't check. To me, his message is readable, but id
> about 25% smaller print, which makes it hard for my farsighted eyes to
> see. Is there a way to make it larger? I'm no computer geek, either (as
> you guessed) so I don't know.

Yes. In the Tools/Options... dialog, click on the "Read" tab, then the
"Fonts" button at the bottom. In the big list, click on "Unicode" and then
set the font to whatever suits you. You may want to set the font for both
"UTF-7" and "UTF-8" encodings, as long as you're there (you can select the
encodings with the "Encodings" drop-down list box, near the bottom of that
dialog).

You may find that you prefer to set the both the "Proportional" and
"Fixed-width" fonts to a font that's actually fixed-width. For example,
"Courier New" or "Lucida Console". I don't see any point in reading any
post on Usenet with a proportional-spaced font, since no post will depend on
have a proportional-spaced font, but some may only look correct with a
fixed-width.

On the other hand, some people find proportional-spaced fonts easier to
read, and may not care about "ASCII graphics" looking right. If you're such
a person, you may find that you prefer a proportional-spaced font for both
choices.

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> >Faster, color, better graphics, a lot more money.
> >
> >| This is my 1st post, just found you guys today. I'm located in Central
> >| Mississippi, flying PA-28-180. I'm interested in moving up to the new Garmin
> >| 496, I would appreciate any thoughts.
>
> Jim, is there a better unit for the price anywhere.

Welcome to the group! I'm not Jim, but I own a 496.

If you want XM weather and music, it's a great choice. If you don't
want weather/music, there are several GPS choices that are MUCH better.


For example, the Lowrance Airmap 2000c is a better GPS, with a bigger
screen, for about 1/6th the cost of a 496. (We fly with the Airmap on
the pilot's yoke, and the 496 in an AirGizmo panel dock.)

So you tell us -- are you looking for on-board weather?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose[_1_]]

> Morgans, I don't quiet understand how to check to see if I am using plain
> text or HTML.

You are posting through a web interface (AviationKB.com). THat is why
it is coming through as HTML. Web interfaces tend to do that (among
other things). I don't know if you are aware, but this newsgroup does
-not- belong to AviationKB.com. It is completely independent, and is
best accessed through a newsreader. Outlook is one and comes with
windows. There are better ones. You set it up similar to an Email
client, and the result is =much= easier, and you aren't beholden to a
web site.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Cherokee via AviationKB.com]

Jose wrote:
>> Morgans, I don't quiet understand how to check to see if I am using plain
>> text or HTML.
>
>You are posting through a web interface (AviationKB.com). THat is why
>it is coming through as HTML. Web interfaces tend to do that (among
>other things). I don't know if you are aware, but this newsgroup does
>-not- belong to AviationKB.com. It is completely independent, and is
>best accessed through a newsreader. Outlook is one and comes with
>windows. There are better ones. You set it up similar to an Email
>client, and the result is =much= easier, and you aren't beholden to a
>web site.
>
>Jose

Jose, how do I go about setting up thru a newsreader, to post and recieve. I
would appreciate any help

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[Cherokee via AviationKB.com]

Jose wrote:
>> Morgans, I don't quiet understand how to check to see if I am using plain
>> text or HTML.
>
>You are posting through a web interface (AviationKB.com). THat is why
>it is coming through as HTML. Web interfaces tend to do that (among
>other things). I don't know if you are aware, but this newsgroup does
>-not- belong to AviationKB.com. It is completely independent, and is
>best accessed through a newsreader. Outlook is one and comes with
>windows. There are better ones. You set it up similar to an Email
>client, and the result is =much= easier, and you aren't beholden to a
>web site.
>
>Jose

Jose, how do I go about setting up thru a newsreader, to post and recieve. I
would appreciate any help

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[Peter Duniho]

"Cherokee via AviationKB.com" <u30624@uwe> wrote in message
news:6bcf152d11407@uwe...
> Jose, how do I go about setting up thru a newsreader, to post and recieve.
> I
> would appreciate any help

I'm not Jose, but I'll tell you that it depends on your ISP. You may or may
not have access to Usenet via a news server (a server that supports NNTP,
the protocol used to get Usenet data).

Generally speaking, whatever news reader you use will have a way to add a
news server account. Your ISP will have to tell you the name of your news
server, and the user ID and password (if required...it usually is) for the
server. The user ID and password is often the same as your email user ID
and password. You enter this information for the new account. At that
point, the news reader will require you to download a list of the newsgroups
it carries. From that list, you can select newsgroups you want to read. To
read this one, select "rec.aviation.piloting".

There is, of course, a lot more you can do with a news reader. One popular
feature is the "kill file" (implemented in a variety of ways in different
news readers), that you can use to filter out particular threads, messages,
or even individuals. One of the biggest advantages IMHO over a web
interface is that with a news reader, you download all the new messages at
once, and they are stored locally. Browsing through the newsgroup is much
faster and easier, and doesn't involve any overhead of sending lots of data
back and forth between you and the web site (and in fact, once the messages
are downloaded, you don't even need to be connected to the Internet until
you want to download again and/or post new messages yourself).

Commonly used news readers on Windows include Outlook Express, Agent, Free
Agent (a free version of Agent, with fewer features), 40titude, and Xnews.
There are a number of other news readers available on other operating
systems as well.

I'll also reiterate that while I agree with Jose that using a news reader is
better than using a web interface, a) not everyone agrees with us, and b) in
spite of what Jose says, you are not actually posting in HTML and aren't
really causing a real problem for anyone. There are other reasons to not
use a web interface, but your posts coming across as HTML isn't one of them,
since that's not actually happening.

Pete

[Jose[_1_]]

> Jose, how do I go about setting up thru a newsreader, to post and recieve. I
> would appreciate any help

Here's a page I recently wrote for our flying club which might help:

http://www.flying20club.org/newsgroups

You'll need to know a few pieces of data from your ISP, like the name of
their news server. That might be available on their web site, or from
their tech support line.

Let me know if this works for you, or you'd like more help.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.