Lowrance 2000C ???

[Tri-Pacer]

I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's and cons. I'm
presently using a King Skymap IIIC and could probably sell if for what a
Lowrance 2000C would cost.



Thanks



Paul Anton

N1431A

KPLU

[Blueskies]

Mine works well. I added the terrain last summer and it is pretty cool also...

Don't try to depend on the internal batteries for too long...

Dan D.



"Tri-Pacer" > wrote in message . ..
:I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
: using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's and cons. I'm
: presently using a King Skymap IIIC and could probably sell if for what a
: Lowrance 2000C would cost.
:
:
:
: Thanks
:
:
:
: Paul Anton
:
: N1431A
:
: KPLU
:
:

[Dave[_3_]]

Yaaaaa!

2 yrs now, love it...

Shopped hard, the 2000C was a runaway winner for the features we
needed.

Big screen, large buttons "thumbable" by both hands when mounted on
the yoke of our Warrior.

Plan for a 12 cable to power it, batteries don't last long with the
colour screen.

Terrain works good, weather due this year..

Enjoy!

Dave


On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 12:24:45 -0800, "Tri-Pacer" >
wrote:

>I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
>using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's and cons. I'm
>presently using a King Skymap IIIC and could probably sell if for what a
>Lowrance 2000C would cost.
>
>
>
>Thanks
>
>
>
>Paul Anton
>
>N1431A
>
>KPLU
>

[Greg Copeland]

On Mar 7, 2:24 pm, "Tri-Pacer" > wrote:
> I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
> using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's and cons. I'm
> presently using a King Skymap IIIC and could probably sell if for what a
> Lowrance 2000C would cost.
>
> Thanks
>
> Paul Anton
>
> N1431A
>
> KPLU

I enjoy my 2000C. Best bang for the buck as far as I'm concerned. I
have terrain and enjoy it very much. My only complaint is the trail
data only records 2d data; meaning altitude is not sampled.

Greg

[Jay Honeck]

> I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
> using one?

We love the 2000c. In fact, we use it as our primary navigation
system in Atlas, with it mounted on the pilot's side of the plane,
while the (much more expensive) Garmin 496 is panel docked and usually
relegated to "entertainment system" with the XM radio screen primarily
displayed.

(Until the weather goes icky, and then the 496's live weather
capability comes to the fore...)

The 2000c is simply a superior GPS. It's got a bigger screen, easy-to-
use menu system, and did I mention it's got a bigger screen? Size is
everything with a GPS, and it also displays flight information in
"portrait" mode, which the Garmin stupidly cannot do.

You'll love it. It's the best bang for the buck out there.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[texas slacker]

On Mar 7, 2:24 pm, "Tri-Pacer" > wrote:
> I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
> using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's and cons. I'm
> presently using a King Skymap IIIC and could probably sell if for what a
> Lowrance 2000C would cost.
>
> Thanks
>
> Paul Anton
>
> N1431A
>
> KPLU

I have had one for about six months. Short learning curve, even for
me. I ditched my old garmin 95 and feel like I am uptown now. Had a
problem with it loseing the satallite, called Lowrance, got a nice guy
who spoke english, described the problem, he said ship it in. week or
10 days it came back, fixed. The only downside is it takes a little
longer to lock on than my old garmin. Don't even think about
operating it on batteries with that beautiful color screen. Leo

[Darrel Toepfer]

"Tri-Pacer" > wrote:

> I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is
> anyone using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's
> and cons.

I put ours in a friends C150 when I fly it, I like it alot better than
the G296 thats already in it. I like it alot better than the 1000 we had
before (although the batteries lasted alot longer in the 1k). Ours
doesn't have the terrain update yet and it'll be the primary navigation
box (will also have a panel mounted Loran) in my '53 Pacer when I
complete its restoration...

I also have a BlueTooth GPS (costs under $50) that used with PocketFMS
for the PeeCee, very slick... http://pocketfms.com

Will work on devising a touchscreen platform based around a brick
PeeCee. Backseaters could watch DVD's while it drives navigation
functions for the front, using a dual display video card...

[Jay Masino]

Darrel Toepfer > wrote:
> I put ours in a friends C150 when I fly it, I like it alot better than
> the G296 thats already in it. I like it alot better than the 1000 we had
> before (although the batteries lasted alot longer in the 1k). Ours
> doesn't have the terrain update yet and it'll be the primary navigation
> box (will also have a panel mounted Loran) in my '53 Pacer when I
> complete its restoration...

I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is cute,
but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of the
1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like about
the 2000c vs. your old 1000?

--- Jay



--

Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are"
http://www.JayMasino.com
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

[Blueskies]

"Jay Masino" > wrote in message . ..
: Darrel Toepfer > wrote:
: > I put ours in a friends C150 when I fly it, I like it alot better than
: > the G296 thats already in it. I like it alot better than the 1000 we had
: > before (although the batteries lasted alot longer in the 1k). Ours
: > doesn't have the terrain update yet and it'll be the primary navigation
: > box (will also have a panel mounted Loran) in my '53 Pacer when I
: > complete its restoration...
:
: I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
: really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
: it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is cute,
: but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of the
: 1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like about
: the 2000c vs. your old 1000?
:
: --- Jay
:
:
:

The terrain feature also has a profile view that will show obstructions also, so the terrain feature is helpful for
flatlanders also...

[Jay Masino]

Blueskies > wrote:
> "Jay Masino" > wrote in message . ..
> : I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
> : really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
> : it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is cute,
> : but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of the
> : 1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like about
> : the 2000c vs. your old 1000?
>
> The terrain feature also has a profile view that will show obstructions also, so the terrain feature is helpful for
> flatlanders also...
>

The 1000 has obstructions, and I doubt I'd ever use the profile view.
After flying behind a Garmin 195 for 10 years, I can safely say that I
use the map view 99.9999% of the time.

Any other advantages?

--- Jay


--

Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are"
http://www.JayMasino.com
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

[Darrel Toepfer]

(Jay Masino) wrote:

> I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
> really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
> it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is
> cute, but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of
> the 1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like
> about the 2000c vs. your old 1000?

Additional screens (options and layouts), including airport diagrams of the
major ones. It also has driving points of interest if you want to use it on
the road...

[Blueskies]

"Jay Masino" > wrote in message . ..
: Blueskies > wrote:
: > "Jay Masino" > wrote in message . ..
: > : I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
: > : really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
: > : it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is cute,
: > : but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of the
: > : 1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like about
: > : the 2000c vs. your old 1000?
: >
: > The terrain feature also has a profile view that will show obstructions also, so the terrain feature is helpful for
: > flatlanders also...
: >
:
: The 1000 has obstructions, and I doubt I'd ever use the profile view.
: After flying behind a Garmin 195 for 10 years, I can safely say that I
: use the map view 99.9999% of the time.
:
: Any other advantages?
:
: --- Jay
:
:
: --

Dunno, does the 1000 have the SD card? I have lots of 'flight plans' stored on my 2000, and have barely touched the 512
meg card...

[Darrel Toepfer]

"Blueskies" > wrote:

> Dunno, does the 1000 have the SD card? I have lots of 'flight plans'
> stored on my 2000, and have barely touched the 512 meg card...

The original only had 32 meg card, but you could install bigger, just like
any camera...

[Dave[_3_]]

I orderd the terrain with the 1Gig card.. lotsa room..

:)

Dave




On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 02:21:11 GMT, Darrel Toepfer >
wrote:

>"Blueskies" > wrote:
>
>> Dunno, does the 1000 have the SD card? I have lots of 'flight plans'
>> stored on my 2000, and have barely touched the 512 meg card...
>
>The original only had 32 meg card, but you could install bigger, just like
>any camera...

[Greg Copeland]

On Mar 8, 1:40 pm, (Jay Masino) wrote:
> Darrel Toepfer > wrote:
> > I put ours in a friends C150 when I fly it, I like it alot better than
> > the G296 thats already in it. I like it alot better than the 1000 we had
> > before (although the batteries lasted alot longer in the 1k). Ours
> > doesn't have the terrain update yet and it'll be the primary navigation
> > box (will also have a panel mounted Loran) in my '53 Pacer when I
> > complete its restoration...
>
> I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
> really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
> it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is cute,
> but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of the
> 1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like about
> the 2000c vs. your old 1000?
>

Even pilots that fly over flat terrtain benefit from terrain
capabilities. Where I fly, towers are everywhere for the first 15-45
minutes, depending on the direction I travel. Airspace also appears
on the terrain page, which is a nice treat. Oh look, 5-minutes ahead
is a tower at my altitude and 10-minutes ahead is class bravo.

While I very much enjoy the color display, I hear the 1000 runs
infinitely longer on batteries. Batteries in my 2000c might make 2-
hours.

Greg

[Jay Masino]

Greg Copeland > wrote:
> Even pilots that fly over flat terrtain benefit from terrain
> capabilities. Where I fly, towers are everywhere for the first 15-45
> minutes, depending on the direction I travel. Airspace also appears
> on the terrain page, which is a nice treat. Oh look, 5-minutes ahead
> is a tower at my altitude and 10-minutes ahead is class bravo.

The 1000 has obstructions (towers, etc). It also has airspace.




--

Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are"
http://www.JayMasino.com
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

[Mark Hansen]

On 03/13/07 16:08, Greg Copeland wrote:
> On Mar 8, 1:40 pm, (Jay Masino) wrote:
>> Darrel Toepfer > wrote:
>> > I put ours in a friends C150 when I fly it, I like it alot better than
>> > the G296 thats already in it. I like it alot better than the 1000 we had
>> > before (although the batteries lasted alot longer in the 1k). Ours
>> > doesn't have the terrain update yet and it'll be the primary navigation
>> > box (will also have a panel mounted Loran) in my '53 Pacer when I
>> > complete its restoration...
>>
>> I've been wrestling lately on whether to get a 1000 or 2000c. I'm not
>> really all that concerned about terrain awareness, since I fly where
>> it's almost exclusively flat. In addition, I think the color is cute,
>> but not really neccesary. In fact, the 320x320 pixel display of the
>> 1000 seems a little sharper to my eyes. What else do you like about
>> the 2000c vs. your old 1000?
>>
>
> Even pilots that fly over flat terrtain benefit from terrain
> capabilities. Where I fly, towers are everywhere for the first 15-45
> minutes, depending on the direction I travel. Airspace also appears
> on the terrain page, which is a nice treat. Oh look, 5-minutes ahead
> is a tower at my altitude and 10-minutes ahead is class bravo.
>
> While I very much enjoy the color display, I hear the 1000 runs
> infinitely longer on batteries. Batteries in my 2000c might make 2-
> hours.

In reading the documentation for the 2000c, the manufacturer expects
the batteries to be used as an emergency backup only, and that normal
operations of the unit should be via ship power.

FYI

[Tri-Pacer]

You guys had such good things to say about it that I ordered one.

I found one at $689.50 for that price I can't go wrong.

Cheers:

Paul
NI431A

[[email protected]]

On Mar 14, 2:30 pm, "Tri-Pacer" > wrote:
> You guys had such good things to say about it that I ordered one.
>
> I found one at $689.50 for that price I can't go wrong.
>
> Cheers:
>
> Paul
> NI431A

Where did you find a new one for that price?

Regards,
Bud

[Darrel Toepfer]

Mark Hansen > wrote:

> In reading the documentation for the 2000c, the manufacturer expects
> the batteries to be used as an emergency backup only, and that normal
> operations of the unit should be via ship power.
>
> FYI

But old planes tend to have crappy ship power outlets, frequently they are
even disconnected...

[Mark Hansen]

On 03/14/07 21:28, Darrel Toepfer wrote:
> Mark Hansen > wrote:
>
>> In reading the documentation for the 2000c, the manufacturer expects
>> the batteries to be used as an emergency backup only, and that normal
>> operations of the unit should be via ship power.
>>
>> FYI
>
> But old planes tend to have crappy ship power outlets, frequently they are
> even disconnected...
>

And the manufacturer says in that case, you can use a supplemental battery
supply which they can sell you. Most people who purchase the unit will have
ship power though, and won't need it.

My point was that it is unreasonable to expect the unit to do something which
the manufacturer says it is not designed to do.

[Mike Noel]

Can the 2000C also operate with the backlight off? I can get 10+ hours on
the internal battery of the GPSMap 296 when using reflected ambient light
instead of the backlight. The reflected light is usually adequate for
daytime use.

--
Best Regards,
Mike

http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel

Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.

"Mark Hansen" > wrote in message
...
> On 03/14/07 21:28, Darrel Toepfer wrote:
>> Mark Hansen > wrote:
>>
>>> In reading the documentation for the 2000c, the manufacturer expects
>>> the batteries to be used as an emergency backup only, and that normal
>>> operations of the unit should be via ship power.
>>>
>>> FYI
>>
>> But old planes tend to have crappy ship power outlets, frequently they
>> are
>> even disconnected...
>>
>
> And the manufacturer says in that case, you can use a supplemental battery
> supply which they can sell you. Most people who purchase the unit will
> have
> ship power though, and won't need it.
>
> My point was that it is unreasonable to expect the unit to do something
> which
> the manufacturer says it is not designed to do.

[Mark Hansen]

On 03/15/07 09:40, Mike Noel wrote:
> Can the 2000C also operate with the backlight off? I can get 10+ hours on
> the internal battery of the GPSMap 296 when using reflected ambient light
> instead of the backlight. The reflected light is usually adequate for
> daytime use.
>

I read in the user's manual that the backlight can be turned on and off.
I don't know how long the unit would run on the batteries with the backlight
off.

[Tri-Pacer]

>>
>> I found one at $689.50 for that price I can't go wrong.
>>
>> Cheers:
>>
>> Paul
>> NI431A
>
> Where did you find a new one for that price?
>
> Regards,
> Bud
>

WWW.avionicswest.com

[Jay Honeck]

> I read in the user's manual that the backlight can be turned on and off.
> I don't know how long the unit would run on the batteries with the backlight
> off.

I find the 2000c to be virtually un-viewable without the backlight
on.

Since I have it permanently plugged into ship's power, that's not a
problem for me. However, if I needed a GPS for use in a plane without
an electrical system, this would be serious drawback.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
(Presently in Memphis, TN)
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[dave]

I just saw one of these units for the first time last week at the pilot
shop at KLNS. Very nice display. I have a garmin 196 and a 430 in the
plane. It's amazing that virtually every hand held produced in the
last 5 or 6 years has a substantially better display than the 430. I
still prefer the B&W 196 display over the color 430 display.

Good luck with the new unit.
Dave
M35

Tri-Pacer wrote:
> I just looked at one of these jewels yesterday and I am impressed. Is anyone
> using one? How do you like it. I'd really like to hear pro's and cons. I'm
> presently using a King Skymap IIIC and could probably sell if for what a
> Lowrance 2000C would cost.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Paul Anton
>
> N1431A
>
> KPLU
>
>

[Tri-Pacer]

After looking at one of these in a static condition I went ahead and ordered
one. I finally flew one yesterday. I'm an IA and delivered a plane I had
annualed. I found as soon as I got within any distance at all of any SUA a
huge nag screen came up completely covering my position.

Is this nag screen something I will be able to turn off?

My Skymap simply brightens the SUA boundry which is ample warning.

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A
KPLU

[Blueskies]

"Tri-Pacer" > wrote in message . ..
:
: After looking at one of these in a static condition I went ahead and ordered
: one. I finally flew one yesterday. I'm an IA and delivered a plane I had
: annualed. I found as soon as I got within any distance at all of any SUA a
: huge nag screen came up completely covering my position.
:
: Is this nag screen something I will be able to turn off?
:
: My Skymap simply brightens the SUA boundry which is ample warning.
:
: Cheers:
:
: Paul
: N1431A
: KPLU
:
:

Yes, you can customize the 'warnings'.

I got mine for about that price also. Did you get terrain?

Dan D.

[Tri-Pacer]

> :
>
> Yes, you can customize the 'warnings'.
>
> I got mine for about that price also. Did you get terrain?
>
> Dan D.
>


Good point I "Think" it included terrain I'll go back on the Web site and
check. If it didn't than add around $100.00 to my price. :-(

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A

[[email protected]]

On Mar 17, 10:18 am, "Tri-Pacer" > wrote:
> > :
>
> > Yes, you can customize the 'warnings'.
>
> > I got mine for about that price also. Did you get terrain?
>
> > Dan D.
>
> Good point I "Think" it included terrain I'll go back on the Web site and
> check. If it didn't than add around $100.00 to my price. :-(
>
> Cheers:
>
> Paul
> N1431A

Their website says the $690 includes terrain. It is a Sun 'n Fun
special.

Bud

[Dave[_5_]]

I have a couple of questions regarding the 2000C:

1. What are the mounting options? I have never liked yoke mounts.

2. Will it work with a non-Lowrance amplified external antenna (I have
a permanent
unit on top of the fuselage that has worked flawlessly with my
Garmin).

Thanks in advance for any advice.

David Johnson

[WestCDA]

On the mount, they come with a yoke mount and a suction cup mount. It uses
standard RAM ball components, so if you want something else you can use
anything in the extensive RAM catalog of pieces to mount it pretty well any
way you like.

On the antenna, I suggest you contact Lowrance and give them your antenna
specifics. The antenna the 2000c comes with is an amplified unit.

"Dave" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I have a couple of questions regarding the 2000C:
>
> 1. What are the mounting options? I have never liked yoke mounts.
>
> 2. Will it work with a non-Lowrance amplified external antenna (I have
> a permanent
> unit on top of the fuselage that has worked flawlessly with my
> Garmin).
>
> Thanks in advance for any advice.
>
> David Johnson
>

[Dave[_5_]]

> On the antenna, I suggest you contact Lowrance and give them your antenna
> specifics. The antenna the 2000c comes with is an amplified unit.
>
I did some checking and found that the answer is apparently no. The
Lowrance external antenna runs on 3 - 3.3V and has a gain of 8 - 10
dB, whereas the antenna
I use with my Garmin can run on 4 - 24V and has a gain of 26 - 31 dB.
My Garmin puts out 5.8V on the antenna connector center pin with no
load. The Lowrance uses a type MCX connector, whereas the Garmin uses
a BNC. There are some non-Lowrance external antennas available that
will work with the 2000C, but those that I have found are "mouse"
style intended for use on the glareshield (vs mounted on the exterior
of the aircraft).

David Johnson

[Blueskies]

"Dave" > wrote in message oups.com...
:
: > On the antenna, I suggest you contact Lowrance and give them your antenna
: > specifics. The antenna the 2000c comes with is an amplified unit.
: >
: I did some checking and found that the answer is apparently no. The
: Lowrance external antenna runs on 3 - 3.3V and has a gain of 8 - 10
: dB, whereas the antenna
: I use with my Garmin can run on 4 - 24V and has a gain of 26 - 31 dB.
: My Garmin puts out 5.8V on the antenna connector center pin with no
: load. The Lowrance uses a type MCX connector, whereas the Garmin uses
: a BNC. There are some non-Lowrance external antennas available that
: will work with the 2000C, but those that I have found are "mouse"
: style intended for use on the glareshield (vs mounted on the exterior
: of the aircraft).
:
: David Johnson
:

FYI, many folks only use the built in antenna with the 2000C mounted on their yoke, and have no problems with lost
signals. I have mine hooked up with the Lowrance external antenna and have the wires tucked in along the edge of the
windshield. The 'mouse' is tucked in along the edge also, not obtrusive in the least and it causes no problems with my
compass...

[Walt]

On Mar 25, 7:38 am, "Dave" > wrote:
> I have a couple of questions regarding the 2000C:
>
> 1. What are the mounting options? I have never liked yoke mounts.
>
> 2. Will it work with a non-Lowrance amplified external antenna (I have
> a permanent
> unit on top of the fuselage that has worked flawlessly with my
> Garmin).
>
> Thanks in advance for any advice.
>
> David Johnson

FWIW (probably not much) I have a Lowrance 1000 and use the yoke
mount. I've never had to use the external antenna as reception is
great, both in a Piper Archer and a Cessna 172.

Since the Lowrance's mount is a RAM mount you should be able to find
the kind of mount you'd like, if you don't want it on the yoke. I've
used the suction cup mount that comes with the unit in my car and it
works very well; stayed on the windshield during a ten-hour road trip
from Bozeman to Denver, although it was pretty useless; kind of hard
to get lost when all you need to do is stay on I-25. But, it was
something to look at going through Wyoming besides treeless hills and
antelope. :>)

At any rate the RAM accessories should be varied enough so you can
find the kind of mount you like.

--Walt
Bozeman

[Dave[_3_]]

Same...

We have never used (or needed ) the ext antenna on ours..

Only time we lost sig was on a looooong x-wind taxi with the yoke
turned hard right....

Welll...

That DOES put the antenna down by one's knee dosen't it? :)

Dave



On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 08:22:21 -0400, "Blueskies"
> wrote:

>
>"Dave" > wrote in message oups.com...
>:
>: > On the antenna, I suggest you contact Lowrance and give them your antenna
>: > specifics. The antenna the 2000c comes with is an amplified unit.
>: >
>: I did some checking and found that the answer is apparently no. The
>: Lowrance external antenna runs on 3 - 3.3V and has a gain of 8 - 10
>: dB, whereas the antenna
>: I use with my Garmin can run on 4 - 24V and has a gain of 26 - 31 dB.
>: My Garmin puts out 5.8V on the antenna connector center pin with no
>: load. The Lowrance uses a type MCX connector, whereas the Garmin uses
>: a BNC. There are some non-Lowrance external antennas available that
>: will work with the 2000C, but those that I have found are "mouse"
>: style intended for use on the glareshield (vs mounted on the exterior
>: of the aircraft).
>:
>: David Johnson
>:
>
>FYI, many folks only use the built in antenna with the 2000C mounted on their yoke, and have no problems with lost
>signals. I have mine hooked up with the Lowrance external antenna and have the wires tucked in along the edge of the
>windshield. The 'mouse' is tucked in along the edge also, not obtrusive in the least and it causes no problems with my
>compass...
>

[Blueskies]

"Dave" > wrote in message ...
: Same...
:
: We have never used (or needed ) the ext antenna on ours..
:
: Only time we lost sig was on a looooong x-wind taxi with the yoke
: turned hard right....
:
: Welll...
:
: That DOES put the antenna down by one's knee dosen't it? :)
:
: Dave
:
:


You know, it is pretty amazing all the problems I hear about the Garmins loosing signal lock with the Garmin external
antenna. For more than 3x the price I would think they would have worked out all the bugs before selling it...

[Dave[_3_]]

Yeah... 'mazin....

The guys here with the Lowrance plug them in, turn them on and go
flyin.....us included...

The Garmin stuff seems to have.... ummm.... issues....

At least they (finally!) took the freakin magnets out of the
antenna...

For 3 X the price, no way are they worth it!

Strange.. the Garmin Marine GPS equipment seems to work very well,
and is priced competitively..

????

Dave




On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 00:03:32 GMT, "Blueskies"
> wrote:

>
>"Dave" > wrote in message ...
>: Same...
>:
>: We have never used (or needed ) the ext antenna on ours..ah..
>:
>: Only time we lost sig was on a looooong x-wind taxi with the yoke
>: turned hard right....
>:
>: Welll...
>:
>: That DOES put the antenna down by one's knee dosen't it? :)
>:
>: Dave
>:
>:
>
>
>You know, it is pretty amazing all the problems I hear about the Garmins loosing signal lock with the Garmin external
>antenna. For more than 3x the price I would think they would have worked out all the bugs before selling it...
>

[Dave Butler]

Dave wrote:

> For 3 X the price, no way are they worth it!

Not interested in defending Garmin, but I'm just curious. What Garmin
and Lowrance models have equivalent function and a 3:1 price differential?

[Thomas Borchert]

Dave,

> What Garmin
> and Lowrance models have equivalent function and a 3:1 price differential?
>

Equivalent is a big word. Have a look at the Lowrance Airmap 600c and the
Garmin 296. Very similar in their capabilities. Yes, the displays are a
little different. So is the stuff that comes with them. But generally, they
do the same thing. At a price difference of at least a factor 2.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article >,
Thomas Borchert > wrote:

> Dave,
>
> > What Garmin
> > and Lowrance models have equivalent function and a 3:1 price differential?
> >
>
> Equivalent is a big word. Have a look at the Lowrance Airmap 600c and the
> Garmin 296. Very similar in their capabilities. Yes, the displays are a
> little different. So is the stuff that comes with them. But generally, they
> do the same thing. At a price difference of at least a factor 2.

The Lowrance 600c and Garmin 296 are not comparable. In particular, the
296 has a much larger, higher-quality display with greater resolution.
The 296 is also a full featured marine GPS, and a full featured
automotive GPS with full auto-route calculation capability. And, if I
remember correctly, there are no approach waypoints in the aviation
database. Whether any of that matters to you is something only you can
determine.

Those are just some of the big differences that come to mind, but the
biggest difference, in my opinion, is the quality of the display. I
spent some time at the Lowrance booth at Sun-n-Fun this past week, and I
was not impressed with the displays on the 2000c or 600c. While
Lowrance has the screen orientation right (and Garmin has it wrong), the
display quality of the 296/396/496 is far superior to that of the
Lowrance units. I was quite disappointed in Lowrance, and certainly any
attempt to overlay XM weather on these lousy screens is going to be
quite disappointing.



JKG