I faced a similar decision, but went with the CNX80,
primarily because it meets TSO-C146a for precision approaches.
The GX55 is certified only under the old TSO-C129,
and I chose to buy for the future instead of the past.

I'll roll my airplane out of the avionics shop a few days from now,
sporting a CNX80, MX20, and some other companion equipment.
I'm expecting great things from the new boxes, including glideslope
guidance on LNAV/VNAV approaches (as soon as the next version
of software is released early in 2004). It's in flight testing now.
Newsletter 2 tells more about it at:
http://www.garminat.com/cnx_docs.shtml

I paid extra for ChartView in my MX20, before learning how much
Jeppesen charges for the required JeppView subscription.
I'll probably buy the first year's subscription just to see if I want
to renew it in following years.
Maybe I won't find JeppView to be cost effective.

WAAS will remain useful.
Nobody but John Tarver says WAAS will "die on the vine".
---JRC---

"Paul DeSmet" wrote in message =
...
Paul DeSmet wrote:
It looks like the new CNX-80 is the way of the future. Has anyone =
used=20
one?
=20
O.K.. I read some of these msgs. Does it look like WAAS is going to =
die=20
on the Vine? If so is there any reason to go with a CNX 80? I'm now=20
thinking about getting an Apollo GX 55 instead and save a bunch a =
money.=20
I have an Anywhere Map IPAC. That does a great job for situational=20
awareness. The GX 55 gets me into the IFR GPS for less than 7K=20
installed? Eventually I can add the MX 20 display. Thoughts?