Garmin 296 or Airmap 2000C ?

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:55:42 -0700, pavansheel wrote:

All - thanks for the valuable input.
Case anyone's wondering , I'll go with the AM 2000C.

Greg - any suggested website for getting the $800 tag on the AM 2000C ?

http://www.airplanegear.com/special-airmap2000.htm

I'm sure I'll buy from them too. I got the address from others here. I
just don't recall who. I've seen it posted a couple of times since.

Let me know how your shopping experience goes.

Greg

Greg Copeland wrote:
Greg - any suggested website for getting the $800 tag on the AM 2000C ?

http://www.airplanegear.com/special-airmap2000.htm

I'm sure I'll buy from them too. I got the address from others here. I
just don't recall who. I've seen it posted a couple of times since.

Let me know how your shopping experience goes.


I'd like to know also. Please let us know how it goes... that is an attractive
price.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

Excellent - thanks.

rgs
Pavan B.

In article ,
Greg Copeland wrote:
Of course they do! They charge more for their product and when its out of
warranty, they charge for more to have the unit serviced. The cost
difference will buy you a brand new Lowrance...assuming Lowrance's service
doesn't allow you to upgrade with trade in.

The Garmins may cost more, but they are better supported and usually
have more features. In 8 years of owning my Garmin 195, I never once
had to send it back to the factory for any type of defect, and Garmin
still publishes Jepp database updates for it. The comparable Lowrance
unit 8 years ago was the AirMap 300, which I also owned, and which
Lowrance abandoned shortly thereafter.

The Garmin 296 has provided features for a couple of years now that the
AirMap 2000c does not yet possess. Lowrance does not have a product to
compete with the Garmin 396. It's up to the individual to decide what's
important. Lowrance does support airport taxi diagrams on its newer
units, which I think is a big deal if you fly into larger airports.



JKG

I recently bought an AM1000 from him. Price $425, less $175 for my
AM300 tradein, net $250!! He had an AM2000c for $795, less $225 for
the AM300, net $570. I figured I didn't need the color (I have a 430
in the panel).
Great service. Highly recommended.

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:38:11 -0400, Jonathan Goodish
wrote:

Hondas have unscheduled problems just like any other make.

My four Hondas, owned over a course of 15 years (usually two at a
time), had fewer repairs that this guy's Saab in three years. Three of
the four Hondas never had a repair other to the exhaust system, this
being considered a disposable part in New Hampshire like sparkplugs.
I drove one of the former Hondas 10 years and the other 12 years; the
two others are still going strong after 3 years (no repairs) and 8
years (none but exhaust).

I have become a bit religous about them. I appreciate that Toyotas are
also good, and that all cars have become more durable in since about
1990, but my experience with the Honda mark has been almost magical.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

I have had a similar experience with Town Cars... (on my 3rd,
since 1985)

Yeh, I keep them a long time...

These big "Rincolns" are boiler plate cars... and will
haul ass AND freight... (and boats, campers and travel trailers)

...over 30 mpg is easy on the hwy even if your foot is in
it...

Drove in one 4 yrs ago (airport limo in Toronto) that was
being "retired" at the end of the week with 1,325,000 kilometers on
it....

BTW, I have a friend who is a technician at a Honda
dealership. He says he and 7 others make a good living fixing brand
new Hondas...

Around here (Eastern Canada) MOST brands are quite good these
days, - locally the Chrysler products seem to be a bit on the low
end, with Jeeps being the most pain...

Quality of the DEALER is a large factor as well...

And this could all change next year.....

YMMV!

Dave



On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 06:58:12 -0400, Cub Driver
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:38:11 -0400, Jonathan Goodish
wrote:

Hondas have unscheduled problems just like any other make.

My four Hondas, owned over a course of 15 years (usually two at a
time), had fewer repairs that this guy's Saab in three years. Three of
the four Hondas never had a repair other to the exhaust system, this
being considered a disposable part in New Hampshire like sparkplugs.
I drove one of the former Hondas 10 years and the other 12 years; the
two others are still going strong after 3 years (no repairs) and 8
years (none but exhaust).

I have become a bit religous about them. I appreciate that Toyotas are
also good, and that all cars have become more durable in since about
1990, but my experience with the Honda mark has been almost magical.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:57:07 -0500, Greg Copeland wrote:
[snip]

Quick follow up on this. My father got his 295 back from Garmin. They
seviced the unit for no fee.

Greg

Jonathan,


The Garmins may cost more, but they are better supported and usually
have more features.

Sorry, but that's just not true. Feature-wise, it for sure isn't, and I'd like
your unbiased statistical measure of support proving your point.

The comparable Lowrance
unit 8 years ago was the AirMap 300, which I also owned, and which
Lowrance abandoned shortly thereafter.

Lowrance dropped the support at the same time Garmin dropped support for units
with comparable memory.


The Garmin 296 has provided features for a couple of years now that the
AirMap 2000c does not yet possess.

And they sell it for a lower price. And the features will be offered soon as
an upgrade. What's your point? Having features is not a value in itself.

Take me, for example. Flying mostly in Europe, I couldn't care less about XM
weather.

Lowrance does not have a product to
compete with the Garmin 396.

They don't have a product that will set you back by an absurd amount of money
plus a steep monthly subscription fee, either. Again, having features is not a
value...



--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

In article ,
Thomas Borchert wrote:
The Garmins may cost more, but they are better supported and usually
have more features.

Sorry, but that's just not true. Feature-wise, it for sure isn't, and I'd
like
your unbiased statistical measure of support proving your point.

It's simple. The Garmin 195 is still being supported with database
updates, which means that the 195 can still operate as a useful unit
with a current database. The AirMap 300, which was on the market as
competition for the 195, was ditched by Lowrance years ago. The AirMap
100 was released after the 300 (and the Garmin 195), and it too is no
longer being supported.



And they sell it for a lower price. And the features will be offered soon as
an upgrade. What's your point? Having features is not a value in itself.

Take me, for example. Flying mostly in Europe, I couldn't care less about XM
weather.

That may be true, but Europe is a rather insignificant market compared
to the United States. Sorry to break the news. Companies sell to their
largest market, and sell features that are valuable to their largest
market.



Lowrance does not have a product to
compete with the Garmin 396.

They don't have a product that will set you back by an absurd amount of money
plus a steep monthly subscription fee, either. Again, having features is not
a
value...

Weather uplink is a huge value if you fly in or around weather. It's
easily worth the price of admission. Garmin has nothing to do with the
monthly fees, though I do not think that $30/month for the "Lite"
subscription is "absurd." Many folks pay 3 times that amount for cable
television every month, and that is truly something that contains almost
no value.



JKG