Garmin 196 or 296?

Denny wrote:
I'm following this with great interest as I have the pair, 195 / 196,
Garmins that reside on the yokes in Fat Albert...
Both databases need their annual refresh... It will cost $70 for the
196 to get the terrain and latest flight data, and $35 for the 195, for
$135 total...

Unless you do a lot of low-and-slow, skip the obstacle database and buy another
$35 worth of avgas. My advice, worth what you paid.

Dave

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:25:37 -0600, Don Hammer wrote:

I have a 296 and think it's great. The screen is reflective and looks
good in bright sun.

I find it's rather washed out, compared to my old Garmin III Plus
grayscale. To be sure, I fly a Cub glazed as an L-4, or more light
than most cockpits.

I have not been happy with the 296. It picks up radio interference,
which the III Plus did not, and it's a lot heavier, with the result
that I have yet to find a solid mount for it.

On the plus side (as it were), the 296 is easier to use despite having
many more features. The terrain screen is awesome for a low flyer like
myself, and the virtual panel is a reassuring backup, since I have no
IFR instruments in the Cub.


-- 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

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 06:46:19 -0700, "Shirley D."
wrote:

Is this common?

No, you should almost never lose signal. It happened a lot on my first
GPS, which I inherited from my daughter, but never on its successor
Garmin III Plus and never on the 296.



-- 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