Budgeting for avionics

Groundpounder

Groundpounder

En-Route
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
2,852
Location
New Hampshire
Display Name
Display name:
Emerson Bigguns
I am in the market for an airplane, and trying to put numbers together. What is the best way to budget for avionics upgrades, without needing to get too specific? I know there are tons of variables, but I would like to have at least a ballpark figure to estimate what we can plan on spending down the road.
 
My PMA600 was just under 1k, as was my Icom radio. My KX155 was a little more and the removal of the old stuff and installation came in at 4.5k. I hope this helps.
 
steingar said:
Says me take the purchase price of the airplane and double it for the avionics. Should come out just about right.
Click to expand...

That all depends on your purchase price. Not sure I could put double the cost in on mine unless I went way way way way way way overboard.
 
EdFred said:
That all depends on your purchase price. Not sure I could put double the cost in on mine unless I went way way way way way way overboard.
Click to expand...
I could have easily paid more than the purchase price for mine. I could have gone way higher had I wanted to go overboard. But if you're really planning on avionics upgrades I honestly think its the way to go, budget it in the front end. Better yet, purchase the aircraft with the avionics you want already in it. That's the smart way to go. You might pay a premium price, but you'll never pay what it cost to get the stuff in there.
 
1) know what's in the plane, what you want to upgrade, and what you want to upgrade TO, 2) check manufacturers websites for retail prices, 3) monitor used market prices, 4) ask avionics shops for an ESTIMATE of install hours for whatever unit you're thinking of putting in, 5) THEN double it.
 
I think it depends on the baseline. (echoing @eman1200)

When I bought my plane it was very basic. 1 comm radio and a sigtronics sport-200 intercom.
Before:
Old panel.jpg

After:
panel.jpg

I think I spent about ~$15,000 including the HSI interface, AP interface, and new servos. All of the stack was purchased used. Oh, and while it's an experimental aircraft, everything I bought is certificated.
 
You need to decide what your mission is,IFR or VFR,new or used.i have had several used aircraft,and have updated the avionics on all of them. Find a good avionics person,and discuss your needs with them. There is a lot of good used equipment on the market.
 
Honestly, no one can begin to give you a ballpark number based on the information you provided. As mentioned earlier, VFR or IFR? That is the place to start. Also you will be much better off determining what your needs are and then purchasing an aircraft with the needed avionics already installed.
 
IFR for sure. The short term goal/need is ADS-B out, bonus points for in as well. Might do an audio panel at the same time. 18 month goal is a WAAS GPS and some sort of backup artificial horizon, along with a new #2 nav/com. After that probably an autopilot, and maybe a PFD of some sort, but that is a play it by ear kind of thing.
 
Groundpounder said:
IFR for sure. The short term goal/need is ADS-B out, bonus points for in as well. Might do an audio panel at the same time. 18 month goal is a WAAS GPS and some sort of backup artificial horizon, along with a new #2 nav/com. After that probably an autopilot, and maybe a PFD of some sort, but that is a play it by ear kind of thing.
Click to expand...

That's got to be at least a $35K - $40K proposition. Cheaper if it's done all at once. Even more reason to find the aircraft with the avionics already installed. The cost is a big reason I chose to be VFR only when I purchased my aircraft. I put in an Stratus ESGi and get phenomenal situational awareness at a fraction of the cost. But, it is VFR only...
 
Purchase an experimental plane and the cost of upgrades will be significantly less expensive for the VFR equipment. IFR, not so much.
 
Groundpounder said:
IFR for sure. The short term goal/need is ADS-B out, bonus points for in as well. Might do an audio panel at the same time. 18 month goal is a WAAS GPS and some sort of backup artificial horizon, along with a new #2 nav/com. After that probably an autopilot, and maybe a PFD of some sort, but that is a play it by ear kind of thing.
Click to expand...

If you are going to own the plane long term, the investing in the panel can make sense. Not so for a minimally capable plane, e.g. 2 place, or a short term time builder.

For maximal IFR utility and safety, you will want WAAS GPS, ADSB-in for WX (or XM WX on a good display), and probably at least a 2 axis autopilot. A second NAV with ILS would be a recommended backup. Cost that out, and it won't be cheap. The first three items could easily be $25-30k, although the new AP options have reduced cost for those a bit. The highest priority is GPS. If you put in ADS-B it would be unfortunate not to have the IN option available without starting over. My experience is these upgrades tend to come in approximately $10k chunks. Not for the faint of heart...the other things are nice to have, but optional, unless things like your audio panel are incompatible with the new stuff.

I've still got ADS-B to go this month, and will try to get out for only $6-7k this time, with any luck.
 
Best advice is to be extremely knowledgeable concerning the difference between WANTS and NEEDS as they pertain to accomplishing your particular mission.

Most of the stuff people install in airplanes is stuff they WANT, but convince themselves they NEED. That is an expensive path to follow.

A prime example is ADS-B. Many people think that ADS-B is a required piece of equipment after Dec 2019. It is NOT required unless you operate in certain areas. Will you be operating in those areas? Can you avoid them?

Know the mission, know the regs that pertain to your mission, and most of all know yourself and your capabilities.
 
Last edited:
Groundpounder said:
I am in the market for an airplane, and trying to put numbers together. What is the best way to budget for avionics upgrades, without needing to get too specific? I know there are tons of variables, but I would like to have at least a ballpark figure to estimate what we can plan on spending down the road.
Click to expand...
Buy an airplane with the avionics you want. Easier, less aggravating, and you'll be flying sooner than leaving the airplane in the shop.
 
I just finished my 4th avionics upgrade. 3 certified and one experimental:

45k for this one:

5K for this one:

If I were doing it all over again, both my planes would be experimental! The choices are vastly better as is the price!

Jim
 
The problem with experimental aircraft is trying to figure out what it is you are “giving up”. Aviation in general and airplanes in particular are a series of compromises. What you gain with experimental is often glaringly obvious, what you give up in return is not.

I agree with Murphey, buy the plane that has the avionics you want. Widen your search to include as many aircraft models as possible, then pick the one with the equipment you desire. Much cheaper that way.
 
Last edited:
Some reference points: My struggle to upgrade

I have been working with my avionics shop since May to upgrade my 1975 180 Archer's old panel. My recent IPC reveled that the nav part of the two Mac 1700 or the indicators is way off. I really don't use them much anyway. With the looming ADS-B, and the current antiquated state of the panel it seems it is time to quit flying the plane or move up. Since I mostly fly to destinations under IFR this makes for an expensive project.

After agonizing about equipment and money since May, I finally bit the bullet (or is it dust now) and committed to installing a Garmin stack of GTN650, GTX345X, 106B and a GTR-255 for the second radio. Notice no VOR backup. I cannot see spending money to use VOR navigation since it is going away so I decided to use a comm only radio in the #2 tray. The 650 can do VOR if I ever needed it. When have you heard ATC giving VOR fixes?

God is flying expensive! I agree with the desire to go experimental but for me IFR is an issue. This setup installed is $22,500!! I priced the plane on VREF without any upgrades and with the upgrade and its value went up by about what the investment will be. Selling it at that price may be a challenge but that will be hopfully a long way off when they drag me out of it for mine and others safety.

The plane goes in on Monday to start this odessey
 
Ether buy a plane with what you want, or get a plane bare bones that can take a skyview
 
Atlcenter said:
Some reference points: My struggle to upgrade

I have been working with my avionics shop since May to upgrade my 1975 180 Archer's old panel. My recent IPC reveled that the nav part of the two Mac 1700 or the indicators is way off. I really don't use them much anyway. With the looming ADS-B, and the current antiquated state of the panel it seems it is time to quit flying the plane or move up. Since I mostly fly to destinations under IFR this makes for an expensive project.

After agonizing about equipment and money since May, I finally bit the bullet (or is it dust now) and committed to installing a Garmin stack of GTN650, GTX345X, 106B and a GTR-255 for the second radio. Notice no VOR backup. I cannot see spending money to use VOR navigation since it is going away so I decided to use a comm only radio in the #2 tray. The 650 can do VOR if I ever needed it. When have you heard ATC giving VOR fixes?

God is flying expensive! I agree with the desire to go experimental but for me IFR is an issue. This setup installed is $22,500!! I priced the plane on VREF without any upgrades and with the upgrade and its value went up by about what the investment will be. Selling it at that price may be a challenge but that will be hopfully a long way off when they drag me out of it for mine and others safety.

The plane goes in on Monday to start this odessey
Click to expand...

How will you shoot an approach if the GTN dies?
 
Ravioli said:
And how will he navigate when the satellites are out?

[I don't believe that Nav radios will be going the way of the dodo any time soon]
Click to expand...

He'll still have the vor side of the gtn. I don't think the relatively small savings you'll see is worth having all your nav ability tied to one box.
 
Ravioli said:
What is the non-obvious to which you elude?
Click to expand...

Experimentals are not required to conform to the same standards of design, construction, testing, and safety that regulate certified aircraft. Some experimentals may be just as safe and well designed as certified, some not. Hard to tell which is which.

There are many reasons why they are dramatically cheaper, some obvious, some not.
 
Groundpounder said:
He'll still have the vor side of the gtn. I don't think the relatively small savings you'll see is worth having all your nav ability tied to one box.
Click to expand...

There’s alot of commonality in the gtn, like the screen, it goes you lost everything. If flying vfr, I wouldn’t worry about it assuming you have a handheld, if ifr...I would not want to be a victim of Murphy’s law just to save 5 AMUs.
 
teejayevans said:
There’s alot of commonality in the gtn, like the screen, it goes you lost everything. If flying vfr, I wouldn’t worry about it assuming you have a handheld, if ifr...I would not want to be a victim of Murphy’s law just to save 5 AMUs.
Click to expand...

Right, I was responding to the guy that asked what he'd do if sat signal was lost.
 
I would start by figuring out what your minimum panel would look like and what your ideal panel would look like. For example, a 530W might be the minimum you want and a grn750 might be the ideal. The closer you can find a plane in between minimum and ideal the better. Once you find a plane that mostly fits, then you can add an item or two to make it fit your needs.

If you can tel us your ideal, we can give you some ballpark prices.
 
Atlcenter said:
Some reference points: My struggle to upgrade
Click to expand...
Thanks for the story. I went through a very similar struggle, but decided on the VFR side of things. I'm ripping out a now dysfunctional, but once-upon-a-time very well equipped IFR panel. 2 VOR's 1 w/ glideslope, DME, ADF, marker beacon, auto-pilot. Unfortunately I'm getting a strong uncommanded transmit on com 1, intermittent useability on VOR #2, DME is dead and unserviceable and I already replaced my ADF with a Garmin Aera 660.

I mulled over going strong IFR with the panel and putting in a GTN 650, but then I realized there's a rabbit hole that I'd end up going down of having a more and more capable IFR panel. The cost of keeping the GTN database up-to-date for my IFR, plus the antenna I'll need and it isn't any more capable than my $700 Aera 660 for VFR flying led me to go with a less capable panel. The huge majority of my flying is VFR anyway and I just want to be able to keep current IFR in the plane which this will allow me to do. I'll leave the fancy avionics for a twin I plan on renting... that way I don't have to deal with it :)

I'm going with the GMA 342, GNC255, GTR225, GI-106a, GTX327 + ads-b - all of this is still 11k in parts not including labor :eek:. All that price for what ends up being a less capable panel than I started with. I don't think I could stomach a more capable panel considering I also need an interior and paint.
 
TigerGene said:
Experimentals are not required to conform to the same standards of design, construction, testing, and safety that regulate certified aircraft.
Click to expand...

Poppycock. They have this thing called an airworthiness certificate. Ever heard of that? I'll bet you dollars to donuts the DAR review of EVERY experimental is more thorough than the inspection of a factory built spam can.

TigerGene said:
There are many reasons why they are dramatically cheaper, some obvious, some not.
Click to expand...

Cheaper my ass. My lowly little RV is worth 65k on a bad day. And it only goes 160kts. Let's ask @Velocity173 what he'd part with his plane for. And then we can talk to some RV-10 owners about how... cheap... they are.

Sorry, but you are WAY off the mark disparaging the relative safety and/or costs of experimental aircraft.
 
Ravioli

If you are saying experimental aircraft conform to the same requirements as Part 23 aircraft, I think you are very much mistaken. There are loads of additional requirements that Part 23 aircraft must meet and demonstrate to meet, that experimentals do not.

As I said, some experimental aircraft might meet Part 23 and be every bit as safe. The problem is figuring out which ones they are.

It’s great that experimentals are growing in popularity. More choices for all of us. I choose certified, you choose experimental. No worries, we each get what we want.
 
Ravioli said:
Poppycock. They have this thing called an airworthiness certificate. Ever heard of that? I'll bet you dollars to donuts the DAR review of EVERY experimental is more thorough than the inspection of a factory built spam can.



Cheaper my ass. My lowly little RV is worth 65k on a bad day. And it only goes 160kts. Let's ask @Velocity173 what he'd part with his plane for. And then we can talk to some RV-10 owners about how... cheap... they are.

Sorry, but you are WAY off the mark disparaging the relative safety and/or costs of experimental aircraft.
Click to expand...

Oh she’s probably worth $80K. Comparable to a older M20J.

What I “gain” in an experimental over certified, is putting the fun back into flying. Flying a typical SE certified is like flying a pick up truck while the EAB is like flying a sports car. I always use my AA-5 as an example. It was enjoyable flying but climbing out 70 kts and 700 FPM doesn’t even comes close to the feeling of 110 kts and 1,700 FPM. Then throw in (Glasair) 140 degrees per sec roll rate, great visibility and aerobatic capable and there’s no comparison. And let’s face it, the majority of EABs just look cool vs the boring plain Jane styling of most certifieds. People come out on the ramp to admire an EAB and ask questions, with certified, not so much. It just amazes me that the light SE GA community hasn’t discovered this yet.

Yeah, if you want to fly the family then certified is probably the best bet. Of course most 4 place aren’t true family planes and then you pay the extra bucks to get one (PA32,C206) only to find out the fam really doesn’t like to fly in small planes.

Safety? Yep, we’ve got a higher accident rate than certified but it ain’t like it’s a marked difference. Most accidents are either early test flight stage or stupid pilot tricks. I always laugh when pilots talk about the strength of a typical EAB design. I’ll take my 9 G Velocity in turbulence over a PA28 any day of the week. Only one Velocity break up and that’s because the guy flew into a tstorm. People worry about how well it’s been built or composite delamination ? Yeah, rare you have an aircraft built haphazardly and when it comes to delam, the aircraft are built with so much redundancy it can persist for years without being a safety issue.

Only way I’ll go back to certified is if I buy a twin. Even then, that’s based on the current twin buyers market and it would only be one that goes 200 + kts. EABs are just flat out fun and offer the most bang for the buck.
 
Ravioli said:
Poppycock. They have this thing called an airworthiness certificate. Ever heard of that? I'll bet you dollars to donuts the DAR review of EVERY experimental is more thorough than the inspection of a factory built spam can.
Click to expand...

There are many threads on vans airforce that would speak otherwise, a whole lot of them involve drilling and attachment of the tails.

Saying an Amateur Built kit with an experimental C of A is equal to a Part 23/25/27/29 C of A is laughable.

Sure your COTS (consumer off the store shelf) device can be installed in you certified personal jet, but it might take a fireproof box with a dedicated automatic fire extinguisher to get a DER to approve it.
 
Last edited:
I could build a plane, or fly, I prefer to fly. There is no way I would buy an experimental built by someone with no standards to adhere to or supervision. I’m reminded of the guy who used RTV on his fuel system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top