G5’s vs Gl275 which would you consider?

[David0423]

I'm about undergoing an upgrade and debating between G5’s and Gl275. Thoughts...

 

[Clip4]

You are comparing apples and oranges as far as cost and capability.

 

[Jim K]

I went with g5s....5 years ago. They were cheaper and at the time the 275s were pretty new and a couple shops I spoke to were having trouble making them talk to existing avionics. I assume that's all been figured out by now. Honestly if I was doing it today, I'd go with the g3x (even though it's really old too) unless I needed to keep round gauges in a historic aircraft. The g5 is still around because it's simpler. It does less, it displays less. The 275 can get pretty busy for such a tiny screen, but it's a much higher resolution. If you have young eyes, it's probably fine. I didn't need the extra capabilities of the 275, so I decided to take the cheaper, easier route. As i age and my eyes get worse, I wish i had bigger screens.

 

[manac]

$9,400 vs $7,200 (w/AP interface), don’t have a delta on the install.
I wen’t with the 275’s and really like them.
I don’t remember the specifics of the differences but the 275’s easily won when I did the upgrade.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Budget considerations aside, the G5 has the advantage of being the simplest way to move from analog to glass. Although definitely expanded from analog, functionality is limited and single-button operation makes it an easy transition. That (and relative cost) is probably why they are so popular. The GI275 has and does a lot more and generally has a steeper learning curve.

In making a choice limited to those two, I would be looking at what airplane I have and what other equipment it is going to interact with.

 

[AV8R_87]

the G5 has the advantage of being the simplest way to move from analog to glass

AV-30 says "hold my install manual".

 

[midlifeflyer]

AV-30 says "hold my install manual".

Good point. Having seen the AV-30 in action, guess I should have said,

the G5 has the advantage of being the simplest way to move from analog to glass within the Garmin ecosystem.

 

[aggiepack]

At lot depends on your plan for the future. If the GFC500 or the G3X is on your bucket list, then the G5 is the better choice even it is the “older“ equipment. The G5 as an backup of the G3X can control the GFC500 of the G3X fails, the 275 cannot.

If you rule out the GFC500 for the future, AV30‘s should be considered.

 

[asicer]

You are comparing apples and oranges as far as cost and capability.

More like Toyota vs Lexus, in my opinion.

 

[bbchien]

Love my 275s.

 

[Ed Haywood]

275 has very impressive integration capability with other Garmin stuff.

 

[David0423]

275 has very impressive integration capability with other Garmin stuff.

How about the JPI? Someone was recommending it

 

[WDD]

If you want ADHRS and HSI, it's between the G5's and GI 275's. I went with the GI 275's. Has the same viewable area as the G5's, higher resolution, and offers lots of nice features.

Garmin is smart with their pricing - for "a little more" you can get a G3 screen. Me? I prefer the 6 pack.

JPI is an engine monitor. If you got the Garmin stand alone engine monitor, you'd get a third GI 275 with the engine probes.

Or.... you could get the Garmin G3 glass and add the engine probes kit, and display the engine performance on the G3.

And for a "little more" you could add.....

 

[asicer]

How about the JPI? Someone was recommending it

To expand on what @WDD said, JPI is an engine monitor and not an AI/HSI. A GI275 *can* be an engine monitor, but only if it is not in the AI/HSI positions (i.e. a GI275 configured as an AI or HSI cannot also be an engine monitor). A G5 can never be an engine monitor. However, a G3x Touch can be both at the same time as can a G500Txi or a Dynon Skyview HDX. That's not exactly a fair comparison since those are 7-12inch displays.

And while we're on the topic, the EI CGR30P is also an engine monitor but not an AI/HSI. Plus, if you go outside of the standard airworthiness certificated world then there are yet even more.

 

[Bill]

We ended up going with 3 275's. HSI, AI, and engine monitor. The 275's work with our legacy KFC-200, and allowed us to ditch the vac pump.

 

[WDD]

I’ll probably also add a third GI 275 someday for engine monitor.

 

[Llewtrah381]

The GI275 has and does a lot more and generally has a steeper learning curve.

Having the 275s, not sure I agree. Not a huge amount to learn, in my experience, beyond transitioning to an HSI from a DG, which would be true for the G5 as well. Can you elaborate on the learning curve differences between the G5 and 275 in your experience? I haven’t used the G5, so I’m curious.

From panel appearance to readability to functionality I’m not sure the G5 wins at anything but cost.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Having the 275s, not sure I agree. Not a huge amount to learn, in my experience, beyond transitioning to an HSI from a DG, which would be true for the G5 as well. Can you elaborate on the learning curve differences between the G5 and 275 in your experience? I haven’t used the G5, so I’m curious.

From panel appearance to readability to functionality I’m not sure the G5 wins at anything but cost.

That’s my answer in a nutshell. More functionality equals steeper learning curve for mastery.

 

[AvNavCom]

We ended up going with 3 275's. HSI, AI, and engine monitor. The 275's work with our legacy KFC-200, and allowed us to ditch the vac pump.

This is my set-up, with the steam-gauge pitot-static instruments kept as a back-up to the back-up (also, they're easier to read). Paired with a GNX 375 and a GFC 500, it's nearly ridiculous capability for a small GA aircraft. I did consider getting a G3X but it's very long in the tooth and a couple of Garmin avionics types told me that the successor is about to be released. Of course, they told me that back in 2023 and here we are, so that's what I get for listening to avionics technicians!

 

[midlifeflyer]

This is my set-up, with the steam-gauge pitot-static instruments kept as a back-up to the back-up (also, they're easier to read). Paired with a GNX 375 and a GFC 500, it's nearly ridiculous capability for a small GA aircraft. I did consider getting a G3X but it's very long in the tooth and a couple of Garmin avionics types told me that the successor is about to be released. Of course, they told me that back in 2023 and here we are, so that's what I get for listening to avionics technicians!

I think that's just a natural consequence of rapidly developing technology. Something new and better is always on the horizon if you wait. And wait. And wait. And wait.

"Easier to read" is an interesting observation. In what way?

 

[David0423]

We ended up going with 3 275's. HSI, AI, and engine monitor. The 275's work with our legacy KFC-200, and allowed us to ditch the vac pump.

Please do you have a picture of your panel you can share with me?

 

[Bill]

This is my set-up, with the steam-gauge pitot-static instruments kept as a back-up to the back-up (also, they're easier to read).

Ditto, we still have the balance of the six pack and I too prefer getting airspeed and altitude information from the steam gauges vs tiny tapes on the 275.

We are still old school with a 430 and KFC-200, but are perfectly situated to make the jump to the GFC when the time comes.

 

[asicer]

From panel appearance to readability to functionality I’m not sure the G5 wins at anything but cost.

A minor annoyance, but the GI275 cuts off the bottom of the compass card while the G5 leaves it intact.

 

[Rick A]

Friend of mine (with well-aged eyes too) had G5’s installed before GI275’s were available.

After viewing my newly installed 275’s, he was sorry he didn’t wait a little longer replace his round gauges. Mostly due to the increased clarity.

 

[WDD]

I did consider getting a G3X but it's very long in the tooth and a couple of Garmin avionics types told me that the successor is about to be released. Of course, they told me that back in 2023 and here we are, so that's what I get for listening to avionics technicians!

I hear you. Someday there will be a G3Xi something that will be built using the new whatnot connection technology with uber pixel clarity.

I got the newest - the GI275s vs G5s - also in part because on longevity. There will always something new, everything has a shelf life. The GI 275s are young enough to have a longer shelf life but yet old enough to not have the new product roll out bugs.

 

[Low Level Flyer]

One small positive for the G5, especially for those that fly IFR and are in actual conditions. The internal backup battery provides up to 4 hours. Not certain for the GI-275 since I have a pair of G5 in my plane, but I believe I've read the GI-275 is either 30 or 60 minutes. And of course these are all predicated on new batteries.

Edited to say up to 4 hours.

 

[frfly172]

I had the G5s before the go 275 was available ,worked fine in my 150

 

[AvNavCom]

"Easier to read" is an interesting observation. In what way?

Easier in the sense of how fast I can get general information without the need to mentally process an actual number, particularly trends. Some of this is doubtless due to training primacy, and I'd be curious if a young pilot "raised" on speed and altitude tapes would feel similarly if put behind steam gauges.

On my steam ASI, I'm very familiar with the rough needle position for the various pertinent speeds and so can tell with a brief glance both where I am in terms of speed and what the trend is (stable/increasing/decreasing). Similarly, I find it much easier to use the steam altimeter during a steep turn to judge altitude deviation and trends to back up the old eyeball-cowling indicator.

The GI 275 has a wonderfully clear display and everything you need is right there in that little circle. But somehow there's just a little bit of extra mental effort to read and process an actual number. It's almost like the analytical part of my brain is already occupied and hitches momentarily when I need to look at a tape, but the visual cortex is free processing.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Easier in the sense of how fast I can get general information without the need to mentally process an actual number, particularly trends. Some of this is doubtless due to training primacy, and I'd be curious if a young pilot "raised" on speed and altitude tapes would feel similarly if put behind steam gauges.

Probably.

The first two things I do with a pilot undergoing a glass transition are (1) cover the analog backups and (2) always bug altitude and heading. Just a good habit for heading, but the altitude bug gives you something visual to fly up or down to to hold altitude. Makes it much easier than mentally processing a number.

Making the direct number connection comes eventually. When I'm using a autopilot with altitude preselect, I will often add the next altitude to the select box well before I need to descend. About 2 or 3 years ago, I caught myself doing that when hand flying and noticed that I didn't need the altitude bug any more. For context, I've been flying glass since 2010, so it took me about 15 years

 

[Llewtrah381]

A minor annoyance, but the GI275 cuts off the bottom of the compass card while the G5 leaves it intact.

Yeah, I noticed that. I do a good amount of flying which involves turning 45 or 90 degrees for a brief while and noticed the 275 doesn’t have the tick marks on my old DG or the G5. I put some white lines (using a label maker) at the 45’s and that works well. Although the arrow tip may be buried in the stuff at the bottom, the tail is in a usable area. It was a pretty easy adjustment for a nuanced need.

 

[WDD]

The first two things I do with a pilot undergoing a glass transition are (1) cover the analog backups and (2) always bug altitude and heading. Just a good habit for heading, but the altitude bug gives you something visual to fly up or down to to hold altitude. Makes it much easier than mentally processing a number.

So... having a disagreement with CFI on instrument use. I have both the dual GI 275's and the analogue altimeter, turn coordinator, air speed, and VSI. I refer to the AHRS and HSI of course, but for altitude and speed I primarily use the analogue steam gauges. CFI was adamant that I should only use the "primary" and not look at the steam gauges.

I don't see how there would be any improved performance / safety by looking only at the GI 275. The old steam gauges were perfectly safe when I didn't have the GI's.

What say you all?

 

[bbchien]

Your CFI is full of crap. Just use whatever scan works. PS. I lost and posted about the loss of my AHARS link from GI 275 #1 to GI275 #2 after an upgrade. The failure was in the new config and was "on and off" until eventually just "off".
It was a good thing I still had my analog skills....

and also CFI/I/-MEI ATP

 

[Llewtrah381]

+1 for using what works. I still have my steam gauge ASI, Alt, VSI, and TC. I rely almost entirely on them for most things because I’m an older analog thinker. A bouncing needle is easier for me to comprehend quickly than a digital readout zinging around. That’s another reason I like the tick marks on the HSI I mentioned above: at a glance I can know what I want to do next and when to stop a turn without trying to do math in my head in the middle of an activity.

All that said, and although the 275 and Alt are both checked biennially, there is a difference between the two which gets bigger at altitude so I set the Altimeter setting on the 275 first and then make the needle on the Alt match the alt on the 275.

 

[asicer]

the G5...The internal backup battery provides a minimum of 4 hours.

Um, no. It provides "up to 4 hours".

I've read the GI-275 is either 30 or 60 minutes.

The GI-275 minimum for takeoff is >60 minutes if your service ceiling is >25000ft and >30 minutes if it's <25000ft.
EDIT: The ICA also says that the GI-275 battery rundown test "may take up to 150 minutes to complete".

 

[WDD]

Your CFI is full of crap.

Yeah - copy that.

All that said, and although the 275 and Alt are both checked biennially, there is a difference between the two which gets bigger at altitude so I set the Altimeter setting on the 275 first and then make the needle on the Alt match the alt on the 275.

Which is what I do / did. She also had huge problems with that. Might have just been having a bad day - she also got testy when I said I didn't have a vacuum system to check and my altimeter couldn't work without it. After a few explanations, she remembered / came around. It was overall a strange flight / session.

 

[WDD]

The GI-275 minimum for takeoff is >60 minutes if your service ceiling is >25000ft and >30 minutes if it's <25000ft.

And you check your battery duration once a year at annual to make sure they work as intended. I also have a battery back up on the HSI as well. I figure if I've lost all electrical power I'm going to land quickly, and if I can't get down in an hour I'm doing something really wrong.

 

[midlifeflyer]

So... having a disagreement with CFI on instrument use. I have both the dual GI 275's and the analogue altimeter, turn coordinator, air speed, and VSI. I refer to the AHRS and HSI of course, but for altitude and speed I primarily use the analogue steam gauges. CFI was adamant that I should only use the "primary" and not look at the steam gauges.

I don't see how there would be any improved performance / safety by looking only at the GI 275. The old steam gauges were perfectly safe when I didn't have the GI's.

What say you all?

My covering them is a training thing. Ultimately, use whatever you want. If you want to feel adept at the glass, use it. If you want analog assist use them. As a CFI I don’t care as long as it works. It’s a glass proficiency thing, not a safety thing. Except for knowing that they are synced and set, I’m not even aware of the analog (or other backup) instruments in normal operations.

 

[WDD]

My covering them is a training thing. Ultimately, use whatever you want. If you want to feel adept at the glass, use it. If you want analog assist use them. As a CFI I don’t care as long as it works. It’s a glass proficiency thing, not a safety thing. Except for knowing that they are synced and set, I’m not even aware of the analog (or other backup) instruments in normal operations.

Maybe it's the hours I've got with this panel, but I have no difficulty switching between glass and the steam. The steam is just easier to glance at when in the pattern so I can keep eyes outside.

 

[AvNavCom]

always bug altitude and heading. Just a good habit for heading, but the altitude bug gives you something visual to fly up or down to to hold altitude. Makes it much easier than mentally processing a number.

Thanks! I'll give it a shot. My GFC 500 has only been installed for a few weeks, so I'm just about in the habit of bugging heading now via the control head instead of the HSI. The altitude bug is a nice tip and I'll try that.

Of course, no good deed goes unpunished. I carefully had my GI 275s updated to the latest software as part of the GFC 500 install and now my HSI has started throwing an "LCD Board Fault" error. A bit of online sleuthing suggests this is software fixable, but my avionics tech has tried a full reinstall and the error remains. We'll see what Garmin has to say tomorrow, but he's making noises about needing to replace the unit. Getting rid of the vacuum system was great, but it seems it just opened up a new set of potential failures.

 

[asicer]

always bug altitude and heading

Lately, I've been bugging DTK to see how that compares to bugging heading. They added the magenta trend indicator to the AI's compass tape last year and then I keep that centered within the AI's heading bug. My thinking is that this might be useful practice if the HSI ever fails or goes into reversionary mode.