Garmin G5 or GRT Mini B ?

I am on the fence and have not seen either one , so for those of you who have seen them in person at Oshkosh , which one do you seem to favor ? The Garmin G5 or GRT Mini B . Any additional comparison will be Greatly Appreciated . Thanks to all who answer .

49clipper

I have been wondering the same thing? which one?

If you have or are planning to have a G3X Touch system or you want to install it as part of a stand alone AP solution using Garmin Servos, then I would highly recommend the G5. There are a couple threads here that already detail the advantages of the G5 in those setups. There are some significant ones on that list.

I would also highly recommend the G5 as a stand alone backup EFIS as well but just be aware that it does not navigate on its own like I think the Mini B does. Other than that, there is nothing much that the G5 does not have that the Mini B does (other than the GRT system integration).

The G5 is smaller and lighter even with the optional backup battery and fits a standard 3 1/8" hole and requires very little room behind the panel as it is not very deep.

My G5 performed flawlessly to Osh and back from East TN. I installed the optional backup battery while sitting in HBC in about 2 minutes. The screen is amazingly sharp and bright. Easy to see in all conditions even at extreme angles.

If you have or are installing a GRT based system, my understanding is that the Mini B has some integration features that would be handy in that setup. It looks like a great piece of equipment. Like the G5 it is nice and bright and has a crisp display.

Well, I own neither. But if the intended function is as a backup EFIS in IFR, then I'd recommend buying what you don't own. e.g., G5 only if you do not have a Garmin panel; Mini only if you do not have a GRT panel. And do not interconnect it to anything. You don't want your backup connected to a failed device.
Just my two cents.

BobTurner said:

Well, I own neither. But if the intended function is as a backup EFIS in IFR, then I'd recommend buying what you don't own. e.g., G5 only if you do not have a Garmin panel; Mini only if you do not have a GRT panel. And do not interconnect it to anything. You don't want your backup connected to a failed device.
Just my two cents.

Click to expand...

The G5 is built with features and design intent to prevent this failure scenario from rendering the G5 useless. Dissimilar design, dissimilar hardware, dissimilar software (even a dissimilar compiler from my understanding), essential features only, etc.

Have no idea about the MINI B...

You will get plenty of opinions!!!

I installed a Mini in a friends BD4 and a G5 in my RV10. If you are looking at a complete stand alone system the Mini has a few more features (options). Both the Mini and G5 have bright sharp screens. Both have PFD and HSI pages. Depending on the Mini and options you can also have a moving map and engine monitoring. Those options are not available on the G5. Garmin did a nice job of explaining why they kept it simple on another thread. I did hook up a serial connection from my GTN650 to the G5.

Also the size is not the same. The G5 is a drop in replacement of an instrument in a 3.125" hole. (or a Dynon D6 in my RV10). The Mini is wider and in my case did not fit.

As someone else said it you WANT integration it's an easy desicion if you already have Garmin or GRT. I have a dual Skyview system and wanted a standalone non-Dynon backup.

Gary

Brantel said:

The G5 is built with features and design intent to prevent this failure scenario from rendering the G5 useless. Dissimilar design, dissimilar hardware, dissimilar software (even a dissimilar compiler from my understanding), essential features only, etc.
.

Click to expand...

I'm aware of the Garmin claim, and I applaud them for making the effort. But IMHO human error (software) remains the big unknown, and personally I think different manufacturers is a bit better route - unless the Garmin engineers never talk to each other at the water cooler! I won't scream or rant if someone chooses a G5 for a Garmin panel; but I do recommend NO interconnects. Just too hard to predict what strange signals or voltages might come down the line in the event of some unpredicted failure.

BobTurner said:

I'm aware of the Garmin claim, and I applaud them for making the effort. But IMHO human error (software) remains the big unknown, and personally I think different manufacturers is a bit better route - unless the Garmin engineers never talk to each other at the water cooler! I won't scream or rant if someone chooses a G5 for a Garmin panel; but I do recommend NO interconnects. Just too hard to predict what strange signals or voltages might come down the line in the event of some unpredicted failure.

Click to expand...

Yeah and Y2K was gonna end the world too but that never happened...

Pretty sure Garmin covered the bases pretty well on this subject. If they had not, I would advise against it for the same reasons but they eliminated all of the concern IMHO. I have personally thrown every kind of failure possible at the G5 trying to trip it up (short of destroying it) and have been unsuccessful...

There's a lot of discussion regarding the benefits of dissimilar HW/SW to address failure modes that are probably very rare. It seems to me that there is not enough discussion regarding the benefits of integration using a single vendor solution.

I just added a G5 to my G3X panel. It immediately sync's up with my G3X's. I can now adjust the baro setting on the G3X using the knob on the G5. This is a feature that I use every time I fly.

In my old panel, I had Garmin for the GPS/NAV & Com, GRT for the EFIS and Trutrak for the Autopilot. There were some functions that never quite worked right between the EFIS & the GPS/NAV. I had to manually switch the AP between the EFIS & the GPS/NAV depending on what I wanted to do.

Now that I have a single vendor solution, everything works together seemlessly. I would never go back to a multi-vendor solution where I have to be the systems integrator.

Rick_A said:

In my old panel, I had Garmin for the GPS/NAV & Com, GRT for the EFIS and Trutrak for the Autopilot. There were some functions that never quite worked right between the EFIS & the GPS/NAV. I had to manual switch the AP between the EFIS & the GPS/NAV depending on what I wanted to do.
r.

Click to expand...

I am very curious about when you had to use that switch. My set up is similar (GRT HX, G420W,SL30, Trio) and I never have used that switch. As far as I'm concerned its only use is if the Hx dies.

As to backups, there is clearly a choice between 'fully integrated as possible' and 'as isolated as possible'. Each has some pluses and minus, nothing has zero risk. Each builder or PIC has to make that call for him/herself, and their passengers. After all, I know some who say they fly ifr with no backups.

BobTurner said:

I am very curious about when you had to use that switch. My set up is similar (GRT HX, G420W,SL30, Trio) and I never have used that switch. As far as I'm concerned its only use is if the Hx dies.

Click to expand...

I had a GNS 480 and Horizon WS. When I was using the VOR the GRT worked properly but the 480 didn't get the handshake it was looking for so the 480 always showed any error (something to the effect of NO OBS).

I don't remember the details of the GRT but there where 2 different modes it could run in. Something like NAV or HDG. IIRC, if I was in NAV mode, I could not change the heading going to the AP using one of the GRT knobs. Since I wanted the ability to use the GRT to fly headings manually, I left the GRT in HDG mode and would switch the AP to use the GRT as the nav source. If I wanted to fly a flight plan or approach using the 480, I would switch the AP to use the 480 as the nav source.

I guess since the GRT menu system required multiple button pushes to switch between NAV & HDG, I just found it easier to have 1 physical switch rather than trying to remember how to switch the GRT from HDG to NAV.

I use the GMC 307 AP controller in my new set-up. I can do all the AP functions with the 307 (which is what I do most of the time) or I can manage to AP from the G3X.

The GTN also does a much better job of seamlessly switching from enroute GPS to ILS/VOR approaches. I always found that to be quite cumbersome in my old set-up and I didn't do it often enough to remember all the buttonology.

Rick_A said:

I had a GNS 480 and Horizon WS.

The GTN also does a much better job of seamlessly switching from enroute GPS to ILS/VOR approaches. I always found that to be quite cumbersome in my old set-up and I didn't do it often enough to remember all the buttonology.

Click to expand...

I think nothing has a shorter lifetime than software. I don't know, maybe the WS didn't have enough memory for newer software? I know the HX will provide autopilot guidance to track inbound to intercept using anything (vector, vor, gps) and at intercept switch over to (ILS, GPS, VOR) automatically. In my case it will even swap radios as needed. I also do not know if the 480 provided gpss commands but the 420w does, the HX passes them thru, it works very nicely.

Bob,
I was thinking the exact same thing. I had a Garmin 430, GRT Horizon (very early model) and a TT AP. I put a switch (ARINC between the GRT, 430 and TT) in so I could have the TT get the ARIC data directly from the 430 in case the GRT crapped out. I never moved the switch in 10 years. Of course you had to program the flight plan and activate the approach from the 430.

That said I do like the integration of the newer systems.

Gary

For me, it was worth the extra space to mount the GRT mini. I have two on the panel. Synthetic vision on one of them. Any smaller screen and it would be difficult to use. Have not used the Garmin, so cannot comment.

+1
I agree, nice to have a backup HSI in case of a screen failure in a single G3X system