Autopilot comparison chart

Flyingfanatic

Flyingfanatic

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
151
Display Name
Display name:
Flying Fanatic
I’m evaluating autopilots for our club’s Archer. I’m looking for a comparison chart of autopilots to show the membership. No luck with a Google search.

I’m comparing The GFC 500, AeroCruze and Trio.

Anyone know where I can find a chart?
 
Flyingfanatic said:
I’m evaluating autopilots for our club’s Archer. I’m looking for a comparison chart of autopilots to show the membership. No luck with a Google search.

I’m comparing The GFC 500, AeroCruze and Trio.

Anyone know where I can find a chart?
Click to expand...

You want the GFC-500. Garmin took everything they learned with the GFC-700 in the G1000 and applied it to a cost effective retrofit A/P solution. Not dissing the other options, just the GFC-500 is in a class by itself, especially with a matching Garmin GPS to get both VNAV and RNAV capability, not just RNAV. Nice to track headings or GPS as desired.
 
A) Read the semi-recent thread about people having issues with King and the Aerocruz. There's a reason there are a lot of posts here and on other forums about folks buying (and loving) the GFC500 and mostly threads bitching about the Aerocruz and King. Why anyone would voluntarily do business with BK at this point is beyond me. You're just begging for trouble.

B) Trio is small and still somewhat unproven and may not be around in 5/10 years when you need service. For an example, look at the issues with the Sandia attitude indicator. Those folks went with the less-known option and are paying for it dearly (their units are, for all practical purposes, bricks now).

In short, you want a GFC500.
 
Does the archer already have an STEC system? If so, it's probably worth getting a quote for the STEC 3100. STEC has a program that reuses your existing servos - they even recondition them and warranty them as part of your new autopilot install. The cost ends up being less than the GFC500. Having said that - I went from an STEC-30 to a GFC-500 and was glad that I did so. The ultimate cost increase was worth it in my case.

I have noticed that less STEC 3100s are sold vs Garmin GFC-500 units. IMHO, this means that Garmin has seen more of the crazy one off issues that can pop up with each different airframe and has most likely resolved that. The 3100 is by all accounts an exceptionally good autopilot, but it might take a bit more effort to work through the bugs during the install process.

Note also that the GFC-500 requires you to also have a G5 or a GI275 which will act as the brains of the system. If you don't already have a G5 or a GI275, you need to factor that into the price. The benefit is that you gain a really nice mini PFD in the process. The STEC-3100 can sometimes use your existing equipment for this information, so that also reduces cost.
 
Wow - sorry, but I think I might have jumped the gun regarding STEC-3100 for an Archer. That's a PA-28 right?
According to this post on BeechTalk - STEC hasn't approved the 3100 for the PA-28. They are saying that they haven't had the level of interest needed to start the approval process.

The key point is made by an STEC Engineer who says - "...at this time the PA-28 is not scheduled for certification of the 3100, that is not to say that it is not a possibility in the future, however as of right now there has not been the required level of demand on that airframe."

The entire post is here - I think you might need to create a free BeechTalk user account if you want to read it.
https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=187532&view=unread#unread
 
JEB said:
Does the archer already have an STEC system? If so, it's probably worth getting a quote for the STEC 3100. STEC has a program that reuses your existing servos - they even recondition them and warranty them as part of your new autopilot install. The cost ends up being less than the GFC500. Having said that - I went from an STEC-30 to a GFC-500 and was glad that I did so. The ultimate cost increase was worth it in my case.

I have noticed that less STEC 3100s are sold vs Garmin GFC-500 units. IMHO, this means that Garmin has seen more of the crazy one off issues that can pop up with each different airframe and has most likely resolved that. The 3100 is by all accounts an exceptionally good autopilot, but it might take a bit more effort to work through the bugs during the install process.

Note also that the GFC-500 requires you to also have a G5 or a GI275 which will act as the brains of the system. If you don't already have a G5 or a GI275, you need to factor that into the price. The benefit is that you gain a really nice mini PFD in the process. The STEC-3100 can sometimes use your existing equipment for this information, so that also reduces cost.
Click to expand...

One downside to the 3100 is it's still using old analog servos. Yes, you save a few bucks by keeping existing servos, but they're older servos. The Garmin autopilots are modern, digital servos (and on a per-servo basis, are pretty inexpensive). That's worth something.
 
Just my humble opinion, but if you're lucky enough to own an which aircraft is on the AML for the GFC-500 your decision should already be made. It's as close to a no-brainer as you can get... GFC-500 all the way.

In my case my personal aircraft is not on the AML. So I've considered the Trio, which appears to be moving towards the PA-24 and PA-30. But instead, I'm going to invest in keeping my old Century III autopilot going for another 5-10 years. That should give you an idea of how easy it should be to go with the GFC-500.
 
Flyingfanatic said:
I’m evaluating autopilots for our club’s Archer. I’m looking for a comparison chart of autopilots to show the membership. No luck with a Google search.

I’m comparing The GFC 500, AeroCruze and Trio.

Anyone know where I can find a chart?
Click to expand...
The AeroCruze 100 is cheapest, but isn't certified for use during IFR approaches (any segment, even above 700 ft AGL), so that washes it out if anyone in your club flies serious IFR. It also doesn't have a heading mode that's independent of the GPS (I appreciated that in my old STEC-20 when my avionics stack failed last year, but I could still track a heading from my DG). If you're all VFR-only (and plan to stay that way), then it's by far the cheapest option.

The GFC 500 seems pretty solid, but it forces you to use a G5 or GI-275 with it — if you already have one, great; if not (or if you prefer something else, like an Aspen), tough luck. It supports extra options like electric trim and a yaw damper if you want to get fancy (and have lots of $$$).

The Trio seems to have had a lot of problems actually getting delivered. Most of what I read in forums is complaints about delays, not PIREPS about any actual features.
 
bradg33 said:
One downside to the 3100 is it's still using old analog servos. Yes, you save a few bucks by keeping existing servos, but they're older servos. The Garmin autopilots are modern, digital servos (and on a per-servo basis, are pretty inexpensive). That's worth something.
Click to expand...
Didn't Garmin initially have problems with some of those digital servos and have to recall some for repair? I assume it's fixed now, though, because I haven't seen any posts about that recently.
 
bradg33 said:
There's a reason there are a lot of posts here and on other forums about folks buying (and loving) the GFC500 and mostly threads bitching about the Aerocruz and King. Why anyone would voluntarily do business with BK at this point is beyond me. You're just begging for trouble.
Click to expand...

I've actually had a good King experience, but the gear was all from a different era. My KLN-94 was a "nice piece of kit" (as the Brits say) in the pre-WAAS days. And my KX-155 has been bulletproof for 20 years, although it's not exactly bleeding edge tech. But that's the end of it. My formerly all-King panel is steadily being removed from my aircraft just about every time it visits an avionics shop. I'd love to replace the KX-155 with a GNC-255 and probably will, someday.

King just hasn't done well across the board for a long time now. Vaporware, weak competitive offerings, re-labeled pseudo-gear, problems with equipment which has been delivered, very poor support... it would be difficult to justify starting a new relationship with them at this point in time. Frankly, I'm not really convinced they want to be in this market despite their marketing presence.

In short, you want a GFC500.
Click to expand...

That's the short AND long of it.
 
When we were looking at an AP install in our PA28, we looked at all of the options listed. We had Dual G5's and a 430W in the panel, TruTrak and Garmin were the finalists, and then BK bought TT out. We put the project on hold and waited to see what was going to happen with that relationship. Ultimately we installed the TT, with some reservation on BK customer service and support....however the cost savings was undeniable and large. Install for the PA28 is a breeze and should not take more than 25 hours...Garmin was 40 hours. We could not be happier with performance of the TT, it is very intuitive and follows the G5 bugs as advertised, flip a switch and you are on GPSS source instantly. It captures and holds altitude very well, +/- 10'. I do love my Garmin stuff, and if you have the fun tickets to spend, go for it. But for what its worth, I am a very satisfied TT user.
 
B-K has the AeroCruze 230 as a slide-in replacement for the old KFC 150, but they're really struggling with their product management. Right now, they're listing the AeroCruze 100 (former TruTrak) as their "Basic Autopilot" at US $5,100, and the AeroCruze 230 as their "Advanced Autopilot" at $9,800. I'm sure that made sense in a hastily-assembled Powerpoint deck, but it doesn't pass the sniff test for anyone taking an impartial, outside look at their product line.
  • Who would buy an AeroCruze 230 if they didn't already own a KFC 150 to replace with it?
  • If B-K adds any new features to the AeroCruze 100, or goes for IFR approach certification, it won't be the "Basic Autopilot" any more and will threaten the AeroCruze 230.
That means the AeroCruze 100/TruTrak is essentially blocked in terms of future development, unless B-K ditches the 230 (which they won't, since it's an internal product with internal champions). It doesn't even make internal business sense, because the products are 100% different — by comparison, Garmin's current autopilots (like their GPSs) can share the same software base and a lot of the same hardware, reducing development and production costs, while the AeroCruze 100 is (for B-K) an expensive one-off diverting engineering resources from the rest of their product line (e.g. if they improve something in the 100, the improvement can't migrate to the 230).

The best thing that could happen for both B-K and the product would be to either drop the 230 and develop a new advanced A/P based on the 100/TT, or to sell off the 100/TruTrak to someone else who wants to invest in it its future as a serious competitor to the GFC 500, but they're probably worried about the competition against their own 230 if they sold the TT. So they'll just let it slowly die, while pretending to support it.
 
GFC500!
c81691620d84cd2f654e3c485cbf7269.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Another vote for GFC 500, get the electric pitch trim, someone mentioned yaw dampener, that’s not approved for Archer, not that you need one for archer anyway.
 
Well, if you already have a g5 or two, or if you're planning to get 1 or 2, then the gfc is the way - probably, definitely if you fly ifr to mins. if youd rather keep your vac dg/hsi or you want aspen glass, then trio. The dollar delta is real, but in the scheme of amu, what's a ten spot.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk
 
The choice here is a Corolla for $10K, or a Lexus SUV for $30K, and most people are recommending the Lexus, without mentioning how expensive it is.
 
MountainDude said:
The choice here is a Corolla for $10K, or a Lexus SUV for $30K, and most people are recommending the Lexus, without mentioning how expensive it is.
Click to expand...

I don't think so.

First, be sure to flatten the comparison baseline by establishing that we're discussing new autopilot installations, not retrofit replacements.

The closest thing to a "Lexus," price-wise right now in this category of autopilots is the S-TEC 3100. It's around $20k for the hardware. The S-TEC ("Gensys") 30 is a bit less at $13k or so but offers less functionality.

You have the "Aero Cruze" at $5k and the GFC-500 at $7k. The Trio... if you can get one... is $6600.

All three of these units are in the same ballpark of price. $5-7k.

It's true that to utilize the GFC-500 you'll need to install a G5 as well. But that's a highly desirable upgrade for a relatively minimal extra $3k. It's a mini-PFD after a fashion, and plenty of folks have already installed them irrespective of their benefit as a component in the GFC-500 system architecture. And you're dealing with Garmin, the world's largest mfgr of GA avionics. The other mfgrs are on far less stable ground.

The GFC-500's featureset exceeds that of all the other units on the list including the "Lexus" mentioned earlier. The Aero Cruze can't even be used for instrument approaches.

The big unknown is installation. Shops might give a quote, but it doesn't take much going off track to find an extra, unexpected 5-10 hours of work thrown in by the time the aircraft is ready for RTS.

As such I think the installation cost differences which have been mentioned will all come out in the wash.

The GFC-500 isn't the cheapest but it's right in the running with its competitors in terms of price. It blows them away in terms of value however.
 
I bought my plane with the all the avionics already installed. I have 2 G5s, a GTN750 and the TruTrak autopilot. I've got about 120 hours flying this setup now and its a decent setup. I had to make a bunch of "tweaks" to the TT to get it to behave correctly but its pretty solid now. Its tec not approved to fly approaches but it will do it, and actually does a vary good job (RNAV only). It's not hard to use at all and all the clamed features work very well. I've also flow other, similar planes with the GFC-500. Hands down the GFC-500 is the better AP! If I had the choice and didn't already have the TT I would have installed the GFC-500 and payed the extra $ gladly! With that said I'm happy enough with the TT that I don't plan to swap it for the Garmin. I fly IFR frequently and the TT works just fine for my needs.
 
MountainDude said:
The choice here is a Corolla for $10K, or a Lexus SUV for $30K, and most people are recommending the Lexus, without mentioning how expensive it is.
Click to expand...
Not a perfect comparison, because a Corolla can drive anywhere a Lexus can at the same speed limit. Maybe more like comparing an ATV to a Corolla? The ATV is cheaper and a lot more fun, but there are things it can't (legally) do that the Corolla can.

If you want to bounce around off-road for fun, buy an ATV; if you want to drive on the highway, buy the Corolla. Likewise, if you're VFR-only, buy an AeroCruze 100 and spend the thousands you saved on gas to do even more flying; if you fly IFR approaches, buy a GFC 500 that's certified for them.

If I were VFR-only, I probably wouldn't spend the extra AMUs on the GFC 500. But when I'm single-pilot IFR, I want an extra pair of virtual hands in the cockpit, especially at critical times like an instrument approach. The GFC 500 isn't cheap, but it's the least-expensive (new) autopilot that's fully IFR-certified.
 
It really is cost vs features. GFC500 = all singing all dancing awesomeness. BKAC 100 = the necessities of real world flying (and the ability to fly RNAV approaches if you are willing to use it that way). The installed cost is likely to be 3x for the Garmin if you include the G5.
 
George Mohr said:
It really is cost vs features. GFC500 = all singing all dancing awesomeness. BKAC 100 = the necessities of real world flying (and the ability to fly RNAV approaches if you are willing to use it that way). The installed cost is likely to be 3x for the Garmin if you include the G5.
Click to expand...
Maybe rephrase that to "the ability to fly coupled RNAV approaches in an emergency". After all, I could navigate RNAV approaches using only my tablet (*), without spending 15-20 AMUs installing an IFR GPS—the GPS in my tablet does a great job tracking my route—but we wouldn't recommend that anyone do that outside an emergency, either.

(* I actually did do that once in an emergency when my avionics stack failed in IMC. By the time I got to the approach I was in VMC, but I still wanted to fly the approach they'd told me to expect as published, so that Ottawa Terminal would see me on the radar behaving predictably and wouldn't start rerouting other traffic in the area as a precaution.)
 
George Mohr said:
It really is cost vs features. GFC500 = all singing all dancing awesomeness. BKAC 100 = the necessities of real world flying (and the ability to fly RNAV approaches if you are willing to use it that way). The installed cost is likely to be 3x for the Garmin if you include the G5.
Click to expand...

There's more to it than installed cost. There's the availability (and quality) of ongoing support. Do you really want to be tied to BK (which, from the GA side, has been basically dead for years) for awhile? BK has shown zero desire to innovate (rebranding other's products) and zero desire to support the existing product base (taking away repair capability from dealers). Do you really want something as involved as an autopilot tied to that company?
 
David Megginson said:
. But when I'm single-pilot IFR, I want an extra pair of virtual hands in the cockpit, especially at critical times like an instrument approach. The GFC 500 isn't cheap, but it's the least-expensive (new) autopilot that's fully IFR-certified.
Click to expand...

I agree the GFC is a better AP then the TT but me personally when I'm flying IFR I use the AP for all the en route stuff so I can go over the approach, program everything in the GPS and radios. Once I'm past final and cleared to land I like to hand fly it in. That reminds me, one other feature I really like on the GFC, the TOGA button! I don't have a TOGA button but I can just push the unsuspend button on the 750 but its really not the same as having the FD and TOGA.
 
AlphaMike said:
I agree the GFC is a better AP then the TT but me personally when I'm flying IFR I use the AP for all the en route stuff so I can go over the approach, program everything in the GPS and radios. Once I'm past final and cleared to land I like to hand fly it in. That reminds me, one other feature I really like on the GFC, the TOGA button! I don't have a TOGA button but I can just push the unsuspend button on the 750 but its really not the same as having the FD and TOGA.
Click to expand...
Owners have quoted the AFMS as saying that the TruTrak/AeroCruze 100 is prohibited from being coupled during any segment of an instrument approach procedure (not just the final segment past the FAF or FAWP). I'm not an owner, so I can't check. What does it say in yours?

But agree, there are two reasons to use an A/P:
  1. To reduce fatigue during long flights in the enroute part.
  2. To avoid task saturation during busy periods like instrument approaches.
The AeroCruze 100/TT certainly helps with #1, and it's also OK (I think) to use it for SIDs and STARs, which can also be hectic times for single-pilot IFR in busy airspace, so it helps a bit with #2, but it, unfortunately, wouldn't be there when I appreciate an A/P most: at the end of a long flight, in IMC and rough air with rain lashing against the windshield and the radio going 100 words/minute, and I have to pull the plane through a T-style RNAV approach while hoping I don't end up going missed.

I can (and do) hand-fly approaches, but in a case like that, it's a lot safer to let the A/P fly the plane while you monitor it (among all the other pre-arrival tasks), and disconnect only if/when you have the runway in sight.
 
Last edited:
bradg33 said:
There's more to it than installed cost. There's the availability (and quality) of ongoing support. Do you really want to be tied to BK (which, from the GA side, has been basically dead for years) for awhile? BK has shown zero desire to innovate (rebranding other's products) and zero desire to support the existing product base (taking away repair capability from dealers). Do you really want something as involved as an autopilot tied to that company?
Click to expand...

Support for the Aerocruze has been mixed. Some folks claiming its a real fiasco, others like us, got good support. But I hear you, BK is possibly the weak link here. Having said that, 10k vs upwards of 30k is a HUGE difference and for many people its a deal breaker.
 
George Mohr said:
Support for the Aerocruze has been mixed. Some folks claiming its a real fiasco, others like us, got good support. But I hear you, BK is possibly the weak link here. Having said that, 10k vs upwards of 30k is a HUGE difference and for many people its a deal breaker.
Click to expand...
Upwards of 30K? I'm hearing 16-21K for the basic GFC 500 installed (just one G5, no optional extras). Of course, you can spend over 30K on a GFC 500 install if you go the deluxe route, including dual G5s (or GI-275s), remote sensors, yaw damper, electric trim, and maybe a few unrelated items since, you know, the avionics tech already has the panel apart anyway. :)
 
David Megginson said:
Owners have quoted the AFMS as saying that the TruTrak/AeroCruze 100 is prohibited from being coupled during any segment of an instrument approach procedure (not just the final segment past the FAF or FAWP). I'm not an owner, so I can't check. What does it say in yours?
Click to expand...

I don't have it in front of my but its says something like that. The autopilot will tell you when its "coupled". It will tell you its armed when you are established then once it intercepts the GS it switches to "coupled" I've let it fly the approach down to min on VFR days just to see how it handled it, and its spot on. I would never do that in IMC but I know it can if I ever needed. I usually turn it off and hand fly before it actually couples.
 
David Megginson said:
Upwards of 30K? I'm hearing 16-21K for the basic GFC 500 installed (just one G5, no optional extras). Of course, you can spend over 30K on a GFC 500 install if you go the deluxe route, including dual G5s (or GI-275s), remote sensors, yaw damper, electric trim, and maybe a few unrelated items since, you know, the avionics tech already has the panel apart anyway. :)
Click to expand...

I've heard that the minimum to expect is 20k and that is with an existing G5 installation and no pitch trim. I have no first hand experience on the G500 so this is pure hearsay! :)

P.S. North east US pricing, so yeah we always get hammered ;)
 
Pricing depends on where you are. Period. Having recently installed GFC 500, I can tell you it’s a involved process (we’ll probably every AP install is), anyway, in an Archer all the servos goes under the back seat, that’s a saving grace and time saver.

OP - not sure where you are, but see if you can find a shop that will quote you for installed price, doesn’t matter how long it takes. That’s the route I went. Already had 2 G5 and all the associated bells.
 
George Mohr said:
I've heard that the minimum to expect is 20k and that is with an existing G5 installation and no pitch trim. I have no first hand experience on the G500 so this is pure hearsay! :)

P.S. North east US pricing, so yeah we always get hammered ;)
Click to expand...

That's probably a little high. I was told I could replace my TT with the Garmin with power trim for around 15 -16K from an installer
 
WannFly said:
Pricing depends on where you are. Period. Having recently installed GFC 500, I can tell you it’s a involved process (we’ll probably every AP install is), anyway, in an Archer all the servos goes under the back seat, that’s a saving grace and time saver.

OP - not sure where you are, but see if you can find a shop that will quote you for installed price, doesn’t matter how long it takes. That’s the route I went. Already had 2 G5 and all the associated bells.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it also depends on the airplane. Apparently Cessnas are harder to install than Pipers because of the location of the pitch servos.
 
AlphaMike said:
I don't have it in front of my but its says something like that. The autopilot will tell you when its "coupled". It will tell you its armed when you are established then once it intercepts the GS it switches to "coupled" I've let it fly the approach down to min on VFR days just to see how it handled it, and its spot on. I would never do that in IMC but I know it can if I ever needed. I usually turn it off and hand fly before it actually couples.
Click to expand...
Totally fair. In an emergency, use every tool at your disposal, and having an A/P option in your back pocket is an extra layer of protection.
 
Thanks for all the info. Does anyone know where there is a comparison chart? LOL!

It's really between the Aerocruze and the GFC. I have heard the BK has been good to work with as of late.

Our Archer is IFR certified and capable, but there's maybe 3 of our 12 members with an IR. I know I won't fly it in low IFR.

It does not have a G5, so we are looking at 16k minimum for the GFC 500 and 1 G5 installed. Unless there's some G5's for cheep on the used market as other upgrade.

I have a quote for $1200-1500 for install on the Aerocruze and I've seen the unit priced at $4800. That puts us in the $6k range.

I would hope they'd update the Aerocruze to shoot approaches, but we'll see?

If money were no object, the GFC would be the way to go, obviously. But looking at a $10k price delta...? And I'm not sure it would add enough utility.

I will throw an comparison chart together and let the club decide.

We do have a Piper Autocontrol IIIb in it, but it's effectively inop. Two trusted mechanics said we would be chasing issues on it for a while, most likely. We've tried troubleshooting it, but no luck. I'm afraid we'd be sending good money after bad.
 
The GFC500 just way outclasses those others you mentioned. The only new autopilot that I'd consider over a Garmin product is the STEC3100, which is just as good as the two Garmin products. The STEC is just expensive if you don't already have an STEC in your plane with serviceable servos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top