Whats the difference in autopilots?

jd21476

jd21476

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
715
Location
San Diego, CA
Display Name
Display name:
jd21476
I have a Piper Comanche and Im shopping for autopilots. The Garmin GFC500 has STC approval but will cost between $15k and $18k installed. Thats alot of money.

The Pro Pilot Trio looks like it will get an STC this year and from what Ive seen should be between $8k to $10k installed.

I have a friend with the GFC500 and he loves it, swears by it and claims there is nothing better.

I cant see spending almost twice as much for an autopilot. I do have a Garmin GNC355 and a G5 HSI so Im sure the Garmin autopilot integrates easier but were talking a significant price difference.
 
Getting the GFC500 is a good option if you have a Garmin panel. I have an stec55x and it functions well with Garmin but if you don't have Garmin, I can't see going with a GFC500. The expensive part is going to be the install.
 
It’s hard to determine the quality differences between the 2 APs. I would suspect all the hardware with the Garmin, servos and controller, are better.

The one big difference is product support. Garmin has a well established network service centers. Trio has 5 in the US. So if you have issues who you gonna call and are you willing to travel 500-1000 miles. Will Trio still be in business in 8 years or do you own an AP without support?
 
1. My Mooney was on the tru-trak “next year” list for 3 years before I gave up on it.
2. Does that price include all the things the garmin does? I see on their website that gpss and “gpsv” are extra.
 
How do you use your airplane? Do you need an autopilot that can legally shoot a coupled instrument approach and remain engaged to low altitude? They are both good autopilots, but the GFC500 is more capable overall and certified to remain engaged to 200' and fully coupled to an instrument approach/procedure. The Trio is limited to 500' and has not been certified for coupled instrument approaches and procedures. It can fly one, but it is not legal to do so currently. It's also limited to GPS vs GFC500 can still track a VOR or fly an ILS. The GFC500 is also more integrated, so you can pre-select on the G5 (via the G5 or the mode controller)for altitudes, vertical speed, airspeed, etc, whereas the Trio must be managed only via it's controller for those options.
 
Last edited:
Here's a quick feature comparison of the Garmin GFC 500, the Bendix King AeroCruze 100 (formerly TruTrak), and the Trio, as far as I've learned so far from online discussions:
  • Track a GPS course: all
  • Wing leveler: all
  • Standalone installation: Trio and AC100 (GFC 500 requires a G5 or GI-275)
  • Allows lateral mode without vertical: Trio only
  • Track a VOR or LOC: GFC 500 only
  • Follow heading bug: GFC 500 (AC100 or ??Trio?? requires an Aspen)
  • IFR enroute certification: all
  • SID, STAR, and approach certification: GFC 500 only
  • Optional yaw damper: GFC 500 only
  • IAS hold (for climb or glide): GFC 500 (not AC100; don't know about Trio)
  • Optional Autotrim: GFC 500 (not AC100; don't know about Trio)
 
Last edited:
David Megginson said:
Here's a quick feature comparison of the Garmin GFC 500, the Bendix King AeroCruze 100 (formerly TruTrak), and the Trio, as far as I've learned so far from online discussions:
  • Track a GPS course: all
  • Wing leveler: all
  • Standalone installation: Trio and AC100 (GFC 500 requires a G5 or GI-275)
  • Allows lateral mode without vertical: Trio only
  • Track a VOR or LOC: GFC 500 only
  • Follow heading bug: GFC 500 (AC100 or ??Trio?? requires an Aspen)
  • IFR enroute certification: all
  • SID, STAR, and approach certification: GFC 500 only
  • Optional yaw damper: GFC 500 only
  • IAS hold (for climb or glide): GFC 500 (not AC100; don't know about Trio)
  • Optional Autotrim: GFC 500 (not AC100; don't know about Trio)
Click to expand...
OP currently has a G5 HSI. Garmin won't allow 2 NAV sources feeding the G5 HSI in conjunction with a 3rd party autopilot.

Trio won't currently follow a heading but apparently they are working on it because page 52 of the October 2020 manual describes how it will work in the future.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0088/9952/6761/files/Certified_Pro_Pilot_Manual_13200006.pdf

Looks like Trio's Comanche kit only has 2 servos (no autotrim).

Trio can do airspeed climb, but the UI for it is a bit funky. As a matter of fact, I've flown a stack mount Trio a couple of times and found the UI rather confusing in general (my A/P experience is mainly with various S-TEC, the early Centuries, KAP-140 and GFC700). The GFC500 is much more intuitive.

EDIT: I believe the GFC500 is capable of engaging lateral mode without vertical. Also, whether the GFC500 can track a VOR/LOC depends on the whether the radio has a digital interface and whether it's connected to G5 or GI275.
 
Last edited:
asicer said:
OP currently has a G5 HSI. Garmin won't allow 2 NAV sources feeding the G5 HSI in conjunction with a 3rd party autopilot.

Trio won't currently follow a heading but apparently they are working on it because page 52 of the October 2020 manual describes how it will work in the future.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0088/9952/6761/files/Certified_Pro_Pilot_Manual_13200006.pdf

Looks like Trio's Comanche kit only has 2 servos (no autotrim).

Trio can do airspeed climb, but the UI for it is a bit funky. As a matter of fact, I've flown a stack mount Trio a couple of times and found the UI rather confusing in general (my A/P experience is mainly with various S-TEC, the early Centuries, KAP-140 and GFC700). The GFC500 is much more intuitive.

EDIT: I believe the GFC500 is capable of engaging lateral mode without vertical. Also, whether the GFC500 can track a VOR/LOC depends on the whether the radio has a digital interface and whether it's connected to G5 or GI275.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the additions and corrections.

The GFC 500 has lots of smaller features that may/may not be important to any specific owner, but as others have mentioned, the most important one to highlight in the list is the level of IFR certification: the Trio and AC100 are certified for IFR enroute use only, while the GFC 500 is also certified for use during IFR procedures (SIDs, STARs, and instrument approaches).

If you need an A/P that is legal to fly IFR procedures, then there's not really an option; if you don't, then the Trio or AC100 will save you at least $7–10K.
 
I have a Trio in my Lancair. Also installed one in our RV when we had it. I had the Garmin in my Lancair; I removed it to install the Trio. Trio has been around the experimental world a long time. They provide excellent product support and are very well regarded in the experimental community. I don't see them going out of business and leaving customers without support.

Find someone in your are and fly both. See which you prefer.
 
jd21476 said:
I know that hands down the Garmin GFC 500 is a better A/P but Im talking cost comparisons and is it $8k or $10k better than the Trio?
Click to expand...
If you need an autopilot that's certified to do IFR approaches (and SIDs/STARs), then yes; if you don't, then probably no.

IFR makes everything more expensive (e.g. $10K+ installed for an IFR GPS, vs $200 for an Android tablet with built-in GPS for VFR navigation). There's no point in paying for more than you actually need, and the Trio is still certified for enroute IFR use.
 
FORANE said:
I have a Trio in my Lancair. Also installed one in our RV when we had it. I had the Garmin in my Lancair; I removed it to install the Trio. Trio has been around the experimental world a long time. They provide excellent product support and are very well regarded in the experimental community. I don't see them going out of business and leaving customers without support.

Find someone in your are and fly both. See which you prefer.
Click to expand...
Ever here of a company named Narco. No one thought would go out of business either.
 
Clip4 said:
Ever here of a company named Narco. No one thought would go out of business either.
Click to expand...
That's one reason (not the main one) that I went with Garmin over Avidyne for my IFR GPS in 2017. There's never any guarantee no matter what your size, but big fish tend to eat little fish rather than the other way around, as we saw with the Honeywell/Bendix-King acquisition of TruTrak and then subsequent neglect, or the earlier Garmin acquisition of Apollo and then slow strangulation of the CNX-80/GNS-480. I don't mind going with little companies for small purchases, but for a big (to me) purchase like an IFR GPS or autopilot, I want someone big and stable.
 
jd21476 said:
I know that hands down the Garmin GFC 500 is a better A/P but Im talking cost comparisons and is it $8k or $10k better than the Trio?
Click to expand...
What NAV sources do you have hooked up to your G5 HSI? That might be a factor when Trio finally gets their G5 interface approved.
 
David Megginson said:
Thanks for the additions and corrections.

The GFC 500 has lots of smaller features that may/may not be important to any specific owner, but as others have mentioned, the most important one to highlight in the list is the level of IFR certification: the Trio and AC100 are certified for IFR enroute use only, while the GFC 500 is also certified for use during IFR procedures (SIDs, STARs, and instrument approaches).

If you need an A/P that is legal to fly IFR procedures, then there's not really an option; if you don't, then the Trio or AC100 will save you at least $7–10K.
Click to expand...
BTW, you might want to add Flight Director if this list is something you've got filed away somewhere.
 
Admittedly don’t know a ton about Garmin stuff and integrating with other stuff - but what about STEC?
 
asicer said:
I believe the GFC500 is capable of engaging lateral mode without vertical.
Click to expand...
I didn't think the Garmin had that option. The trio pro pilot definitely does have that capability.
 
Right now I have a Garmin GNC 355 and the G5 HSI. I understand they will interface better with the GFC 500 being as it is Garmin too but Im sure it will work for the Trio as well.
 
jd21476 said:
I have a Piper Comanche and Im shopping for autopilots. The Garmin GFC500 has STC approval but will cost between $15k and $18k installed. Thats alot of money.

The Pro Pilot Trio looks like it will get an STC this year and from what Ive seen should be between $8k to $10k installed.

I have a friend with the GFC500 and he loves it, swears by it and claims there is nothing better.

I cant see spending almost twice as much for an autopilot. I do have a Garmin GNC355 and a G5 HSI so Im sure the Garmin autopilot integrates easier but were talking a significant price difference.
Click to expand...


Some aircraft cannot install the auto pitch trim system of the GFC500, if that is true on your airplane then the differences in the autopilots are mostly going to be connectivity.

We own both a GFC500 w/auto pitch trim and a vacuum driven Britain w/o any pitch control. The GFC500 with pitch trim is awesome.
 
FORANE said:
I didn't think the Garmin had that option. The trio pro pilot definitely does have that capability.
Click to expand...
I think you're right. Now that I dwell on it, after you remove all of the vertical settings I think the GFC defaults back to PIT (pitch) mode.
jd21476 said:
Right now I have a Garmin GNC 355 and the G5 HSI. I understand they will interface better with the GFC 500 being as it is Garmin too but Im sure it will work for the Trio as well.
Click to expand...
Right now the Trio doesn't talk to the G5 at all. It would get everything straight from the GNC355, which is why the Trio can't follow a heading, not until they get approval for the interface.

Since you only have one NAV source feeding the G5, you aren't really affected by Garmin's 3rd party autopilot limit. Yet. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top