This is why when I replaced the KI525 HSI with the SN3500 EHSI – writeup here – I did it as a “surgical” mod, with a conversion cable, so the old HSI could go back in easily. Years later, when it was all proven, and a second SN3500 was installed on the RHS, that cable was chucked out and it was wired in directly. And I didn’t involve an avionics shop (I appreciate not many have that option) and if/when I do use one in the future it will be done to my wiring design.
I find it really sad to hear of these stories but I am not even a tiny bit surprised. You can read here under Installer Performance and that job was done by a UK outfit with an immaculate “forum reputation” 
EuroGA was threatened with legal action over something (which was 100% true) posted about that firm later on, even though my writeup doesn’t mention their name.
I have written this before and many disagree but I see no evidence that “glass” (by that I mean the full size PFD type products, or anything Aspen sized or bigger, not just anything with an LCD) is any more reliable in terms of delivering less aircraft downtime. You just tear hair out from a different part of your head.
Also you never recover money spent on avionics when you sell. You have to “fly out” that expense, so you need to get a plane you really want for your mission, and keep it for many years.
Peter wrote:
I really think people should fly more, and spend less on avionics
Not a penny of these tens of thousands will make the plane go faster, higher, or go anywhere more safely unless your existing gear was flakey.
Come on it has to be IFR & FIKI & G3000nxi & GFC700 otherwise I am not going out of my bed
Excellent thread, keep it going
Ibra wrote:
Come on it has to be IFR & FIKI & G3000nxi & GFC700 otherwise I am not going out of my bed
Agreed 
Good looking TBM right there.
Snoopy wrote:
Agreed
No need to go out of my bed, I will sleep like a baby in that one
Peter wrote:
Also you never recover money spent on avionics when you sell. You have to “fly out” that expense, so you need to get a plane you really want for your mission, and keep it for many years.
I do see planes with upgraded GPS navigators and G5/G500Txi and especially GFC500 (as it’s the biggest installation expense) yield higher prices.
A 40k plane upgraded with G5, GNC355 and GFC500 would probably sell for 80k.
A local ATO now has two 172s from the 70‘s with G500Txi, GTN750+650Xi, GFC500 and dual G5s… apparently those planes retail around 300k €.
Glass panels look really really really nice, especially all glass.
But in 10 years time they will probably look quite dated and the manufacture’s latest gismo do a lot more.
A tablet does a lot more today (graphical notams, weather, flight plan filing) and is easy to update as new features come along. A 30K panel install is much harder to upgrade for the latest features.
Obviously the upside for a panel is that it’s conveniently located and doesn’t require attaching to your leg, yoke or window nor taking with you at the end of the flight.
If I had my own aircraft I think I’d be more looking at getting a panel installed mounting for tablet with good USB ports built in.
But then again 30K is a lot of money to me. There are plenty of people here who’d spend that on a holiday without thinking about it
dublinpilot wrote:
But in 10 years time they will probably look quite dated and the manufacture’s latest gismo do a lot more.A tablet does a lot more today (graphical notams, weather, flight plan filing) and is easy to update as new features come along. A 30K panel install is much harder to upgrade for the latest features.
Yes this exactly. Just look at how quickly the tech has evolved. You had basically the same tech for decades, and now it changes every year. A good analogy is the infotainment systems in cars. A 40-year-old classic car can still look good with its original equipment, but a 10-year-old sports car already looks dated because of the old tech. Of course a 172 equipped with current generation glass will command more, but what happens in 10 years when that glass looks clunky and dated?
There may come a day when the newness and hype have subsided and the tech stabilizes, but I think we have a ways to go before we reach that point. There is very little that 30k of screens can buy me that I can’t get on a sub-1k ipad. There are no places I can fly with it that I can’t fly now. To @peter’s point, it adds zero additional capability, and that’s where it falls down for me. Plus I stare at a computer screen all day for work, and the eye fatigue is so much less looking at naturally lit round gauges.
The main advantage of owning a plane has nothing to do with cost, in my view.
It’s the ability to fly WHEN you want, WHERE you want and HOW you want. The ability to NOT DEPEND on anyone else (other than regarding maintenance and airfield “politics”, at least 90% less dependency than when renting…)
Same thing when one compares owning a car vs. taking taxis or renting for a trip. Even though people may work out it turns out to be cheaper to rent a car or take taxis everywhere, this is only true if one lays ZERO value on the immense freedom one has when owning the equipment.
When I tried to find an airplane a month ago to fly from the UK to Germany, it was a HUGE hassle. I rang no less than 30 operators/owners and all gave me different reasons why I couldn’t have their airplane.
