Dynon vs MGL

For general discussion of the Just Aircraft family of aircraft.
Includes: Highlander, Escapade, Summit and SuperSTOL.
User avatar
RV6
Forum Regular
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:25 pm
Location: Gallatin,Tn

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by RV6 »

I did,I learned a lot on that one!!!!

John
jtaylor
Forum Regular
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:19 pm

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by jtaylor »

Here is my take. I have a an Odyssey in my Highlander. Disclaimer- I have never flown behind a Dynon. I chose MGL over Dynon because of the following. I liked the screen customization options. You really can do what they say. I pretty much leave it alone now, but for a while, I would have something to add or delete and I just do it myself. Or if it was major, they would do it for me and email me the update. Put the hd card in the panel and ta-da! Also, the RDAC unit is what all the engine sensors terminate to. It is approved to mount on the hot side of the firewall. (not so on Dynon) All that data transmits through a 1/8" diameter cable. I only have about 6 small gauge wires penetrating the firewall. I have a Jabiru 3300, so think about 6 egt's, 6 cht's, oil pressure, oil temp, current shunt, fuel flow, ect. all through the firewall. A good thing and much easier to install. Extra stuff for MGL is much cheaper. The compass and attitude sensors connect with RCA cables. The plugs are all standard dsub connectors. Very flexible configurations. They manufacture their own com radio that has intercom built in. The panel controls the radio freq when you select it. Made sense to have same manufacturers for support reasons.

Now here is my take after living with it for 2 years. Screen flexibility- it's nice, but if the screens are well designed from the get go, they don't need customizing. Especially in something as simple as a Highlander. I have struggled with the radio. Rx and intercom quality has been spotty. Using their recommended antenna. I may give up on the radio. I'm pretty tech savvy and don't mind messing around with the system. That's why we call it "experimental". If you want to put in something turnkey and really sorted, I think Dynon is a more polished system. If you unleashed MGL on a flight school or any airplane with multiple pilots, might be troublesome. If you are building something really wacky, the inherent flexibility of MGL is a winner. If you are a 6-pack guy and this is your first glass panel rodeo, I think the Dynon may be an easier transition.

The service at MGL has been great. Matt at the California office is very professional and really helpful, but maybe a bit spread thin. I just feel the MGL product is a lot like our aircraft, experimental. MGL is constantly developing their products on the fly. They are not at all shy about changing things. That said, not every change is a hit, some are misses. Nature of the beast if you are going to carry the spear. The Dynon is a little closer to certified, slower to modify, but changes are really going to be really ironed out before being released.

I'm happy with my choice, but both have their advantages. Hey, I like some of the flying characteristics of a Supercub better than my highlander, but that's just me. You can't have it all. Nothing is perfect.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
levyland
Veteran Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by levyland »

just for the record the 10" Skyview does fit in the panel. Just barely, but it does
jak
Veteran Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:40 pm
Location: toccoa Ga

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by jak »

John 10" skyview does not fit into standard panel . Jak
Pick up a rifle and you instantly change from a subject to a citizen.
User GDS
Veteran Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 11:59 am
Location: Big Bear Airport

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by User GDS »

I've got the 7" Dynon Skyview and am very pleased with it, for all the reasons everyone else has said here. But if I were building another JA plane now, I would build a simple panel, similar to the SS in the recent AOPA pilot magazine article. Big turn and bank coordinator, big airspeed indicator, analog AOA meter. Then I would add any legal altimeter and a digital engine monitoring system (the one with the biggest numbers) from one of the manufacturers mentioned here. For navigation I would add a portable GPS that could I/O to an ACK 406 ELT. Add a handheld radio wired to an external antennae and the best portable intercom/headset on the market and that's a panel.

Flying my Highlander is a lot like riding the HD Road King. It's great on short trips, nice weather and no traffic, don't need distractions on the panel.
GDS
So Cal
Highlander #232
Rotax 912ULS, Dynon Skyview
User avatar
stede52
Premium Member
Posts: 1066
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:40 am
Location: Carnation, WA

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by stede52 »

My Dynons have been bullet proof since I installed them, but I did need a taller panel. I'm looking forward to the Skyview touch panel in my next project. :D
Steve D N419LD
User GDS
Veteran Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 11:59 am
Location: Big Bear Airport

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by User GDS »

In the other plane I fly I use my wife's I-Pad with Foreflight. When we get into the smallest bit of turbulence we end up fingerpainting on the screen and opening menus and pages we didn't want. Anyone use a touchscreen on a panel mounted unit and have better luck?
GDS
So Cal
Highlander #232
Rotax 912ULS, Dynon Skyview
User avatar
john2
Veteran Member
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:42 am
Location: Lucedale, Ms.

Re: Dynon vs MGL

Post by john2 »

User GDS wrote:In the other plane I fly I use my wife's I-Pad with Foreflight. When we get into the smallest bit of turbulence we end up fingerpainting on the screen and opening menus and pages we didn't want. Anyone use a touchscreen on a panel mounted unit and have better luck?
That is a problem that Dynon recognized with it's new touch screen. You have the option to used the standard buttons and knobs if there is turbulence.
Take Care,
John Cooley
Kit #265 converted to SuperSTOL
N265JC reserved
Post Reply

Return to “Just Aircraft”