- precisionagricultu.re
- Compare
- M20 vs A200 Dual Antenna
Bynav M20 vs ComNav A200 Dual Antenna
What M20 does better (4) and where A200 Dual Antenna wins (1) — every spec side by side.
4.0Positioning4.6
Dimensions
Size comparison
M20A200 Dual Antenna
| M20 | A200 Dual Antenna | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 17 mm | 38 mm | −21 mm |
| Width | 22 mm | 460 mm | −438 mm |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is M20 better than A200 Dual Antenna?
- Satellite systems supported6 vs 5+20%
- Operating temperature (min)-40 °C vs -30 °C+-25%
- Operating temperature (max)85 °C vs 65 °C+31%
- Tracking channels1,507 vs 1,226+23%
Why is A200 Dual Antenna better than M20?
- RTK accuracy (horizontal)10 mm vs 8 mm+25%
Specifications
Side by side
| Satellite positioning | ||
| Satellite systems | GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, QZSS, NavIC (IRNSS) | GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, QZSS |
| Satellite systems supported | 6 | 5 |
| Tracking channels | 1,507 | 1,226 |
| SBAS (WAAS / EGNOS) | Yes | Yes |
| RTK positioning | Yes | Yes |
| RTK accuracy (horizontal) | 10 mm | 8 mm |
| Static accuracy (horizontal) | — | 2.5 mm |
| Tilt compensation (IMU) | Yes | — |
| Dual-antenna heading | Yes | Yes |
| Correction sources | L-band / PPP, SBAS | UHF radio, SBAS |
| Built-in UHF radio | — | Yes |
| L-band / PPP corrections | Yes | — |
| Connectivity & safety | ||
| USB-C | — | Yes |
| Battery & power | ||
| External power input | 5V; 3.3V | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | — | IP67 |
| Water protection (IPx) | — | IPx7 |
| Drop resistance | — | 2 m |
| Operating temperature (min) | -40 °C | -30 °C |
| Operating temperature (max) | 85 °C | 65 °C |
| Weight | — | 627 g |
| Width | 22 mm | 460 mm |
| Height | 17 mm | 38 mm |
| Depth | — | 58 mm |
| Housing material | Aluminium | Aluminum-magnesium alloy housing |
