A student of mine has bought himself a C172 with G1000.
He intends to use it for VFR touring - including some long distance touring when the weather is suitable. He has a house in Belgium, but he is realistic about not being able to travel that kind of distance without very good weather.
My own view is this: he had a certain budget, and the aircraft he bought fits that budget. If it were me, I would have looked at the price of a C172 without the G1000, and seen that it was a little below my budget. Then I would have considered what I would spend the extra money on. It wouldn't have been the G1000, because that really doesn't extend the capability of the aircraft. It doesn't go any faster or any further, it may make it marginally easier to do the kind of trip he intends to do but any PPL should, with a bit of experience, be able to fly those trips without the G1000.
If it were me, I would have used the extra budget to upgrade the capability of my aircraft - perhaps by buying a C182 instead of a C172, or investigating other manufacturers' offerings for a similar budget. If I was thinking, longer term, of getting an IMC rating, I'd have spent some money on a DME and an ADF (neither of which his aircraft has), and maybe a cheaper GPS. These would give me real extra capability. (Although it should be pointed out that ADF and DME will become far less important if GPS becomes certified for instrument approaches, as seems likely now.)
Having said that, my student is very pleased with his purchase, and at the end of the day it is his feelings that count. We are all different, we all want different things from life and from aviation, and for him, the G1000 is what he wanted to spend his money on. I have to admit that the first few times I flew it, there was a definite novelty value (as there was with a Seneca which I flew for a while which also had a glass cockpit), but it didn't last very long - it still flies just like any other C172.
FFF
----------------