I'm curious...
 
Are people routing to Aux tracks or Buss tracks as effect sends now that we're not limited to just buss channels?
 
Do you see any benefits to using one or the other?
 
Looking forward to some great responses! Especially from Mr. Anderton :-)

Well I haven't needed the aux tracks . I can see how useful they are for recording things but for sends I use aux buses. Just as I have for many years. 
 
I did test them out and was impressed by them but I haven't found a piratical use for them yet. Its very possible I need to rethink how I mix. In the case you propose I wouldn't do it that way. I don't need to have a recorded track created be a send. Others may need one very much. 

I tend to use Aux Tracks for sub-mixes rather than effects, and I always place the Aux Tracks with the regular tracks feeding them into a folder.  But that's because I don't often have FX per instrument type, but rather shared between different instruments.
 
That said, maybe on my next project I'l try using them for FX, and maybe organize them together in an Effects folder.  Hmmm...

Yeah I'm still using busses for Fx sends, it just seems more natural as that was the way I learnt, back in the day...

I finding AUX tracks have their place. for example if you do a lot of DI guitar tracks, you can mix down to an AUX, then use that same guitar DI track and send it to another amp sim for a more fuller sound.
also mixes within the mix. also using it for parallel compression.

Regular buses for FX, Aux tracks for sub mixes.  Not really a functionality thing though other than where they live in Console View.
 
For example, I like having a reverb bus out of the way.  OTH, if I have instruments grouped, I like them located just to the right of the instruments that feed them. 
 
If/when we ever see functional CV folders this might change though
 
I really like the way R* handles this - folders ARE buses.  Quite elegant.  In fact, any track can do anything ... I still prefer Sonar over all though
 

I use a mix of both - buses for the traditional "effects-that-process-more-than-one-track," like reverb, distortion, delay, etc., and cue/headphone buses. The reason why is the ease with which you can hide the Master pane (or buses in the Console view) and reduce clutter, and because I don't need to record their outputs...the outputs are only of interest in the context of feeding into the master bus during mixdown, or feeding something like a headphone amp.
 
I almost never use synth recording/aux tracks for the reason people wanted them  I use Aux Tracks mostly for multiband processing so they can fold up nice and neat into a folder track. I also use them in the weirdass ways described in the Friday's Tip of the Week for Week 84 (songwriting) and Week 104 (instructional videos), as well as for archiving instrument tracks within the project itself, rather than exporting/importing.
 
Although I see why some people feel SONAR's previous bus structure was limiting, and why eliminating a distinction between buses and tracks is liberating, I very much like the way things are now: two different ways to approach buses, so you can use the approach that's optimum for specific tasks.

I haven't really figured Aux Tracks and Patch Points out yet.

olemon
I haven't really figured Aux Tracks and Patch Points out yet.

Well worth the time IMHO.  Just experimenting in a test project is probably enough to figure out if they offer anything for how you typically work.  Personally, I wouldn't want to do without them...
 

I still tend to use buses for FX sends and Aux tracks for grouping/applying inserts to multiple tracks; however, I do use Aux tracks for parallel processing on the track level.