2000's DA40 vs >1977 Arrow III - Best financial alternative

Like has been said in the other thread, there is not financial justification for buying a plane. The CapEx isn’t your biggest financial outlay, it’s fixed and recurring OpEx. Buying today’s market is almost going to guarantee you’re over-paying for a depreciating asset.

Also, averaging 200/hrs a year for 10 years is a lot of flying.

Having said that, buy the one you want.
 
Bonanza. I’m not endorsing it, it’s just that it seems to be a race between someone posting Bonanza vs Mooney

M2C - you just got your ppl. Spend the next year renting and getting your instrument. It will take as long as getting your ppl

Then fly for a while renting different kinds of airplanes. You’ll have a much better understanding of what you’re really need for what kind of flying you’ll really be doing

Then start the process of buying only if it is still something you want to do.
 
I think in general it’s untrue that newer aircraft are cheaper to maintain than older aircraft in reasonable condition. Annual property tax may also be an issue, given a substantial value difference between the aircraft. $100 extra a month in tax adds up over time. Same for cost of money.

I’d conjecture that in the 10 year long term the G1000s in the DA-40 could be a risk area. Garmin is not known for supporting existing products forever and the whole panel is integrated around one product.

A friend has had a DA-40 for the past ten years, it’s a reliable plane in his caring hands but the annual inspections are not cheap. His hangar rent is also a bit high because of the wingspan door clearance requirement.

Buy the one you want, but don’t underestimate the costs or you’ll be frustrated.
 
Last edited:
Calculate various W&B scenarios for the DA40. I find it is easy for the CG to go out with passengers in the rear seat.

However, if CG doesn't go out then your rear seat passengers will love having their own door. :)
 
@Ernesto Castro We have a Diamond in our shop presently. The 2000 hour inspection is not for the faint of wallet. I have friends with DA-40's and I have flow 2 examples myself.

Seats are very uncomfortable (hard sitting), in some situations the plane loves to Yaw and you're peddling the rudders to keep it straight, long wing span requiring the next larger hangar at many airports, much higher insurance coast due to all composite design, hotter than Haiti's bubbly canopy in Summer heat.

There are strengths and plus, but many downsides too for the DA40. The ergonomics and visibility of the DA-40 is beyond terrific. You'll break your lower back and rearend sitting for more than an hour. The Arrow is nicer from cost of ownership perspective if that is a concern. Plus anyone can fix an Arrow on nearly any field.

YMMV
 
Last edited:
Just because someone has to do it, I will volunteer. I was considering the same thing as you. I have a good amount of arrow time, and felt comfortable in them, but prices are crazy, so I was thinking about da40s and Columbia's. I ended up with a bonanza for not too much more than nice arrows are going for. So far I have to say I'm thrilled. I know this was kind of an "I had the lasagna" comment from airplane, but something to think about.
 
For $240k, I'm sure as hell not buying a DA40. Not a PA28 fan either, especially if I have to sit in them for 200hrs a year
 
I love the Diamond and have a couple hundred hours in the 40 but I’d have to say the Arrow is a better plane in this situation. As others have said, newer composite planes are not necessarily cheaper to maintain. Any hangar rash or minor damage, the arrow will be cheaper. Also, a $120k Arrow will be a nice machine. I bet you can find a nice one below $90k and fly your 10yr mission (with fuel) for way less than a $240k Diamond.
 
NordicDave said:
Seats are very uncomfortable (hard sitting)...You'll break your lower back and rearend sitting for more than an hour.
Click to expand...

I found them to be quite the opposite. I was able to do four hours non-stop in a DA40 with no problem. I'd probably still be flying a DA40 if it weren't for the rear CG problem.
 
$240K is insane

Arrow

But why just those two. There are plenty of airplanes you can buy for your budget that are superior to both the da40 and arrow..
 
ktup-flyer said:
Not a PA28 fan
Click to expand...

Where that dislike button at?? At leas the Arrow has the wings in the right place :p:):)

But yeah, in terms of seat comfort - after two hours or so in my arrow, hours my butt needs a break. But that’s just me and I need to stop every two hours anyway for other reasons lol.

Arrow - cheap to maintain in terms of aero plane financials. Comfy enough. Fast enough. Good IFR platform. See above for correct placement of wing (low). All in all a good aeroplane. Does everything good but nothing great. I like mine. No experience with diamonds. They look like big, white RC planes to me.
 
If you're new to flying, find a partner. The costs are split, the maintenance surprises are split, and you won't be able to fly it every day. If not that, then a non-equity partnership.
 
Ernesto Castro said:
Bonanzas
Click to expand...
I don't get their hype. Pretty, good ramp presence, but I could never get past the big yoke bar or the fact that you can't actually use all six seats. The 210 and Piper Lance/Saratoga/Six lack the Beech refinement but I find them more comfortable and a little more capable

But saying that is sacrilege around here!

What about a Tiger? Arrow speeds and fixed gear fixed pitch prop.. fly great too! If you plan to fly something 200 hrs a year for the next ten years it might be worth actually getting the very thing you want and best fits your mission even if it means a longer trip home with your new plane
 
My issue (if I were in the market, so gain of salt time) is panel upgradability. A DA40/G1000 has limited upgradability. A steam gauge panel has very few.
 
Ernesto Castro said:
Mooney were another alternative, but the low payload is not good and also I understand that are not very comfortable inside.
Click to expand...
Mooney payload is going to depend a lot on which Mooney (short body vs medium body vs long body, 4cyl vs 6cyl, etc). Comfort is also going to depend on which Mooney but also your body type.

Tantalum said:
What about a Tiger?
Click to expand...
+1

Fixed gear, fixed prop, carburetor and aluminum construction means cheaper maintenance than either the DA40 or the Arrow for about the same speed. A tad bit less fuel burn than a 200hp Arrow, too.
 
Ernesto Castro said:
Yeah, G1000 is a concern in that respect. Clearly a pair of 430 (or one 430 plus one regular nav/com radio) and good all steam gauges are likely to depreciate less over time and eventually if I need to replace the 430 is just one equipment, and not the whole avionics of the aircraft.

Also the wingspan for the hangar was a concern as well.

Finally, cost of money is also a point, I was able to get 120k by refinancing my home, at a equivalent 1.5% 30 years fixed. So if I go with something on the range, the cost of money is going to be low. If I need to add an additional 120k with a 6% intereset rate it's going to have a significant impact on the fixed costs.
Click to expand...

You put your home up as collateral for a toy?

Must be nice to have a guaranteed for life job.

Risk? What risk lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top