DA40's selling for under $100k

Irish_Armada

Irish_Armada

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
374
Display Name
Display name:
Irish Armada
I've seen two on the market now. Seems like a great deal for a lot of airplane, especially if you want something built less than 10 years ago. What's the catch? Are people beginning to discover long-term problems with composite aircraft or are they showing great durability? All I think i know is that with a fresh overhaul, seems like these planes would be worth more than their $130k ultimate cost...?

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...0-STAR/2003-DIAMOND-DA40-180-STAR/1252207.htm
http://www.controller.com/listingsd...le/DIAMOND-DA40/2002-DIAMOND-DA40/1255843.htm
 
Irish_Armada said:
I've seen two on the market now. Seems like a great deal for a lot of airplane, especially if you want something built less than 10 years ago. What's the catch? Are people beginning to discover long-term problems with composite aircraft or are they showing great durability? All I think i know is that with a fresh overhaul, seems like these planes would be worth more than their $130k ultimate cost...?

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...0-STAR/2003-DIAMOND-DA40-180-STAR/1252207.htm
http://www.controller.com/listingsd...le/DIAMOND-DA40/2002-DIAMOND-DA40/1255843.htm
Click to expand...

#1 has 1650 hours on the engine, so it's getting close to overhaul time. Figure $30K on another engine and you're about there.
 
Sac Arrow said:
#1 has 1650 hours on the engine, so it's getting close to overhaul time. Figure $30K on another engine and you're about there.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what I'm saying -- with that, you're at a $130k with a new engine, avionics and parts that are all less than 10 years old, and a plane that by all accounts is a dream to fly. DA40s are way too expensive new or close to new, but seems like these could get you close to the realm of possibility of owning one of those bad boys. Just do as Homer Simpson did and tell your kids that only one of them gets to go to college...
 
Because they are 6 pack planes, not G1000/Avidyne panels. That takes a big chunk out of their price. Also, remember the older models (pre XLS, I believe) have a little less headroom and are a bit slower, IIRC.

Also, one of the ads claims 150 KTAS @ 10 GPH at 75% power. Ain't no way, on an old model like that. I spent a summer flying a DA-40 a bunch, and in between 8-12K feet, I could run WOT and 2550RPM at get 141-142 KTAS at between 8-9.5 GPH, depending on altitude.
 
I agree with KSCessnaDriver. I have over 400 hrs on my 2003 DA40 since I bought it in 2007.

The 1000 and 2000 hour inspections are costly, possibly as much as $10,000 for the 2000 hour inspection. The rudder cables need to be replaced every 5 years. The Garmin G500 glass panel is an option for steam gauge DA40s but that upgrade will cost around $30,000. Many of the improvements in newer models can be installed in older DA40s but the cost is usually not cheap.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Because they are 6 pack planes, not G1000/Avidyne panels. That takes a big chunk out of their price.
Click to expand...

Yeah I had noticed that too. But here's one for $10k more (below) that needs an overhaul as well but is a G1000. So for $140K you're in a DA40 G1000 with a new engine. I guess my point with all this is that it seems like prices are lower than they have been before. And to my earlier question: are the older model composites showing the durability that everyone had hoped? So far anyways?

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...0-STAR/2004-DIAMOND-DA40-180-STAR/1256391.htm
 
Gary F said:
I agree with KSCessnaDriver. I have over 400 hrs on my 2003 DA40 since I bought it in 2007.

The 1000 and 2000 hour inspections are costly, possibly as much as $10,000 for the 2000 hour inspection. The rudder cables need to be replaced every 5 years. The Garmin G500 glass panel is an option for steam gauge DA40s but that upgrade will cost around $30,000. Many of the improvements in newer models can be installed in older DA40s but the cost is usually not cheap.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks. Sounds like upkeep is more expensive than your equivalent Cessna then? Also, how does this maintenance compare to the SR20?
 
Irish_Armada said:
I've seen two on the market now. Seems like a great deal for a lot of airplane, especially if you want something built less than 10 years ago. What's the catch? Are people beginning to discover long-term problems with composite aircraft or are they showing great durability? All I think i know is that with a fresh overhaul, seems like these planes would be worth more than their $130k ultimate cost...?

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...0-STAR/2003-DIAMOND-DA40-180-STAR/1252207.htm
http://www.controller.com/listingsd...le/DIAMOND-DA40/2002-DIAMOND-DA40/1255843.htm
Click to expand...
You have a couple run out round panel planes, they need a refurb in engine and panel to be worth more in to days market.
 
Irish_Armada said:
Interesting, thanks. Sounds like upkeep is more expensive than your equivalent Cessna then? Also, how does this maintenance compare to the SR20?
Click to expand...
The DA40 is a simpler airplane than the Cirrus and no expensive parachute maintenance so I think it is significantly less. I am fairly certain insurance costs are less than the SR20.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Because they are 6 pack planes, not G1000/Avidyne panels. That takes a big chunk out of their price. Also, remember the older models (pre XLS, I believe) have a little less headroom and are a bit slower, IIRC.

Also, one of the ads claims 150 KTAS @ 10 GPH at 75% power. Ain't no way, on an old model like that. I spent a summer flying a DA-40 a bunch, and in between 8-12K feet, I could run WOT and 2550RPM at get 141-142 KTAS at between 8-9.5 GPH, depending on altitude.
Click to expand...

I think those numbers are a little optimistic as well, I remember getting the same numbers as you when I flew the 40.

Since its the same engine and the same airframe he should be getting the same performance numbers as the new one.
 
MachFly said:
I think those numbers are a little optimistic as well, I remember getting the same numbers as you when I flew the 40.

Since its the same engine and the same airframe he should be getting the same performance numbers as the new one.
Click to expand...
Newer airplanes may have a few improvements that increase the speed including improved fairings, Powerflow exhaust and different prop.
 
After owning a SR 20 and looking at the DA 40, I believe costs are a wash. The SR 20 has an expensive chute repack at 10 years, but the DA 40 has the expensive 1000 and 2000 hour annuals.
 
Gary F said:
Newer airplanes may have a few improvements that increase the speed including improved fairings, Powerflow exhaust and different prop.
Click to expand...

That's possible, but you should be able to easily install those on an older version.
 
jmp470 said:
After owning a SR 20 and looking at the DA 40, I believe costs are a wash. The SR 20 has an expensive chute repack at 10 years, but the DA 40 has the expensive 1000 and 2000 hour annuals.
Click to expand...


They aren't that expensive, just don't do everything listed in chapter 5 unless you feel it is necessary at the 1k and 2k hour times. If you stick to only what is required in chapter 4 it is a pretty cheap plane to maintain.

The rudder cable replacement is one that you do have to do every 5 years though but if you are really worried about cost most of the upfront work can be done on your own pretty easily.
 
MachFly said:
That's possible, but you should be able to easily install those on an older version.
Click to expand...
I think PF exhaust costs about 6 to 7K installed, speed kit fairings 5K, and a new prop is not cheap either.
sdpilot said:
They aren't that expensive, just don't do everything listed in chapter 5 unless you feel it is necessary at the 1k and 2k hour times. If you stick to only what is required in chapter 4 it is a pretty cheap plane to maintain.

The rudder cable replacement is one that you do have to do every 5 years though but if you are really worried about cost most of the upfront work can be done on your own pretty easily.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Chapter 4 items are airworthiness requirements and Chapter 5 contains recommended maintenance.
I would be amazed if the DA40 cost as nearly much as a SR20 to maintain and insure. Don't forget about the line cutter replacement on the Cirrus parachute every 6 years.
 
Last edited:
Not all DA40s have an A/P and it can't be added if not originally equipped. Neither of the 2 listed in the op has one.
 
Gary F said:
Not all DA40s have an A/P and it can't be added if not originally equipped. Neither of the 2 listed in the op has one.
Click to expand...

Ah. Good catch, I didn't think to look at that.
 
Those look like the knee-killer models, before they raised the panel.

On one I literally could not get into it due to poor ergonomics with the bottom of the panel.
 
150kts @ 10gph is a marketing myth. I've seen it maybe 3 times in 1,000 hours. I need to be right around 9,000 feet, cool outside temp and not too heavy. However 144kts @ 8.5gph I can do all day long. This on an '08 XLS with powerflow exhaust, wheel fairings and nose gear that points straight ahead in flight.
 
nddons said:
Those look like the knee-killer models, before they raised the panel.

On one I literally could not get into it due to poor ergonomics with the bottom of the panel.
Click to expand...
I'm 5'10" and have no problem with the old style circuit breakers under the panel although some people won't fit.
 
Gary F said:
Newer airplanes may have a few improvements that increase the speed including improved fairings, Powerflow exhaust and different prop.
Click to expand...

Bingo. The newer models have more headroom, and IIRC, it's from a slight cabin redesign. Additionally, the propeller is the big difference. The 3 blade MT prop versus the 2 blade Hartzell metal prop made darn near a 10 knot difference, with little change in noise in the cabin. I don't know what the 2 blade Hartzell composite prop is like, never flown one.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Bingo. The newer models have more headroom, and IIRC, it's from a slight cabin redesign.
Click to expand...

It is mostly from a 'bubblier' canopy. Also the instrument panel was a bit low on the very early models.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Bingo. The newer models have more headroom, and IIRC, it's from a slight cabin redesign. Additionally, the propeller is the big difference. The 3 blade MT prop versus the 2 blade Hartzell metal prop made darn near a 10 knot difference, with little change in noise in the cabin. I don't know what the 2 blade Hartzell composite prop is like, never flown one.
Click to expand...

Didn't the three-bladed prop slow it down? I definitely read that somewhere. Three blades are better for takeoff and climb, but two blades are better for cruise. Performance-wise, that is. I understand that three-bladers are better in that they're smoother and can be quieter.
 
jpower said:
Didn't the three-bladed prop slow it down? I definitely read that somewhere. Three blades are better for takeoff and climb, but two blades are better for cruise. Performance-wise, that is. I understand that three-bladers are better in that they're smoother and can be quieter.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't make that clear. The switch was from 3 blade to 2, and it picked up almost 10 knots.
 
Henning said:
So does it end up with a 2 bladed MT composite or a 2 bladed Hartzel metal?
Click to expand...

Went from a 3 blade MT composite to a 2 blade Hartzell metal. The 3 blade hub was leaking oil and would have needed overhauled, IIRC, and the school decided they would just change the whole setup (helps they are Diamond dealer/service center).
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Went from a 3 blade MT composite to a 2 blade Hartzell metal. The 3 blade hub was leaking oil and would have needed overhauled, IIRC, and the school decided they would just change the whole setup (helps they are Diamond dealer/service center).
Click to expand...

So why not an MT 2 blade composite? How did it do? Or did it not happen?:dunno:
 
Henning said:
So why not an MT 2 blade composite? How did it do? Or did it not happen?:dunno:
Click to expand...

No, didn't happen. Don't think it was available at the time, or they didn't want to spend the money. I don't think it would make the airframe much quicker. And with the tendency to have a rearward CG, a heavy prop seemed to help the situation.
 
jpower said:
Ahh gotcha. Does that mean they went from 2 to 3 and back to 2? Or am I just making things up, which is entirely possible?
Click to expand...
The first prop was a symmetrical 3 blade composite (wood covered by epoxy) MT prop. A 2 blade Hartzell became available around 2004. A new scimitar MT 3 blade composite prop replaced the old style MT prop. A new 2 blade Hartzell prop replaced the old 2 blade aluminum prop that was not compatible with the Powerflow exhaust. The newest prop option is a 2 blade Hartzell Kevlar composite prop. Confused yet?

Current DA40s come standard with the new design MT 3 blade composite prop. The new Hartzell 2 blade aluminum prop can be ordered instead at no additional cost. The 2 blade Hartzell composite prop option will set you back an additional $950 so take your pick. (see other options) http://www.diamondaircraft.com/build/index.php?id=3
 
Last edited:
Gary F said:
The first prop was a symmetrical 3 blade composite (wood covered by epoxy) MT prop. A 2 blade Hartzell became available around 2004. A new scimitar MT 3 blade composite prop replaced the old style MT prop. A new 2 blade Hartzell prop replaced the old 2 blade aluminum prop that was not compatible with the Powerflow exhaust. The newest prop option is a 2 blade Hartzell Kevlar composite prop. Confused yet?

Current DA40s come standard with the new design MT 3 blade composite prop. The new Hartzell 2 blade aluminum prop can be ordered instead at no additional cost. The 2 blade Hartzell composite prop option will set you back an additional $950 so take your pick. (see other options) http://www.diamondaircraft.com/build/index.php?id=3
Click to expand...

....and then there was a 2-blade fixed-pitch prop for the carburetered stripped-down flightschool version.

In addition to speed, weight of the props plays into the decision. Some models with long-range tanks had an aft-CG issue, ordering the plane with the metal 2-blade allowed to put weight in the most advantageous place.
 
Gary F said:
The first prop was a symmetrical 3 blade composite (wood covered by epoxy) MT prop. A 2 blade Hartzell became available around 2004. A new scimitar MT 3 blade composite prop replaced the old style MT prop. A new 2 blade Hartzell prop replaced the old 2 blade aluminum prop that was not compatible with the Powerflow exhaust. The newest prop option is a 2 blade Hartzell Kevlar composite prop. Confused yet?

Current DA40s come standard with the new design MT 3 blade composite prop. The new Hartzell 2 blade aluminum prop can be ordered instead at no additional cost. The 2 blade Hartzell composite prop option will set you back an additional $950 so take your pick. (see other options) http://www.diamondaircraft.com/build/index.php?id=3
Click to expand...

Har har har. Impressive. But I think I get it!
 
MachFly said:
Since its the same engine and the same airframe he should be getting the same performance numbers as the new one.
Click to expand...

Huh? :nono:

There's easily a 10-15 knot difference between the oldest and newest models due to changes in aerodynamics, different propeller models, PowerFlow exhaust, etc.

jmp470 said:
After owning a SR 20 and looking at the DA 40, I believe costs are a wash. The SR 20 has an expensive chute repack at 10 years, but the DA 40 has the expensive 1000 and 2000 hour annuals.
Click to expand...

Again, those are optional on the DA40, but the chute repack on the SR20 is required.

sdpilot said:
The rudder cable replacement is one that you do have to do every 5 years though but if you are really worried about cost most of the upfront work can be done on your own pretty easily.
Click to expand...

The rudder cable replacement is pretty cheap in the grand scheme of things aviation... I believe ours cost less than $700 with all of the work done by an A&P.

Gary F said:
Not all DA40s have an A/P and it can't be added if not originally equipped. Neither of the 2 listed in the op has one.
Click to expand...

And that right there is the big reason for the low price. In fact, with runout engines and no autopilot, those are priced maybe even a little too high!

nddons said:
Those look like the knee-killer models, before they raised the panel.

On one I literally could not get into it due to poor ergonomics with the bottom of the panel.
Click to expand...

The 2001-2002 models were the worst. The ergonomics were improved in 2003, again in 2004 with the G1000 introduction, and headroom was improved in 2007 by making the canopy bubble out just a bit farther.
 
One thing to note about used DA40 prices (and I think used Cirrus prices as well) is that there are significant changes from the oldest (2001 for the DA40 and I think SR22, and 1999 for the SR20) to the newest models, I think simply because they're new designs.

If you look at 172's, a 2001 172 is almost identical to a 2012 172 with the exception of the G1000 being added. In a design that's well over 50 years old, they've pretty much worked the bugs out and put in what people want by now. The newer designs like the DA40 were refined significantly in their first several years and have only settled out the last few.

There haven't been any significant changes to the DA40 since 2008, but there's going to be a jump in prices from 06 to 07 because of the GFC700 autopilot, WAAS GPS (a $23K upgrade in a G1000 non-waas plane), and a number of other niceties like electric rudder pedals and extra headroom.

There'll also be a pretty big price gap between 2003 and 2004 due to the addition of the G1000.

Finally, there were some DA40's made, mostly for the USAF and flight schools, that had no autopilot, cloth interior, fixed-pitch prop, etc. that will also generally be priced quite low due to the demand for those features and the expense or inability to add them later. So, that's why prices are all over the board for the DA40.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
One thing to note about used DA40 prices (and I think used Cirrus prices as well) is that there are significant changes from the oldest (2001 for the DA40 and I think SR22, and 1999 for the SR20) to the newest models, I think simply because they're new designs.

If you look at 172's, a 2001 172 is almost identical to a 2012 172 with the exception of the G1000 being added. In a design that's well over 50 years old, they've pretty much worked the bugs out and put in what people want by now. The newer designs like the DA40 were refined significantly in their first several years and have only settled out the last few.

There haven't been any significant changes to the DA40 since 2008, but there's going to be a jump in prices from 06 to 07 because of the GFC700 autopilot, WAAS GPS (a $23K upgrade in a G1000 non-waas plane), and a number of other niceties like electric rudder pedals and extra headroom.

There'll also be a pretty big price gap between 2003 and 2004 due to the addition of the G1000.

Finally, there were some DA40's made, mostly for the USAF and flight schools, that had no autopilot, cloth interior, fixed-pitch prop, etc. that will also generally be priced quite low due to the demand for those features and the expense or inability to add them later. So, that's why prices are all over the board for the DA40.
Click to expand...

There it is -- exactly what I was looking for. Makes sense. Thanks!
 
I just dont see damn near 100k worth of value in those.

For half the price you can get
Lanceair
Maule M5
Showstoper Stinson
NICE older 182
Viking
Pa18-180
Etc
 
weilke said:
....and an early death.



Stick + rags + flaking paint.



That's like the the real estate agents who emphasize the 'character' of a property.



Uses more fuel for the same speeds, costs more to overhaul.....



You are surely jesting.



2-seater, right ?
Click to expand...

Oh young grasshopper, you have much to learn.

FYI, talking down on a Stinson... yea... MUCH to learn :yesnod:
 
weilke said:
....and an early death.



Stick + rags + flaking paint.



That's like the the real estate agents who emphasize the 'character' of a property.



Uses more fuel for the same speeds, costs more to overhaul.....



You are surely jesting.



2-seater, right ?
Click to expand...

Seriously? What do you fly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top