2002 DA-40 Question

Open for questions of visitors of DAN. Posts of our guests are on moderation queue.

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

Guest

2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Guest »

Hello all,

I'm looking at a 2002 DA-40 with steam guages and would like to know if there are any particular things I should be on the look out for?

Thanks for your help.
Bill

Code: Select all

EDIT: Email was removed. /Admin
User avatar
Gary
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:09 am
First Name: Gary
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N286DS
Airports: KSAW
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Gary »

Guest wrote:Hello all,

I'm looking at a 2002 DA-40 with steam guages and would like to know if there are any particular things I should be on the look out for?

Thanks for your help.
Bill

Code: Select all

EDIT: Email was removed. /Admin
It's hard to answer such a general question. Can you be more specific?

The most important question is does the airplane have an autopilot? If not, don't even think about adding it later. If you could even find a shop to attempt this project it would be horrendously expensive. There were a lot of changes to the DA40 design during the early period. Most early DA40s are lighter than newer but nose heavy. There is a service bulletin for adding lead shot to the tail fin that fixes that easily.

I have a 2003 DA40 and have ripped out the steam gauges and replaced them with the Garmin G500 glass. This is a great setup with many advantages over the G1000. Diamond has made it possible to install many of the improvements of newer DA40s through service bulletins but they can be pricey.
User avatar
Steve
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1953
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:23 am
First Name: Steve
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N432SC
Airports: 1T7
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 493 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Steve »

I have owned a 2001 DA40 for the past 13.5 years, and love it. The early airframes are a few knots slower than the newer ones, but as Gary mentioned, quite a bit lighter (my empty weight is 1694#). With 40 gallon tanks, I never have any aft CG issues. Since I learned on steam, I don't miss the G1000. I agree that autopilot is a must.

I would make sure that the airframe is up to date on the various SBs and few ADs that have come out over the past 13 years. The aircraft age well. Most people think that my aircraft is a new one until they look inside the cockpit and see the round gauges.

Steve
User avatar
Gary
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:09 am
First Name: Gary
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N286DS
Airports: KSAW
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Gary »

Here is a link to the DA40 service bulletins. There are three types: MSB (mandatory), RSB (recommended) and OSB (optional). Check the serial number ranges to see if a given service bulletin is applicable to the airplane you are considering. The estimated number of labor hours is often much less than what you would be charged. The price for parts can be obtained from a Diamond Service Center.

http://support.diamond-air.at/da40-180_ ... 73ab0.html
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Rich »

I have a 2002 with certain goodies since added. A friend recently purchased a 2002, assuming it would be identical to mine. But it wasn't. A few highly desirable things to look for:

1. Expanded luggage compartment. The original one leaves you only a minuscule area behind the back seats. That tube thingee isn't much help, and it also was optional at the time. The expanded area is monstrous by comparison. Installation when this expanded baggage option became available was a bit under $4K and added 8 pounds to the empty weight (in the rear, which is helpful). I understand it's now over $10K.
2. Powerflow exhaust. It adds a few knots of cruise but LOTS to climb rate. I seem to recall it ran us about $5-6K at the time all together. BUT it also requires that you have the "Arizona Baffle" and can not be installed with the original version of the Hartzell prop. Requires either a MT or a subsequent model of Hartzell. Lack of these things considerably increase to cost to install.
3. WAAS upgrades to the Garmin 530/430. When this conversion first became available, it was $1,500 per unit to Garmin, plus installation. All in, conversion of both units, with installation, was about $3.6K. These days a single unit costs $3.5K to Garmin plus installation, so you're looking at close to 8K to do both.
4. Front canopy seal. In ours the seal was incorrectly installed which allowed air to flow in under the front side areas. This might have been a one-off problem. Diamond fixed it under warranty.
5. Xe Vision lights. The original landing/taxi lights were worthless. Cost, installed came to about $1,500.

As mentioned below, I second the autopilot. But there have been software updates to this unit which cleared up an annoying habit it had of deciding to quit working. Been fine now for 10+ years.

Also check for the most recent prop overhaul. And last mag service.

Check that ADs and MSB's have been dealt with.

These are the biggees. There are other desirable things that aren't expensive to deal with, such as fine-wire plugs and oil separator.
Last edited by Rich on Sun Jan 18, 2015 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
Guest

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Guest »

Thanks for the great information. The model I am looking at has:

3 blade MT composite prop
430W and 530W
KAP 140 A/P with alt

In reviewing the logs, in 2003 the airframe has had corrosion removed from the left and right push rods at the bellcrank in wing. Also in 2004 the left and right inboard fuel tanks repaired with subsequent 2 new fuel tanks installed in the right wing. Seems early for these items, but nothing since then.

Cheers,
Bill
User avatar
Gary
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:09 am
First Name: Gary
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N286DS
Airports: KSAW
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Gary »

My 2003 DA40 s/n 40.286 purchased in 2007 was originally equipped with 530/430 (non-WAAS), HSI, KAP140 A/P, 3 blade MT prop. It was a great airplane as configured but I could not resist upgrading with many of the newer options including the gross weight increase, Power Flow exhaust, AmSafe airbag belts for the front seats, 530/430 WAAS upgrade, GDL 69 satellite weather receiver, Garmin G500, XeVision landing and taxi lights and a few others bells and whistles. All 2003 DA40s and earlier came with (single) 40 gallon tanks but can be upgraded at great expense to the dual tanks in each wing for 50 gallon capacity. I'm happy with 40 gallon tanks which restrict me to a little over 3 hours flying time with one hour reserve. I still have the original "ski tube" smaller baggage compartment but have not found this to be a problem as I have never flown with more than two passengers.

My next project for later this year will be installing the Garmin GDL 88 with ADSB in and out. This is already approved for the 530/430 unlike the G1000 equipped aircraft.
User avatar
rwtucker
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1283
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:24 pm
First Name: Rob
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N831BA
Airports: KFFZ KEUL
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by rwtucker »

Bill,

You are getting great guidance from those who own earlier DA40 aircraft. I have flown the earlier models but own a 2008. My guidance is more general and goes to the question of purchasing a DA40 versus a C172, C182, or any of a variety of PA28s, each of which confer advantages and disadvantages when compared with the DA40.

I love my DA40, especially its engineering and construction quality, hyper-stable design, fuel efficiency, relative speed for HP, and comfort (some pilots find the seats uncomfortable). On the other hand, I sometimes don't appreciate its very small payload, crowded cockpit (the early DA40s have an even smaller canopy), and general unsuitability for back country flying. As a point of comparison, my PA28-201T will fly twice the payload higher, faster, and with a luggage compartment that is easily twice that of the DA40 (maybe three times the volume and more practical because it is mostly a large rectangular area). In a few minutes I can drop the fairings on the PA28 and fly in and out of small dirt strips in the mountains. The DA40's 39.5 ft. wings make most of those flights unsafe, even if you go to the trouble of removing the Diamond's wheel fairings. True, the PA28 is burning 11.5-13.5 GPH to fly four adult passengers and their luggage 155-160 kts. but the per-passenger fuel cost is considerably less. Annuals are also less expensive.

My point in mentioning this example is not to promote a PA28 over a DA40. It is to point out that there are a lot of great aircraft available in the general price range of a 2002 DA40. Some of them have the benefit of being at the end of their development line rather than the beginning, like an early DA40. As others have mentioned, many changes have been made since 2002.

If I were buying today and my plans were Point A to Point B on paved runways, carrying only my wife and perhaps a young child, I would give strong consideration to an early DA40. If I had other needs, I might not.
User avatar
Gary
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:09 am
First Name: Gary
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N286DS
Airports: KSAW
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by Gary »

It seems we are drifting off the subject but I think it is reasonable to compare the DA40 to other 4 seat singles in it's class. I have about 600 hours in the DA40 and about the same number flying other aircraft, mostly C172s, a few hours in the Piper Warrior and miscellaneous other aircraft.

The earlier DA40s are lighter but most have not had the gross weight increase which requires new main landing gear. I had this done and it set me back around $5,000 (I think) and increased the gross weight from 2535 to 2646 lbs. In spite of all my upgrades I have a 933 lb useful load. That works out to a full fuel (40 gal) payload of 693 lbs. which is very respectable. If you really need to haul a lot of weight a C182 or Cherokee 6 is probably a better choice. It should be easy enough to work a few W&B problems for the airplane you are considering to see if it meets your needs. Check out the W&B section in the Wiki to see how things have trended over the years.

Compared to other aircraft I have flown the DA40 has amazing cockpit visibility due to the canopy and forward placement of the front seats. I am 5'10' and have the smaller canopy and have not had a problem with headroom. The DA40 safety record is amazing. Check out the NTSB Aviation Accident query page and compare it to other aircraft you are considering. I'm glad I don't own a Cirrus. The DA40 is a joy to fly and has very docile handling characteristics. It is substantially faster than the PA28 or C172 and a better fuel efficiency than most other airplanes with a similar cruise speed. The seats are a little uncomfortable for long flights but sheepskin seat covers (about $550 for both front seats) help considerably.

The downside is that not all mechanics are familiar with the DA40 but that is improving. There are a few MSBs/ADs to contend with. The 1000 and 2000 hour inspections are not cheap but at least we are not stuck with the parachute maintenance expenses of the Cirrus.

In summary I think the DA40 is a great airplane if it fits your mission.
User avatar
rwtucker
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1283
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:24 pm
First Name: Rob
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N831BA
Airports: KFFZ KEUL
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: 2002 DA-40 Question

Post by rwtucker »

Gary,

I agree with most of what you said in balancing features in relation to need, and I think these issues are relevant to Bill's decision. A couple of exceptions:

- Unlike the DA40 designation, the PA28 designation encompasses quite a wide range of different aircraft configurations, even different airfoil designs (I believe there was even a short run of a T-tail with a PA28 designation). The Warrior, as you say, and the 180 are somewhat similar to the earlier DA40s, much more than the larger PA28s, such as the 235 and, especially, the short run of the 201T where 50 gallons gets you a payload of more than 1,000 pounds and around four hours flying time with reserves.

- Some PA28s are slower and some are faster than various DA40 years. My XLS is pretty fast in relation to book values. I have flown is side by side with my 201T on several occasions. There is no circumstance in which it can keep up and is generally 10-15 kts behind when both aircraft are at 75%. At my airport, a fully loaded XLS is coaxed off the runway in the summer. The 201T lifts off aggressively if needed.

Of the few considerations I threw out to Bill, I think the most significant may be looking hard at his projected flying habits and payload needs. In my opinion, the maintenance and annual issues, while important, are less important than the missional fit. The DA40 is not a serious four-passenger aircraft and, even though you can take the DA40 to tame grass strips, it is designed for concrete or asphalt runways. Also, it can be a real annoyance to have to drop 25 or more gallons of fuel so you can take another couple for a nearby hamburger while pointing out that they can't bring anything heavier than a billfold with them. :( I know DA40 pilots who are moving elsewhere because of the limitations in SOB, baggage, and W&B.

Like you, I love the design of the DA40 and the safety record is without equal. Most important, it fits my mission about 80% of that time and that's probably as good as you can hope for.
Post Reply