DA40 NG purchase now

[ChiFlyer]

I am seriously in the market for a DA40 NG around $400k price point, maybe a bit higher with the right hours and equipment.

Michael
630.781.8890

[Boatguy]

I'm working with someone also interested in a used 40NG. I think you are in the ballpark on the value of the used 40NGs.

There are a number of 2020+ planes with the Austro built engines. In the expected 1800hr normal life of this engine, the injectors would have been replaced once and the lower end (pistons, main bearing covers, etc.) would never have been touched.

Many of these planes have had the pistons replaced once and are now are waiting to have them replaced again. Many also had other ADs addressed with HPP's, oil pumps, HPP drive gears, etc. replaced. The blocks have been exposed to pistons not within spec that were throwing metal necessitating the first replacement. Then more bad pistons that either cracked or were at risk for cracking. The blocks have endured metal from the first bad pistons, and the heads have had the injectors removed and reinserted numerous times for the borescope inspections. What's the state of the heads and blocks of these engines? We know some heads were stripped while A&P's came up the borescope learning curve and some switched to doing inspections through the glow plug.

It looks like Diamond is now trying to rebuild the order book with 3yr warranties. None the less, presumably the representations made to DPA at Airventure, and the three year warranties, will convince some buyer's to spend $700K for a new 40NG, a 40% increase in price in six years.

Admittedly I have not read the comments from the factory and their assurances of how after six years, Austro has finally figured out how to build a Mercedes engine as reliable as Mercedes built them. But I would be surprised if that conveys any value to used planes whose engines have been opened up and rebuilt multiple times and then must be replaced at 1800 hrs anyway.

Many Austro's have flown more limited hours in the last year due to the need for borescope inspections and piston replacement. What's the chance that those engines have seen their last AD? How confident can you feel flying behind an engine that has had dramatically more wrenching hours than was ever intended? These aren't Lycoming or Continentals which routinely replace pistons and cylinders. Do these planes really need a fresh start with a new engine?

These planes have no warranty coverage and are somewhere between 200 - 1000hrs from replacement. Why are they priced at $500K - $600K? I can appreciate that owners don't want to accept that Austro sold them a fundamentally defective product that after 3-6yrs of ADs and band-aids, is simply not the same as a Mercedes built engine with the same hours. But that's the reality. Austro engines built from 2020 to 2024 (hopefully no longer) were part of Austro's learning curve on how to build a complete engine, as opposed to adapt an engine built by Mercedes. Which brings me back to the OP's $400K offer versus the $550K asking prices for the used 40NGs.

If a new engine is about $70K, then maybe a 40NG with a repeatedly repaired and patched engine is really worth more like $425 - $450K.

OK. Now tell me why I'm wrong and I should advise someone to spend $540K for a 40NG with 900hrs that has been through all the wrenching to address the ADs of the last 3-6 years.

[danno2000]

These planes have no warranty coverage and are somewhere between 200 - 1000hrs from replacement. Why are they priced at $500K - $600K?

Because no one wants to wait 12-24 months plus any (some would say inevitable) delays for their plane. Plus the fact that a warranty on a new plane might offer financial protection but still doesn't answer the problem of potentially facing AOG for months if manufacturing problems persist. I assume the warranty doesn't include a loaner plane

cheers,
dan

[Boatguy]

Because no one wants to wait 12-24 months plus any (some would say inevitable) delays for their plane. Plus the fact that a warranty on a new plane might offer financial protection but still doesn't answer the problem of potentially facing AOG for months if manufacturing problems persist. I assume the warranty doesn't include a loaner plane

What's the wait? Premier has two new 2024 40NG's in inventory. For $150K more than used you get a new engine with 1800hrs before replacement and a 3yr warranty. The engine is worth about $35K for the difference between 1800hrs and 900hrs, it's not clear the warranty is worth another $115K.

We're more than halfway through 2025 and the 2024's haven't sold. Some choices:

- Buyer's don't think the Austro engine problems are over.
- Buyer's have learned that Diamond / Austro abandons owners after the warranty, parts availability is a problem, the warranty has no protection against AOG, etc.
- Prices are just too high.

There's no question that the Austro debacle and Diamond's treatment of owners has tarnished the brand. Some free food and a beer at Osh isn't much reassurance to someone planning to spend $500K - $1.8M. Austro has offered nothing to existing owners which explains the flooded used market.

These are great airplanes offered by a company which historically has treated owners poorly but now apparently wants to improve its customer relations. Is the warranty enough to sway new buyers? Wanfeng is multi-billion dollar industrial and services giant that clearly has plenty of resources.

What else could Diamond do to reverse their poor image, build owner confidence and create goodwill?

[Mjwatlanta]

Or look for a plane, mine for instance (2019 not for sale), that somehow is not on the list of serial numbers requiring engine work. There are such planes with good records, no unusual maintenance work, that are amazing aircraft. Not sure any are for sale, but that’s what I’d look for.

[ZAV]

I have a 2011 XLS loaded up, A/C too, that I might be persuaded to sale for that price that won’t have an Austro engine to worry about

[Don]

I have a 2011 XLS loaded up, A/C too, that I might be persuaded to sale for that price that won’t have an Austro engine to worry about

This! A long time proven powerplant and any A&P can service it. Just sayin.

[Mjwatlanta]

I don’t fully get all the hate against the Austro engine. My engine has over 500 hours. It hasn’t needed to be scoped, it hasn’t needed a new cylinder, it hasn’t needed a new crankshaft, it hasn’t had fouled spark plugs because it doesn’t have any, it starts when it’s hot, it starts when it’s cold, it gets amazing fuel mileage, it has wonderful torque, it’s super quiet and smooth, I don’t have to adjust the mixture as if I’m adjusting my pressure washer because FADEC takes care of those details for me, and it burns jet fuel which is cheaper. By the way, I don’t have to change the oil but once every hundred hours and so far I’ve only had to add about a quart or so during each of the 100 hour oil change cycles. In contrast, some of my gas burning buddies just carry a case of oil with them.

If there’s any problem at all with the Astro engine, everybody goes bananas. In contrast, all of the problems with the mid 60s design of continental annd lycoming engines are just accepted as parts of life because, as y’all say, it can be serviced anywhere. But, the point is, they need service. All that having been said, I might be singing a different tune if I had a 62 that was grounded.

Just say’n.

[Ed McDonald]

My comments about purchasing a DA62 in this thread explains my disappointment with the Austro engine (viewtopic.php?t=9480&start=70).

Your engine is still a baby. Wait for the 600 hour inspections when you are replacing fuels pumps and flywheels, the 900 hour inspection replacing the fuel injectors. These are planned maintenance events. The unplanned ones - replacing prop governors, waste gate controllers, turbo chargers, etc. The costs add up fast, particularly with the price increases of the parts, but equally important is the downtime and the hassle of dropping off the aircraft at at DSC then having to get home and the reverse process.

These are mechanical devices that cost many multiples of a car yet a car is far more reliable. If your car was this expensive and unreliable you would be taking it back to the dealership. Big picture: surely for what we pay for the Diamond product (anywhere from half to one and a half million dollars), there should be better reliability of these components.

[Mjwatlanta]

I do understand everyone’s disappointment with the engines in the DA 62. The amount of downtime for you guys has been simply unacceptable.

I also absolutely buy your analogy to car engines. Car engine engines in many ways have a tougher life. They carry a much heavier automobile. They are accelerated and decelerated all over the place instead of being able to cruise at a constant speed. And despite these challenges they are extraordinarily reliable. Perhaps when my father was buying his first car in the 1930s replacing a cylinder was common. But I’ve been driving since 1974 and I’ve never replaced a cylinder. Yet, owners of gasoline airplane engines are always talking about things like that.

I recently watched a video about Cirrus’ new Safe return Garmin auto land system. When th company demo Pilot got back into the airplane after the short stop they made at an airport, she said, I hope it will start or something to that effect. That a $1.3 million Airplane has a questionable start because it is hot is a sad reality about the state of aircraft engines. Yes, the Astro engines have a lot of problems, but at least they are a step out of the past into the future.