NG vs XLS

Any DA40 related topics

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
gtmize
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 6:58 pm
First Name: gary
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N175DA
Airports: KFMN
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 18 times

NG vs XLS

Post by gtmize »

I'm based in FMN, mountain country and am considering upgrading from my XLS to a NG, mainly for improved climbs. ALso I'm told ..

Other big advantages of the NG over the Lycoming DA40:
- No hot starts, just turn the key and it starts within 1/2 turn of the prop every time. No cranking ever needed (it's a car engine after all).
- No need for engine pre-heat in the winter; you can start it down to -30C/-22F by just turning the key
- No more leaning, worrying about rich-of-peak, lean-of-peak, or enriching the mixture during long climbs in the summertime to keep the engine cool.
- Single-lever power control is like a jet: just set % power
- No spark plugs to foul, or mags to overhaul every 400-500 hours
- Oil changes only required every 100 hours instead of 50 hours becauses it uses synthetic oil (I use 0W-40 Castrol european formula synthetic oil that I can buy right off the shelf in 1qt and 5qt containers at my local Walmart).
- Consumes only 1 quart of oil between 100 hour oil changes, so seldom need to top off engine oil
- Burns 6.5 gph@75% power, and 8 gph@92% maximum continuous power -- using JetA that's typically $1/gal cheaper than avgas
- And the best part: MUCH quieter and smoother than a Lycoming for less fatigue on longer trips (and all NGs have reclining front seats.)

for another $200k after trade in ...

Any thoughts ?
User avatar
TimS
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
First Name: Timothy
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N1446C
Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by TimS »

It boils down to a few items.
1. CG
2. Does it match mission. NG suffers in short range UL hauling, but is better at longer range.
3. Stall Speed

A few previous threads:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6771&hilit=ng+xls
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6932&p=75108&hilit=ng+xls#p75108

Tim
User avatar
CFIDave
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:40 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N333GX
Airports: KJYO Leesburg VA
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1473 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by CFIDave »

TimS wrote: Fri Jun 19, 2020 12:33 pm It boils down to a few items.
1. CG
2. Does it match mission. NG suffers in short range UL hauling, but is better at longer range.
3. Stall Speed

A few previous threads:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6771&hilit=ng+xls
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6932&p=75108&hilit=ng+xls#p75108

Tim
Tim, have you flown both planes? I have extensive experience flying both (in fact the points Gary listed above originally came from me).

1. There is no CG issue in an NG -- but especially if the NG includes air conditioning (more than 50% sold to individual owners are configured that way), which adds more weight to the rear. In contrast, many XLS models with MT props have limited back seat use unless 20 lbs of ballast is added in the nose.

2. The NG excels in the higher-elevation New Mexico mountainous region where Gary lives because of the turbodiesel. It will maintain its 700-800 fpm climb rate up into the teens, whereas the Lycoming XLS drops below 500 fpm above around 6000 feet. The NG is also slightly faster (155 KTAS at 11,000 feet.). But I have a US east coast customer who flies at lower altitudes, who traded in his DA40 XLS for a new NG nearly 3 years ago and is glad he did; he definitely likes the NG better. I'm also aware of multiple flight schools that have been replacing their Lycomings DA40s with new NG models.

3. Yes, the NG has a slightly higher stall speed because it's heavier (with a greater useful load than the XLS), but still handles (nicely) like a Lycoming DA40.
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
User avatar
Boatguy
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1827
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:48 am
First Name: Russ
Aircraft Type: DA62
Aircraft Registration: N962M
Airports: KSTS
Has thanked: 1328 times
Been thanked: 1163 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by Boatguy »

I've had my DA40NG for 18 months. I just took it into the shop for the 300hr engine service with 286 on the service meter and 375 on the Hobbs. I live in CA and frequently cross the mountains to the N, S and E. I did not buy AC, but did buy Jet-Shades. I bought it for all the reasons you list and here is a little expansion on that.

1) No engine or prop management. Climbing, descending, starting. Set the power and fly the plane. The engine is smooth and quiet. I have taken off and forgotten to turn on the ANR on my headset! The air vents in the DA40 are the biggest source of noise.

2) Turbocharger. Climb performance is not a rocket, but declines very little as you climb. From the AFM: 2,645TOW, ISA, climb at SL = 739fpm, 16,000' = 632fpm. Service ceiling is usually defined as where climb rate is 100fpm, but I think they certified the plane with the Lycoming so the service ceiling is 16,400' (5,000m). I've climbed above 16,000 and had to throttle back slightly to keep the prop from overspeed, plenty of power at altitude

2) Here's a real world trip in your neighborhood. Last July 6 I departed KVGT (2,200') about 11:30am so probably 85-90F. I took off and climbed to 14,500 at recommended cruise climb of 88KIAS. There was a little bit of vectoring and altitude restriction but from 3,800 to 14,500 took 18min for a real world climb rate of 594fpm. Myself, my wife, a bunch of luggage and full tanks. Crossed the Sierra's at Mammoth. Total flight time KVGT / O69 was 2.8hrs, 398nm and we had some headwinds. Coming down the trip only took 2.5hrs, with a little tailwind.

Actual cruise speed at 14,500', 85% , ISA + 10 was 153-156KTAS. The real world performance is a touch better than what's in the AFM. The AFM says 14,000' @ ISA and 92% = 153KTAS.

Average for the r/t was 148kts ground speed and 7.1gph, climbing at 88KIAS and descending at 125KIAS. All actual numbers are from the engine log.

3) Be prepared for "fuel truck embarrassment". On that trip to Vegas, the FBO gave me a break if I "topped up". The Jet-A truck came out and I bought 18gallons! I don't know how many times I've had these huge lumbering trucks drive up to me and squirt less than 10gal into each wing! I feel like apologizing for the trouble of moving the truck.

4) The stall speed is not an issue, just fly to the Vref in the AFM and everything is fine.

5) The usable load is a red herring once you adjust for fuel. The lower fuel burn increases real world UL.

6) The only drawback I can think of is that you can get a Lycoming serviced anywhere. The Austro is an odd duck to most A&P's. Fortunately they are very reliable. If you don't have a local Diamond service center, you can do the 100hr service yourself, but you'll have to find a shop for the annual.

7) Your $200K also buys you new avionics and the NXi is very nice improvement over the legacy G1000.

If you want my AFM, send me a PM.
User avatar
ZAV
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:40 am
First Name: Bryan
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N387DS
Airports: KLEX
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by ZAV »

I looked an a new NG vs a used Lycoming.

I liked a lot of things about the NG. Decision for me came down to two things.

1. Service concerns: nobody close to me has worked on an Austro. Mine wasn’t going to be their first.

2. Maintenance costs: The Lycoming costs over time are well known. The Austro seems to still be having some expensive AD’s pop up. I wanted a known cost.

Those factors were the most important to me. I liked every other aspect about it though. The climb performance high altitude performance didn’t matter as much for me in the Eastern US.

I got the Lycoming version. Love it.
User avatar
TimS
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
First Name: Timothy
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N1446C
Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by TimS »

@CFIDave,

No time in a DA-40 that I count. I just named the critical points that come up repeatedly in the comparison threads. Then I gave a couple links to some of the threads. I figured others would step in an elaborate the basic points I raised (which occurred).

Tim
User avatar
AndrewM
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:05 pm
First Name: Andrew
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N897KC
Airports:
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by AndrewM »

I have flown both and for me, if buying new, I would go with the NG.

Like you, some folks have considered or sold their DA40 100LL to go with the NG, but I would never do that... the 100LL version is still a magnificent product. Have you considered adding the supercharger? There was some "healthy debate" on this forum recently on that, however I would definitely be looking into that if I were in your shoes.

The smoothness of the NG engine is a big attraction. I think on long flights it would absolutely reduce fatigue and make it more comfy for passengers. Maintenance I think will be more of a hassle with the NG, you would need to be careful who you took it to. The NXi avionics are clearer, faster, smoother, but I still think the G1000 does a very good job and your XLS should have WAAS which is a good thing to have in my view.

Mixture control etc really is no big deal, it just becomes second nature as you would know. And FWIW, I have never had an issue with hot starts.

Good luck with your decision. By the way, I am thankful that Russ is so active on this forum but it would be great if a past 100LL owner that traded to an NG could give a comprehensive PIREP on their experiences / pros' & con's after experiencing ownership of both.
User avatar
shorton
2 Diamonds Member
2 Diamonds Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:42 pm
First Name: Scott
Aircraft Type: DA42NG
Aircraft Registration: N68MJ
Airports: KSNA
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by shorton »

It would be good to see an objective side by side comparison of the cost of recurring maintenance for both. I mean actual itemized line-by-line numbers. I don't know that I've seen that on this forum. Has anyone seen or have such a worksheet? A Diamond shop once told me the difference was quite significant....close to 2x more for the NG over a lifecycle as a result of the 300 and 600-hour inspections. The gap has probably shrunk some in the past few years, not sure how much.

It's interesting to hear that an advantage of the NG is no magnetos and only 100-hour oil changes. I guess an advantage of the Lycoming is no timing chain, no gearbox oil, no high-pressure fuel pump, no wastegate AD, no ECU warnings that need to be cleared, etc. I guess how its spun is a matter of personal bias to some extent.

As discussed, no doubt the real advantage of the NG is the high altitude performance. If you live in the mountains or otherwise don't mind strapping on supplemental oxygen to reap the rewards on a long cross-country, then that can justify the cost. To me, the Lycoming DA40 continues to be the best training aircraft ever built. What's best for an individual, as always, depends on their mission. I guess we're lucky that Diamond offers both.
Scott Horton, JD CPA
ATP, FAA Gold Seal CFI, CFII, MEI
https://orangecountyflightinstruction.com
KSNA, Orange County, CA
User avatar
AndrewM
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:05 pm
First Name: Andrew
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N897KC
Airports:
Has thanked: 73 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by AndrewM »

Scott, looks like you run a flight school. I would have thought Diamond (or their various representation) should be falling over themselves to provide the side-by-side comparison you suggest based on a 3/5/10 year operational structure, number of hours flown per year etc. Presumably you would have very robust data on how many hours your planes are doing so can look at the all-in cost including what should be a meaningful fuel cost saving.
User avatar
CFIDave
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:40 pm
First Name: Dave
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N333GX
Airports: KJYO Leesburg VA
Has thanked: 231 times
Been thanked: 1473 times

Re: NG vs XLS

Post by CFIDave »

IMHO *THE* biggest difference is how quiet and smooth the Austro diesel is compared to the Lycoming -- leading to more enjoyable and less fatiguing flights in the NG. This is something that doesn't show up if only considering numbers, and may not be evident until you fly both aircraft.
Epic Aircraft E1000 GX
Former DA40XLS, DA42-VI, and DA62 owner
ATP, CFI, CFI-I, MEI
Post Reply