DA40 XL v XLS

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

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
Lance Murray
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1163
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:25 pm
First Name: Lance
Aircraft Type: DA40
Airports:
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by Lance Murray »

There is a big difference between Active traffic (TCAS) and ADS-B. ADS-B does a lot but there will be holes and latency issues.
Hetch wrote:Hi Antoine,

I am also a prospective DA40 xls buyer. Regarding your advice to get active traffic, wouldn't complying with the ADS-B requirements fulfill the same objective? Thus making the plane just as safe as one with active traffic monitoring? You can guess why I am asking lol

Thank you.
User avatar
Colin
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:37 pm
First Name: Colin
Aircraft Type: DA42
Aircraft Registration: N972RD
Airports: KFHR
Has thanked: 319 times
Been thanked: 527 times

Re: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by Colin »

(Trivia: The refund for the wingtips was $5,000.)
Colin Summers, PP Multi-Engine IFR, ~3,000hrs
colin@mightycheese.com * send email rather than PM
http://www.flyingsummers.com
N972RD DA42 G1000 2.0 s/n 42.AC100 (sold!)
N971RD DA40 G1000 s/n 40.508 (traded)
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: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by Rich »

Lance Murray wrote:There is a big difference between Active traffic (TCAS) and ADS-B. ADS-B does a lot but there will be holes and latency issues.
Not with direct ADS-B transmissions. There are issues today with non-ADS-B aircraft. But reception from ADS-B Out has no holes nor latency. While this is fairly rare today in 3 years it should be commonplace. In fact even now I find it more and more common.
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
Antoine
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2043
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:00 pm
First Name: Antoine
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N121AG
Airports: LSGG
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by Antoine »

True. If you're not flying IFR, an older DA40 can be a very nice alternative.
IIRC Lance wrote in another thread that they have nicer handling too.

So I would say: if you fly IFR, go for an XLS. If your mission is VFR, pick a well kept "steam gauge" that is cheap enough to let you upgrade it to look good and match your needs. It won't have a GFC700, but this is overkill for VFR-only.
User avatar
Lance Murray
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1163
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:25 pm
First Name: Lance
Aircraft Type: DA40
Airports:
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by Lance Murray »

Steam gages work great for IFR. My DA40 is actually a little better equipped in some ways than the Boeing 767 that I am Flying this week. My 767 doesn't have Synthetic Vision, WAAS or satellite weather. In fact no airliner has SV but my old DA40 does.

I really liked my G1000 DA40XL but in the end it didn't do anything that my older DA40 couldn't do. So after considering the price differential, the weight and CG difference and the mission I decided to cash out on the XL and keep my 2002. Also as Antoine mentioned the difference in CG has a significant effect on how it feels. That is a hard thing to quantify but I like the feel much better than the aft CG, G1000, MT Prop equipped airplane. The newest DA40s are very nice. I just wouldn't discount the older planes.
DAC

Re: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by DAC »

I have no issue with steam gauges or glass as I have flown behind both. However, when I combine ease of future saleability and extra 5-7 knots I would think the newer plane wins out? A plane could never be considered a liquid asset but I assume the newer (2007/8) glass plane is easier to sell and possibly depreciate less than an older non glass plane, especially as I assume both are at an age where someone else has taken the initial heavy depreciation. I am looking to spend in the region of £150k (given how sterling is trading will have to be a sterling vendor!) with VAT paid and woul hope this gets me into an XL.
User avatar
nathanda40
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:23 am
First Name: Nathan
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: 98P
Airports: KSMO
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by nathanda40 »

I'm looking at these STC's for the various available props. The Hartzell 2-Blade clearly says DA 40 XL, but we have a 2002 DA 40. Is this still compatible? Having a hard time understanding the nuances here.

https://hartzellprop.com/wp-content/upl ... DA40XL.pdf
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: DA40 XL v XLS

Post by Rich »

nathanda40 wrote: Fri Nov 05, 2021 1:02 am I'm looking at these STC's for the various available props. The Hartzell 2-Blade clearly says DA 40 XL, but we have a 2002 DA 40. Is this still compatible? Having a hard time understanding the nuances here.

https://hartzellprop.com/wp-content/upl ... DA40XL.pdf
Yes it is. Note the oil cooler modification kit which is apparently included for older models.
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
Post Reply