DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Any DA50 related topics.

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
yl472401
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat May 16, 2020 5:02 pm
First Name: Bryan
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N890US
Airports: 1C5
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 21 times

DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by yl472401 »

The all new DA50 RG is right around the corner to be on the market for pre-ordering. There goes the comparison between the DA50 RG and SR22 up to discussion.
According to my research, SR22 has higher cruising speed, dual WAAS, FIKI, and EVS.
DA50RG has retractable gear, stable control, FIKI and No EVS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
AndrewM
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:05 pm
First Name: Andrew
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N897KC
Airports:
Has thanked: 72 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by AndrewM »

Will be super interesting to see how the insurance companies rate and what the annual premium differences will be between say a normally aspirated SR22 and the DA50. With retractable gear and no chute, I am guessing DA50 may well be substantially more to insure than Cirrus.

Also, I presume the less known DA50 engine, coupled with the retractable gear will be more on the average annual and maintenance.

I guess at some stage someone who is seriously looking at both will do a side-by-side comparison. Obviously fuel will be less, but I would think those savings will not have a material overall difference.
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 3617
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 720 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Rich »

AndrewM wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 5:52 pm Will be super interesting to see how the insurance companies rate and what the annual premium differences will be between say a normally aspirated SR22 and the DA50. With retractable gear and no chute, I am guessing DA50 may well be substantially more to insure than Cirrus.

Also, I presume the less known DA50 engine, coupled with the retractable gear will be more on the average annual and maintenance.

I guess at some stage someone who is seriously looking at both will do a side-by-side comparison. Obviously fuel will be less, but I would think those savings will not have a material overall difference.
There's no doubt that you pay a premium for insurance and maintenance for a retractable - any retractable.

The presence or absence of a chute may have little impact on hull insurance. Every chute pull is a premed claim. Even for those cases where the resulting damage to the airframe is minimal, installing a new chute I'm sure is an expensive proposition.

Speaking of engines, SR22's have had quite a number of accidents resulting from power loss. Some fatal, some "saved" by pulling the chute.
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
User avatar
AndrewM
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:05 pm
First Name: Andrew
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N897KC
Airports:
Has thanked: 72 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by AndrewM »

Has anyone ever done some analysis of SR22 engine failures, turbo vs normally aspirated? Would love to see that data if anyone is aware of where one might obtain a consolidated of that data. By the way, we are hearing of a number of partial and some complete failures of Austro engines.
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 3617
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 720 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Rich »

AndrewM wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 8:18 pm Has anyone ever done some analysis of SR22 engine failures, turbo vs normally aspirated? Would love to see that data if anyone is aware of where one might obtain a consolidated of that data. By the way, we are hearing of a number of partial and some complete failures of Austro engines.
It's painstaking to try to quantify the engine failure instances. A quick check of NTSB query tool (limited to back to 2009), comes up with 54 cases of Cirrus accidents where "power" is included in the probable cause. 46 of these are SR22's. The rest 20's. It's worth noting, I suppose, that these are all continental engines.

For the same time period I see 19 entries for diamonds, of which most are DA20's (Continental engines abound, again). For DA40's I see 4. 3 are NGs and one Lycoming.

Search is limited to US accidents would NOT include engine loss incidents that don't count as accidents to the NTSB.
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
User avatar
Colin
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:37 pm
First Name: Colin
Aircraft Type: DA42
Aircraft Registration: N972RD
Airports: KFHR
Has thanked: 230 times
Been thanked: 392 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Colin »

When I was looking to buy a Cirrus I was told that a chute pull totalled the plane. Is that not true?
Colin Summers, PP Multi-Engine IFR, ~2,800hrs
colin@mightycheese.com
http://www.flyingsummers.com
N972RD DA42 G1000 2.0 s/n 42.AC100
N971RD DA40 G1000 s/n 40.508 (traded)
User avatar
Colin
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1741
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:37 pm
First Name: Colin
Aircraft Type: DA42
Aircraft Registration: N972RD
Airports: KFHR
Has thanked: 230 times
Been thanked: 392 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Colin »

The SR22 Turbo burns 18gph. The DA50 is 9.2gph. I would think these owners are flying 200hrs per year.

JetA is $3.40 around me right now. 110LL is $5. $18k in fuel for the SR22, $6,250 for the DA50. That almost pays for my annual the first few years, but I agree that it is not a HUGE deal.
Colin Summers, PP Multi-Engine IFR, ~2,800hrs
colin@mightycheese.com
http://www.flyingsummers.com
N972RD DA42 G1000 2.0 s/n 42.AC100
N971RD DA40 G1000 s/n 40.508 (traded)
User avatar
yl472401
4 Diamonds Member
4 Diamonds Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat May 16, 2020 5:02 pm
First Name: Bryan
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N890US
Airports: 1C5
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by yl472401 »

That's some valuable information and it may contribute to a high insurance premium.

Colin wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:28 pm When I was looking to buy a Cirrus I was told that a chute pull totalled the plane. Is that not true?
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 3617
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 720 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Rich »

Colin wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:28 pm When I was looking to buy a Cirrus I was told that a chute pull totalled the plane. Is that not true?
Not the chute-pull itself. But what it comes down on and where that is can wind up totaling it. The early Cirri required things like axes and power saws to remove the one-piece wing for recovery. I understand the newer gens are at least somewhat better in this regard, but recovery of aircraft, generally, from fields and woods and streams, etc. often results in significant further damage.
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
User avatar
Chris
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 731
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:34 am
First Name: Chris
Aircraft Type: DA42NG
Aircraft Registration: N449TS
Airports: KHIO
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 259 times

Re: DA50 RG VS SR 22 GTS G3+

Post by Chris »

Colin wrote: Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:28 pm When I was looking to buy a Cirrus I was told that a chute pull totalled the plane. Is that not true?
According to this post on BeechTalk, some airframes have been returned to service after a chute pull.

If I were flying behind a Continental TSIO-550 I might want a chute as well. Do any of these make it anywhere close to TBOH without needing some cylinders and/or valves replaced? When I was shopping around for a new aircraft last year, I looked at dozens of logbooks and every Conti 550 I looked at had some major work done on the cylinders, usually before they reached 1000 hours.

The jury is still out on the new CD-300 engine in the DA50. Hopefully it fares better in that department, but it will take time to find out.

Even with all that, it's hard for me to come up with a good argument to pick the DA50 over an SR22. If the DA50 went a bit faster and had larger fuel tanks, it would be a better competitor, IMO.
Chris
N449TS / DA42-NG / 42.AC049
KHIO
Post Reply