Nope, Centurion 2.0s. We have a couple of extra antenna and the aircraft was a ‘Platinum Edition’ with extras such as electric pedals etc.
Anyway, despite the digression, we find that the 62s are far more capable and adaptable. Although ours are the 7 seat version, the back row is removed for specialist equipment. With that equipment on board, full de-ice and three crew we can still operate with full tanks (326 litres). That gives us at least 6 hours on task with IFR reserves; the 42 in the same task configuration would give us about 3 hours. We also get a TAS bonus of 25-30kts.
Pointless pictures from yesterday. 
Dave,
You are probably referring to Austro engine equipped ones, which (from memory) are about 100 kg heavier.
My DA42 is 1355 kg empty (TKS, long range tanks, oxygen).
The two DA42 I fly:
1326kg FIKI long range without oxy
1342kg FIKI long range with oxy
Romain
A 1358kg DA42? We have one of those as well, somewhat stripped-out with only one back seat and no headlining/carpets etc. That one weighs 1411kg.
Archie wrote:
Ouch!!!! The 1,999 kg doesn’t make much sense indeed. But I take it it’s better than a DA-42? A LOT more expensive however.
To the contrary. My (very well equipped) DA42: empty 1358, MTOM 1785 so payload 427 kg.
Diamond claims that the latest version of the DA42 (-VI) has a payload of 589 kg, but that is probably not a “fully loaded” aircraft.
Dave_Phillips wrote:
Our two aircraft have an empty mass of about 1700kg (there’s a few extra bits that add to the ‘book’ basic mass but you’ll get my point). A 300kg useful load isn’t that great, especially since you could choose to make 260kg of this fuel.
Ouch!!!! The 1,999 kg doesn’t make much sense indeed. But I take it it’s better than a DA-42? A LOT more expensive however.
I find it amazing how the arbitrary weight limits created by regulation distort the market. At the lower end, it is the Microlight – LSA – ELA – whatever distinction, and the higher end the 2000kg “limit”. We would all be better off if we could focus on doing the right thing and getting what we need and is safe, rather than trying to shoehorn twins below 2t.
The 1999kg version makes less sense than the 2300kg. Our two aircraft have an empty mass of about 1700kg (there’s a few extra bits that add to the ‘book’ basic mass but you’ll get my point). A 300kg useful load isn’t that great, especially since you could choose to make 260kg of this fuel. However, double that load to 600kg and you actually have something rather good.
Performance – The extra 300kg adds about 100m to ground run and 200m to 50ft on an ISA day. Cruise speeds are in the region of 3-5kts less for the same power/fuel burn.
Not suprising. 1999 kg makes absolutely no sense with the 3rd row of seats.
