Sounds pretty strange – there’s plenty of Thielert 2.0 DA40 G1000 flying around, and I’ve never heard about dismal performance like this. (300fpm?)
Agree with Hodja. There must be something seriously wrong in order to get only 300 fpm with a 135 HP DA-40TDI. Usually I am at 1200 ft above airfield in about 2 minutes after take-off. And close to max weight.
That is with flaps up shortly after lift-off. Leave the flaps in take-off-position and it climbs a little better!
I also doubt that the G1000 extra weight makes the difference. If I fly alone the performance is still not great.
We got the updated Centurion 2.0 with the new “two mass flywheel” clutch, and the new gearbox (with cooler). These components have a TBR of 600hrs (used to be 300hrs).
There might be some performance penalty with these (higher TBR) components?
The two things we’re suffering from is:
- initial climb rate is bad. This gets better once you gain some altitude.
- we need to set 80% cruise power in order to get the same IAS as the “old” DA40 with 70%
I’ll keep you updated on how it performs with the new engine…
Like you said, if flying alone and the performance of the plane is still below expected, the G1000 weight is not the issue.
I cannot imagine that the dual-mass flywheel and/or new gearbox have anything to do with this. These would somehow have to absorb energy through additional friction and that does not seem logical. Btw, I have the new gearbox design too, and no impact on performance.
Are there any differences in RPM between the new and old engine during various phases of the flight? If so, maybe a problem with the governor.
Pressure test of the cylinders? ECU (Electronic Control Unit) malfunction also comes to mind. Swap one from another engine (quickly done)..
When I read the numbers of the DA40-TDI I can’t help scratching my head. The DA40-180 has massively better performance, better payload and is available with the GFC700 and WAAS. Makes the TDI look like a dangerous, outdated and not very useful plane.
I did a few hours in the TDI for my PPL. The only advantage it has against the Lycosaur is the smoothness of the engine.
But a recent DA40-XLS will do 1000 fpm and 140-150 knots on 8 to 10 GPH. And if you reduce power you can still do 130-135 KTAS on 7 to 7.5 GPH.
Hopefully the TDI with CDI-155 will have decent performance…
I think the DA40 is a very good aircraft. For me performance was fine with the little diesel, and I would probably opt for the diesel version for its extra utility with jet fuel availability and economy, but I would imagine the Lycoming has performance advantages (I havent flown the Lycoming version). Whether or not you are going to regularly operate near MTOW or from short strips may be a consideration (I assume the Lycoming performs better in both situations).
On the negatives I found the autopilot wasnt all that robust when it came to choppy conditions and would trip out on occasions. Also the aircraft feels more like a 152 for example that a Piper Warrior. In other words it feels light and reasonably responsive, as opposed to solid and stable (that is about the best way I can describe the feel). For lots of long distance cross coutries I might prefer the flying characteristics of a heavier more substantial single, for, fun and feel the DA40 ticks more boxes.
What is the fuel flow if you set the engine power around 40% in these Thielert/Centurion engines in DA40? If the plane still flies 100kts or more. I saw some really low figures from DA42 and I’d like to know what is the figure on DA40. Please report 
If you have Austro report that too
Here you go (austro)
We are looking to replace a PA-28-161 in our flying club with something newer. The majority of use is PPL- training and pattern work together with fire patrol (longer XC) service. Two on board for 90% of the time (but 4 seats req.). Looking for something around eur 100k-150k. Do you see the DA40 TDi as a good option for us?
@AirV: Any Diamond related performance figures can be found on their Austrian web site. The figures are accurate.
http://support.diamond-air.at/techpubs+M52087573ab0.html
@NorFlyer: I would say that the DA40 TDi fits that profile nicely. It is a rugged, stable, forgiving aircraft with great visibility. The Diesel makes it low-noise (inside and out) and of course very economical. How much money you save depends on the difference between the price of Avgas and Avtur in your country of course. The plane comes with traditional (but with G430) or with G1000 avionics and opinions differ on which is better for training. Some think ‘steam gauge’ is the way to start. Others (me included) think that we need modern and informative avionics if we want to attract and retain new pilots, especially youngsters..
On the engines. I personally would not touch the 1.7 litre version unless you can find one that is cheap and you can thus change to a new Conti Diesel. That way you’d get the latest engine version which is a step further in economy: 2100 hrs TBR and gearbox 1200 hrs (used to be 1500 hrs and 300 hrs respectively). And for NCO I’m confident that the new EASA maintenance rules would allow operation ‘on-condition’. You won’t find a donor 1.7 DA40 TDi with a G1000 though.. Anyway, although a little more expensive to operate than the very latest versions, the previous iteration of the 2.0 litre engine is fine. Reliable..
