SR20 vs. DA40

In messages on this board the SR20 is often compared to the Lancair 300. I seldom see comparisons to the Diamond DA40 (Star). Is this because the DA40 is lags behind the other planes in the development process? From what I’ve read, the DA40 has some nice features, such as a greater useful load, but it’s a little slower and doesn’t have the parachute. I would like to hear your comparison of the two planes.

Stephen S. Ashley

It’s all relative … :slight_smile:

The DA40 is cheaper, but nowhere near as sexy as the SR20. The SR20 is faster but uses more fuel (200HP vs 180 with LASAR). The DA40 has a more comfortable door for the pax (2 doors both on the same side for front row and for back row). The SR20 has a much less acrobatic access to the right front seat (2 doors on different sides). The SR20 has a more plush interior and more fancy looking panel (although not more advanced - courtesy ARNAV). The DA40 has a larger payload but smaller range… etc

And no, the DA40 doesn’t lag behind in the dev process. It’s a different plane, maybe somewhat less prestigious. They’re both really nice :slight_smile:

you could read the articles on www.avweb.com for more

Regards, Chris

In messages on this board the SR20 is often compared to the Lancair 300. I seldom see comparisons to the Diamond DA40 (Star). Is this because the DA40 is lags behind the other planes in the development process? From what I’ve read, the DA40 has some nice features, such as a greater useful load, but it’s a little slower and doesn’t have the parachute. I would like to hear your comparison of the two planes.

Stephen S. Ashley

I just saw the DA40 this past weekend – and from a non-pilot perspective I’d chose the Cirrus hands down. I’m not thrilled about the center stick and the cabin appears VERY cramped – I can’t imagine riding in it for hours, whereas the SR20 is very comfortable on long trips.

Just my thoughts…

In messages on this board the SR20 is often compared to the Lancair 300. I seldom see comparisons to the Diamond DA40 (Star). Is this because the DA40 is lags behind the other planes in the development process? From what I’ve read, the DA40 has some nice features, such as a greater useful load, but it’s a little slower and doesn’t have the parachute. I would like to hear your comparison of the two planes.

Stephen S. Ashley

I used to have slot #47 (since built and delivered) but sold my position because of concerns I had abouot the financial viability of Cirrus Design and problems with the useful load of the A/C, along with the pricey, but doorstop like ARNAV display. Since then I’ve looked at the DA 40, and have mixed feelings. I flew one yesterday, and it was SWEET- better than my Bonanza, and a lot like the sr20, which I have also flown. Visability- great, actually as good as a helecopter. But, the baggage compartment is severely limited (I doubt you could put two carry on’s in there)and the sales rep is heming and hawing around about the useful load and speed numbers, and not in the right direction, if you get my drift. If the production a/c comes as advertised (950# load with radios included, 147 kts) its probably not bad, but a little pricey. I did not find the cockpit crampted and I am 5’10’ and 220#, the sales rep more FAA standard. Right now the intereior is teutonic, owing to its austrian heritage, but is scheduled for upgrading in the production units to suit our broader american rumps. in sum, would be a good deal at 175 K basic ifr with wing leveler, but thats not where she is priced. JSJ