My opinion and experience is that the DA40 is just not a very well designed airplane. Sure it flies decently and is pretty efficient but it has quite a few downsides both in design and ergonomics that make it a bad choice for the cost.
After reading your whole post, it looks like you're trying pretty hard to hate it for some reason.
The front seats don't move, it seems from a design standpoint the CG is so critical that the front seats are fixed, so the designers reacted by making the controls move instead.
That's not why the seats are fixed. The seats are fixed because the stick goes through the seat, F/A-18 Hornet style. (I dunno if the Hornet seats move or not, but for $millions per copy and jet power, they can afford the extra cost, weight and complexity of doing so.)
To get real utility out of the plane, it sucks not being able to move around.
What does utility have to do with moving seats around?
It's no wonder air-taxi operations dropped them and bought more Cirrus.
Huh? The DA40 was never used by any air-taxi operations, to my knowledge. Those that were using newer singles were using the SR22, and that's because it goes fast and carries more - It's in a different class. They're not using SR20's either. Has nothing to do with the Diamond design.
There's quite a few other quirks that point to the airplane, as a whole, being designed with a european, reactionary mindset in converting a motor glider.
Reactionary mindset?
The glider-like aspects of the DA40 are mostly excellent characteristics, IMO - The high aspect ratio wing gives it both great efficiency and an excellent glide ratio, which is a good thing to have in a single IMO. Hell, I'm going to get MORE utility out of it because of that - I'll be able to cross Lake Michigan in some spots and remain within gliding distance of shore for the entire crossing. That's going to greatly increase its utility for me.
The front door and step are stuck where they are because of having to fit them around an existing wing design.
Huh? Existing wing design? The DA40 uses a different wing than any of their other stuff. It has some glider-like characteristics, but it is not an "existing wing design".
Also - There is no front door - It's a canopy, which allows for pax to get in from both sides, makes it easier to get into, and also allows for EXCELLENT visibility. And I kind of like the step being on the front instead of behind the wing - I can get directly into the plane rather than grabbing a handle and walking up the narrow wing-walk, then trying to squeeze and contort myself in through the door while trying not to place too much weight on the seat back like I have to do in a "normal" low wing. With the Diamond, it's open the canopy, left foot on the step, right foot on the wing, left foot on the cockpit floor, right foot in and sit down. Easiest low wing to get into, IME.
Since the front seats don't move they stuck on a rear hatch for the passenger seats (which also don't move) that's not easily reached from inside by the pilot, it adds overall weight and complexity and frankly is annoying to get in an out of.
See, this is what makes me think that you're trying too hard to hate the DA40. Most single-engine 4-seat airplanes have a single front door, or two front doors, and a baggage compartment door. If you put adults in the back seat, how do you think they feel about moving a seat forward and climbing in? I haven't done that since I was a kid and rode in the back seat of my dad's Nissan. Do you carry adults in the back seat of a 2-door car?
Rather than having a baggage compartment door, Diamond made the rear door so that it can be used for both people AND bags. It's easier to get into the back seat, and at 6'4" I actually fit in the back seat of the Diamond!
In general, everything about the plane feels to me like it's lightweight, kinda cheap,
Hmmm. It's actually the sturdiest plane I fly. Very solidly built.
Really the best way to describe the plane is to say it's too European in style...which means they're just too quirky.
Funny, automakers *advertise* "European styling" as a positive thing. Do you have something against Europe?
Diamonds don't to any job very well
They go places well, they're very efficient, they have the most roomy, flexible baggage compartment of any 4-seat single, you can get directly into 3 of the 4 seats without having to slide across anything or move anything...
They do a LOT of jobs very well. Since we picked up the DA40, I've only flown the 182 once and that was because I had to carry somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 pounds of people. Every other mission I've had, it has done very well. I wouldn't take it into the Idaho backcountry, and it won't carry what the 182 can, but the 182 is a different class of airplane. Compared to every other currently-produced fixed-gear 180hp single - That is, other airplanes in its class - It compares VERY favorably, which is why we bought one.
and at their price point, there's a lot of other airplanes out there that do for the same money.
Price point is only a problem because you can't buy a 1978 DA40.
That's an awesome solution. The Spirit of St Louis also had great range, but really poor passenger comfort and no room for golf clubs.
The DA40 has more room for golf clubs than any other plane in its class.
As someone who uses airplanes as tools, I don't want to have to customize something that's an average performer when I can much more easily buy an airplane that's been built to do the job required.
Okay, that guy was flying across a lot of territory where there were no airports. Haven't you ever heard of putting ferry tanks in other airplanes? It's not like he wouldn't have had to add tanks to any other airplane to do the exact same job.
The DA40 is also not an "average performer." Again, you need to compare it to airplanes in its class - It's not an SR22 or a Bonanza. Neither is a 172. But when you compare it with other planes in its class, it's faster, more efficient, carries more (compared to other NEW airplanes - A 1970's Archer carries way more than a new one does), climbs faster, yadda yadda yadda - It outperforms other fixed-gear 180hp singles, and by a lot in many cases.
I have talked to plenty of folks who really like their DA's and it's a good fit for its market. It's a fine airplane.
There's a reason for that.
My qualms are that's it's clearly designed in a way that attempt to fix its inherent shortcomings.
Every airplane has inherent shortcomings, and every airplane is designed in a way that attempts to mitigate them. That's why there's no such thing as a "perfect" airplane. Some come closer than others, and the DA40 is as close to perfect as I think you can get in a fixed-gear 180hp single.
In the cabin, it's lack of flexibility in loading and comfort makes it not very suitable for xcountry flying.
I still don't know where you're getting this "lack of flexibility in loading" thing.
And as someone who has flown it on a long cross-country trip - It's quite comfortable for 3-hour legs, more so than a lot of other airplanes.
DA's are great trainers, perfect fit for the "172 but newer" niche, but just don't work as a real utility or xcountry business tool. Proof? Go to a busy Class D exec airport around a bigger city and compare the piston singles on the ramp hidden among the big boy airplanes. There's three distinct categories -
The ones you see alot: the "SR22/Bonanza/maybe Mooney, Matrix, Malibu" category for single business guy who's time is money.
The planes you'll see pretty regularly: the "182/Cherokee variants for the self-flown/not as fast" category
The planes you don't see too often: the "I rented it at the flight school" category for the 172's and DA40's flown by occasional business, mostly VFR, not used to controlled field pilot. SR20's kind of cross over the last two categories.
You don't see DA40's too often because Diamond does a pretty crappy job of marketing them, especially compared to Cirrus. They're also viewed as a "newcomer" compared to a company like Cessna, but that's mostly because most people don't realize they've been building aircraft since 1981 - The fact that they only built gliders and changed their name twice prior to 1995 when they started building airplanes didn't help.
Your assertion that the DA40 is something that you only find rented from a flight school is also incorrect - Diamond expected that to happen more than it did, but they found that they were ending up with a lot of single owner pilot customers - That's a large part of why they created the DA40XL and DA40XLS, and split the flight-school variants into the DA40FP and DA40CS - Neither of which has sold particularly well, further reinforcing that most of the customers for the DA40 are owners, not flight schools.
Please explain how it's safer. I've never understood why Cirrus aircraft are thought of us unsafe.
Cirri have their fuel in a wet wing. Metals tend to bend in a crash, while composites shatter. So, when Cirri crash, they tend to dump all of their fuel out very quickly, leading to flash fires.
Diamond, OTOH, built a wing with dual main spars and put the fuel in an aluminum tank between them so it's very well protected, and extremely unlikely to burn. We've discussed this recently, I suggest you go check out that thread.
I flew it like I fly the 182 on a long XC - Flight plan in the GPS, take off, hit the autopilot and enjoy the view.
