seasalt
Bronze Member
Please refer to the previous post if you want any history on how we got to this point....
I will try to present what data I have been able to gather in a fair and objective manner.
I am leaving out the 3120 due to lack of complete data (accurate street pricing, etc.) and the fact this post was born out of the step up considerations from a 3320 to its two more powerful turbocharged stablemates, the 3520 and 3720. Generally, the 3320 will serve as a proxy (although a little shy) in this comparison for the 4410 (to the extent they remain available in the market, and because I dont have a quote on one - maybe one of you does).
As you know the vehicle weight is the same for all these mid frame bretheren at 2900# on the head. Also note the hydraulic flow potential is exactly the same for all models as well (4410 included).
3320 HST:
List $20,263 with small R-4's.
Local street price: $15,900
Gross HP 32.5
HST PTO HP 25.5 (or 25 depending on what brochure you are looking at)
Max Torque at Rated Speed 61.6 ft-lbs.
Power to wieght ratio 1:0.0112
Cost Per HP: $489.23
Cost of Torque: $258.11/ft-lb.
3350 HST:
List $22,303 with small R-4's
Local Street Price $17,400
Gross HP 37
HST PTO HP 30
Max Torque at Rated Speed 71.1 ft-lbs
Power to weight ratio 1:0.0127
Cost Per HP $470.27
Cost of Torque: $244.72/ft/lb.
3720 HST:
List $24,683 with small R-4's
Local Street Price $19,100
Gross HP 44
HST PTO HP 35
Max Torque at Rated Speed 84.3 ft-lbs
Power to Weight Ratio 1:0.0151
Cost Per HP $434.09
Cost of Torque $226.57/ft-lb.
Lets assume that while the torque ratings are at the crank, the available PTO torque is exactly proportionate, (i.e.: tranny losses are constant across the board).
OK there is a nice declining power cost as you go up the ranks - partially due to the constant weight of all machines and partially due to smart marketers.
Analysis: The power differential between the 3320 and the entry turbo 3520 is $2,040 list and $1,500 in the real world. For that you get 4.5 HP (Gross and PTO), at a cost of $333.33 per HP. You also get 9.5 ft-lbs of added torque, at an incremental cost of $214.73 per ft-lb.
One might point out that while the cost of the first unit of power be it HP or torque is the same as the last unit, (due to simple math), the VALUE of the first unit of power is infinite compared to the value of the last increment. I think that is a fair and impartial statement of fact. Said another way, you can't run a tractor with no power. You need a certain amount just to get by. Question is how much is "sufficient" and how much is "plenty" and how much is "brutally powerful" (and how do you put that punishing power to work)?
I know, I know, if you are male, more HP is better...and "its all subjective" - "a personal choice" or "depends on your needs" - but that is all a bunch of hockey since none of us knows what we will ultimately ask our machines to do. Remeber the first rule of toys...err...I mean tractors. You never know what the extent of work is you will be using them for until you get one. Hawthornes Principle: "Work expands to fill the HP alloted".
Anyway, too much inside the box thinking just kills the game so just play along and lets see where this goes, OK? I promise I have no agenda and am doing these calcs in real time, so I dont know the answer, and that assumes there will be one!
Analysis (cont'd): The power differential between the 3520 and the most powerful unit, the intercooled turbo 3720 is $2,380 list and $1,700 in the real world. For that you get 7 Gross HP but this time only 5 extra PTO HP, (??Go figure), at a cost of $340.00 / $476.00 per Gross / PTO HP, respectively. You also get a beefy 13.2 ft-lbs of added torque, at a cost of $180.30 per ft-lb. of incremental torque. (Cheaper by comparison due to the relatively large gain in torque. Nice...but since we said early on the first HP is invlauable and the last is incremental, how valueable is it in the real world since it is at the top of the scale?)
Finally, (you may have other thoughts or ways to read the tea leaves here but I am just about done), the first step turbo seems to be disproportionately high in cost (adds $2,040), for what you get. However, if you are solidly into the 3520 range, the 3720 seems easier to justify, as and additional $2,380 seems buys a lot of torque bang for the buck. The same cannot be said of the HP differential as it costs more per HP (at least at the PTO), to upgrade from the 3520 to the 3720.
In Summary: Moving up from the 3320 to the 3520 will cost you just under 10% more $$$ and give you 14% more grunt (HP).
Moving up from the 3520 to the 3720 will cost you another almost 10% in cash and yeild a 19% gain in HP, (engine not PTO).
The jump from a 3320 to the class leader is $3,200 (street) and nets you 11 1/2 HP (10 at the PTO) and 23.2 ft-lbs. of torque. Said another way the 3720 will cost you 20% more than the 3320 for 35.4% more HP and 36.8% more torque.
Compelling Thought: the welter weight (orange belt) pocket rocket compact contender - Bota's B3030 has a power to weight ratio you would expect to be huge due to its excellent HP and light weight. Although many (esp on this forum) might argue the 3030 has more snort than bones, its power to weight ration is suprisingly close to the 3720 at an impressive 1:0.0162 compared to the 3720 at 1:0.0151, based on Gross HP, and an eyelash off at 1:.0124 vs. 1:0.0120 on a PTO basis. Very close. I would imagine this is quite a compliment for the 3720 in terms of its muscle per pound.
Price per HP is another matter, as you might expect as the Bota costs $453 vs. 434 for the 3720. (Woops!) NO I ASSUMED WRONG!! /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
How about for power where the rubber meets the road, as it were...$591 per PTO HP for the Bota vs. the 3720 at $ 545 per PTO HP.
Well cut me off at the knees and call me Shorty!! /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
JD is STILL cheaper - Whooda Thunk That?!!
Please realize that the old saying is true...figures lie and liars figure. I could have run the percentages using the larger more powerful models as a basis and the numbers would be much different so dont be fooled. (For example while the last statement from the first paragaraph of "Analysis (cont'd) analysis true if stated using the 3320 as the basis and looking up from there, if stated the opposite way "the 3320 has x% less than 3720", the numbers would not match. BTW in that case, x would be only = 26%, instead of 35.5%.
I was unsucessful at fining a Yanmar torque curve for the TNV engines for comparison to post along with this data. If someone had such it would be useful to see a graphical representation of the RPM ranges where the differences occur. I would agree with those of you who suggested tractors are better suited for turbos than cars since tractors tend to have their throttles set for individual tasks and cars demands are less predictable and span twice the RPM range. Diesels are also built to handle more heat, stress and punishment than a motor gas IC engine. Despite the added complexity, it is true that diesels are more naturally suited for such punishment.
How do you feel about this information? Did you spend time poking at the numbers before choosing or did you go to the dealer and drive off into the woods and start a bulldogging competition between the models? Did you just pick the biggest one in this class or were you somewhat disappointed with your last tractor and wanted to fix the power issue for good? /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
I will look forward to your thoughts.
I will try to present what data I have been able to gather in a fair and objective manner.
I am leaving out the 3120 due to lack of complete data (accurate street pricing, etc.) and the fact this post was born out of the step up considerations from a 3320 to its two more powerful turbocharged stablemates, the 3520 and 3720. Generally, the 3320 will serve as a proxy (although a little shy) in this comparison for the 4410 (to the extent they remain available in the market, and because I dont have a quote on one - maybe one of you does).
As you know the vehicle weight is the same for all these mid frame bretheren at 2900# on the head. Also note the hydraulic flow potential is exactly the same for all models as well (4410 included).
3320 HST:
List $20,263 with small R-4's.
Local street price: $15,900
Gross HP 32.5
HST PTO HP 25.5 (or 25 depending on what brochure you are looking at)
Max Torque at Rated Speed 61.6 ft-lbs.
Power to wieght ratio 1:0.0112
Cost Per HP: $489.23
Cost of Torque: $258.11/ft-lb.
3350 HST:
List $22,303 with small R-4's
Local Street Price $17,400
Gross HP 37
HST PTO HP 30
Max Torque at Rated Speed 71.1 ft-lbs
Power to weight ratio 1:0.0127
Cost Per HP $470.27
Cost of Torque: $244.72/ft/lb.
3720 HST:
List $24,683 with small R-4's
Local Street Price $19,100
Gross HP 44
HST PTO HP 35
Max Torque at Rated Speed 84.3 ft-lbs
Power to Weight Ratio 1:0.0151
Cost Per HP $434.09
Cost of Torque $226.57/ft-lb.
Lets assume that while the torque ratings are at the crank, the available PTO torque is exactly proportionate, (i.e.: tranny losses are constant across the board).
OK there is a nice declining power cost as you go up the ranks - partially due to the constant weight of all machines and partially due to smart marketers.
Analysis: The power differential between the 3320 and the entry turbo 3520 is $2,040 list and $1,500 in the real world. For that you get 4.5 HP (Gross and PTO), at a cost of $333.33 per HP. You also get 9.5 ft-lbs of added torque, at an incremental cost of $214.73 per ft-lb.
One might point out that while the cost of the first unit of power be it HP or torque is the same as the last unit, (due to simple math), the VALUE of the first unit of power is infinite compared to the value of the last increment. I think that is a fair and impartial statement of fact. Said another way, you can't run a tractor with no power. You need a certain amount just to get by. Question is how much is "sufficient" and how much is "plenty" and how much is "brutally powerful" (and how do you put that punishing power to work)?
I know, I know, if you are male, more HP is better...and "its all subjective" - "a personal choice" or "depends on your needs" - but that is all a bunch of hockey since none of us knows what we will ultimately ask our machines to do. Remeber the first rule of toys...err...I mean tractors. You never know what the extent of work is you will be using them for until you get one. Hawthornes Principle: "Work expands to fill the HP alloted".
Anyway, too much inside the box thinking just kills the game so just play along and lets see where this goes, OK? I promise I have no agenda and am doing these calcs in real time, so I dont know the answer, and that assumes there will be one!
Analysis (cont'd): The power differential between the 3520 and the most powerful unit, the intercooled turbo 3720 is $2,380 list and $1,700 in the real world. For that you get 7 Gross HP but this time only 5 extra PTO HP, (??Go figure), at a cost of $340.00 / $476.00 per Gross / PTO HP, respectively. You also get a beefy 13.2 ft-lbs of added torque, at a cost of $180.30 per ft-lb. of incremental torque. (Cheaper by comparison due to the relatively large gain in torque. Nice...but since we said early on the first HP is invlauable and the last is incremental, how valueable is it in the real world since it is at the top of the scale?)
Finally, (you may have other thoughts or ways to read the tea leaves here but I am just about done), the first step turbo seems to be disproportionately high in cost (adds $2,040), for what you get. However, if you are solidly into the 3520 range, the 3720 seems easier to justify, as and additional $2,380 seems buys a lot of torque bang for the buck. The same cannot be said of the HP differential as it costs more per HP (at least at the PTO), to upgrade from the 3520 to the 3720.
In Summary: Moving up from the 3320 to the 3520 will cost you just under 10% more $$$ and give you 14% more grunt (HP).
Moving up from the 3520 to the 3720 will cost you another almost 10% in cash and yeild a 19% gain in HP, (engine not PTO).
The jump from a 3320 to the class leader is $3,200 (street) and nets you 11 1/2 HP (10 at the PTO) and 23.2 ft-lbs. of torque. Said another way the 3720 will cost you 20% more than the 3320 for 35.4% more HP and 36.8% more torque.
Compelling Thought: the welter weight (orange belt) pocket rocket compact contender - Bota's B3030 has a power to weight ratio you would expect to be huge due to its excellent HP and light weight. Although many (esp on this forum) might argue the 3030 has more snort than bones, its power to weight ration is suprisingly close to the 3720 at an impressive 1:0.0162 compared to the 3720 at 1:0.0151, based on Gross HP, and an eyelash off at 1:.0124 vs. 1:0.0120 on a PTO basis. Very close. I would imagine this is quite a compliment for the 3720 in terms of its muscle per pound.
Price per HP is another matter, as you might expect as the Bota costs $453 vs. 434 for the 3720. (Woops!) NO I ASSUMED WRONG!! /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
How about for power where the rubber meets the road, as it were...$591 per PTO HP for the Bota vs. the 3720 at $ 545 per PTO HP.
Well cut me off at the knees and call me Shorty!! /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
JD is STILL cheaper - Whooda Thunk That?!!
Please realize that the old saying is true...figures lie and liars figure. I could have run the percentages using the larger more powerful models as a basis and the numbers would be much different so dont be fooled. (For example while the last statement from the first paragaraph of "Analysis (cont'd) analysis true if stated using the 3320 as the basis and looking up from there, if stated the opposite way "the 3320 has x% less than 3720", the numbers would not match. BTW in that case, x would be only = 26%, instead of 35.5%.
I was unsucessful at fining a Yanmar torque curve for the TNV engines for comparison to post along with this data. If someone had such it would be useful to see a graphical representation of the RPM ranges where the differences occur. I would agree with those of you who suggested tractors are better suited for turbos than cars since tractors tend to have their throttles set for individual tasks and cars demands are less predictable and span twice the RPM range. Diesels are also built to handle more heat, stress and punishment than a motor gas IC engine. Despite the added complexity, it is true that diesels are more naturally suited for such punishment.
How do you feel about this information? Did you spend time poking at the numbers before choosing or did you go to the dealer and drive off into the woods and start a bulldogging competition between the models? Did you just pick the biggest one in this class or were you somewhat disappointed with your last tractor and wanted to fix the power issue for good? /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
I will look forward to your thoughts.
