L3940/L42240, LA724/LA854

[kuboman]

I presently have the L3130 with the la 723 loader and want to upgrade to either the l3940 or l4240. The l3940 only comes with the la724 loader. My question is . The la854 specs show a lot more lifting capacity. Does it pan out in reality or will I not notice the difference from the la724. Any of you out there that have gone form one to the other and what is your assessment.

 

[TripleR]

No, I have not done this, but researched it to some extent when I was looking at this size tractor a little over a year ago. We were going to buy an L3940 until I looked at the loader and decided to go with a cab.

When I called to order an L4240 HSTC, my wife insisted, seriously, that I get the price on an L5030 HSTC we had seen on the lot that Sunday. Well it turned out too good to pass up and we love it. It has the heavier loader, predecessor to the 854.

I was recently using our M8540 with the LA1353 and managed to bog it down. I really like a strong FEL.

 

[Piston]

I have the LA852 (older version to the 853/854) and wouldn't want anything smaller.

 

[art]

I'd buy the larger loader! Now that you are questioning it, it will come back to haunt you if you don't!

 

[nybirdman]

I have owned both::an L3130 with the 723 loader traded for a L4240 with the 854 loader..........huge difference,the 854 loader is the reason I purchased the L4240 over the L3940.I added a tooth-bar and grapple...awesome.

 

[kuboman]

I have owned both::an L3130 with the 723 loader traded for a L4240 with the 854 loader..........huge difference,the 854 loader is the reason I purchased the L4240 over the L3940.I added a tooth-bar and grapple...awesome.

Ahhh you would have to say that:laughing:

How did you find the 4240 compared to the 3130. I find the 3130 quite underpowered with the loader and extra ballast. Does the 4240 have enough hp as to not feel underpowered.

 

[nybirdman]

I don't find the L4240 under-powered at all.In the winter (we get a fair amount of snow) I have an eight ft.Curtis FEL mounted snow-plow and a seven ft.rear...use both at the same time.I have an old Ferguson two bottom plow,it pulls that with ease,use a six ft. rototiller and bush-hog.
With the rears loaded(R1 tires) I have hooked rocks and lifted the rear..that's how much power this loader has.Like I said amazing tractor with this loader.

 

[crazyal]

The only real reason to go with the 3940 is if you just don't have or can't justify the extra money to go with the 4240. Any frame size difference, if any, is not going to make any difference. When I was looking there were a couple of dealers that had at least one 3940 in stock and no 4240s. They were eager to give a discount on the 3940 yet no so much on the 4240. I wish i could tell you the difference between the to two loaders but I've never used the 724. Actually the 854 feels weak to me since I'm use to my 580K's loader. :laughing:

 

[PHILIP8N]

The LA854 loader does have more lifting capacity. But, I have filled my L3940/LA724 6' heavy duty bucket with many things, and there is nothing I have not been able to pick up. Philip.

 

[TripleR]

The LA854 loader does have more lifting capacity. But, I have filled my L3940/LA724 6' heavy duty bucket with many things, and there is nothing I have not been able to pick up. Philip.

I use my FELs for digging in hill sides or dirt that has long since settled, so the more power the better. Like I said, I often run out of power with the LA1353 on our M8540. For hauling, a FEL with less power is fine.