3930 with loader pricing

[geneP]

I've been looking at 3930s, first without a loader, but found these two with loaders. first is a Ford '92 model with Long loader plumbed to the remotes, 8x2 trans., 880 hrs, has bent sheet metal on hood and panel to the rear of the hood. Asking $8500, I haven't tried to negotiate,

Second is a '97 New Holland with a Great Bend loader, optional pump, 8x8, remote, extendable lift links, really clean with 1600 hrs. Around $11,000.

The both sound a little high for what they are, but I've been known to be "frugal". Comments?

 

[Soggy Bottom Outdoors]

Morning Gene, I travel to the Memphis/Olive Branch area regularly. My local JD dealer has a Ford/New Holland 1997 4630 with 1350 hours, canopy, Bushog loader with bucket and bale spear, very clean, power beyond block to the loader, big rubber on front, no FWA or shuttle. asking $13500

 

[RollingsFarms]

I like the first tractor the best but hate the loader (Long) and that would be coming off and replaced asap if it were me. I've never been a fan of the early New Holland tractors that replaced the Fords but that's just a personal thing. It's too bad you can't switch loaders between the two tractors.

 

[RickB]

I like the first tractor the best but hate the loader (Long) and that would be coming off and replaced asap if it were me. I've never been a fan of the early New Holland tractors that replaced the Fords but that's just a personal thing. It's too bad you can't switch loaders between the two tractors.

The only thing "New Holland" about the second tractor is the identification plate and decals.

 

[sawtooth]

One thing to consider is that Ford went higher in hp for the last years produced. I know 98's and 99's had higher hp but not sure about the 97's. My 98 listed the engine hp rating on the serial plate. The later tractors had 60 engine hp and 52 pto hp. Early tractors like 1990-96 or 97 only had 45 pto power. Look under the hood of the 97 model and find the serial plate.

 

[RollingsFarms]

The only thing "New Holland" about the second tractor is the identification plate and decals.

True but what you can't deny is you can sell a Ford 3930 faster then the NH if both are otherwise equal in price and condition. I just don't know how good the quality control was with the first NH produced tractors as most early NH's I've been around all seemed to have electrical gremlins for some reason.

 

[geneP]

Three things in my consideration of the tractors are: (1) The Ford badged tractor has the 8x2 trans vs the shuttle in the New Holland (2) the Ford has the loader plumbed into the remotes. I would have to correct that. (3) the engine went from 3.2 l (201 ci) in the Ford to 3.1l (192 ci) in the new holland and the rated rpms went from 2000 in the ford to 2200 in the new holland. All this is from the Tractordata.com site. The 3.2 was rated at 43.6 at PTO speed while the 3.1 was rated at 41.2 at PTO speed and had to turn 200 more RPM to get max power.

 

[RickB]

True but what you can't deny is you can sell a Ford 3930 faster then the NH if both are otherwise equal in price and condition. I just don't know how good the quality control was with the first NH produced tractors as most early NH's I've been around all seemed to have electrical gremlins for some reason.

I'll deny that all day long.
I've almost 20 years here at a New Holland dealership and a 30 series with NH decals will sell just as fast as one with Ford decals, if not faster because it's newer. There's too many buyers that actually know what is behind the decal. Can't speak for South Carolina.

Edit: Speaking strictly about Basildon- built New Hollands, not Fiat based machines.

 

[RickB]

Three things in my consideration of the tractors are: (1) The Ford badged tractor has the 8x2 trans vs the shuttle in the New Holland (2) the Ford has the loader plumbed into the remotes. I would have to correct that. (3) the engine went from 3.2 l (201 ci) in the Ford to 3.1l (192 ci) in the new holland and the rated rpms went from 2000 in the ford to 2200 in the new holland. All this is from the Tractordata.com site. The 3.2 was rated at 43.6 at PTO speed while the 3.1 was rated at 41.2 at PTO speed and had to turn 200 more RPM to get max power.

The 8X8 shuttle is a huge plus, especially on a tractor with a loader. The 8X2 has two reverse choices; too slow and too fast. The rest of the differences posted at (3) are minutia.

 

[geneP]

The New Holland sold today, I was going to look tomorrow. I really want a shuttle transmission so I'm still looking.