3000 vs 4000 series for stability

[jcmseven]

Dirt,

That is pretty steep. With regard to our OP's question, I have had both 3000 and 4000 series machines. Dirt's solution is about the only one that will make a 3000 series tractor approach the 4000 series stability. The 4520 I owned was light years better on stability than is the 3720 I currently have. And, it is not just hillside, it is front to back. This is something we do not discuss often but is very important. With a bucket-full of stuff, the 3000 series have a tendency to "see-saw" back and forth. My 4520, no matter how heavily-loaded, did not do that. Weights would likely help that, but not totally resolve it.

John M

 

[NYBOB]

I did notice the front to back issue also. I went from a HD 72" bucket to a 60" standard bucket due to the weight issues.

I guess the question is whether the 4000 would fix my issue, still be usable with my implements and how much the trade would cost me. Versus using the extentions.

 

[beefeater]

The 4 series also comes with either R1s or R4s that have 8 position rear wheels. They can be moved out quite a bit without adding wheel extenders. The 3 series only has the R1's with 8 position wheels, according to the JD website.

 

[Superduper]

Just looked up the rear tire track width and it looks like the 4x20 series can be set much wider than the 3x20 series. At the widest setting, they are quite a bit wider so conventional wisdom says that it will be more stable. Looks like the 4x20 series tractors can have multiple setting on both R4 and R1 equipped tires/rims whereas the 3x20 series tractors can only adjust out with the R1 tires. On the other hand, it is bigger frame size and the width can be a detriment depending upon where it is being operated. A tractor with a 75" rear track width is obviously not going to work for everyone.

-------------------------------------------------------

Rear Tire Size
Position .........17.5L-24 8PR R4 TI .......13.6-28 4PR R1 TI
1 (Narrow) .............N/A ..........................N/A
2 ....................1.3 m (51 in.) .............1.3 m (51 in.)*
3 ....................1.4 m (55 in.) .............1.4 m (55 in.)
4 ....................1.5 m (59 in.) .............1.5 m (59 in.)
5 ....................1.6 m (63 in.) .............1.6 m (63 in.)
6 ....................1.7 m (67 in.) .............1.7 m (67 in.)
7 ....................1.8 m (71 in.) .............1.8 m (71 in.)
8 (Wide) ...........1.9 m (75 in.) ............1.9 m (75 in.)

--------------------------------------------------------

 

[beefeater]

Nice follow up Super!

I think those are inside widths. My dealer claims he got my R4s out to 90 plus inches outside width, at one point in the decision process. He said it looked a bit goofy at max width.

Also, the 4 series is about 30 percent heavier than the 3 series.

 

[Superduper]

Actually, I think they are measured from center to center of tire. If so, then 90 inches or so would sound about right from edge to edge. If the 75" was measured at the inside edge of the tire, then talk about goofy looking. Of course, it would be super super stable then.

 

[NYBOB]

I have a 6 1/2 front plow and a 6 foot woods rear finish mower. What setting would get me as wide as I could go and not be wider then the mower or the plow angles 30 degrees?

 

[beefeater]

NYBOB,

Your 3720 with R4's only has two width settings for the rear tires. I don't know how wide yours go in the widest setting.

A 4 series with R4's has 8 settings for the rears and two for the fronts.

 

[NYBOB]

If I traded my 50 hour 3720 in for a 4120 assuming my implements work except my 300CX loader, how bad would I get hammered on it financially?

Thanks for everyone's help....someday I will get the perfect tractor

 

[Superduper]

Don't know but I think alot of us would be curious as well so if you ever get a quote, please share this with us. Using Deere's configurator, the difference does not look to be that much. Lightly configured with 400cx loader, it looks like a 4120 would set you back around $29k list. The 3720 is like a couple grand below that. You would need to pay new taxes all over again which on a $29k purchase would be quite substantial. Then the warranty on your trade-in is either expired or at the minimum, less than that of a new one which reduces it's desirability. Then there is the fact that Deere does not offer the financing incentives (0%, or low%) on used equipment. Because of that, the tractor needs to be priced accordingly or buyers will go new everytime. In short, although 50 hours is not much at all for a tractor like this, going used would mean the buyer will get a less than desired warranty and no financing incentives. Don't underestimate the allure of the financing incentives; I believe most folks take advantage of this, are drawn to it, and was a big part of their decision. To draw them away from new and buy used, price needs to be low enough to be a motivating factor. Then the dealer needs to make their money too.

I asked about this once just to get a quote. These factors were all mentioned to me by the dealer and while I was prepared for anything, he apparently didn't feel it was worthwhile to make the swap and didn't even offer me a price, just that it wasn't cost effective. My initial response was that I'm offering my business, this is a salesman's dream but clearly, he didn't want me to do it and was looking out for my best interest.

If I were to guess, I'm thinking that it could be a min. $10,000 hit with taxes taking a $2k-$3k chunk of the pie, dealer taking a couple grand just to make it worthwhile, a couple grand amounting to the difference in value between the two, and at least -10% -20% to get a buyer interested in used vs. new.

It adds up (or down) fast.