Price difference between 3720 & 4320

[speedbump]

I own a 4520 and love it. It has a cab which I finally had to go with because I'm mowing between 4 acres of Date Palms. They can shread you when they get big. I had the open cab before this one and loved it too. It had the shuttle shifter where the new one has just a three speed shifter and two pedels, F&R. The loader works great and I when I had the 8 foot pull behind mower, it ran it just fine is some very tall and thick weeds.

I would never but a two wheel drive tractor. Just my 2¢

 

[jcmseven]

Steve, there seems to be not much difference in real-world performance between a 4120 and 4520, unless PTO work is involved; at least in my experience. Does your TLB have a 4 cylinder Yanmar engine? If it does that may explain the difference in performance. I found the 3 cylinder Yanmar turbo in my 3720's (I had two) to seemingly have less power than the 4120, even though it was rated one HP higher at the flywheel. Though I suspect a 4 cylinder engine to have a little more grunt, if it is Yanmar, it will not have the torque curve of the PowerTech engine.

John M

 

[eagle107]

Steve, there seems to be not much difference in real-world performance between a 4120 and 4520, unless PTO work is involved; at least in my experience. Does your TLB have a 4 cylinder Yanmar engine? If it does that may explain the difference in performance. I found the 3 cylinder Yanmar turbo in my 3720's (I had two) to seemingly have less power than the 4120, even though it was rated one HP higher at the flywheel. Though I suspect a 4 cylinder engine to have a little more grunt, if it is Yanmar, it will not have the torque curve of the PowerTech engine.

John M

You are right. The 3720 might have the same HP as the 4120 (43hp), but the engine torque is different. The 4120 has an engine displacement of 148.9 cu. in., four cylinders and 95 ft. lbs of torque while the 3720 an engine displacement of 91.5 cu. in., three cylinders and 84.3 ft. lbs. of torque. Couple the 4120 engine with beefy hydraulics and final drive hydro or planetary gear set, this tractor feels and performs better than the 3720; however, for some people, the downside is that it is also has a bigger size chassis which cannot easily be garaged or use between tighter spaces as a 3720. If I did not get such a good deal on my NH Boomer 3040, the 4120 would have been the next tractor on my list to purchase.

 

[jenkinsph]

Steve, there seems to be not much difference in real-world performance between a 4120 and 4520, unless PTO work is involved; at least in my experience. Does your TLB have a 4 cylinder Yanmar engine? If it does that may explain the difference in performance. I found the 3 cylinder Yanmar turbo in my 3720's (I had two) to seemingly have less power than the 4120, even though it was rated one HP higher at the flywheel. Though I suspect a 4 cylinder engine to have a little more grunt, if it is Yanmar, it will not have the torque curve of the PowerTech engine.

John M

John,
You bring up a good point about the engine differences, the 110tlb has a Yanmar 132 ci naturally aspirated 4 cyl engine while the 4520 has a Power tech 4cyl turbo engine. Since I operate at about 7000 ft elevation the turbo might make the most difference.

 

[msmud]

If you look at the dimensions of the 4000 series, they really are fairly compact. To me the great advantage of the 4000s is the wider stance compared to many compact tractors, longer wheelbase for ride comfort/stability with long rear attachments, heavier front end weight and overall machine weight, and the decreased need for ballast for many 3ph applications. Truly, if the 3720 turbo engine could be put into the 4120, tuned to produce peak hp at around 2300 rpm for lower fuel consumption and higher operating torque, it would be the ideal tractor for my uses. As it is, I think the 4120 is the bargain of the 4000 line.

 

[PioneerMan]

Is it true that the 4x20 is cast iron vs the 3x20? And I assume the frame is larger? There is a big weight difference for the size difference.

 

[CTW]

I have the similar equipment the size of the 4320 and would point out that none of these will lift a pallet of pavers. I do lots of paver work and flagstone work, most pallets of pavers weight about 3,400 lbs and stone can be up to 5,000 lbs.


My suggestion is to have the pallets placed in position when they are delivered. Most places such as Lowes or Home Depot and other brick companies will do this for you without any added charges. Once you have laid some of the pavers from each pallet you can then move them down with a tractor and forks to keep them close to your work.

My thoughts exactly. These pallets will weigh alot more than that FEL capacity, especially the height you will have to lift them off of the trailer. We had paver work done before for a driveway and the crew used a big piggy back forklift that you see on the back of a flat bed rig trailer. As in our case, your delivery company should be placing them for you, especially for a customer who's buying that much product. At any rate, when the project does start, post some pics.

 

[msmud]

The best way to compare the two was by the comprehensive specs published in the various manuals, which used to be available online, but which I can not find so far on the new website. To the best of my remembering, the fronts of the 3000s and 4000s are all cast iron but the 4000s had 500# more capacity, approx 1000# more in the rear; the 4000 has a 3.5" longer wheelbase and about 10" longer OAL.

Generally the dimensional differences are fairly small--except for maximum OAW-- but the capacity differences are substantial. The gross wt of the 4000s is about 800# more than the 3000s, more than a 25% difference. The 4000s also have beefier R1s (8-16 F, 13.6 - 28 R vs 7-14F, 11.2-24r on the 3000s), and better maximum OAW at rear R1s (89" vs 68") for better slope stability.

 

[jcmseven]

Compared to a big farm tractor, none of these machines are overly large, but for a compact the 4000 series are big tractors. The term "compact" seems to address the length of the machine primarily and my 4520 was not much longer than my 3720 and not too much longer than my 2320 even; but it was much wider than either and much taller. It also weighed a lot more. I had a 72" 4/1 WR Long bucket on mine, with loaded tires and had wheel weights as well. I also had a 72" box blade on back and that combination tipped at roughly 6300 pounds. I had a 20' tandem trailer and the combination was just over 8000 pounds. That is a pretty big load for a 1/2 ton, and at the time, my diesel Ford would notice the weight. I know this is by no means a huge load, but for our half ton truck owners out there, careful balancing of the load may be needed if one is planning to transport that kind of machine, even with one of these 10K tow rating trucks. Just another thing to keep in mind when buying.

John M

 

[speedbump]

I had a 20' tandem trailer and the combination was just over 8000 pounds. That is a pretty big load for a 1/2 ton, and at the time, my diesel Ford would notice the weight.

I'll attest to that. I have pulled mine with just the loader on with a 16' tandem trailer. The 6 liter GMC has no problem pulling it, but stopping it is a horse of a different color. The GMC is a 1/2 ton also. And I do have to pull the tractor up on the trailer very slowly and watch for the truck to settle back down near level to get the tractor centered on the trailer with a little tongue weight. Once your going down the road, you forget it's back there, but don't tail gate.