2320 Question

[2Malamutes]

Possibly. The engine was designed for a rated power output at 3000rpm. That being said power and economy should be at that rpm which it was operationally designed to operate at. Would be hard to believe the Japanese and JD had designed the tractor to be the least efficient at its rated rpm where only its load determines the FC and where it will see the most operational hours. Running it at 3000rpm is better and will do less harm than anyone letting a diesel idle for any lenght of time. Also, PTO isn't the only function on the tractor that is designed to operate at the rated rpm. Some think that 3000 rpm is the limit of this engine but it is JD's required limit as the same engine in other applications have over 3500+rpm ratings.

I think you are reading too much into my wording. I stand by my statement that WOT is the greatest fuel consumption irrespective of fuel efficiency, which is what you seem to be referring to. I vary the RPM based on the task at hand. Under load I generally run near the rated 3000 RPM as I assume that is where the engine has the best balance of consumption and power (and thus the greatest efficiency). When not under load I don't always run at 3000 RPM, as I would rather have the lower consumption even if there is a trade-off in terms of power vs. consumption (since I'm not under load I'm not too concerned about the power portion of the equation.) There is a reason other than noise violations that you don't pull into a truck stop at night and hear dozens of diesels idling at WOT.

 

[PCABE5]

I think you are reading too much into my wording. I stand by my statement that WOT is the greatest fuel consumption irrespective of fuel efficiency, which is what you seem to be referring to. I vary the RPM based on the task at hand. Under load I generally run near the rated 3000 RPM as I assume that is where the engine has the best balance of consumption and power (and thus the greatest efficiency). When not under load I don't always run at 3000 RPM, as I would rather have the lower consumption even if there is a trade-off in terms of power vs. consumption (since I'm not under load I'm not too concerned about the power portion of the equation.) There is a reason other than noise violations that you don't pull into a truck stop at night and hear dozens of diesels idling at WOT.

I do not run WOT/rated every time I run mine either. I use WOT/rated when I need front/rear pto speed or full hydraulic capacity which is probably no different than everyone else. Transport or hauling light material I run an rpm that does not bog the motor so it will vary depending on the task. We must also remember that the percentage of load will change with rpm regardless of what you are doing and directly affect FC. I think what you, me and everyone else are alluding to is the fact there are trade-offs to how we use the tractor whether it be power or FC. Your semi correlation is misplaced as trucking/automotive applications are a much different animal than an agricultural application and would effectively be the same as comparing apples to oranges but justifying it by calling them both fruit. My idling statement above was that more damage is done by idling a diesel for a length of time than running it at WOT. I realize that this is your first diesel tractor but don稚 confuse gas engine operational knowledge to diesel engines.

 

[2Malamutes]

I realize that this is your first diesel tractor but don稚 confuse gas engine operational knowledge to diesel engines.

The two diesels in my boat tell me we won't even go there, but this seems to be the R3/R4 argument in disguise. As you said it's all about trade-offs, so we'll all have to make our own choices on this one.

 

[traprap]

Here's another perspective.

From the JD 2320 Operator's Manual describing the instrument panel:

"Hour Meter - Shows total number of accumulated running hours at rated speed. Use the hour meter as a guide when servicing various components of this machine."

That is why I usually run at rated (PTO) speed. I'm afraid if I run below rated speed that I will have quite a few hours on the machine that aren't accounted for. When my hour meter says 50 hours, I want to know that I have 50 TOTAL hours; not 50 at rated rpm PLUS 50 at below rated rpm.

As a test and when possible for the task, I'm running at slightly below rated rpm and trying to find the rpm point that the hour meter no longer calculates hours. From the little testing I've done, it seems to quit adding hours if I drop below 2000. I haven't done enough testing to know for sure, however.

Just a thought.

 

[flyngti]

As a test and when possible for the task, I'm running at slightly below rated rpm and trying to find the rpm point that the hour meter no longer calculates hours. From the little testing I've done, it seems to quit adding hours if I drop below 2000. I haven't done enough testing to know for sure, however.

Interesting. My dealer told me the meter was running any time the engine was running. I've not really paid that close of attention but my hour meter certainly APPEARS to be picking up running time under 2000 RPM. As I mentioned, the bulk of the time I am below 2000 and I just did my first service at 52 hours.

 

[thatguy]

Interesting. My dealer told me the meter was running any time the engine was running. I've not really paid that close of attention but my hour meter certainly APPEARS to be picking up running time under 2000 RPM. As I mentioned, the bulk of the time I am below 2000 and I just did my first service at 52 hours.

My understanding was that the hour meter does run at lower pms, but it just runs slower. IE - you run one hour (watch time), the hour meter may only show .8 hours of time..

Im sure someone can correct me if im wrong..

brian

 

[ChuckinNH]

It's my understanding that the hour meter on most tractors shows PTO rpm hours, and is corrected to that. So, if PTO rpm is 3000rpm, and you run at 1500rpm, you will only show .5 hours on the clock for each hour of actual time you run at that rpm.

 

[UpstateNYMarine]

As with riding a harley...Drive it like you stole it!

Just remember to wash it when you're done!

 

[Pushing_Tin]

I hadn't ever noticed whether it accumulated hours at low RPM or not. I'll check it this week and report back.

 

[Pushing_Tin]

I hadn't ever noticed whether it accumulated hours at low RPM or not. I'll check it this week and report back.

 

[traprap]

Just a followup. A recent inquiry to JD was responded to with:

"According to our product specialists, the hour meter accumulates time as long as the engine is running. The hour meter is counting no matter the engine speed."

I also contacted my dealer and they said the hour meter was "pro-rated" to rated speed.

I ran the 2320 for about 20 minutes yesterday at about 2000 rpm (rated at 3000) and I ticked 2/10 on the hour meter. Not an exact test to the pro-rating of the meter, but at least I know it is working as designed and ticking at less than rated speed.

I still have a concern, though, regarding the maintenance on items other than the engine. If I were to run the machine at 50% rated, at 50 hours I would have the equivalent of 50 hours on the engine (pro-rated). The machine (hydraulics, front axle, etc.), however, still ran 100 hours. So what do I base my chasis maintenance on?

 

[Runner]

Sounds to me like JD is trying to get at the "average" time the machine is operating. They don't want us going 5,000 hours between oil changes, but whether it's 200 or 250 probably isn't really that big of a deal.

Also, not sure about everyone else, but all the parts of my machine aren't always working that hard when the engine's running. Even if the engine's running 2000 rpm, sometimes the machine is just sitting there, or moving really slow. Part of the hours I put on are just idling and not moving at all. So, again, I think they are trying to get at an average number that we can all shoot for to schedule maintenance tasks.

That's my take on it, anyway.

 

[traprap]

Sounds to me like JD is trying to get at the "average" time the machine is operating. They don't want us going 5,000 hours between oil changes, but whether it's 200 or 250 probably isn't really that big of a deal.

Also, not sure about everyone else, but all the parts of my machine aren't always working that hard when the engine's running. Even if the engine's running 2000 rpm, sometimes the machine is just sitting there, or moving really slow. Part of the hours I put on are just idling and not moving at all. So, again, I think they are trying to get at an average number that we can all shoot for to schedule maintenance tasks.

That's my take on it, anyway.

Excellent Point! I will not worry about it anymore. Based on other threads about fuel usage and tractor power, I will start running at less-than-rated speed when the conditions allow.

 

[Spud67]

I am a new owner of a 2320 in the fall of 2007, excellent machine. Used it last fall for some tilling and a little mowing but a fair bit of snow moving this past winter. I ordered it with the front end loader, 54D mid-mount mower and 655 rear tiller. I took the mower off for the winter but kept the tiller on for weight while using the FEL for snow removal. Most of the time with the FEL I ran the machine about 1800 RPM but with the mower and tiller I ran it at 3000 (PTO rating). I am looking foward to seeing how easy it is to reinstall the mower for the summer. I was working with it today tilling up some of the yard we are going to seed to grass, seems strange to be tilling up part of the yard while there is still snow in the trees. I live in southern Saskatchewan and the weather is finally warming up nicely. The area I kept clean of snow all winter is already frost free and I can start to work it up.
Great machine, I am looking forward to many years of work/play.

 

[Nuru]

Push That Diesel too its Limits Go for it is it still under warranty ????? If it is dont worry about it ! Im thinking Of puttin a K&N Air filter on Mine ! for more power & fuel Economy ! A turbo charger would be nice LOL !

hmm, I wonder what it would take to migrate the turbo off of a 3520 or 3720 to a 3320, Hmmmm?

That is an interesting question. Hmmm.