2720 vs 3120

[JDGREEN4ME]

I am in the market for a new tractor, I had a 4115 and was looking to move up to the 3000 Series. I believe the 2720 is rated higher in torque and horsepower yet the 3120 has better lift capacity at both ends, plus it is only $200 list more than the 2720. Looking to add a backhoe in the future and you can put a 447 or 448 on the 3120 which is a plus there.

 

[AKfish]

Good "head scratchers" ..... The 2720 has the very same 100cu.in. engine that powers the 3320.

Should have more "umph" than the 3120.

Do you need the bigger footprint of the 3000 series? Likely be able to power a 5' mower all day long in - high range - with the new 2720!!

Some poster's hereabouts have opined that JD would be better off by discontinuing the 3120...

AKfish

 

[tuolumne]

Good "head scratchers" ..... The 2720 has the very same 100cu.in. engine that powers the 3320.

Should have more "umph" than the 3120.

Do you need the bigger footprint of the 3000 series? Likely be able to power a 5' mower all day long in - high range - with the new 2720!!

Some poster's hereabouts have opined that JD would be better off by discontinuing the 3120...

AKfish

If I recall correctly, the 3320 has a 130 cu. in. engine. The 3120, 3520 and 3720 have a 90 cu. in. engine, the 3520 having turbo aspiration, and the 3720 adding an intercooler and boosting the pressure.

Carefully examine your needs. I went through a similar process with 3520 vs. 4120, and chose the 3000 series for better maneuverability on our wooded, sloped lot. I am glad I went that route. This tractor has served us very well, and will continue to meet our growing needs.

 

[thebigc]

Good "head scratchers" ..... The 2720 has the very same 100cu.in. engine that powers the 3320.

Should have more "umph" than the 3120.

Do you need the bigger footprint of the 3000 series? Likely be able to power a 5' mower all day long in - high range - with the new 2720!!

Some poster's hereabouts have opined that JD would be better off by discontinuing the 3120...

AKfish

Thankfully, JD didn't discontinue the 3120 before I bought one.

I bought one to harness the power of the 300CX FEL and haven't been disappointed.

 

[JDGREEN4ME]

I know the 3120 has the 3 range eHydro and the 2720 only has the 2 range hydro. My 4115 only had the 2 range and for my use I don't recall any problems but I have read on here guys who prefer the 3 range set ups.

 

[2Malamutes]

If I recall correctly, the 3320 has a 130 cu. in. engine. The 3120, 3520 and 3720 have a 90 cu. in. engine, the 3520 having turbo aspiration, and the 3720 adding an intercooler and boosting the pressure.

I don't know which is correct, but my JD literature doesn't agree with the above. It shows the 100.1 cu. in. Yanmar 3TNV88 in the 3320 and 91.5 cu. in. in the 3120, 3520 and 3720. JD specs show the same Yanmar 3TNV88 above in the 2720. With 1000 lb. less tractor to haul around the 2720 ought to have plenty of grunt. 2320 is plenty for what I need right now, but that doesn't mean I don't have tractor envy for the 2720.; 3xxx chassis is too big for my tasks.

 

[CinderSchnauzer]

First off, I'm sure you have reflected on what you want the upgraded tractor to do, however, I'd suggest you need to share that with TBN members before anyone can provide objective input. The 3x20 series may simply be too large for your purpose.

I made a 2320 / 2520 / 3320 comparison and price aside it was no contest, but keep in mind attatchments / accessories will probably be more expensive for the 3x20 series.

Compare FEL specs, compare 3 PTH specs, compare BH specs, compare attatchments - both range of availability and specs, check seating / other ergonomics. Check 3 range eHydro vs 2 range. eHydro is more than just another range.

Will slightly greater gross & PTO power on 2720 offset weight advantage of 3x20. For your needs will the greater power even be noticable?

 

[Superduper]

The 2720 looks to be a 2520 with a larger engine. The 3120 is not even in the same size/class. I'd say it all depends upon what you want the tractor to do. Haven't heard too many 2520 owners complaining about lack of power. A more common complaint is the 2 speed hydro and the 2720 comes with the same 2-speeder. Putting power to the ground is hard enough as it is with the 26.5hp on the 2520. Bumping that up to 31hp isn't going to mean the tractor will do much more work unless you have some power hungry pto implement. It could even be 310hp and if you can't put that power to the ground, it won't make a bit of difference. I take that back, if you have lots of hills, then the extra HP will be welcomed. A few extra hp will also mean more zippy transport performance. You mentioned backhoe work is in the future. If that is the case, then the 3120, even with less torque will be more than enough for hydraulic related work and the 1000 lb extra tractor ballast will be a huge plus to keep the hoe from tossing the tractor around.

 

[kennyd]

The 2720 looks to be a 2520 with a larger engine. The 3120 is not even in the same size/class. I'd say it all depends upon what you want the tractor to do. Haven't heard too many 2520 owners complaining about lack of power. A more common complaint is the 2 speed hydro and the 2720 comes with the same 2-speeder. Putting power to the ground is hard enough as it is with the 26.5hp on the 2520. Bumping that up to 31hp isn't going to mean the tractor will do much more work unless you have some power hungry pto implement. It could even be 310hp and if you can't put that power to the ground, it won't make a bit of difference. I take that back, if you have lots of hills, then the extra HP will be welcomed. A few extra hp will also mean more zippy transport performance. You mentioned backhoe work is in the future. If that is the case, then the 3120, even with less torque will be more than enough for hydraulic related work and the 1000 lb extra tractor ballast will be a huge plus to keep the hoe from tossing the tractor around.

Well said, I agree 100%. I will also add that the 2720 does not have a upgraded hydraulic pump, so all the loader and 3PH specs remain the same as the 2520 at 5 GPM for the implements. So, if all you needed was increase in PTO HP to run say a 3PH chipper but need the small footprint...then the 2720 may be good for you. But I agree with the other posters...it's not worth the money over the 2520 IMHO.

JDGREEN, Could you possibly tell us what you need the machine to do for you? And what you felt the 4115 was lacking?

When I was looking to buy the 4110...I looked very hard at the 4115 also, but just could not justify the extra HP for the money when all the other specs remained equal-like the lift capacity (FEL and 3PH) and the hydraulic pump output. The next logical step up for me would have been the 4210/4310, but with only 2.36 acres it just seemed to big for my needs(NOT wants)

 

[Nuru]

Well said, I agree 100%. I will also add that the 2720 does not have a upgraded hydraulic pump, so all the loader and 3PH specs remain the same as the 2520 at 5 GPM for the implements. So, if all you needed was increase in PTO HP to run say a 3PH chipper but need the small footprint...then the 2720 may be good for you. But I agree with the other posters...it's not worth the money over the 2520 IMHO.

JDGREEN, Could you possibly tell us what you need the machine to do for you? And what you felt the 4115 was lacking?

When I was looking to buy the 4110...I looked very hard at the 4115 also, but just could not justify the extra HP for the money when all the other specs remained equal-like the lift capacity (FEL and 3PH) and the hydraulic pump output. The next logical step up for me would have been the 4210/4310, but with only 2.36 acres it just seemed to big for my needs(NOT wants)

KennyD, you missed being in the Overkill Team by that much! I got 2.25 acres and I went for overkill but I am not saying that I am always sensible. Plus some of those grocery loads my wife brings home are pretty heavy Plus with the cab, you can't hear the hollering as much

3320 (1.6L, 97.6 cu), 3520/3720 (1.5L, 91.5 cu) are the specs I found.

JDGREEN4ME, looks like you are leaning towards the 3x20 series, power to spare and the size to boot. It might be overkill, but the one time you need the Ok, it will be there.

 

[JDGREEN4ME]

JDGREEN4ME, looks like you are leaning towards the 3x20 series, power to spare and the size to boot. It might be overkill, but the one time you need the Ok, it will be there.

I guess I like the higher capacity at both ends of the tractor (3120) along with the ability to add a larger BH someday than the higher torque/HP of the 2720. I just remember the 46 hoe was nice but I felt a larger hoe would have been so much quicker.

 

[Nuru]

I guess I like the higher capacity at both ends of the tractor (3120) along with the ability to add a larger BH someday than the higher torque/HP of the 2720. I just remember the 46 hoe was nice but I felt a larger hoe would have been so much quicker.

JDGREEN4ME; If you are also considering a used tractor see the message that I sent directly to you.

 

[jcmseven]

I think one needs to look closely at his needs to answer this question. While I cannot speak for others, I can attest to my situation and hope that it offers some insight into potential issues. I have had both large framed 4000 series and mid framed 3000 series machines, including two 3720's. All my JD equipment has been excellent, but each has had good and weak points which are of important note. Things to keep in mind when buying: the 3120 will have stronger hydraulics and can power heavier equipment than can the 2720. It can pull attachments that are much heavier secondary to its higher frame weight and general size. The 3120 has some nicer features such as tilt wheel, ehydro, three ranges, etc. that the 2720 will not have. The 2720 will definitely have more stability on hills, so if you live in a hilly area consider this. It also will undoubtedly have better performance on hills pulling attachments and in transport due to its better power/weight ratio (even with only two ranges). That said, it likely cannot pull attachments of the same size as well secondary to its lower chassis weight--it would just pull appropriately sized attachments better. Also, bear in mind, although the 2720 is a smaller, lighter machine--it is not that much smaller. Comparing the two machines side by size and measuring them, the actual "footprint" of both the 2520 and now 2720 are very close to the 3120. The 3000 series machines truly are "compact" and most of the size difference is height and weight, not width and length. With these things in mind I have made a list of general suggestions:

Favors the 3120: better hydraulic capacity, more modern operator's station with some additional features, ability to operate larger and heavier attachments, three ranges with ehydro, compact footprint

Drawbacks: not a lot of engine power for weight and size might inhibit operation in hilly terrain or under heavy PTO loading; "top heavy" design makes hillside operation tricky; no standard mid PTO; resale value suspect secondary to perceived lack of power among some potential buyers, somewhat more of a challenge to trailer (weight with ballast, loader and BB about 5000 pounds).

Favors the 2720: somewhat smaller and highly manuverable; extremely favorable power to weight ratio would enhance operationg in hilly or rough terrain; very stable on hills secondary to lower, wider stance, standard mid PTO; quick loader performance, quicker than 3120 (but will not lift as much); lighter weight is easier in soft terrain and makes hauling/transporting easier (effective trailering weight about 1200-1400 pounds less).

Drawbacks: may by too light to perform some tasks, really cannot handle heavy attachments as well as 3000 series secondary to lighter weight (no matter what JD says); no ehydro, rigid steering wheel and straddle-style platform, marginal seat, two ranges, not really that much smaller in physical size/dimensions, probably overpriced for the features present.

So there you have it. Good luck with your decision.

John M

 

[Nuru]

jcmseven, good inputs, I owned a 4100, a 4310, and now a 3520. however, the 2520 is longer in length and I think shorter than my 4100 was at the hood, but I am not certain? The 4310 with the Turf Specials (widest turf tires JD offers 41x18LLx20 and 25x10.50LLx15) was a lot more stable on slopes and my slopes than my 4100 was. Its stance was 66" wide and the hood height was 50" or so. I don't think the 2520 or 2720 have a stance that wide at the rear? The 3x20 series is a bit taller at the hood than the 4310 as it is 53". The 3x20 series has the same wheelbase at 68", but with that additional height they might be a little less stable. Some have applied hub spacers to increase the stability of the cab tractors like mine, I am gonna use the Turf Specials to do that. I have not heard much about the 3120 having issues on slopes, but that can behandled with loade tires depnding on what you are doing.

I do think you hit the nail on the head in your reponse overall though. Sounds like JDGREEN4ME is looking for power with larger tools/attachments and the 3120 looks pretty good from where I am looking!

 

[Ramairfreak98ss]

So what price ranges are we talking about here? i didnt realize a 2720 was out until today at the dealer. I know for around 17k give or take you can get a 2520 with a 200cx loader... is the 2720 really closer to 20k+ just for a few more hp? I was assuming it was hardly more since it sounded exactly the same but with a few more hp.

Not a JD tractor owning guy, i know my smaller Simplicity legacy xl 27hp 3-cyl diesel is pretty zippy. It has more than enough power to do every task... although, i can say, you can bog any machine down and ive done it at times...

What i want most is POWERFUL loader features, fast curl, fast lift, fast lower and still not be a beast of a machine to trailer around, we use it for the business in NJ. Ive had my heart set on a 3720 and recently a 4720 cab with a 400cx loader for its lifting capacity for landscaping and snow removal in the winter for commercial work, but they're not cheap.... even with 0% financing options :/ We more-so need another machine to take out on jobs for mulching work in parking lots, commercial stuff, something that isnt huge, but is bigger, stronger and lifts higher/faster than my current "garden tractor" with a 500lb ~ weight capacity loader. Granted i love the machine but it has its limits and were pushing all of them. It was the right machine to buy at the time and still the right machine for us to use often, but just need something larger at times.

 

[AKfish]

Nothin' beats sittin' yur butt in the seat and usin' the FEL and seein' for yourself!!

Is one model too big... or too tall and a little tippy... or one model a trailer pulling nightmare ??

When I read that one tractor is 50" or 53" (no offense, here) I just can't get a good feel for what exactly that means; really!

Besides --- that's part of the fun --- kickin' the tires and startin' 'em up and turnin' in a circle and stoppin' and runnin' the loader up and down... Man, just talkin' about makes me wanna get on down there and buy another one!!!!

Best of luck with your decision.

AKfish

 

[Nuru]

Nothin' beats sittin' yur butt in the seat and usin' the FEL and seein' for yourself!!

Is one model too big... or too tall and a little tippy... or one model a trailer pulling nightmare ??

When I read that one tractor is 50" or 53" (no offense, here) I just can't get a good feel for what exactly that means; really!

Besides --- that's part of the fun --- kickin' the tires and startin' 'em up and turnin' in a circle and stoppin' and runnin' the loader up and down... Man, just talkin' about makes me wanna get on down there and buy another one!!!!

Best of luck with your decision.

AKfish

AKfish no offense taken (we know you all are tough people up there), The 50" or 53" is just one noticable difference between the 4310 and the 3520. The 3520 appears to be much stockier visibly and that is due to the taller hood height and rake of the hood. It also from riding in both, appears to be a little bit more tippy (well it feels like it is, it may actually not be). I will definitely know more once my unit comes back, as I will have it configured almost the same as my former 4310 was, except for the cab. Then I will be able to make a judgement on whether or not the additonal lower weight alleviates the pucker factor on 2 specific paths on my lawn.

I do agree, the ultimate way to do it is to get in the seat of both yourself and try them out and see how they feel for you.

 

[orlo]

Hi:

As others have already mentioned here in passing it depends a lot on your needs. Also the implements (Loader, Snowblower if your moving snow, and mower) cost a ton more on the 3000 series than the 2000 series.

(I have a 2305 with a BH, Blower, Loader, MMM mower, etc. and a 3720 with a Loader, MMM (RFM also), blower, etc. Loader and blowers are about double for the 3000 series when you consider mounts, etc. Mowers are about 50% more.

One other item are the nice accessories that they offer for the 3000 series that they don't for the 2000 (you can do it yourself though) - 3rd SCV, Remote diverter valves, etc.

Also, Although I prefer the feel of the mechanical hydro, the E-Hydro has a lot of nice features like loadmatch, speed match, true cruise, etc.

I used to have a a 3320 (Before the 3720) that I bought over the 2520 due to those features and the small price difference.

The 2305 is a little smaller than the 2520 and 2720 (Although has a very usable high range) but from my perspective there are many times I like the small stature of the 2305. There are fewer times I 'need' the small stature of the 2305.

Also, due to bigger tires the weight difference on the 3000 series is a lot more than 1000lbs once you get your running gear on. My 3320 held 900lbs of weight in the tires (a lot more than the tires on the 25 or 2720. The loader frame (if you mow with it as I do) is 1100lbs (without the bucket) for the 300CX vs about 560 for the 200cx so if you add up the difference in weight of the accessories it can
be a lot.

I used to mow at about 5300lbs with my 3320 (2900+900lbs in the tires + 1100 loader frame + a 300-400lb MMM deck. With my 3720 cab I'm running about 6klbs (R3's hold less than 900lbs now). That's a lot of weight for mowing. At least 2000lbs (maybe 3000) more than a comparably equipped 2520. Will that be too much for your lawn?

Anyway, it's not a simple choice.

 

[JDGREEN4ME]

I used to mow at about 5300lbs with my 3320 (2900+900lbs in the tires + 1100 loader frame + a 300-400lb MMM deck. With my 3720 cab I'm running about 6klbs (R3's hold less than 900lbs now). That's a lot of weight for mowing. At least 2000lbs (maybe 3000) more than a comparably equipped 2520. Will that be too much for your lawn?

Anyway, it's not a simple choice.

I am not looking to mow with this tractor but would like TNT for box and rear blade work. Concerned somewhat about the "tipping" issue I have seen raised with the bigger tractor but on the other hand I haven't read anywhere where they are tipping over all the time either. I do believe I would go with the smaller R4s however.

 

[Mech]

I was also raised with bigger tractors, most with tricycle front wheels, but it was a lot flatter there. My 790 feels tippy quite a bit. There is not much level group where I live. I have the wheels as wide as they go and and filled my R1's and its a lot better. I think the 790 is about 61" wide and I don't want anything much wider.