3120 gets no respect

[DayDreamer]

Thanks for bringing this issue up Garrabo. As a 3120 owner with 60 hours of seat time, I tend to agree the 3120 doesn't seem to get any respect. The point that jcmseven made on the hydraulic flow rating being the same for 3X20's is important and one that influenced my buying decision when comparing it to an orange colored tractor.

One thing I've noticed is how little fuel the 3120 uses. The comparison per JD specs @ 100% load is listed below:

3120 - 1.9 gal/hr
3203 - 2.1 gal/hr
3320 - 2.0 gal/hr
3520 - 2.4 gal/hr
3720 - 2.8 gal/hr

The other interesting comparison is torque:

3120 - 55.6 @ 2600 rpm
3203 - 55.6 @ 2800 rpm
3320 - 61.6 @ 2600 rpm
3520 - 71.1 @ 2600 rpm
3720 - 84.3 @ 2600 rpm

Notice the 3203 gets it's number based on a higher rpm than the others.

The other models get higher torque numbers, but, they also increase their fuel usage. One nice part of being a 3120 owner is I'll make less stops for fuel. At the end of the day I'll get the some amount of work done than if I was using the higher end 3x20's. I use it with the 300CX FEL and the 448 backhoe to move lots of dirt and rock around. It hasn't failed me yet and I expect many years of trouble free service from it.

 

[DayDreamer]

Thanks for bringing this issue up Garrabo. As a 3120 owner with 60 hours of seat time, I tend to agree the 3120 doesn't seem to get any respect. The point that jcmseven made on the hydraulic flow rating being the same for 3X20's is important and one that influenced my buying decision when comparing it to an orange colored tractor.

One thing I've noticed is how little fuel the 3120 uses. The comparison per JD specs @ 100% load is listed below:

3120 - 1.9 gal/hr
3203 - 2.1 gal/hr
3320 - 2.0 gal/hr
3520 - 2.4 gal/hr
3720 - 2.8 gal/hr

The other interesting comparison is torque:

3120 - 55.6 @ 2600 rpm
3203 - 55.6 @ 2800 rpm
3320 - 61.6 @ 2600 rpm
3520 - 71.1 @ 2600 rpm
3720 - 84.3 @ 2600 rpm

Notice the 3203 gets it's number based on a higher rpm than the others.

The other models get higher torque numbers, but, they also increase their fuel usage. One nice part of being a 3120 owner is I'll make less stops for fuel. At the end of the day I'll get the some amount of work done than if I was using the higher end 3x20's. I use it with the 300CX FEL and the 448 backhoe to move lots of dirt and rock around. It hasn't failed me yet and I expect many years of trouble free service from it.

 

[Cargun]

The problem is Deere probably doesn't have room to go lower on the 3120 price as it costs nearly the same for them to make as a 3320. When shopping it's hard to pass up the alure of the extra power unless you feel the 3120 has more power than you'll ever need. But most people do things with their tractor that requires power, so it makes a lot of sense to make sure you have enough.

When comparing fuel consumption, don't compare 100% load on tractors with different power ratings. The more powerful tractors are doing more work at 100% load than the less powerful ones. When looking at the 4320 versus the 4520 the 4520 is more efficient than the 4320 at any given power output, from lowly 5 horse all the way up to the 4320's max power. So the 4520 is more fuel efficient unless the operator chooses to burn that extra fuel... which is always a good option to have.

Another advantage of the more powerful tractors is the ability to run them at lower RPM for less noise.

The best way to pick a tractor is to decide how much PTO horse you need, how much FEL capacity, how much 3point lift, what implements you want to run... and then go find a tractor that meets ALL those criteria. Then look make sure the next model up isn't close in price /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Cargun]

The problem is Deere probably doesn't have room to go lower on the 3120 price as it costs nearly the same for them to make as a 3320. When shopping it's hard to pass up the alure of the extra power unless you feel the 3120 has more power than you'll ever need. But most people do things with their tractor that requires power, so it makes a lot of sense to make sure you have enough.

When comparing fuel consumption, don't compare 100% load on tractors with different power ratings. The more powerful tractors are doing more work at 100% load than the less powerful ones. When looking at the 4320 versus the 4520 the 4520 is more efficient than the 4320 at any given power output, from lowly 5 horse all the way up to the 4320's max power. So the 4520 is more fuel efficient unless the operator chooses to burn that extra fuel... which is always a good option to have.

Another advantage of the more powerful tractors is the ability to run them at lower RPM for less noise.

The best way to pick a tractor is to decide how much PTO horse you need, how much FEL capacity, how much 3point lift, what implements you want to run... and then go find a tractor that meets ALL those criteria. Then look make sure the next model up isn't close in price /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[jcmseven]

Cargun makes a very good point. I had a 4310, which would be pretty close torque wise to the current 3120. I had to run the tractor at significantly higher RPM to accomplish the tasks that my current 3720 (or the one I had before) will do at a lower RPM. My impression is that the 3720 in my real world usage at MY place does not consume fuel at a faster pace than the 4310 I had did. In fact, I think it uses less fuel in most circumstances. Now, the 4520 I had would use a fair amount of fuel. It was not a fuel hog by any stretch, but it used a good bit more than any of the Yanmar engine JD's I have owned.

John M

 

[jcmseven]

Cargun makes a very good point. I had a 4310, which would be pretty close torque wise to the current 3120. I had to run the tractor at significantly higher RPM to accomplish the tasks that my current 3720 (or the one I had before) will do at a lower RPM. My impression is that the 3720 in my real world usage at MY place does not consume fuel at a faster pace than the 4310 I had did. In fact, I think it uses less fuel in most circumstances. Now, the 4520 I had would use a fair amount of fuel. It was not a fuel hog by any stretch, but it used a good bit more than any of the Yanmar engine JD's I have owned.

John M

 

[BloomingtonMike]

I think one tactic used to sell the 3120 is dress them up and have them ready to go with a 300CX, 3rd valve, mid pto, etc.

The lots around here have some 3120s fixed up and the 3320s sitting waiting to be customized. Solves two needs - one to allow the 3320s to be built to order for those with plenty of time on their hands and two to send to the field for those with the money and need but not a lot of time.

Another thing I have noticed with my local dealer - he is still selling 2210 instead of 2305s and 2520s - he has them and does not want to showcase the others until they are gone.

I went about an hour south and they had the full lineup.

I still think the 3120 is a great tractors - just too close in price to the 3320 - or was - It may be a wider price gap by now.

 

[BloomingtonMike]

I think one tactic used to sell the 3120 is dress them up and have them ready to go with a 300CX, 3rd valve, mid pto, etc.

The lots around here have some 3120s fixed up and the 3320s sitting waiting to be customized. Solves two needs - one to allow the 3320s to be built to order for those with plenty of time on their hands and two to send to the field for those with the money and need but not a lot of time.

Another thing I have noticed with my local dealer - he is still selling 2210 instead of 2305s and 2520s - he has them and does not want to showcase the others until they are gone.

I went about an hour south and they had the full lineup.

I still think the 3120 is a great tractors - just too close in price to the 3320 - or was - It may be a wider price gap by now.

 

[tglass]

I bought a 3320 because that was the smallest tractor they sold with a.c..What I believe is with all the electronics on the machine, power wasn't any problem. If I could have bought the 3120 w/air I would have. I'm seeing JD coming out with cheaper machines now to compete against the other competetors. About time, and maybe we will be remembered as the people who still believed.

 

[tglass]

I bought a 3320 because that was the smallest tractor they sold with a.c..What I believe is with all the electronics on the machine, power wasn't any problem. If I could have bought the 3120 w/air I would have. I'm seeing JD coming out with cheaper machines now to compete against the other competetors. About time, and maybe we will be remembered as the people who still believed.