3203 vs 3320

[Jksnvly]

Looking for fact based opinions/experience on the merits of both units. The 3203 loks like a nice unit, what you give up, doesn't look like it is important to me. But the powertrain specs look very similar to a 3120, which I've read here is underpowered. I'll be using the unit for rotary cutting, finish mowing and loader wrok. Thanks for the help.

 

[ducati996]

Looking for fact based opinions/experience on the merits of both units. The 3203 loks like a nice unit, what you give up, doesn't look like it is important to me. But the powertrain specs look very similar to a 3120, which I've read here is underpowered. I'll be using the unit for rotary cutting, finish mowing and loader wrok. Thanks for the help.

You will find the 3203 has some real limitations (depending on type of work), and I dont beleive it has a mid PTO - I could be wrong ?

3320 seems like a good choice if you need the PTO power because I think its close to the same otherwise to the 3120 - hydrolics and loaders are the samed rated

 

[McRancher]

I test drove a 3203 and you are right it is a nice machine, but it does have some limitations. My impressions of it against the 3000 series tractors was that it was not as comfortable, the controls did not feel as good, the hydraulics were weaker and the kill switch in the seat was a bit if a pain. Also, it was cold that day, and my coat kept getting tangled up in the controls near the seat (a bit crowded). I finally decided on the 3120. The only difference I could see between it and a 3320 was a few hp's and about $1000 (with e-Hydro on both machines). Granted the 3320 has 25 pto hp, which seems to be a minimum requirement for some pto driven implements, while the 3120 has only 22 pto hp. I don't do much mowing or tilling, so I chose to save the $1000 for implements. So far have not found anything that the tractor can't do. Think about what you want to do and check out what the implements you will be using require.

 

[orlo]

Hi:

I had a 3320 (now a 3720) and looked at the 3203's but didn't consider them due to lack of a Mid PTO.

I think the HP on the 3203 is the same as the 3320 (1/2hp diff), not the 3120 so From a HP perspective both machines (3320/3203) are similar.

You won't get ANY of the electronics on the 3203 (no load match, no cruise, etc.)
You CANNOT get a Mid PTO on the 3203. No MMM, no Snow blower, etc.

It has only a 2 range tranny vs a 3 range tranny on the 3320.
It has a mechanical vs e-hydro. (In all honesty, I prefer the feel of the mechanical hydro (like on my 2305) but you don't get any of the electronic features but I would miss the 3 range tranny.

The 3203 only takes the 300 loader (not the 300X or 300CX) The 300X and 300CX lift quite a bit more than the 300. (Was a biggie for me).

You cannot get a third SCV, Power Beyond (I think), divert valves, etc. on the 3203. Although
I'm sure a dealer could put things like power beyond on it.

And as mentioned, the seat isn't as comfortable, etc.

I also think the Tires available on the 3320 are bigger than those available
on the 3203 but I'm not sure about this.

There probably are a few things I forgot to mention.

 

[Jksnvly]

Orlo. Thanks for the information. You pointed out a couple of differences that I was not aware of, one being the 3 range trans.. I do think that the power of the 3203 is closer to the 3120 than the 3320 however.

 

[HuskerInVA]

I noticed the 3203 only has a the single brake and not the independent right/left brakes the 3x20's have. Must have for doing donuts in the snow.

 

[orlo]

From the specs the 3320 is 32.5hp, the 3203 is 32. The 3120 is just 29hp.

 

[Jksnvly]

Orlo you are correct. 3203= 32.1hp 3120=29.5 3320=32.5

 

[mnbowhunter1960]

I also test drove the 3203 and then the 3320 which I ended up purchasing, I needed more pto power for the MX5 brush cutter and I just liked the 3320 alot more, much more comfortable,also think it will have better resale down the road with mid pto capability and all the other bells and whistles.

 

[JDFANATIC]

The 3203 doesn't have position control on the 3PH and there is no Deere BH option.

 

[Gatorback]

Also, the 3203 has a hydro but not the e-hydro with the loadmatch feature found on the 3120 and 3320.

 

[tuolumne]

Consider the 12/12 tranny option to get the 3320 price back down. Independent braking is a must to reduce turning radius in the woods. If I recall correctly, visibility was better from the 3x20s due to higher seat, and the platform was less crowded, easier to mount/dismount. The 3320 has more hydraulic capacity, larger fuel tank, and more lift capacity for both the 3ph and the loader options. Top speed for a 3320 with R4 (ehydro) is 18.2 mph, while the 3203 is 12.9. This is a big difference if you are moving your equipment on the road frequently. The 3203 is a fine machine; I'm just recalling my own reasoning for paying more and moving up the scale.

 

[RoyJackson]

I think you'd miss that off seat operation on the 3203 (can't run a chipper or generator). That relegates the 3203 to being a big lawn tractor to me.

I'd go with tuolumne's suggestion...look into that power-reverser 12/12 transmission. That's a nice tranny! I looked into the 3320 last year...and the main reason was for that transmission. Every bit as quick as a hydro and I'd guess a more robust unit (looking at it long term).

 

[Kahuna]

I have the 3320 with e-hydro. I mostly use the 300 cx loader which does everything I ask it to. I also use a finish mower for which the e-hydro is great, you can ease around ditches, poles and other obstacles while keeping your rpm's in tact yet slowing the ground speed for getting around.

I wouldn't even think about not getting the e-hydro. The only scenario I could think of in getting the regular transmission is if you planned on doing mostly all heavy pulling or tillage work where variable speed didn't make a difference because I do feel you give up a little power with the hydro.

However, for mowing or loader work, the e-hyro, in my opinion, is the only way to go. The 3320 will have sufficient power for any loader or mower work as long as you stay within the recommended range of implements. I have a MX6 rotary cutter I bought for another tractor that will also work on the 3320, but if you get into 3 foot grass, it will slow you up a bit.

I also looked at the 3203 (for about 2 minutes) but disregarded it because it is so stripped down. The 3320 has a few extra horses than the 3120 and for not much extra money, here in south central Illinois it is less than $800. The 3320 is the most popular in this area because it has the largest block and no turbo. You pay dearly for those few extra horses when you get to the 3520 or 3720.

 

[putt_putt_green]

I wouldn't even think about not getting the e-hydro. The only scenario I could think of in getting the regular transmission is if you planned on doing mostly all heavy pulling or tillage work where variable speed didn't make a difference because I do feel you give up a little power with the hydro.

But you do have variable speed on the 12x12 transmission. Its kind of the opposite the Hydro. With the 12x12, you set the hand throttle to the lowest RPM you want to run, and then you can give boost with a foot throttle, which will increase the RPMs above and beyond the hand throttle. The hydro allows speed changes over the whole range, whereas the 12x12 only allows speed changes over 1 of 4 gears within a range. Lower RPMs consume less fuel and generate less noise.