3520 vs 3720

[NYBOB]

After some advice from this forum I have decided that the 3320 was too much like my NH TC33D horse power wise and would like to go larger. Now my question is, would I be better to get the 3520 or 3720? I am going to mow 7 or so acres, push snow, skid logs and use a 3PH splitter.

One of the reasons I am buying a new tractor was I thought my NH TC33D was not enough when plowing after I loaded the tires and put the Curtis snow plow on it.

Would the 3520 be more then enough power to get the jobs done I need to do? Or, would I be better off with the 3720?

Thanks

 

[jcmseven]

Bob,

I have a 3720. It has lots of power. I am not sure whether your NH was traction or power limited. There is a difference in torque between the 3520 and 3720, so the 3720 would do more when loaded down. I would say go with the 3720. When you are looking at machines in this price range, I would not dip with one toe. If you are spending the money on the 3520, go a little extra and get the 3720. You will need to load the tires, and the machine will easily handle wheel weights, etc. also. The only real advantage you would notice over a less powerful machine would be if you ballasted the machine well. If you do that, there is a difference. Good luck.

John M

 

[rod330]

Well, I'm certainly no expert on the difference between the 3520 and the 3720 but decided to purchase the 3720 based on the simple theory that a little bigger is always better since both tractors have the same physical dimensions. I'm sure you are aware that eHydro is standard on the 3720 but can be ordered as an option on the 3520.

Many years ago I purchased a litte Ford Ranger with a wimpy 4 cylinder engine thinking it would be ecomonical. After two years of fighting that toy truck up every hill, I was determined to never buy a small truck with a small engine. Ever since, my rule has always been to purchase the largest engine available and I've never been disappointed. For a few extra dollars spread out over the years you'll own a tractor, I think you'll appreciate the extra muscle.

 

[putt_putt_green]

I was deciding the same thing and decided to go with the 3520. But my choice came down to wanting the Power Reverser. I've heard that gears are much more efficient at delivering power to the wheels/drawbar/3pt than hydrostatic transmissions. No proof delivered. I'd be interested in seeing a 3520 Power Reverser and a 3720 Hydro hook back to back and see who outpulls who.

 

[tuolumne]

I went with the 3520 for the same reason. My debate was not 3520 vs. 3720, but rather 3520 vs. 4120. In the end, I the decision was based on maneuverability, not dollars. A 3720 and 4120 must be pretty close price wise.

I too would like to see that pull off. With the load match turned on I think the ehydro would start spinning tires prematurely and lose. If it were turned off (that's possible right?) and weights were identical I would think the gear tractor could still deliver more power to the wheels and spin them faster. PTO power is rated higher without the ehydro.

 

[the_sandman_454]

I just picked up a 3520. For me the 3720 wasn't even a consideration. Sure you get more horse power, but that's it, same loader capacity, same 3PH lift capacity, and so forth. If I were going for more power than the 3520, I'd have jumped up to the 4120, with the 400CX loader, and a bunch of extra hydraulic capacity, as well as a machine more suited to handle heavier implements.

 

[Tact]

I know it's not the same tractors but it sort of the same situation. I was debating between the 4520 and the 4720. I chose the 4520 due to it being the exact same tractor but only a few HP difference, but several thousand more $$. I didn't see paying the difference for only a few more HP. I'd go with the 3520. Later once your warranty is out I'm sure you might be able to tweek a few more HP out of it to equal the 3720.

 

[NYBOB]

Thanks for the advice...compelling evidence both ways...

I wish I could drive 3720 and a 3520 configured the way I will have them, so that I can see the difference first hand.

 

[radman1]

I have a JD 3720 cab. I went with the 3720 partly because of the A/C hp loss. In reality, I doubt if most people could tell the difference in power between the 3520 and 3720. It may be noticeable when traveling in high gear pulling a load or going up hills. My previous tractor was a Kubota 3710 GST with 37hp (similar to JD 3520). With the 3720 of 44hp I can tell the difference when traveling down the road. The kubota would struggle up some hills that the JD 3720 does easier with little decrease in the rpm for the JD.

 

[jcmseven]

There IS a difference between these two machines. Trust me on this: I have owned or operated almost every JD compact out today. The 3520 is some more powerful than a 3320, but a 3720 is much more powerful than a 3520. On flat ground, the difference is not that notable but where I live separates the pretenders from the contenders and it is a notable difference between the two. Pushing, pulling, etc., the 3720 gets to speed quicker and maintains speed better. It can handle more auxillary weight, which also helps. As for the question about the 4120, I have the following response: I have owned a 4520 which I really liked. It had a great loader, and a lot of power. I liked its ride and stability better than my current 3720. I think the 4120 shares these traits, but it does not have the torque/weight ratio of the 4520. This hurts it a lot on steep hills, especially with the hydro tranny. Our original poster most likely is aware that the 4000 series machines have a higher lift loader and can accept some larger attachments, not from an ability but a stability perspective. But I am sure he is also aware, as am I, that those machines take up more room in garage or building, are harder to haul around and can compress grass, etc. There are places on my property that I could not or would not go with my 4520 that are accessable with the 3720. I also like the somewhat lighter weight for hauling and when working on grass, where there is a good deal difference in ground compaction. I believe his question centers around whether a 3720 is worth the extra money. I suppose that depends; if one is doing mostly hydraulic work or light to moderate ground engagement work on flatter ground, the 3720 is overkill and a lower powered machine would be fine. But if one wants to do PTO work such as heavy brushcutting or has heavier ground engagement work that involves hills, etc or lots of "c" range tranport work when loaded, there is no substitute for the 3720's power in the mid-frame line.

John M