B7800 loader vs B3200 loader
- Thread starter 1TMatthews
- Start date
- Views: 4770
-
- Tags
- kubota b3200 kubota b7800
JOHNTHOMAS
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2008
- Messages
- 7,719
- Location
- Somerset, Ky
- Tractor
- F2690 4WD RTV X1140 MX5400 HST ZD1211
I did the same trade except with a L3240 HST between them. I was impressed with all 3 of them.
Verticaltrx
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2009
- Messages
- 1,908
- Location
- VA
- Tractor
- Kubota B3200/L2501/SVL65-2/U35-4, IH 454/656, Ford NAA, Case 1845C/480E/450C LGP
What about it seems cheaper? The single plate mounts? I would bet good money that kubota did plenty of testing and engineering before going that route, and I doubt it will cause any trouble. The specs on the two loaders are nearly identical IIRC, and the LA504 has better hose routing, not to mention the built in loader valve. If you want to get rid of the Kubota QA coupler you can send it to me. :thumbsup:
OP
1TMatthews
Bronze Member
The new pin set up I dont like, on the old loader if I took tension on the pins they wont rattle like these do. The cross bar that use to connect the loader over the tractor was great for a place to grab to get on the tractor tho it sucked to fuel. The new loader you can see the arms rack will grading the old one didnt. I'm still getting use to it so we will see.
magicheater
Veteran Member
Interesting, When I checked out the LA504 compared to my LA402 I was glad I had the LA 402 for some of the same reasons you state. However I did not have any seat time to substantiate my perceptions. Do you notice any lack of breakout force due to the closer pin spacing on the brackets?
I agree the 402 loader is likely tougher but after using both I prefer the 504 because of the narrower stance which makes operating nicer (better visibility) plus the tractor is not so 'bulky' if you know what I mean.:confused2:
magicheater
Veteran Member
Here are 2 visibility shots on my B7800 with LA402 loader.
Attachments
OP
1TMatthews
Bronze Member
Yes that set up on the b7800 is more rugged then the B3200, the fame on the B8700 doesnt rack compared to the b3200 while grading. The nice part to that cross member was that it made for a great grab handle while getting on the tractor, the down side was that it was difficult to fuel with that bar there.
OP
1TMatthews
Bronze Member
Can you show pictures of the pins? and I will get pics from my loader to post.
NH-Rob
Gold Member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2008
- Messages
- 319
- Location
- Northern NH
- Tractor
- Kubota B7510HSD(sold) B3200(new 6/15/09)
I would have to agree. I am not real impressed with the 504 loader. I feel if it had a wider stance and the crossbar it woud be great. I dislike the fact that it is so close to the tractor. it makes it hard to hook and unhook the hoses and I find it is much harder to see the quick hitch when istalling the bucket then it was on my b7510. I think kubota did it to streamline the tractor. It does look sharp though.
Rob
Rob
davatk
Gold Member
Hmm. I never tested the FEL on the 3200 (504), however I did test the similar design - just smaller on the 2920 (364 I think). I immediately noticed it was "bouncy" when I raised an lowered it. I then tested an LA403 on a B3030, and it felt very solid, just like I remember on my B7800/LA402.
Wonder if anyone else has noticed this with the newer loaders ?
Not sure why the la403 would be any different than the la504. Same basic loader. Just has the valve pedestal on the loader instead of on the tractor.
red4now
Silver Member
Have not noticed any real difference between the use of the two loaders. Easier to connect / disconnect hoses on the B3030, than on the B3200, yes wider stance and maybe a bit easier to QA buckets. Both material buckets rattle when empty and tractor idling in certain positions (drives our dog crazy) 
but no other things come to mind.
I could picture that the loader on the B7800 would be some what "beefier" since that was more the way to do things that way back then. See it all the time now when you compare newer equipment with older ones. Was that better? If the specs are met ie: lift capacity, breakout force, etc, maybe lighter material used to make the loader parts now but stronger metal?? Similar thoughts were also talked about on TBN when comparing tractors - why were some tractors so much heavier and bulkier in the same size / HP range and the strength of the metal vs thickness was the general conclusion resulting in what seemed to be lighter products. I guess time and use of our tractors over the years will tell us if this was the case. Maybe the next generation of B3200 / B3030 replacements will have this same thread - why does the loader on my new Bnnnn seem so much lighter than my old B3200 / B3030?
but no other things come to mind. I could picture that the loader on the B7800 would be some what "beefier" since that was more the way to do things that way back then. See it all the time now when you compare newer equipment with older ones. Was that better? If the specs are met ie: lift capacity, breakout force, etc, maybe lighter material used to make the loader parts now but stronger metal?? Similar thoughts were also talked about on TBN when comparing tractors - why were some tractors so much heavier and bulkier in the same size / HP range and the strength of the metal vs thickness was the general conclusion resulting in what seemed to be lighter products. I guess time and use of our tractors over the years will tell us if this was the case. Maybe the next generation of B3200 / B3030 replacements will have this same thread - why does the loader on my new Bnnnn seem so much lighter than my old B3200 / B3030?
