Confused..3203 vs 3320 vs 790 why similar?

[Coyote]

These three tractors are within 3hp of my target of 30HP. They are so similar I can't determine the differences. They are all the same size, same 3 cy YM engine, etc. Can someone enlighten me? Why would JD need 3 so close to each other? Kind of like the Chevy Tahoe vs GM Yukon...same truck, different badges!

 

[gamble77]

They are really different machines. The 790 is a budget no frills tractor with a standard straight geared transmission. The 3203 is a budget tractor also and has a simple 2-range hydrostatic transmission. The 3320 is a higher spec tractor with either a hydraulic shuttle shift clutch or E-Hydro transmissinon. There really ins't overlap if you crunch the numbers...

BTW I am sending you a PM.

 

[Coyote]

They are really different machines. The 790 is a budget no frills tractor with a standard straight geared transmission. The 3203 is a budget tractor also and has a simple 2-range hydrostatic transmission. The 3320 is a higher spec tractor with either a hydraulic shuttle shift clutch or E-Hydro transmissinon. There really ins't overlap if you crunch the numbers...

I have driven a 4710 with e hydro...how does shuttle shift work? Looks like the 3320 weighs more than the other two, where is the extra weight?

 

[RoyJackson]

They are really different machines. The 790 is a budget no frills tractor with a standard straight geared transmission. The 3203 is a budget tractor also and has a simple 2-range hydrostatic transmission. The 3320 is a higher spec tractor with either a hydraulic shuttle shift clutch or E-Hydro transmissinon. There really ins't overlap if you crunch the numbers...

I have driven a 4710 with e hydro...how does shuttle shift work? Looks like the 3320 weighs more than the other two, where is the extra weight?

For one thing, they all use different engines. The 790 has a 82 cid engine, the 3203's is 92 cid and the 3320 is 101 cid (all rounded up).

The 790 is a great machine...but it's an old design (mid 80's). The hydraulic capacities aren't as high as the other two, but would be quite adequate for most residential or farmette needs. The gear tranny is simple and robust. It's lighter then the other two machines (about 2200 lbs without the loader). It's also considerably cheaper then the other two.
Using gears is easy. Loader work would be a bit slower, but unless you're planning on using the tractor commercially, that probably wouldn't be a concern.
A great tractor for an owner who likes keeping things simple or doesn't want to spend a lot of money.

The 3203 is closer to the 3320. However, you cannot use the 3203 as a stationary power unit (couldn't run a chipper or log splitter, for example). Looking at the specs, the 3203 is what I'd call a plain jane 3320.
I bought my 790 to have enough power to run a chipper. That would require the tractor to operate as a power unit.
Since the 3203 is not capable of being used as a power unit, I wouldn't even consider that one...I wouldn't...doesn't mean you shouldn't.

The 3320 is the heaviest of the three (700 lbs over the 790, 200 lbs over the 3203). I'd guess a good part of that weight is the bigger engine (20 cid more then the 790, 10 cid more then the 3203) but doesn't put out much more HP then either. Deere doesn't list how much engine torque is produced but I'm sure the 3320 is quite a bit torquier then either of the other tractors.
The Power Reverser tranny has 12 forward and 12 reverse gears...quite versatile. Once a gear is selected, you use a lever to select forward, reverse or neutral. This is a nice transmission!
I looked at a 3320 last year. I'm quite happy with my 790's capabilities, but I really like that power reverser transmission. I strongly suggest you try it out!

I thought long and hard about trading up to that 3320. But, the 790 did the work...and it's almost paid off. Also, I have 2½ acres of my own plus a few acres I'm maintaining for a neighbor. I just don't need a bigger or more powerful tractor. And I definitely don't need the debt.
I know I'll get flamed for the next comment..but here goes. I also think the 790 will be operational longer then the other two...primarily due to it's extremely simplicity. I am one of those guys who really believes KISS.

 

[ruglad03835]

[I know I'll get flamed for the next comment..but here goes. I also think the 790 will be operational longer then the other two...primarily due to it's extremely simplicity. I am one of those guys who really believes KISS.[/QUOTE]


If you get flamed I'll stand there with the fire extinguisher and put you out. Being a fellow 790 owner I will agree with Roy for a no frills machine this tractor delivers the most bang for the buck. Would a hydro tranny be nice? Maybe......But if I decide to pull a 2 bottom land plow Hydro is not the way to go. I don't do much loader work so shifting back and forth is no big deal and after a little while setting the throttle to the correct gear you need to accomplish the task is not a big deal. It's amazing that this style (aka gear tractor with no frills) is still going strong and probably will be hanging around for a long time .

 

[Mech]

I bought a 790 with 60" box blade and FEL with bucket and blade about 2 weeks ago and absolutely love it. It is perfect for what I need to do, maintain some dirt roads, push snow (yes we got over a foot on May 6th so I got to try the blade) and do a little loader work. I let a Yanmar 1610D go to get this and the 790 is a more modern and bigger version of it. If you don't do a lot of loader work I think this is a great tractor. But of course it is a lot more like what I grew up with than a hydro. Don't know how I could get use to the brakes on the left side and I rented a Kobota hydro once and put it through a fence because of the strange/unfamiliar controls. Heck I couldn't even get use to the Yanmar's throttle which is opposite of "US" tractors.

 

[Coyote]

<<The Power Reverser tranny has 12 forward and 12 reverse gears...quite versatile. Once a gear is selected, you use a lever to select forward, reverse or neutral.>>

Do you have to clutch or just switch the lever on the dash to reverse? That sounds great! My Yanmar is geared so shifting comes natural to me. Thanks for the detailed explanation!

 

[RoyJackson]

<<The Power Reverser tranny has 12 forward and 12 reverse gears...quite versatile. Once a gear is selected, you use a lever to select forward, reverse or neutral.>>

Do you have to clutch or just switch the lever on the dash to reverse? That sounds great! My Yanmar is geared so shifting comes natural to me. Thanks for the detailed explanation!

You've got to clutch to change gears and ranges. Once in a gear, it's all with the lever....
This type of transmission has been around a long time. Different manufacturers have different names for it.

 

[rdam]

I don't know why you'd get flamed. They've been making the tractor (790) for what? 15...20 years? Unchanged? It doesn't gey any simpler or reliable. I considered one a few years ago, but needed to swing a 6 foot bushhog at the time...Around $11,500 w/loader back then as I recall.

Add synchro/shuttle and electro/hydraulic PTO and I'm getting one....but then it would be a.....3320....and a touch more expensive.

 

[AKfish]

I agree that the less complex and hence more easily servicable tractor for many users like the 790 and 990 will continue to be available for many years.

You don't have to be a skilled technician trained to service computerized, electronically controlled hydraulic units to work on a 790.

Or tracking down a LED error code and plugging your tractor into a hand-held computer to trouble shoot a problem is not something that happens for owner's of 790's or 990's, either.

But, I'm curious Roy, what do you mean that the 3203 can't be used for a stationary power source --- running a chipper or a log splitter?

Are you saying that they don't have an independent PTO??

Thanks. AKfish

 

[jcmseven]

Roy,

Are you sure about the PTO thing??? I will admit I do not know much about the 3203 except I do not like them that much, but I believe I recall from the JD website that they DO have an independent PTO, which to my feeble mind means that they would serve as a power source for stationary PTO-driven implements. As far as the difference between tractors, I actually really like the 790. I am not sure why, I think it looks cool. I have even thought about getting one, but where I live, it would be the death of me with my steep hills that really necessitate a hydro type tranny to pinpoint inputs. I also do a large amount of loader work, which is a good reason for hydro. If I did not have this to do, or were working a large garden, etc. I would go for the 790 in a heartbeat. Did I mention I think they look cool, too???

John M

 

[orlo]

JCMSeven:

I suspect the 3203 doesn't have a seat safety override switch (Like the 790 and other tractors). All this means is that you need to 'jump' (or make a switch if your ambitious) closed the seat switch so you can run the PTO when your off the seat. I need to do this on my 2305 as when the PTO is engaged it will kill the engine if you go off seat. I unplug the harness from the seat, stick in an electrical staple (just the right size) to jump it and it works fine. Just leave the seat up so you remember to remove it (and hook the seat switch back up) when your done. The safety is there for a reason.

 

[tuolumne]

One more thing about the 12/12 transmission on the 3320 is that it has a syncro so you can shift through the 4 speeds within a range on the fly. This is what I ordered. Foward to reverese requires no clutching. I was not impressed at all with the 3203. I did not look too closely at the specs after driving one...it is a bit smaller than the 3320 is it not? The operator's station is certainly smaller.

 

[tuolumne]

They all have independent PTO, it's just that the 3203 has a safety switch that will shut it down without operator presence. I'm sure this can be overridden, if not with a c-clamp, electronically. The 790 does look great and will save you some money. However, I noticed that visibility is better with the hood design of the 3x20s even if they don't have the classic tractor look. The 990 would be comparable to the 3320 price wise, with some extra HP and less frills.

 

[RoyJackson]

But, I'm curious Roy, what do you mean that the 3203 can't be used for a stationary power source --- running a chipper or a log splitter?

Are you saying that they don't have an independent PTO??

Thanks. AKfish

This is from the 3203 manual:
"Using Rear PTO
NOTE: The Rear PTO is only operational with the operator on the seat."

There was a post on TBN from a new owner who asked about using the PTO off seat.
I did some research and found the 3203, unlike most (if not all), did not have a procedure on using the PTO as a power unit. I'm sure you 970 manual describes flipping the seat up, pulling up on the switch, etc., etc....just as my 790 does.

I'm sure one could put a weight of some sort on the seat to simulate an operator's weight or jumper the switch as Orlo and Tuolumne have written, but I don't think that should be necessary. I also think it would not be safe.

Tuolomne, that's a good point about the syncros...I forgot about that. I can shift the 790 "on the fly", but I've got to really slow down though. 1st or 2nd to reverse goes pretty smoothly...I guess I've worn the gears down enough for smoother shifting.

 

[AKfish]

Ok, that makes sense... I don't know much about the 3203 (only got a look at one on the dealer's lot a couple weeks ago).

Appreciate the feedback. AKfish

 

[RussfromIA]

I have had my 790 for almost a month now. I bought it used with 158 hours and it was a bank repo. It doesn't look brand new but it's still a good looking tractor. It came with the 300 loader. I then bought a woods rm360 and a 7 ft blade. I love the tractor. I have an 80 acre farm that I rent out but still have a long driveway to maintain and a couple acres to mow. It is simple as everyone has stated and hooking up implements and the loader are a breeze. I don't know much about the 3203 and 3320's but, I would say they would have more things to wrong with them. But, like I said I have never been around them and don't know the first thing about them. I grew up with IH tractors and they all had the quad range shift so that is what I am use to. The hydrostats and shuttle shifts would be nice thouhg if you were going to spend a lot of time on the tractor.

 

[dieselalles]

The 3320 with the PowrReverser transmission has 12 speeds forward/12 reverse. There are two gearshifts on the left side of the seat. One is for your three ranges. These are unsynchronized and you must stop the tractor to shift "A", "B" and "C" ranges. The other gear shift is for gears 1 thru 4 that are synchronized. With these you can clutch and shift on the fly. Then there is the PowrReverser shift lever on the left side of the dash. Three positions, forward, neutral and reverse. With this you don't have to clutch, but you must have your brain engaged to use it. I've never tried shifting from forward to reverse going 10 MPH nor would I ever attempt it. But it's handy as heck doing jobs where you need a quick change of direction. And I don't know if the 790 has it, but the 3320 has a foot throttle.

Why did I pick it over eHydro? Because I like gears. I grew up with the likes of the 3020, 4020 and 4520, all with Syncro-Range trannies. Plus the PowrReverser is quieter and more efficient at getting power to the ground, it's small but there's still a difference. And a case can be made that if you will be pulling hard, gears are the way to go. Every tractor I drove that had a hydrostatic transmission made some odd hissing noises at times that was related to the transmission. Especially the 3203. You have to run up the RPM to avoid the noise according to the salesman showing me the tractor. I just can't get used to it or the fact the left and right brakes are where the clutch should be... But then again, viva la difference!

 

[Sweats62]

All these tractors have many attributes. If you buy on specs alone and don't take your own needs or budget into consideration you may be dissapointed. We all sit here and tout our own tractors but then we don't have your situation. Good luck.

 

[Superduper]

These three tractors are within 3hp of my target of 30HP. They are so similar I can't determine the differences. They are all the same size, same 3 cy YM engine, etc. Can someone enlighten me? Why would JD need 3 so close to each other? Kind of like the Chevy Tahoe vs GM Yukon...same truck, different badges!

The 3 tractors are far from merely being rebadged tractors. Engine sizes and capabilities aside, you should look also beyond the HP target but also look at other capacity ratings. There are some very significant differences. Some areas to consider are:

Loader: The 3x20 series can accept the 300x or 300cx loader and has lift capacities of (1357 - 1595 depending upon loader) compared to 740lbs for the 3203 and 790 which both take the 300 loader. I consider that a significant difference. Of course neither the 3203 or 790 will accept a 4in1 bucket or grapple as the 300 loader does not support them.

The 790 and 3x20's will accept mid mount mowers, the 3203 does not.

Tires: The 790 has smaller rear tires than both 3203 and 3320 tractor. The 3203 tractor only offers R4 tires but with a 6 lug bolt pattern. The 3320 takes the same and larger R4 tires as well as R1 and R3 tires and the rims are mounted via 8 lug bolt pattern. Not coincidentally, the rear axle ratings are commensurably greater in the more costly tractors. Rear Axle ratings are 1922lbs for 790, 4000lbs. for 3203 and 5292lbs. for 3x20 tractors. While the 790 tractor is only about 700 lbs lighter than the 3x20 tractor, it's rear axle capacity is only 48% of the 3203 and 36% of the 3x20 tractor.

The 790 is available in 2WD and 4WD whereas the 3203 and 3x20 tractors are only 4WD, or MFWD, whatever the terminology.

Hydraulics. The 3x20 series tractor has stronger hydraulics with slightly greater flow capacity and greater operational pressures (2500 vs 2150). The 3x20 tractor offers up to 3 additional rear remote hydraulics for top/tilt capability in additonal to hydraulic box blade rippers, etc. 3203 does not offer power beyond capability.

Backhoe: The 3203 will not accept a backhoe. The 790 can take a deere 7 backhoe. The 3x20 will accept a 447 and 448 backhoe. The 447 and 7 backhoe have similar digging depths but the 447 has 50% greater digging force. The 448 backhoe will dig deeper and has twice the digging force of the 7 backhoe.

3-point hitch lift capacity: The 790, 3203, and 3320 tractors have 3PH lift capacities of 815, 1868, and 2200 rated at 24" behind pins. These are significant differences and the 790, even if it had the same HP, would have to haul smaller rear attachments.

Of course there are greater differences and as someone else posted, the 3203 is basically a stripped down basic (with limited upgrading ability) 3x20 type tractor with looks somewhere between the 790 tractor and 3x20 tractor. The 3x20 tractors can be outfitted with tons of options not available in the other two tractors. The 790 is a great light(er) duty tractor of simple construction and lacks the options and frills but offered at price that makes one wonder why go chinese. The 2WD 790 has a MSRP of $9600 and the real world street price is probably not much more than the Chinese offerings.