Comparison Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350

   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #31  
I'm not really talking about displacement, but rather, engine configuration. The best way to look at it is "all else equal". If just want/like more displacement, then a larger three-cylinder would be smoother than the same displacement four-cylinder and capable of the same power. It might be too wide or tall, however, so there may be a packaging disadvantage.

The smoothness is all about balance, reciprocating mass, and harmonics and there is a real fundamental difference in various engine configuration. If you're a car guy, you will know straight-six engines and V-12 engines are legendary for their smoothness, and it's the same reason a three-cylinder is smoother than a four-cylinder. Which engine is chosen for a given application, and why, is often dictated by packaging.

Tractors are just like any other application, and as HP needs go up, the natural progression is to increase displacement up to some practical limit, and then start adding cylinders beyond that limit. There are quite a few examples of this in Kubota's lineup, and some oddities too. The previous generation B series had three-cylinder engines in the B2320,2620,2920, displacing 61.1, 68.5, and 77.0 cubic inches respectively, with a 2800rpm power rating, while the larger B3200/3300SU had a four-cylinder of 91.5 cubic inches rated at 2700rpm. At the same time, the larger L-series 3200/3800 models had three-cylinder engines with 91.5 and 111.4 cubic inch displacement rated at 2700 and 2800 rpm, respectively.

So there is an interesting crossover, with a smaller B3200 having a 91.5 cu.in four-cylinder (which was commonly noted to be a real buzzy engine, BTW) and the larger L3200 having a 91.5 cu.in three-cylinder engine. Why would that be? Most certainly, it was because the B didn't have the space to squeeze in the wider and taller three-cylinder (lengthwise, the engines are within about an inch of each other). If it did, it would have gotten a smoother engine with the same displacement, rpm rating, horsepower, and torque. The L's 91.5 cu.in three-cylinder is known to be a stronger, smoother, better engine than the B's 91.5 cu.in four-cylinder (the three-cylinder also weighs more, at 148# compared to the four's 110#). This is a case where, all else equal, the B would have been better off with the three-cylinder if it could have fit. Or coming at it from the the other direction, it just wouldn't make sense for anyone to want the four-cylinder in the L -- the three-cylinder fits and is a better, smoother, heavier engine.

This is one example of many where you should not conclude that more cylinders are better, and it's the same reason I don't consider the L4701's four-cylinder to be an advantage over three-cylinder engines as you claimed. If the L4701 had enough space to accommodate a three-cylinder of the same displacement/power as its 148.5 cu.in 47HP four-cylinder engine, I think you'd find it was a smoother, better engine. But, once you start getting into that displacement range, three-cylinder engines would be quite wide/tall and not practical for packaging.

Funny thing here... we're basically saying the same thing, lol. I'd most certainly prefer a smoother engine over a rougher one but in this case, Kubota doesn't offer a larger 3 to the same displacement of the 4 and I want the additional displacement so a 4 it is. Perhaps I should have said, "benefit: more displacement so it has more oomph" or something like that. When I compared tractors, the bigger displacement happend to be a 4 instead of a 3. So.... since the 4 brought bigger displacement, the 4 is an "advantage" to me. Now... if there was a smoother, quieter, 3-banger then, by all means... It's all good. :)
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #32  
When i was looking at the 3901 and 4701 a couple of years ago the dealer suggested i would be better off going to an mx as the price/performance was better. i am not sure that is the case , but a thought.

As one of the resident pull behind blower cheerleaders here i will vouch that they work great on long drives. I too have issues with turning around too much causing back issues. With the pull blower i just drive and it follows, Today i did my 1k rd, my drive and 3 neighbors pretty quickly considering the shapes of the drives.

A pull blower does not work as well as a push for deep drifts and piles. Another consideration is your drive, if its gravel and heavily crowned a blade is a bit easier to use till an ice layer forms. Paved, its all easy.

Hope this helps
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #33  
Fun fact LS is owned by LG, LG and Fiat are the primary share holders of CNH so all the LS, New Holland and Case compacts are the same tractors made in South Korea. I read guys that bought a workmaster with LS badge on the rear end. That being said, I got my hands on the workmaster 37 and liked it a lot, way more expensive than non grand L and JD E series but at a build quality close to the 1533 Mahindra I looked at.
I owned a base Kubota L3200 & looked hard at LS & TYM before I decided on a loaded Kubota L4060. I would have to agree that the Koreans are very competitive if not better than the economy Kubota's. More standard features, felt nice & beefy, etc. I ended up going with a premium grand Kubota as I was looking for a nicer compiler machine. The Kubota just felt better & had much better dealer support (only 1 small dealer for the Koreans in the state & they were 2 hours away as opposed to 4-5 Kubota dealers within 20 min to 2 hours). It was hard to pass up the price & value of the Koreans though.
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #34  
I'm not really talking about displacement, but rather, engine configuration. The best way to look at it is "all else equal". If just want/like more displacement, then a larger three-cylinder would be smoother than the same displacement four-cylinder and capable of the same power. It might be too wide or tall, however, so there may be a packaging disadvantage.

The smoothness is all about balance, reciprocating mass, and harmonics and there is a real fundamental difference in various engine configuration. If you're a car guy, you will know straight-six engines and V-12 engines are legendary for their smoothness, and it's the same reason a three-cylinder is smoother than a four-cylinder. Which engine is chosen for a given application, and why, is often dictated by packaging.

Tractors are just like any other application, and as HP needs go up, the natural progression is to increase displacement up to some practical limit, and then start adding cylinders beyond that limit. There are quite a few examples of this in Kubota's lineup, and some oddities too. The previous generation B series had three-cylinder engines in the B2320,2620,2920, displacing 61.1, 68.5, and 77.0 cubic inches respectively, with a 2800rpm power rating, while the larger B3200/3300SU had a four-cylinder of 91.5 cubic inches rated at 2700rpm. At the same time, the larger L-series 3200/3800 models had three-cylinder engines with 91.5 and 111.4 cubic inch displacement rated at 2700 and 2800 rpm, respectively.

So there is an interesting crossover, with a smaller B3200 having a 91.5 cu.in four-cylinder (which was commonly noted to be a real buzzy engine, BTW) and the larger L3200 having a 91.5 cu.in three-cylinder engine. Why would that be? Most certainly, it was because the B didn't have the space to squeeze in the wider and taller three-cylinder (lengthwise, the engines are within about an inch of each other). If it did, it would have gotten a smoother engine with the same displacement, rpm rating, horsepower, and torque. The L's 91.5 cu.in three-cylinder is known to be a stronger, smoother, better engine than the B's 91.5 cu.in four-cylinder (the three-cylinder also weighs more, at 148# compared to the four's 110#). This is a case where, all else equal, the B would have been better off with the three-cylinder if it could have fit. Or coming at it from the the other direction, it just wouldn't make sense for anyone to want the four-cylinder in the L -- the three-cylinder fits and is a better, smoother, heavier engine.

This is one example of many where you should not conclude that more cylinders are better, and it's the same reason I don't consider the L4701's four-cylinder to be an advantage over three-cylinder engines as you claimed. If the L4701 had enough space to accommodate a three-cylinder of the same displacement/power as its 148.5 cu.in 47HP four-cylinder engine, I think you'd find it was a smoother, better engine. But, once you start getting into that displacement range, three-cylinder engines would be quite wide/tall and not practical for packaging.

I bet you love the big displacement John Deere two cylinders like an 830 or a R! They are the extremes of your theory.

What theory are you referencing when you say a 3 cylinder engine is smoother than a 4?
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #35  
That's odd. My l3200 would lift and move 4x5 round bales with ease. That was with loaded rears also.
I cleared out my friends barn of 20ish what we're suppose to be 1,200lbs bales. I could barely lift most to hood height. Even with a 5' rotary cutter on the 3pt it was hairy. I often piled some heavy junk on the back of the mower. Without the junk on the mower I had the rears lift once & lost a bale off the forks as well as my clean underwear.

The L3200 is only rated to lift 1,200lbs or so at the pins. So I'm aware I was probably exceeding that with the weight of the forks & the bales hanging out a ways. It handled em, but big square or round bales are generally over 1,000lbs & not going to be a good idea to do often. If you plan on doing big bales, you should have a 4000 series machine or bigger.
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #36  
I owned a base Kubota L3200 & looked hard at LS & TYM before I decided on a loaded Kubota L4060. I would have to agree that the Koreans are very competitive if not better than the economy Kubota's. More standard features, felt nice & beefy, etc. I ended up going with a premium grand Kubota as I was looking for a nicer compiler machine. The Kubota just felt better & had much better dealer support (only 1 small dealer for the Koreans in the state & they were 2 hours away as opposed to 4-5 Kubota dealers within 20 min to 2 hours). It was hard to pass up the price & value of the Koreans though.

Kubota's are made in Vietnam aren't they? I know most are assembled in Georgia.
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #38  
I'm no motor guy but common sense says a 4 cylinder motor would be more balanced than a 3 cylinder, common sense also would suggest a lower RPM equal cylinder motor would be quieter and smoother.

I don't understand the strait 6 and V12 comparison if you say there both legendary smooth.

I guess I'm not understanding the pro 3 cylinder, I would have to respectfully disagree from my perspective.


I don't know why people assume a four-cylinder would be smoother than a three-cylinder, but a lot of people do -- perhaps it's the "more is better" attitude, or just the intuitive thought that more pistons and firing pulses are smoother. But an inline-four has some inherent balance problems -- for one, pistons move in pairs. This leads to a secondary imbalance that can be quite bad. Auto manufacturers deal with this on larger inline-fours by installing balance shafts, which add counter-rotating weights to counteract the reciprocating mass.

There's some information you can read here:

Engine balance - Wikipedia

Couple snips:

Three cylinder engines[edit]
Inline 3 with 120ー crankshaft is the most common three cylinder engine. They have 13. evenly spaced firing and perfect 3. phase balance on reciprocating mass, with 4., 6., 14. and 16. imbalances. Just like in a crossplane V8, these first order rocking couples can be countered with heavy counterweights, and the secondary balance is comparable to, or better than an ordinary inline 4 because there are no piston pairs that move together.

Four cylinder engines[edit]
Inline-4, flat-4 and V4 are the common types of four cylinder engine. Normal inline-4 configuration[note 5] has very little rocking couples that often results in smooth middle rpm range, but the secondary imbalance, which is undesirable for high rpm, is large due to two pistons always moving together. Rotational vibration on the X axis, which is often felt during idling, tend to be large because, in addition to the non-overlapping power stroke inherent in engines with 4 or fewer cylinders, the height imbalance from connecting rods centre of gravity swinging left and right[note 2] is amplified due to two connecting rods moving together.

Inline six cylinder engines[edit]
Inline 6 normally has crank throws at 120ー phase shift to each other with two pistons at about equal distance to the center of the engine (#1 and #6 cylinders, #2 and #5, #3 and #4) always moving together, which results in superb plane balance on reciprocating mass (4.) and rotating mass (6.) in addition to the perfect phase balances 3., 5., 13. and 15.. Combined with the overlapping torque generation at every 120ー of crankshaft rotation, it often results in a very smooth engine at idle. However, the piston pairs that move together tend to make secondary imbalance strong at high rpm, and the long length configuration can be a cause for crankshaft and camshaft torsional vibration, often requiring a torsional damper.

A lot of that is engineering gibberish and not as cleanly written as I'd like, but frankly I'm an engineer and I'd probably do a worse job if I tried to explain it! I don't want to hijack the OP's thread further, but there is a ton of information on the internet if anyone wants to read further. Bottom line to me is that there are definite reasons to choose certain engine configurations, but nobody should conclude that a four-cylinder tractor engine is smoother or more desirable than a three-cylinder, all else equal. It's mainly size/packaging constraints that drive us into fours as tractor size and HP goes up, not because they are better engines.

Anyone who has run the very common B3200/L3200 four/three engines of the same displacement and HP has discovered this first hand. The difference is so significant, it's hard to miss. It's the kind of thing that is so much easier to experience/realize in person than to explain. Sort of a "seat of the pants" engineering analysis.
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #39  
You guys are welcome to "respectfully disagree" with s219, but he's talking truth.

He's not saying that fewer cylinders equals a more balanced engine, just that three is smoother than four, so the Johnny poppers aren't part of the discussion. Three cylinders are smoother than four cylinder engines, all other things being equal. It's not a matter of opinion, it's the way they operate.

Also, owning a three cylinder and a four cylinder tractor, I can anecdotally confirm this notion, though the science of the matter is pretty cut and dried, so my opinion isn't really needed.
 
   / Decision time. L4701/L3901/L4060/L3560/B3350 #40  
Sorry just to follow up. In some ways I really would like to just snowblow in reverse when I need to clear snow. For one thing it would allow me to keep my bucket on for help with the process of snow clearing. However, it seems like being turned around for say the hour it'd take me to clear the driveway would really be a pain. Maybe not though, anyone have experience with that? Sorry meant to put this in the first post, but it slipped my mind, regarding the advantages of keeping a bucket on working with the blower for snow clearing.

Yes, I have experience with that. My rig required me to turn my head and look over my shoulder when moving snow....and it wasn't much fun but wasn't really a problem for a couple of years. Then one winter snow storm with that same rig and the same time in the saddle clearing the driveway something changed. It didn't hurt at the time but the next day my back started to hurt and was a problem for most of half a year before it finally settled down.

It wasn't permanent, but it did sure slow me down for that spring and summer. I've changed it now. My recommendation would be that if you have a known back or neck problem - and it sounds like you do - I'd make that a major part of my decision.
luck,
rScotty
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

Blue Concrete Test Shed (A49461)
Blue Concrete Test...
2019 Komatsu PC490LC-11 Hydraulic Excavator (A49461)
2019 Komatsu...
2019 CATERPILLAR 326FL EXCAVATOR (A51242)
2019 CATERPILLAR...
Unused Delta Crash Attenuators (A49461)
Unused Delta Crash...
2013 Ford E-350 Enclosed Service Van (A50323)
2013 Ford E-350...
2014 MACK CHU TANDEM AXLE DAY CAB (A51219)
2014 MACK CHU...
 
Top