Tractor Sizing Difference between B3200 and L3200

[AaronS]

Be a lot nicer if they had a comparison feature like the Kawasaki website. Select models to compare, all specs line right up.
Would work with the rebates too.

I've noticed that the LS Tractor site has that feature also.

 

[k0ua]

I've noticed that the LS Tractor site has that feature also.

Kioti's too!

 

[My Hoe]

Try this site:
Options for Kubota 2012 B3200HSD Tractors

Bless you, beckmurph!

Thank God for this--I have been looking for this site for two years! I'm not even sure this is where I used to go, to see this same, side-by-side comparison feature--I thought it was Great Plains Kubota, yet one day, I went there, and it was gone. I asked their webmaster about it and he said "Well, I've only been here less than a year, but I don't know anything about it. I asked my coworkers, and they thought we might have had it, at one time, but they don't know for sure...".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kubota.com ???

Well, you'd think so but, sadly, not so much--at least, not for the (2012) models that Kubota has discontinued, like the "Premium B" series (aka the B2630 and B3030). Evidently, once Kubota takes down their extensive, precise, model-specific .pdfs (on late-model but discontinued machines, like the B2630 and B3030), they're g-o-n-e. This is especially infuriating because, if you want to see any specs on these machines (which were "current" until at least 2012, I believe) you have to go to Kubota Tractor Corporation "Prior Products" page. Take a look for yourself, here: Kubota Tractor Corporation - Prior Product - BSeries

You'll notice that, instead of the current 37 rows of data, for the 2014 B3350, Kubota's "Prior Products" page provides a whopping five (5) columns of data, namely:
"Tractor Model#" "Year Introduced" "Transmission Type" "Gross Horsepower" "2 or 4 Wheel Drive"

I don't find that very helpful, personally.

Oh, wait--my bad--it gets worse: there are ZERO tractors on Kubota's "Prior Products" page that begin with the designation "B26"--or "B3", for that matter, so forget about finding a B2630. OR the B3030HSDC. Or the B3030HSDCC ("Cold Cab").

Yet, they list SOME B's as far back as the 1974 B600E.

Yet...the previous, 2012 "Premium B" line is just...gone.

And for implements in "Prior Products?" No specs, no dimensions, no capacities. Just...model numbers.

And what I really don't understand is this: why go to the trouble of creating an entirely new (and entirely inadequate, and incomplete, "Prior Products" page, when they could simply have moved the B2630 and B3030s' 37-row data table .pdf over to a "Prior Products" page? This would have required virtually zero work.

Also, as mentioned by another poster, there was no (to my knowledge, anyway) "side-by-side" model comparison, on the Kubota Tractor Corporation site. So, maybe you could juggle two .pdf's on the same screen, or flip between them, but it's not nearly as convenient as this Deen Implement's side-by-side comparison.

Check out this comparison between the "old" 2012 (read, discontinued) B3030 and the OP's 2012 B3200:
Kubota vs Kubota 2012 vs 2012 B3030HSD vs B3200HSD

You might notice the puzzling, 484lb. extra lift capacity of the "old" B3030's TPH, compared with the B3200's. Yet the frame sizes, ground clearance, etc..., seem identical. But without the side-by-side comparison, I might have missed that. Is it important? Probably not, but some other features (like "1/4-inching" vs. "Position Control)," are important, IMO, and per the opinions of those here who do a lot of TPH-work, from what I've read.

The side-by-side comparison on Deen's site also offers three different tabs worth of data: Specifications, Features and Options. Very comprehensive, and closest, IMHO, to Kubota's original .pdf's for these machines, before they became "old"/discontinued.

I find comparison pages such as the one on Deen's site to be invaluable in cross-shopping models.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tractordata.com is a great place for basic specs.

Yes, to a degree...but I find the lack of uniformity in the categories being compared to be confusing, at best. Worse, that makes me question the accuracy of the data (though I have never found an error there--just absences of data). I can't remember exactly what it was, but it was something like they'd list a spec for one model, and just not have any data, or sometimes, even the entire category of that data was missing, for another model. Yes, it's FAR better than Kubota's dismal "Prior Products" page, but not as comprehensive as the side-by-side on Deen Implement's site--IMO. But hey--the more resources, the better, right? Especially if you're in the market for a used tractor, as I am.

Thanks again, beckmurph!

[/rant over] :confused2:

 

[My Hoe]

Verticaltrx, That was a nice comparison.

Ditto--very helpful, especially this:

Overall, I find the B3200 handier for quick jobs, getting in and around tight places like in the barns, and work that requires a light foot print like seeding, landscaping and mowing wet areas....

And perhaps the following will be of more interest to the OP's original question, than was my last post.

I need to use my tractor within the barn (hopefully upstairs and down) and a four-bay garage, and I was considering an L, but was concerned about the wider turning circle.

And speaking of that issue, this was very interesting to me, as I've always wondered why the loader capacities weren't much different from the B's. Are the loader arms longer, thus making a longer "lever arm" than on the B3200?

L3200 has a heavier built loader despite having almost the same lift capacity as the B3200. *snip*

The loader arms stick out much further in front of the tractor on the L, this can be a good thing or a bad thing.

Verticaltrx, do you happen to have an actual measurement of how much longer the loader sticks out in front, on the L3200 vs. the B3200?

And, if you know, does any of that have to do with the fact that the L3200 has a longer overall length (and yet, a shorter wheelbase), than the B3200?


From the site beckmurph listed, it states the following:


Length: L3200 106.3 in. (2,700 mm) without 3P B3200 99.2 in. (2,520 mm) without 3P

Wheelbase: L3200 63.3 in. (1,610 mm) B3200 65.6 in. (1,666 mm)

Turning Radius: L3200 8.2 ft. (2.5 m) with brake, 4WD disengaged B3200 6.9 ft. (2.1 m) with brake

Source: Kubota vs Kubota 2012 vs 2012 L3200 HST (4WD) vs B3200HSD


That's right: the L3200's overall length (naked tractor) is 106.3", fully 7.1" longer than the B3200's overall length of 99.2", yet the L3200's wheelbase is 2.3 inches shorter.

I can understand that the L just has more "overhang" (as it's called, in the auto biz), but does anyone know why Kubota chose to do that? It seems especially odd, considering that that L's engine is should be shorter, being a 3-cylinder (albeit .1 cu. in. larger, at 91.5 ci) than the B3200's four cylinder engine, displacing 91.4 ci. IOW, the L3200 has one less cylinder to house, yet it's 7.1" longer, overall....

And while we're at it, isn't it odd that while the L3200 has a 2.3" shorter wheelbase (63.3") than the B3200 (65.3"), the L3200 has a larger turning radius: 6.9' for the B3200 vs. 8.2' for the L3200? (Of course, the stats above don't appear to be under the exact same conditions, as the L3200's specifies with 4WD disengaged, but I've seen that 8.2' figure, for the L's a lot, as tight-quarters operation has been a concern of mine).

So, to repeat: Verticaltrx, exactly (or even just your estimate would help) how much farther does the loader stick out, on the L3200 vs. the B3200?

And, to all: why is it that the tractor with the 2.3" shorter wheelbase has a turning radius 1.3' wider?

Yes, these are the things that keep me up at night. Along with the height of my garage doors. LOL :laughing:

Thanks, all.

My Hoe

 

[s219]

The L is a bit wider, and that's my guess why it has a longer turn radius. But it could also be a factor of the steering linkage setup. They do have vastly different rod configurations (hang below on the L, among other things).

 

[Verticaltrx]

Ditto--very helpful, especially this:

And perhaps the following will be of more interest to the OP's original question, than was my last post.

I need to use my tractor within the barn (hopefully upstairs and down) and a four-bay garage, and I was considering an L, but was concerned about the wider turning circle.

And speaking of that issue, this was very interesting to me, as I've always wondered why the loader capacities weren't much different from the B's. Are the loader arms longer, thus making a longer "lever arm" than on the B3200?




Verticaltrx, do you happen to have an actual measurement of how much longer the loader sticks out in front, on the L3200 vs. the B3200?

And, if you know, does any of that have to do with the fact that the L3200 has a longer overall length (and yet, a shorter wheelbase), than the B3200?


From the site beckmurph listed, it states the following:


Length: L3200 106.3 in. (2,700 mm) without 3P B3200 99.2 in. (2,520 mm) without 3P

Wheelbase: L3200 63.3 in. (1,610 mm) B3200 65.6 in. (1,666 mm)

Turning Radius: L3200 8.2 ft. (2.5 m) with brake, 4WD disengaged B3200 6.9 ft. (2.1 m) with brake

Source: Kubota vs Kubota 2012 vs 2012 L3200 HST (4WD) vs B3200HSD


That's right: the L3200's overall length (naked tractor) is 106.3", fully 7.1" longer than the B3200's overall length of 99.2", yet the L3200's wheelbase is 2.3 inches shorter.

I can understand that the L just has more "overhang" (as it's called, in the auto biz), but does anyone know why Kubota chose to do that? It seems especially odd, considering that that L's engine is should be shorter, being a 3-cylinder (albeit .1 cu. in. larger, at 91.5 ci) than the B3200's four cylinder engine, displacing 91.4 ci. IOW, the L3200 has one less cylinder to house, yet it's 7.1" longer, overall....

And while we're at it, isn't it odd that while the L3200 has a 2.3" shorter wheelbase (63.3") than the B3200 (65.3"), the L3200 has a larger turning radius: 6.9' for the B3200 vs. 8.2' for the L3200? (Of course, the stats above don't appear to be under the exact same conditions, as the L3200's specifies with 4WD disengaged, but I've seen that 8.2' figure, for the L's a lot, as tight-quarters operation has been a concern of mine).

So, to repeat: Verticaltrx, exactly (or even just your estimate would help) how much farther does the loader stick out, on the L3200 vs. the B3200?

And, to all: why is it that the tractor with the 2.3" shorter wheelbase has a turning radius 1.3' wider?

Yes, these are the things that keep me up at night. Along with the height of my garage doors. LOL :laughing:

Thanks, all.

My Hoe

The loader arms are longer on the L3200 and they do stick out further. Also, I might just be imagining things but the B3200 with its closer coupled loader and longer wheelbase actually seems more stable than the L3200 when doing loader work without any rear ballast. Not exactly a fair comparison since we use different forks and buckets on each, but the L3200 seems to lift the rear wheels more often.

I'll try to get some measurements of the loader to tractor lengths (bucket edge to front axle and frame, bucket pivot pins to axle/frame, etc) and at different heights as well. It may be Monday before I can get the measurements on the L though.

 

[Verticaltrx]

Here's the length comparison between the loader on the B3200 and L3200, as I suspected the loader on the L3200 sticks out a good bit further. All measurements are from the bucket pivot pin to the front axle center line. The distance from the bucket edge to the bucket pivot was 24" on both tractors.

Ground level:


B3200: 30"
L3200: 46"

At 4' to bucket bottom:


B3200: 43"
L3200: 59"

Didn't take any measurements at full height, just some pics for comparison.

 

[My Hoe]

Here's the length comparison between the loader on the B3200 and L3200, as I suspected the loader on the L3200 sticks out a good bit further. All measurements are from the bucket pivot pin to the front axle center line. The distance from the bucket edge to the bucket pivot was 24" on both tractors.

Ground level:
View attachment 369196

B3200: 30"
L3200: 46"

At 4' to bucket bottom:
View attachment 369197

B3200: 43"
L3200: 59"

Didn't take any measurements at full height, just some pics for comparison.
View attachment 369199

Verticaltrx,

Wow--thank you so much! This is really helpful.

I have been debating, of late, between a ("non-Grand") L and one of the older "Premium B's," which are the same length (99.2"), width (53.7") and wheelbase (65.6") as your B3200. The weights are just about equal between what I'll call "The Three B's" as well, with the B3030 at 1,852, the B2630 at 1,786 and your B3200 at 1,762.

Because I plan to use my forks, inside my buildings, as much as possible, I am concerned with maneuverability. So your comparison is extremely helpful to me. And I suspect I will also have a hoe hanging off the back, frequently. (Of course, a BX25D would be best for inside use, but I've also got almost 2 acres to take care of, with snow, yard and other uses which require the higher ground clearance of the B's, so unfortunately, I've ruled out the BX25D).

Your pictures and measurements really made up my mind for me--I can't afford another 16" of FEL hanging out there, while I swing around, inside the barn and and garage--hoe or no hoe.

So, a 1.3' bigger turning radius, plus the 16" longer FEL that you documented, kind of tears it for me. The L3200 is simply more than I want to contend with, in small spaces. Again, while the larger B's might be "pushing it" (for inside work) I do need their ground clearance (14.6") vs the BX25's 8.7".

So your real world "face off" between the B3200 and the L3200, again, is very helpful, in enabling me to rule out the L3200. Which is a relief in another way, as the L3200, at 2,623lbs, is 859lb. heavier than your B3200 (and 837lb. heavier than the B2630 and 771lb. heavier than the B3030). That's 800 less pounds I have to worry about, upstairs, in our 150+ y.o. barn.

To the OP's question, yet another difference between the L3200 and the B3200 is ground clearance. The L has 13.4" and the "Three B's", surprisingly, have 1.2" more, at 14.6". Not a big deal, but I didn't expect that, given the much larger rear wheels of the L3200.

I have to also commend you on your excellent photography and measurements, not to mention the time and effort you expended to get them--thank you very much! Your photography is very consistent, and really allowed me to see the difference in sheer bulk, between the two machines. No wonder you find the B3200 more nimble--it is, in length, width and turning radius.

The only smaller (relevant) dimension of the L3200 is wheel base: 65.6" for the "Three B's" and only 63.3" for the L3200. Yet it's still 7.1" longer, despite the 2.3" shorter wheelbase. And the shorter wheelbase still results in a greater turning radius (8.2') than the turning radii of the B2630, the B3030 and your B3200, at 6.9'. I still find that odd, as I said earlier, but I defer to s219's observations, below:

The L is a bit wider, and that's my guess why it has a longer turn radius. But it could also be a factor of the steering linkage setup. They do have vastly different rod configurations (hang below on the L, among other things).

How About Ride Quality, and "Tippiness"?
Since a shorter wheelbase makes for a rougher ride (all else being equal), that's a point in favor of the "Three B's," but I'm sure the additional 800lb. of the L3200 helps smooth out the ride, considerably--as would it's larger diameter wheels.

Which do you feel rides better, the L3200 or the B3200?

And do you have the suspension seat in either/both?

Re: "tippiness" or, as it's known here on TBN, "the Pucker Factor," which feels more stable? At 55.1" the L3200 is 1.4" wider than "The Three B's," at 53.7" each.


Verticaltrx--I think your "front axle-to-FEL pins (or bucket edge) dimension" should be a measurement that Kubota includes in their specs., for just the purpose it served--to give an idea of which machine would best meet the needs of those with smaller spaces to work in.


And another "shoutout" to beckmurph: the "Kubota vs. Kubota Specs Comparision Site" is awesome! Kubota vs Kubota 2012 vs 2012 L3200 HST (4WD) vs B3200HSD


I do have a question for all: Why is there an "HST" after the L3200, but an "HSD" after "The Three B" tractors? (I believe they are both considered "hydrostatic" so I'm curious as to the differing nomenclature.


Lastly, that's some pretty country you and your folks have. That "sunken forest" behind the L3200 is interesting--it looks like it's fenced off from the field you're in, and lower than you are?

Thanks again,

My Hoe

 

[Verticaltrx]

How About Ride Quality, and "Tippiness"?
Since a shorter wheelbase makes for a rougher ride (all else being equal), that's a point in favor of the "Three B's," but I'm sure the additional 800lb. of the L3200 helps smooth out the ride, considerably--as would it's larger diameter wheels.

Which do you feel rides better, the L3200 or the B3200?

And do you have the suspension seat in either/both?



Re: "tippiness" or, as it's known here on TBN, "the Pucker Factor," which feels more stable? At 55.1" the L3200 is 1.4" wider than "The Three B's," at 53.7" each.

In the field the L3200 does ride a little better than the B3200 due to the larger wheels and increased weight. The L3200 also has a suspension seat vs just springs under the B3200. I believe the B2630 and B3030 have a suspension seat which does contribute to a better ride.

Both feel about as stable. Despite having more ground clearance the B3200 carries its mass a little lower, which makes it about as stable as the L3200. With the loader off either will go on some really scary steep side hills. The loader does raise the center of gravity on both tractors by a measurable amount.

I do have a question for all: Why is there an "HST" after the L3200, but an "HSD" after "The Three B" tractors? (I believe they are both considered "hydrostatic" so I'm curious as to the differing nomenclature.

As far as I know, just different nomenclature. HST = Hydrostatic transmission vs HSD = Hydrostatic drive.

Lastly, that's some pretty country you and your folks have. That "sunken forest" behind the L3200 is interesting--it looks like it's fenced off from the field you're in, and lower than you are?

My Hoe

Thanks, we live in the Blue Ridge mountains in VA, both my parents place and my place are about 2400' elevation. The L3200 is in a field that's up on a ridge, which is why you are looking down at those trees.

 

[Chilly807]

Some folks have complained about vibration on their B3200s, something else to check on a test drive.

Sean