FEL for 2320

[Deadman]

I'm sure the larger rear tires offer much more traction, and also work the engine more. Its also 200Lbs heavier, so that also offers more traction and works the engine harder.

At Least I'm learning something here!

Its funny that I never knew "all" the differences in a 2320 and a 2520, but i looked up many of them now!!!!!

 

[Gizmo2]

I'm sure the larger rear tires offer much more traction, and also work the engine more. Its also 200Lbs heavier, so that also offers more traction and works the engine harder.

At Least I'm learning something here!

Its funny that I never knew "all" the differences in a 2320 and a 2520, but i looked up many of them now!!!!!

All true. I originally wanted a 2520 but just could not justify the size and extra money. I am happy with my 2320, big difference from my 1988 650.

 

[jcmseven]

Again, having used both the 2320 and 2520 machines, I feel there is very little--if any--perceivable difference in their respective ground engagement capacities. Deadman, you are correct that the 2520's direct injected diesel has more torque than does the 2320's indirect injected diesel, but the final drive is also higher and it has the larger tires to turn, so the actual difference in torque at the site of interface is only slightly different. Both these machines have ample torque to out-do their tractive capabilities. I can say that in my testing there simply was no difference in the two doing most of the common ground engagement tasks I do. Now, if one was doing more loader work than I, the 2520 and 2720 are the much better choice due to their faster hydraulics. They will not lift appreciably more, though. Thus again, the 61" bucket is doable for the 2320, just not as much of a difference maker as one might think.

John M