If You Could Change/Want/Miss Anything On Your New JD?

[BloomingtonMike]

You can get the X series seat (suspension with armrests) for your sub-CUT, there are threads here on folks who have done it and it looks really nice. Down side is that the seat is ~$500 from JD.

Scott

On the 3X20 and 4X20 series tractoprs, you can add the 4X20's option of arm rests to the existing seat. Air suspension is also a $400+ option as well on these models. Both of these use the existing seat which I find quite comfy and I am a big guy.

 

[Neophyte]

I wish I had independent mid and rear PTOs like I had on the 755. On the 755 I could select the rear, mid or both. On the 4310 the rear pto must turn when the mid pto is selected. I think it is a bad design that there are 2 pull type switches (one for each PTO) and that when using the mid PTO the switches must be operated in the correct sequence to avoid damage. Poor design. Jeff

Jeff,

This was always a big pet peeve for me on the 4310. Luckily, they must have listened to us because they remedied this on the 3320.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/photos/showphoto.php/photo/3655/size/big/sort/1/cat/500

The yellow PTO handle now lets you select between rear only, rear+mid, or mid only. There is no longer a second yellow PTO engage button for the mid-PTO. They only have the one yellow PTO engage button that controls both PTOs based upon the PTO lever position.

I got the rear work light option but I didn't get the forward work lights. I wish I would have but I can easily add this at some point. Having an FEL and Deluxe Grill Guard, greatly reduces the function of the factory headlights. The one downside to forward work lights is that you will have a cloud of bugs around your heard while working at night.

 

[Neophyte]

1. Add auto leveling to the 300CX loader, no excuse for this oversight!

At first, I thought this was odd as well. It would definitely be nice for Fork use, etc. but sometimes you don't want it during bucket work. Many of the larger tractors don't even come with this option. Event most of the backhoes and skid steers I have used don't have it either. Most just come with a lockout to prevent overcurl when the bucket is up in the air.

Do any of the CUTs on the market have an auto leveling feature?

I think if they were to add it, it should be a switchable feature so you can shut it off when you don't want it.

 

[Neophyte]

There is a toolbox kit for the 3020's I like mine.

Can you post a picture of this kit? I'm curious to see what it looks like.

 

[slaveToHorses]

Electric locker!
...
Less hardware and wiring underneath. I've had my electric diverter valve come unplugged twice. That took a while to figure out the first time.
...
Another vote for improved mixing on the loader SCVs. It can lift and curl at the same time, but it takes quite a bit of concentration and can be sloooow.

...Perhaps my throttle is just a stiff sucker?

A radiator support that isn't directly in the way of the air filter cover. Dumb!

A PTO cover that will stay up on it's own. Perhaps mine is not normal?

Good points! Electric locker would be very sweet.
The undercariage is way too exposed. Nice for working on but too easy to get stuff snagged. Skid plates are in my future.
My throttle is also very stiff. I can reach it (just barely and I am 6'1") from the backhoe seat but I don't have enough leverage left to actually move it so I have to get down and walk around and adjust the throttle. Very much of a pain.
BIG DITTO on the radiator support v.s. air filter issue. A side effect of making it a compact tractor I guess...like the darn fill hole for the transmission, yuk!
My PTO cover also doesn't stay up.

Oh here's another I forgot about.
MOVE THE DARN FUEL FILL!!! refilling from a full Blitz can pretty much garrantees that some will miss the opening. You would think they would have noticed that!

Gee, if only someone at Deere would actually read this thread.
Does anyone know of a formal channel to make suggestions to the Deere product designers? Somehow I doubt anything I have said to my sales guy makes it there...

 

[jmt1271]

I would also like a real tool box. And another location for the forward(ing?) light kit. They blind your peripheral vision and attract bugs to your face.

On the mixing of loader functions, mine mixes them just fine(non-cab).

I only have 29 hours on mine and I love it.

 

[bam747]

The 400cx is a mechanically self leveling FEL.

Can you explain why you do not want a self leveling FEL? I'm totally at a loss trying to understand why, other than cost, you wouldn't want MSL on the FEL if you have the option to get it in the first place. And this is not the first time I've seen this "don't need or want it" statement about a self leveling FEL.

It is understood that self leveling loaders don't actually "level" anything, right? Their purpose is to maintain the same relative roll back angle on the FEL attachment (bucket, grapple, palate forks, bale forks, etc.) as the lift arms move up and down through their complete range of motion. As an example, if you rolled the bucket back to 15 degrees at ground level, the bucket will still be at that 15 degree angle relative to the ground even at the full lift height of the FEL lift arms with no operator input required.

The operator is still free to change the attachment rollback angle as desired anywhere throughout the full FEL lift range. Up to and including rolling the attachment fully back at full lift height and dumping a significant portion of the load right on the tractors hood if desired!

 

[minimax]

Neophyte,I kinda forgot to say for cab only, it's right under the loader mast.I know bad photo but it is dark outside.

 

[Neophyte]

The 400cx is a mechanically self leveling FEL. Can you explain why you do not want a self leveling FEL?

That's very interesting. I had asked my JD dealer if any of the tractors came with the self leveling feature and he told me that none of the JD compact tractors came with it. He said that only the 5000 series offered it and even then it was an upgrade from the 542 to 542SL. It goes to show you that the TBN collective is always smarter than many of the dealers.

He also said that it did not come on the 110 TLB and it was not even an option. I can't find a reference to the 110 TLB having a self-leveling bucket. Is this the case? If there is no limiting factor to it, it seems odd that the 110 TLB would not have it?

Like I said, I have never used a machine with a mechanical self-leveling loader. However, I was under the impression that it would prevent you from simultaneously curling the bucket and raising/lowering the arms. Is this the case?

My understanding is that mechanical self-leveling linkage also limits the amount of bucket curl in either direction. Therefore, a loader without this linkage can have a greater bucket curl.

I also read somewhere that although mechanical self-leveling linkage may increase lift capacity, it reduces rollback power. Perhaps this is why loaders still come without this option; so as not to reduce rollback power for digging? The increased lift capacity also explains why tractors with Self-Leveling loaders require more rear ballast than tractors with Non-SL loaders.

I wonder how the 400X compares to the 400CX or how the 542 compares to the 542SL in terms of rollback power. I would be curious to see how much of a difference this feature makes. If the rollback power reduction is negligible and it still allows for simultaneous curl/lift, then it seems like there is no reason not to have this feature. As far as I can tell, there does not seem to be much cost associated to this feature since the jump from 300x to 300cx and from 400x to 400cx are both around $500.

I wonder if you can still have the mechanical anti-rollback feature with the mechanical self-leveling feature?

In case someone is interested, there is a video of the 400CX self-leveling feature in action here.
http://www.deere.com/en_US/groundsc...actors/twenty_series/twenty_series_video.html

 

[bam747]

That's very interesting. I had asked my JD dealer if any of the tractors came with the self leveling feature and he told me that none of the JD compact tractors came with it. He said that only the 5000 series offered it and even then it was an upgrade from the 542 to 542SL. It goes to show you that the TBN collective is always smarter than many of the dealers.

Can't explain a dealer not knowing that the 400cx is a MSL FEL. No excuse IMHO since it's a distinct selling point advantage for Deere.

Like I said, I have never used a machine with a mechanical self-leveling loader. However, I was under the impression that it would prevent you from simultaneously curling the bucket and raising/lowering the arms. Is this the case?

There is absolutely nothing associated with a MSL setup that prevents the operator from adjusting the bucket curl/dump while simultaneously rasing/lowering the FEL booms.

My understanding is that mechanical self-leveling linkage also limits the amount of bucket curl in either direction. Therefore, a loader without this linkage can have a greater bucket curl.

If you are talking about rollback and dump angle, the exact opposite is true. MSL loaders typically have greater rollback and dump angles. I can't find numbers for the 400cx, but the rollback/dump angle spec (degrees) for the 542 vs 542 MSL are 33/69 and 39/73 respectively. I also found specs for the 640 and 640 MSL and that FELs dump/rollback angles are 15/39 and 38/80 respectively (a huge difference!).

I also read somewhere that although mechanical self-leveling linkage may increase lift capacity, it reduces rollback power. Perhaps this is why loaders still come without this option; so as not to reduce rollback power for digging? The increased lift capacity also explains why tractors with Self-Leveling loaders require more rear ballast than tractors with Non-SL loaders.

I wish I could have found 400x/400cx specs on lift, breakout, rollback numbers. For the 542/542MSL, using the same 800mm ahead of the lift pins specs in lbs., the numbers for lift, breakout, and rollback are: 2134/2381, 3884/4698, 5733/5305. For the 640/640MSL, the numbers are: 2424/3968, 4608/5575, 3844/4946. So, it looks like in general the MSL FEL beats the non MSL FEL numbers in all specs with the exception that the 542 beat the 542 MSL by about 400 lbs in rollback strength.

As far as I can tell, there does not seem to be much cost associated to this feature since the jump from 300x to 300cx and from 400x to 400cx are both around $500.

Note that the 300cx is NOT a MSL loader while the 400cx is. This difference has already been pointed out by other posts in this thread.

In case someone is interested, there is a video of the 400CX self-leveling feature in action here.
http://www.deere.com/en_US/groundsc...actors/twenty_series/twenty_series_video.html

I wish they had shown the MSL action while lifting the bucket load of dirt from the side for the full ground level to full lift height action. You do get to see the full MSL feature with the side view of the palate forks in action though.

I hope everyone can understand why I couldn't understand the reasoning behind the dislike of a MSL loader versus the same loader without the MSL option. Other than the additional cost, I see no downside whatsoever of MSL, especially since it is a passive system that just uses geometry to implement the self leveling action.

BTW, here is a thread on TBN discussing the 400x versus 400cx differences complete with pictures of the 400cx in action posted by a TBN member: 400x vs 400CX ... Help!

As for Hydraulic Self Leveling (HSL), I can see where some of the concerns pointed out here like simultaneous raise/lower and curl/dump could be an issue depending on how the HSL is implemented. By definition, HSL is using some form of hydraulic bleed off from the FELs lift cylinders to hydraulically adjust the bucket curl/dump cylinders as the FEL is raised and lowered. Actually, most of the HSL FELs I've heard of only level the FEL attachment while the FEL arms are being raised. However, I do remember running across an HSL system that does level for both the raise and lower operation.