JD 3032E

wnymudd · Jun 17, 2009

Well, pulled the trigger on a new JD 3032E today. Been looking at everything and the Deere just felt right. Got the R1 ag tires filled with Rimguard, FEL w/pin on bucket, pin on forks, cruise control. Some things that influenced my decision were dealer location, attitude and parts availability. The financing fit my budget better than any other. I traded in my Mahindra 2015hst for the new John Deere. Loved my mahindra but needed a bit bigger tractor for our growing farm. Can't justify two payments. I opted for the 32 hp because i felt it would run our 5' implements without a problem and fuel efficiency. Have never taken my loader off so that wasn't a problem. Two quick pins and the bucket is off anyways. Have never or will never run off of mid pto. Can't wait to see it next Wed. Out the door for 17,000.

WH401 · Jun 17, 2009

Congrats on the new tractor, it sounds like you got a pretty reasonable deal. I tried out a 3038e a few weeks ago and was pretty impressed by the smoothness and lack of whine from the HST, as well as the quickness and snappiness of the loader hydraulics. If I were to do my purchase over again I think I would be hard pressed not to purchase either of the 2 new E series models. You definitely get a lot of tractor for a great price.

I don't think you'll have a problem running your 5 ft implements. I run a 6 ft RFM, as well as other implements, with my 3320 and its 32.5 hp/25 at the PTO.

Remember though, pictures are mandatory when starting a "I just bought a new tractor" thread.

wnymudd · Jun 18, 2009

Yes, sorry about that, pictures will be here soon. The smoothness and no whine of the hydro was one of the big things I noticed also! One of the big selling points. The no rattling around of the loader also. I really searched my soul on the non-removable loader and realized I havent ever taken mine off even to try it. The only thing I would need to take it off for was pallet forks and it seems very easy to drop the bucket and put on forks. Thanks to all the help from everyone.

WH401 · Jun 18, 2009

wnymudd said:
Yes, sorry about that, pictures will be here soon. The smoothness and no whine of the hydro was one of the big things I noticed also! One of the big selling points. The no rattling around of the loader also. I really searched my soul on the non-removable loader and realized I havent ever taken mine off even to try it. The only thing I would need to take it off for was pallet forks and it seems very easy to drop the bucket and put on forks. Thanks to all the help from everyone.

I too really don't have a problem with the non-removable loader, it's definitely much more solid than a quick park model. The only time that I have had the loader off my 3320 was for maintenance. It's so much easier to get at the oil filter and oil fill point with the loader off. The idea I came to as to how to get around that was raise the loader up to it's highest point and then park with the bucket nudged up against a tree. That will give you much easier access to everything on the engine, and the tree will give some support to the loader while you stand there.

wnymudd · Jun 18, 2009

Good idea. I was thinking of tailgate of pickup or picnic table. I looked it over pretty well and thought i could see each of the filters, pretty easy to get too. Hydraulic, hydro and oil filter. How do you like your cummins diesel on the dodge? Sister and bro inlaw work for them.

WH401 · Jun 19, 2009

wnymudd said:
Good idea. I was thinking of tailgate of pickup or picnic table. I looked it over pretty well and thought i could see each of the filters, pretty easy to get too. Hydraulic, hydro and oil filter. How do you like your cummins diesel on the dodge? Sister and bro inlaw work for them.

I'm very happy with both of them. The 92' has 170k on it and runs like a champ. I wouldn't hesitate to drive it cross country or on a trip, it's a very reliable vehicle. It will do about 20 on the open road at 70, and about 16 - 17 in mixed city/highway driving, not bad for a 17 year old truck. The 06 has been good so far, it's much quieter than the 92' for sure (though a lot of times I miss that loud Cummins growl). Doesn't get as good of fuel mileage as the 92', but it's still great for a truck of that size. I can do about 15 - 16 in mixed city highway driving, and about 17+ all highway at about 63 - 65 (keeps the RPM's around 2k).

I traded an 04' 1500 in on the 06 and the 04 had a 4.7L V8, was 2wd, quad cab, and had much better aerodynamics. It could only do 13 in any kind of driving. This 06 Cummins is 4x4, a dually, weighs almost double as much as the 1500, and has the aerodynamics of a brick turned sideways. For the size of truck, and mileage that it gets, I think that is phenomenal.

Out of the entire family we have had 6 Cummins diesel's in the last 20 years, an 89', 92', 95', 01', and 2 06's. They've always been highly reliable to us and have never given us any trouble. All of them get excellent fuel mileage, and even respectable fuel mileage when towing. They make great tow rigs, and that was the main reason for going to them in the first place. You won't meet many people that aren't pleased with a Cummins, or don't at least respect it.

BryanM · Jun 20, 2009

I have a couple questions: whats the price differance between the 3032e and the 38e. and how much can the loader lift? thanks

WH401 · Jun 20, 2009

Depends on the dealer you go to as far as price difference. Here a dealer is offering a 3032e w/ loader for 14995 and a 3038e w/ loader for 15995. JD's website says close to 1200 at full height for the lift capacity.

wnymudd · Jun 22, 2009

I was told by my dealer about a $1200 upgrade for the 3038e. He was told by some of the owners of them that they probably could have gotten away with 3032e for what they do with them. I decided on the 3032e. Mine will be here on wednesday!

WH401 · Jun 23, 2009

Congrats. I agree that you can probably get by with a 3032e fine. The power difference is only 5.7 hp + a turbo on the 3038e. It's so close that either tractor should really do the same work fine. If Deere spread the HP out more, say to a low 40's hp tractor, than I think it would make more sense in that model line. Though then you would see a higher price too.