Comparison L3240 to L4240

kcender · Feb 28, 2011

Thanks for the comments.I am aware of letting up on the HST pedal when going up hills.It helps but I get the feeling the tractor is somewhat underpowered for the weight of it.I figure with loaded tires,BH 90 backhoe,724 FEL,fluids and my weight the tractor is moving about 7500-7900 pounds.This seems like alot for 32 horsepower.I usually run about 2000 RPM.I haved reved it higher but it is not how I like to run it as the power does not seem as smooth ,if that sounds right.I had a BX 25 before this and that is all I really have to compare it to.I realize there is quite a difference between the two tractors but the BX had lots of power for the weight.I wonder why Kubota even offers the package I bought as it seems to me that more horspower would be more appropriate.As to why I bought it in the first place I am not very experienced with tractors and couldn't really get a true feeling for the tractor until I used it for awhile.I am not saying I am totally disappointed with the tractor but I find the bogging down on hills frustrating.I guess I like the feeling of power.Maybe most tractors do this,I don't know. That is why I was asking how a L 4240 compares to the L 3240.If the seat of the pants feeling is not much different then there wouldn't be much sense in trading as I certainly don't have money lying around.Maybe you have to get way up in horsepower to get rid of the bogging down on hills,I don't know.Thats why I was asking.Thanks guys.

ejkessler · Feb 28, 2011

Try using the ATA / stall guard setting. It will adjust accordingly. Most of these tractors develop their power at 2700 RPM. Many people feel it revved way to high above 2000 but that is not the case. They are meant to work at higher RPM's. HP is not the only consideration with power HP doesn't mean squat without torque. That machine you have has a fair amount of both. You are probably running the machine to low. Give it a chance. The features of the HST+ are there for a reason. If you are solely running the machine at a straight RPM setting of 2000 and aren't willing to push it to its designed and acceptable limits then you do need to upgrade.

moship · Feb 28, 2011

kcender,

Have you thought about putting a turbocharger on it? Don't laugh. On Kubota Engine America - Compact Diesel Engines I noticed they have turbochargers on some of their engines and it boosts HP by about 33%.

Compare D1105-T-E3B and the normally aspirated D1105-E3B for reference. (Just as a comparison. I'm not certain what would be the closest to your engine)

I bet with a bit of research, we would find that it would not be too hard of a conversion.

It certainly would be nice to find parts list to compare both engines to see if they are using the same base engine and just adding a turbo or if they are changing internals such as pistons, rods and crank or the addition of piston squirters.

Does anybody know of a parts list for these engines to see what is physically different?

crazyal · Feb 28, 2011

The 3240 is the smallest engine they put into the GL tractor frame. The 4240 (and above) is a slightly larger tractor frame. I would guess Kubota figured that it was the smallest engine that would get the job done, kind of like the base engine in a pickup truck, bigger will do more.

ejkessler · Feb 28, 2011

crazyal said:
The 3240 is the smallest engine they put into the GL tractor frame. The 4240 (and above) is a slightly larger tractor frame. I would guess Kubota figured that it was the smallest engine that would get the job done, kind of like the base engine in a pickup truck, bigger will do more.

The frame and chassis size increases with the 3940. It has the same dimensions, weight and tires as the 4240 but uses the 724 instead of the 854 loader. The 3240 and 3540 share the same chassis and frame. I had the 3540 up until last weekend when I traded it for my 3940 cab unit and had the opportunity to see them side by side. The only reason I traded was because after this Winter I can't be blowing snow on an open station tractor for hours at 0 degrees and the snow blowing right back on to me anymore. I wimped out. Got a great deal at White's Tractor Supply in NY to help ease the pain of the trade.

I still say run that 3240 at a higher RPM's and/or use the ATA before deciding.

crazyal · Mar 1, 2011

ejkessler said:
The frame and chassis size increases with the 3940. It has the same dimensions, weight and tires as the 4240 but uses the 724 instead of the 854 loader. The 3240 and 3540 share the same chassis and frame. I had the 3540 up until last weekend when I traded it for my 3940 cab unit and had the opportunity to see them side by side. The only reason I traded was because after this Winter I can't be blowing snow on an open station tractor for hours at 0 degrees and the snow blowing right back on to me anymore. I wimped out. Got a great deal at White's Tractor Supply in NY to help ease the pain of the trade.

I still say run that 3240 at a higher RPM's and/or use the ATA before deciding.

That's what I had thought but some people have found the sub frame fits differently on the 3940 (sticks further out the front) compared to the 4240.

Baby Grand · Mar 1, 2011

kcender said:
...<snip>
I wonder why Kubota even offers the package I bought as it seems to me that more horspower would be more appropriate.<snip>...

There is no doubt in my mind why Kubota offers the L3240. For me, it's the perfect balance of just enough power to get the job done with the attachments available. In my opinion, unused power is wasted power (and $). The L3240 offers a good frame size, a nice loader, adequate hyd flow, and sips fuel.

Some background as to how I came to think this way:
When I was in my teens I work at a couple of gas station jobs. PTE (petroleum transfer engineer) that's what I told folks, anyway. This was during the 1978 fuel shortage. People behave differently when fuel is really expensive vs when they can't get it for however much money they have. They get downright ugly when you tell them "no more gas". I saw grown men getting in each others faces over their place in the gas line.

I need my tractor to be ready to work and that means it needs to be fueled up and ready to go. When fuel is in short supply, the desire for more power is quickly overridden by the desire for anything that will get the job done without have to go back to the hated filling station to wait in line.

3 and a half years with the L3240 has never revealed a need for more power that couldn't be handled by simply downshifting and moving a little more slowly. Traction, or space to maneuver have been the limiting factors for me.

When you make your decision to buy, ask yourself: will fuel always be available whenever you want it or could it be a tight commodity in the foreseeable future? Then buy according to what you decide.

-Jim

art · Mar 1, 2011

There are a number of things that I could ask, tires loaded, additional weight are you shifting down when you feel you are short on power as well as letting up on the hydro control. The additional controls of the tractor can change the way you need to operate the tractor.

The tractor chassis of the 3240 does have a higher lbs per horsepower then many of the other chassis's and it would effect climbing hills and other operations. To go to a larger horsepower chassis with the same tractor set-up would allow you to operate the tractor differently.

kcender · Mar 1, 2011

Just put four hours on the tractor digging ice out of my driveway with the backhoe.Under these conditions the tractor works perfectly fine and I am happy with it.This is when I appreciate the fuel consumption that I won't get with a bigger tractor.As I stated earlier the tractor is able to do pretty much what I ask of it.As far as the ATA,I have tried it but I am not a big fan of it.I have the stall guard on all the time and find it quite helpful.The HDS is one of the best features of the tractor and I use it every time I use the tractor.I certainly don't know everything about the tractor but I have put well over 300 hours on it since last April when I bought it and feel I have a decent understanding of it.I have tried revving the tractor at different speeds from 1800 RPM to WFO under different operating conditions to see how it responded.I just don't feel that an engine should have to be run WFO all the time even if they are designed for it.Even when the tractor is WFO going up a hill it still bogs down more than I would like to see regardless if I let up on the hydro pedal or not. Maybe I will just have to accept it for what it is as trading again would be the third time in less than two years and it is getting kind of expensive.I'll have to give it some more thought.

ejkessler · Mar 1, 2011

kcender said:
I'll have to give it some more thought.

Careful thought is a wise decision. There are all those darn fine lines between wants and needs. I am guilty as the next in having difficulty trying to figure out the difference.