L3560le vs L4060le

[jacksonhill]

Hey all. Brand new to the forum. I have a L3560le on order from the local dealer but am toying with the idea of moving up to the L4060le. My home sits on 3 acres but I have another 30 acres at the end of the road. I'll be using the tractor for some landscaping at the home. Moving big rocks, ground leveling, tree removal etc. I'll also use it to plow snow in the winter. and I'll use it to log firewood as well. I also plan to keep whatever I get for a long time so I want to make the right choice. The reason I'm considering the 4060 over the 3560 is mainly size but also for the 4 cylinder vs 3 and the upgraded hydraulic pump. Kubota says the 4060 is about 6 inches wider and I want all of the stability I can get for retrieving firewood. I have scoured the internet looking for photos or videos showing the two side by side to see if the size difference is noticeable but haven't found anything. So, I'm interested in what you all have to say about the 3560 vs the 4060 but also hoping someone has a picture or pictures of the two side by side. None of the local dealers have much of anything in stock.

Thanks in advance!

 

[jeff9366]

I went through what you are going through in 2012, before buying my L3560 open station in January 2013.

Buy a ten foot stick of 1-1/4" PVC pipe. Cut it to 66", the width of the L4060. Mark it at 60", the width of the L3560. Walk around your land to see which tractor will fit between your trees and through your gates. I work in woodland much of the time. On my land it was evident the L3560 would fit between Oaks better. (See below.) (I plow occasionally.)


Kubota says the 4060 is about 6 inches wider and I want max stability for retrieving firewood.

All the Grand Ls have several increments of rear wheel width adjustment standard, with both R1/ag and R4/industrial tires. An unusual feature which is part of the deluxe package. Rear wheel/tire stance is the #1 factor in improving tractor stability. "Loading" rear tires 50% or 75% with liquid helps too, but not nearly as much.

With the rear wheels spread wider than the non-adjustable front wheels you lose the ability to operate moldboard plows as front and rear right-side tires have to fit in the active plow furrow.

You have not revealed your location. Above 4,000' altitude some L3560/L4060 owners feel a backhoe and/or cab equipped tractor is a bit short on horsepower moving up hills. (You may not be considering a cab. You may not be considering a backhoe.) Both engines are naturally aspirated. Turbos eliminate altitude power loss. Few with a cab "load" rear tires, the cab provides ample traction weight. I have never felt the need for more power in my L3560 in relatively flat, sea-level Florida. My tires are inflated with air.

I'm considering the 4060 over the 3560 is mainly size but also for the 4 cylinder vs 3.

I do not know the basis for your preference. The three cylinder L3560 diesel is very smooth. Fewer bits and pieces subject to wear and repair. If you need 50-55-60 horsepower it makes sense to consider four cylinders. The "4" is in all the 66" tractors for marketing consistency.

My home sits on 3 acres but I have another 30 acres at the end of the road.

You have not mentioned any farm work. If you will farm your thirty acres the L3560 uses mostly 60" wide implements. The L4060 uses 66" and 72" implements which means less time doing soil prep, crop cultivating and harvesting.

Be aware that neither an open station L3560 nor an open station L4060 will fit under an 84" garage door header without cutting the ROPS. Both are about 5" too tall. (Big surprise to me in early 2013. May be lower in 2021. )

Moving big rocks....
Order the optional LA805 Loader with the L3560. Consider L2296 heavy-duty, round-back SSQA bucket to securely mount a Bucket Spade.

Bare tractor weight is a spec used to evaluate tractor capability. L3560 = 3,500 pounds. L4060 = 3,527 pounds.

Attachments

• 
  IMG_0471.JPG

  102.4 KB · Views: 409
• 
  DSC00692.JPG

  4.7 MB · Views: 999

 

[jjp8182]

The statement about "6" wider" from a practical perspective would also depend on where the rear wheels are set. For example when I received my L3560 (with the heavier LA805 loader) the dealer set it up with the rear wheels (R4s) at the widest setting which is just under a foot wider than the minimum width listed in the marketing material. Thus making the overall width of my L3560 as setup right around 71" (which makes 72" implements rather conveniently sized).

So just my personal opinion, but unless the additional power at the PTO is required or you're at a higher altitude (in which case one of the turbocharged models may make more sense) the difference between the two is pretty negligible.

The difference in hydraulic flow may make a difference if operating hydraulic motors, but the flow is still below the recommended minimum for many hydraulic-motor driven implements. Any potential difference in cylinder-cycle times due to the difference in flow isn't likely to make much of a difference for non-commercial work.

BTW ....I do use a 16" single bottom moldboard plow to good effect in a clay/loam soil (relatively flat ground). The disc harrow with 20 18" pans can push the limits a bit as it's running a bit over 50lbs/pan (not sure I'd recommend less weight per pan though), but it still gets satisfactory results. However, if I was doing more than my 1/4 acre garden I'd probably consider getting a gear-driven tractor as the hydraulic fluid/transmission can get quite warm when the tractor is being worked hard for an extended duration.

Based on the comments the dealer made when I bought mine, I'm not sure I'd expect many dealers to keep either much less both tractors in stock (even if there wasn't a limited supply and record demand) ..... impression I got is more people buy either the standard L or the MX series.

So since I'm getting long winded here, I'll wrap this up by saying that when I looked at the implement recommendations in the manual (which for the standard Grand L line covers all models of the Grand L) for the first time I was rather underwhelmed by the differences in recommended implement sizes across the line. From a practical perspective the lower HP end of the line would use 60" to 72" implements and the higher end of the line would use 72" to 84" implements (subject to PTO power for PTO powered implements, and ground conditions for draft implements).

Even if you're going with the cab, I'd recommend adding either wheel weights or filling the rear tires with liquid just to help keep the center of gravity lower. Have been mowing across a few ditch slopes (not long enough to drive up/down the slope) and had the rear of the tractor start sliding on the wet grass before. While that's not particularly a fun/safe experience, I'd rather have a tractor set up such that it has a better chance to start sliding rather than start tipping.

Just my $0.02 though.....

 

[nybirdman]

For the money the L4060 makes more sense;5HP more and larger tires and front axel.Loader (805) is the same.Air conditioning is going to use a little HP.
I have had my L4240 HSTC for ten years and happy with the power and size.I have run a L4740,almost identical performance.

 

[pokey1416]

I like my GL4060HSTC and find it does very well with the attachments I have used. How big of boulders do you want to move? As you can see from my photo that size is about the maximum. I didn’t have any trouble pulling the 7’ LPGS although 4WD helped considerably. I use a 7’ HLA snow pusher in the winter and it feels like the right size.

Two things I would change. Increase the lift capacity (I have the LA805) and increase traction in the winter. Only way to increase my lift is moving up a machine but I plan to increase traction by grooving my R4’s. BTW I have the BH92 and it’s a beast - I use it all the time (mechanical or hydraulic thumb is a must).

 

[jacksonhill]

Thanks for the input so far.

For clarification:
I live in Vermont so elevation isn't a concern. While the comfort of a cab would be nice when plowing I see too much work in the woods for a cab to make sense so I'll be going open station. Rear tires will be loaded.

Dealer just called and said the 4060 arrived this morning. Leaning towards that. It's only money, right? Welcome any more input, though.

 

[sea2summit]

At 30+ acres to mess around in I don't think you'll have any regrets going a little bigger.

 

[RjCorazza]

I would definitely go with the L4060. I know you want to operate in woods and don't want a cab, but have you weighed that against plowing snow in Vermont?
I went from an open station L3510 to a cabbed L4060 for the climate controlled cab. It is a joy to operate year round.

 

[s219]

4060 is quite a bit larger, and I think seeing the two tractors side by side will tell you which is more appropriate.

3- versus 4-cylinder would not be a major factor in my opinion, as Kubota mixes these engine configurations throughout the lineup. There are smaller 4-cylinders and larger 3-cylinders. and it's not like one is significantly better than the other. A 3- will run a little smoother but I don't recall anyone complaining about the 4-cylinders except in an older B3200 model that had poor vibration isolation. The Grand L models are much better.

 

[Fallon]

All Grand Ls are the same size. Some just have bigger tires. And obviously the different engines, although in some cases it's just adding a turbo, intercooler or tune to the same engine.

At the L4760 and up they put on a beefier front axle. As a result the L4760 & bigger machines can be speced with the small, medium or bug loader. The L3560 & L4060 can only spec the small & medium loader. I have the medium loader & the hydraulics are the weak link. Unlike my former L3200 where lack of weight & stability even with proper 3pt ballast was the weak link. I'm guessing the bigger loader may be a bit less rock solid at max lift, but still fine.

The L6060 has a Cat 1/2 sized 3pt & the smaller machines only have a Cat1. Not clear what point they upgrade the 3pt, but it's above the L4060. I'm not clear if it's any stronger, or likely just has larger ball ends. The weight differences between a L3560 & L6060 is just the weight of the bigger engine, tires & front axle. Less than 400lbs.

All Grand Ls have adjustable rims. I think the L3560 with smaller tires & the skinnier R1s can be as narrow as 66". My L4060 with R4s is set to 72" but could go wider or narrower. I find 72" is a good mix of stability, maneuverability & match for 72" implements.

My L4060hstc does me well. It's paid off in December & if it weren't for the supply chains today I'd think about upgrading to a L6060. I'm in Colorado so am 15% down on power due to lack of oxygen. I road the machine a lot with some decent hills. I also mow with a wide mower, also on hills. It's my side gig doing tractor work so time matters a bit. If I were at sea level & not pulling a huge mower the machine would be fine. It would be a good match power for traction if I had a little more oxygen.