New 3203 with loader and hoe

[RoyJackson]

Not to bring a old post up from the dead But I gotta ask anyway. How is the 3203? Does it still have the hoe on the back and did it have enough power? Being a 3203 owner, I was told the the limiting factor was the rear end. the rear wouldn't support the extra weight.

You might want to send jd4310man a PM. He hasn't posted on TBN since Dec 2009. Looks like he hasnt been on since June 2010.
Of course, he may have changed his nick to reflecthis new tractor.

 

[Rob-D]

Not to bring a old post up from the dead But I gotta ask anyway. How is the 3203? Does it still have the hoe on the back and did it have enough power? Being a 3203 owner, I was told the the limiting factor was the rear end. the rear wouldn't support the extra weight.

I agree and Matt also makes some good points. The first thing I saw in the original photos was that the rear axle is 6 lugs and not 8 like the 3x20 series.

Good luck with it but personally I wouldn't run one myself. JD wants to sell implements and if they thought it wouldn't over tax the machine the would have a BH or adapter for it.

Rob

 

[swampercj]

I wasn't planning on running one, right before I bought my tractor my neighbor bought a older little trac hoe so we're good between the both of us. I was curious if the 3203 stood the test of time with the back hoe.

 

[RoyJackson]

I agree and Matt also makes some good points. The first thing I saw in the original photos was that the rear axle is 6 lugs and not 8 like the 3x20 series.

Rob

I dunno, Rob...my 4400 has 6 lug wheels and it handled the 48 backhoe. In fact, after reading your post, I went down and counted the wheel bolts.

 

[JD755]

Not saying anything good or bad about any tractors here, but I have wondered why the 2x20 tractors only have four bolts on the front wheels. Even the smaller 2305 has five bolts.

 

[Rob-D]

I dunno, Rob...my 4400 has 6 lug wheels and it handled the 48 backhoe. In fact, after reading your post, I went down and counted the wheel bolts.

I don't know that answer Roy. As far as I know JD specifically cites the 8 lug wheel in my old brochure as a defining point in robustness and power to the wheels.

Look at the 3PH lift capacity of the 3032e/38e. 1356 lbs, not much more than the 2520.
The 3x20 series is 2200 lbs.

That tells the story, what's the lift capacity of your 4400? I couldn't find the specs on it.
One thing I do know is that the 485 (the second generation of the 48 BH) at 1500 lbs weighs more than the 3032e can lift so the lift system of the 3x20/4x20 with the 485 can't be used on the 3032/3038. I can't see anyway such a large BH could be put on a tractor that light.

At 2175 lbs the 3032 is way to light for the 485 and probably the 375 which comes in around 1000 lbs or a little more. That's almost half the weight of the tractor.
Rob

 

[RoyJackson]

I don't know that answer Roy. As far as I know JD specifically cites the 8 lug wheel in my old brochure as a defining point in robustness and power to the wheels.

The 3PH lift capacity of the 4300 and 4400 is 2200lbs although I'm not sure that's relevent. The rear axle weight rating might be a better indicator.

The 47 backhoe was built for the 4200 through 4400 series (as well as the 4210 through 4410). The 48 backhoes were for the 4300/4310 and 4400/4410.
There was also the 46 for the 4110 (I think) and the 7 for the 770/790 (and others).

It wouldn't surprise me if Deere did "downscale" the 3032 (including the hydraulic capacity) in order to sell more 3120s (that didn't work, did it?) and larger 3x20 series machines. That's just an opinion though.

 

[Rob-D]

The 3PH lift capacity of the 4300 and 4400 is 2200lbs although I'm not sure that's relevent. The rear axle weight rating might be a better indicator.

The 47 backhoe was built for the 4200 through 4400 series (as well as the 4210 through 4410). The 48 backhoes were for the 4300/4310 and 4400/4410.
There was also the 46 for the 4110 (I think) and the 7 for the 770/790 (and others).

It wouldn't surprise me if Deere did "downscale" the 3032 (including the hydraulic capacity) in order to sell more 3120s (that didn't work, did it?) and larger 3x20 series machines. That's just an opinion though.

I think it's more than down scaling. Lower hydro power means smaller pumps, less need for a beefier frame, lighter 3PH parts, etc. It's bucks, that's why the 3x20 series with things like a 3 speed ehydro cost more.
Rob

 

[RoyJackson]

I think it's more than down scaling. Lower hydro power means smaller pumps, less need for a beefier frame, lighter 3PH parts, etc. It's bucks, that's why the 3x20 series with things like a 3 speed ehydro cost more.
Rob

Could be, Rob...just stated an opinion there...

 

[swampercj]

Ionly thought the differance was in the rearend, it being a lighter weight one