Questions for 3320 owners

[Folio]

I'm getting close to pulling the trigger on this tractor (upgrading from a 3032E), but have a couple concerns I'm hoping you can help with. First, it requires 2600 RPMs to drive the PTO while the 3032E needs 2500 to do the same job. Does this imply the 3320 is underpowered? Did about four hours of brush hogging with a 3320 demo and had a devil of a time keeping the RPMs at 2600. Then again, I was operating in low range and did not think to try the B range gear. Did not have a chance to try the box blade or FEL when my power requirements are at their peak. (The 3032E does bog down with a full box blade and/or a bucket full of crushed granite.) Would like to know what your experience has been.

Second issue: the model I field tested had 15.00-19.5 R4 tires with a stance of only 57.3 inches, according to the specs. Not only did the machine look top heavy to my eye, it also felt very tipsy on even moderate slopes where I've had no discomfort on the 3032E. Can you shed any light on your experience with this observation and/or corrections/adjustments you've made?

Has this model served your needs? Any pros/cons would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

[charleyfarmall]

I had a 3320 with a power reverser until recently. It did everything I asked of it and more. I just needed more tractor so I went to a 4520.
The 3320 has a different engine and different torque curve than the 3032. 100 rpms more does not mean it is under powered.
There is nothing like a box blade to bog down a tractor. I had mine on the 4520 the other day and yes I dug down enough with a 6' box blade to bog down the tractor. It requires practice/ experience which you learn while doing....

The operator sits higher on the 3320 because it has a flat floor so it feels much more top heavy than it really is. Many people, including myself, used after market wheel spacers to widen the track. I did it for loader work. Deere doesn't support them but they certainly increase the stability of the tractor and I would not hesitate to use them unless I was putting a backhoe on. Do a search there is lot's of discussion about it, good and bad.

Now, why do you want R4's? They are a general purpose one size fits nothing tire for most property owners. How much do you really need that tread and stiff tire? For most people the R3 Turf tire would be a better choice even though the PERCEIVED traction would be less. I have certainly filled R4's with mud and made them a useless slick. R3's are very good, especially in snow, and they are easier on the lawn too. They actually provide very good traction. Now, if you don't care about the lawn, get R1's. They have maximum traction and adjustability for width. Compare the width of all 3 tires and think critically about it.

I really like the 3320 as an all around utility machine.

 

[foggy1111]

I've got a 3320 and operate a good number of implements with mine. I've never wanted for more power when operating my 5' rotary cutter....but I may not have the heaviest grasses either. THe hydro tranny on mine and load match allow perfect blend of power with loader, ground engagement and PTO implements...IMO. THe only place I have wanted for more power is with my stump grinder - not that it doesnt work well....just that more power allows a faster feed with a grinder. I can see a need for more power if you need a snow blower or heavy PTO work....but I'm satisified with power.

I hear a few folks that feel tippy on the 3320. I have fairly flat land and have not had any issues....nor feel very tippy. I do have fluid in my rear tires and keep ballast on the rear....and leave my loader on the tractor at all times. I reversed my rear wheels to get a 59" width. I have 5 foot implements....so the width works for me. I simply dont see a problem with tippyness on my mostly flat land....but can envision a concern for some folks.

I'd buy my 3320 again....it's a great size / power tractor for my purposes.

 

[Cocre]

2600 RPM is not a magic number for the 3320 PTO. If my PTO is not running 540 RPM the brush hog and the tiller may not be performing at their MAX, but they are not like a PTO generator that may need the 540 to operate properly. Run it at the speed that works for you.

In some situations my 3320 does not handle a box blade as well as my 8N. Trying to drag load of wet sand out of a steep sided collection basin will cause the Deere to either bog or spin. I contribute most of that to the R4 tires. The 8N just raises its front-end off the ground, the Ag tires dig in, and I steer with the brakes; the dirt comes out. I can actually do a better job with the Deere in a situation like that than the 8N. I go in face first with the differential locked and scoop up a huge FEL bucket of the sand, and back right out. I should make a GoPro video of the Deere doing this, it is pretty amazing. Oh, and I have had to use the 3320 to pull the 8N out of a bog, never the opposite.

The 3320 does feel and look tipsy. I live on very unlevel ground and at times have felt very uncomfortable. Loading the rear tires has really helped, but I remain cautious. I recommend caution with any tractor in those circumstances.

I love my 3320. It is a better tractor than I ever imagined. I wholeheartedly recommend it.

 

[msmud]

Here are the engine differences between the 3032 and 3320 machines. The engines are the same except for the tuning. The 3320 produces 61.6 ft-lbs operating torque at 2600 rpm, with peak torque of 73.9 at 1560 rpm, with a torque rise of about 1.2 ft-lbs per 100 rpm drop under load. The 3032 produces 62.7 ft-lbs operating torque at 2500, with peak torque at 1680 rpm of 80 ft-lbs for a torque rise of about 2.1 ft-lbs per 100 rpm drop under load. The differences here aren't huge but it means the 3032e resists loads better at operating rpm and when rpms fall under load, say when you're cutting heavy grass. When you add 900# weight for the base 3320 or more than 1500# for the cabbed 3320 (not to mention A/C power losses), it becomes more apparent why the 3320's power may seem a bit lacking.

Folio, I would trust your experience cutting with the 3320 and finding it hard to keep the rpms at 2600. That is exactly my experience on my mom's cabbed 3320, something that just doesn't happen much on my 3038e even with a larger bushhog. The 3038e/3032e is also much more stable than her tractor on slopes. If I traded my 3038e in on a 3x20 series--and I wouldn't, I'd get a 4120 for its stability--the minimum power level I'd consider would be the 3520. After spending a fair amount of time on the 3320 cab model, I can certainly understand from a power standpoint why so many forum members get the 3720. But then, since the 3720 costs almost as much as the 4120, I am left with asking myself why one should put up with the stability limitations of the 3720.

 

[Folio]

Very useful/helpful information guys. Thanks so much. In light of your experience and advice and my own review of the specs, I doubt I would be getting much improvement in performance with the 3320, if any, over what I have now. I would be getting considerably greater operating comfort. Is that enough to justify the cost? Dunno. Think I'll hold off a bit and reconsider my options. Really appreciate you help . . .

 

[msmud]

Folio,
This may be a bit more detailed of an answer than you want about the engines but I thought I would provide a practical real world example. The other day I was bushhogging for my mom on her cab 3320. Engine speed was 2600 rpm but it was routinely dropping 300 rpm to 2300 with the cutting load. Was in B range. Now, what this really means is that the base engine torque of 61.7 ft-lbs was not enough for the load and the drop in engine rpm added (2600-2300=300) x 1.2 ft-lb torque rise /100 rpm drop to achieve a final engine torque of around 65 ft-lbs to handle the grass with her 5 foot bushhog. Of course, I could have gone slower in her machine but I wasn't going that fast as it was.

In the 3032e, the amount of drop would have been only about 100 - 150 rpm because of the greater base operating torque and higher torque rise under load. Same engine, tuned for peak hp production at lower operating rpm. In the 3038e/3520/3720/4120 etc there would have been no drop in rpm at the same ground speed since each produces more operating torque than 65 ft-lbs.