Took a look at the 4020 series today...

fastpat · Sep 17, 2005

To see what the actual machine looks and feels like:

I'm 6'1" and about 240lbs. to give perspective. This is a nice size, compact yet no feel of being a lawn tractor. There was a 3020 series to view, but it's clearly much smaller. With the slope of the terrain on our land, I don't think that smaller than a 4020 series fill our needs.

Unfortunately, there was no 5025 series with which to compare, so I'll have to wait until the dealer gets one in, or visit another dealer.

Another shot of the dealers yard, there was a new 2305 there, definitely a sub-CUT. That's it just to the right of the 4320, viewing the back of both tractors.
pic 2 pic 3

(wide in-line images changed to links)

beenthere · Sep 17, 2005

Hopefully the moderators can fix these pics for us. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

fastpat · Sep 17, 2005

What appears to be wrong with them on your computer? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Deere3120 · Sep 17, 2005

I see nothing wrong at all, Looks good to me. Nice tractors. I'm getting the 3720 with 300cx and 448 hoe in October. 4320 to much money for me /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif. I only have small area to maintain.

fastpat · Sep 17, 2005

There's a 3320 in the bottom photo, last one in the row on the left going away from the camera. I really should have taken more photos of the rest of the models while I was there, sorry about that.

The 3020 series isn't too much smaller than the 4020 series, 3.5 inches shorter wheel base, and about 800 pounds lighter.

jcmseven · Sep 18, 2005

Pat,

You may have read my recent posts about the 4520 I just bought. I do not consider myself well-learned by any stretch on this machine (or anything for that matter) but I just traded in a 3720--the top of the 3020 chain, for this tractor. My thoughts are this, based on a whopping four hours on the machine (and about 90 on the 3720): You are correct about the size, the difference in appearance is mostly due to the height and width, not the length. So far, there is no place my 3720 would fit that my 4520 cannot. I also feel the stability is better as the machines are heavier and wider. Some have expressed concern about ground compaction with the larger machine, say when mowing, but in my one hour mowing this weekend, I can see no difference. Both machines will compress grass if it is wet, but neither badly when dry. On hills the 4020's are much more stable. I would also say that they are pretty manuverable. My 3720 steered a bit tighter, but not by a lot. As far as engine power goes, I have been impressed by the PowerTech JD engine. I would say the 3720 would FEEL more zippy than a 4320 or 4120 because of its power/weight ratio, which is more noticeable with a hydro, but the 4520 and 4720 I think are more potent engine-wise than any of the mid frames. To give you a quick example: my 4310 I traded for the 3720 would climb the paved road in front of my home in "c" range at 15.5 mph, until I hit the 17% grade right in front of my home, where it would drop to 7 mph, with LoadMatch on. My 3720 would go 16.5, and drop to 12 mph with LoadMatch on the same hill (both with a loader and 60" box blade. The 4520 15.5 mph and 15 mph with or without loadmatch, that with a heavier loader and 72" boxblade. Similar impressions have been noted when boxblading and doing lower speed work, where the torque difference between the two is noticeable, even by the "seat of the pants". My thoughts, if YOU CAN, go with the large frame, but I was thoroughly pleased with my 3720, and I feel all in the mid frame line are good (except the 3120 may be a bit short on power). The biggest difference I have noted so far is the stability and low end torque (and the ride).

John M