Capabilities of a 2520
- Thread starter TomWhite
- Start date
- Views: 4651
I suppose the $1,500.00 difference in price (on the Deere web site) is part of it, but the other part is that the dealer has the 2520 in stock with a decent package price of $16,800.00 for it and a loader. That is the tag that is on the tractor, before any serious negotiating. I don't know (yet) how he would package a tractor that he would have to order in.
If you can believe the Deere web site price of $15,729.00 for the 2520, then the dealers price to add on the loader is only about a thousand more. I don't think that is a bad starting point.
This dealer is about 20 miles away, with the next closest dealer about 40 miles away. They are both owned by the same people.
I see your rationale, Tom. All things being equal, I would opt for the 2720 for $1500, BUT all things are NOT equal with your local dealer having a 2520 in stock and ready for use!!
As I already HAVE the 2520, there is NO WAY that I would consider going to a 2720 as I simply am unable to find any difference major enough to cause me to lay out the bucks. A little more power, etc., but I find that my 2520 has power for everything I use it for: Snowblower works incredibly well; 5' back blade, 6' landscape rake, 5' rotary cutter (JD, and DO make sure you have weight on the front - either the loader or some 'suitcase' weights as JD calls them); and the JD rotiller, which absolutely pulverizes a planting bed, even one that has been in grass and weeds for several years (though I will usually do two passes over those to get the growth churned up and thoroughly incorporated).
I would suggest loaded tires (I have R4s). Chains are VERY useful in the snow, especially if you have hills. The difference is tremendous, as opposed to "adequate" with just the loaded R4s. I just got in from dealing with 8" of new snow with my back blade. Loader won't come off (and s'blower ON) until after deer season here, as I use the tractor to tote the critters up from the woods and to my barn for processing.
The move from the 2210 to the bigger tire etc. 2520 was MAJOR. The extra clearance of the 2520 - and the additional power - made this size a real deal for my usage.
As I already HAVE the 2520, there is NO WAY that I would consider going to a 2720 as I simply am unable to find any difference major enough to cause me to lay out the bucks. A little more power, etc., but I find that my 2520 has power for everything I use it for: Snowblower works incredibly well; 5' back blade, 6' landscape rake, 5' rotary cutter (JD, and DO make sure you have weight on the front - either the loader or some 'suitcase' weights as JD calls them); and the JD rotiller, which absolutely pulverizes a planting bed, even one that has been in grass and weeds for several years (though I will usually do two passes over those to get the growth churned up and thoroughly incorporated).
I would suggest loaded tires (I have R4s). Chains are VERY useful in the snow, especially if you have hills. The difference is tremendous, as opposed to "adequate" with just the loaded R4s. I just got in from dealing with 8" of new snow with my back blade. Loader won't come off (and s'blower ON) until after deer season here, as I use the tractor to tote the critters up from the woods and to my barn for processing.
The move from the 2210 to the bigger tire etc. 2520 was MAJOR. The extra clearance of the 2520 - and the additional power - made this size a real deal for my usage.
Matt Heath
New member
A 2520 can certainly handle a 5' rotary cutter. I run my 5' Deere rotary cutter on my 2320 with no problems. Well, I haven't tried backing up the hill yet, but on the flats no problem.
Matt
Matt
Being off on Sunday, and being bored, I decided to take a bit of a self guided "tour" of various Deere dealer lots in about a 50 mile radius of my home. I finally got a chance to see, first hand, the differences between the various 2000 & 3000 series tractors available.
Got to tell you, it was an eye opener. At least for me, it was.
First, a bit of a disclaimer. With what I am going to say here about the different models, I mean absolutely no disparagement to any model Deere tractor, or their owners. Each model has its own intended design, and uses, and each person's need will vary greatly from the needs of the next person. So, when I give my impressions, don't get offended.
Also, remember, this was a Sunday, so I did not get to drive any of these machines. That will come, hopefully, this week.
First the 2000 series. Man, these are small. I can understand why Deere has had to come up with newly designed lift arms on the three point. I had taken along a measuring tape, and was glad I did. You can get dimensions on the Deere website for outer width, but what they don't give is the inner width, or distance between the rear tires - inside tread to inside tread. I measured this at 25 inches, with the distance inside wall to inside wall at 21 inches. Tiny, no doubt. I guess if you wanted to outfit this with a belly mower and use it as a lawn mower that looks more like a tractor, this would be something to look at. The seating was also very cramped, for me. I'm 5'11" and about 200lbs. It is just not enough machine for my needs.
Now to the 3000 series. Much more to my liking, size wise. Comfortable to sit on with controls that either were where they should be, or could be gotten used to easily. You can easily see how much of your money is going for style over substance when you compare the more basic tractors to the "curved hood" series.
For my needs, which include brush cutting, maintaining fields and plowing snow from a long gravel driveway, the 3000 series fits the bill nicely.
For the price, I really like the new 3032E. No, it is not as sleek looking as the 3120 or up tractors, but I really like what I saw. For the difference in price, I can live with a more squared style. Heck, my current tractor is a New Holland TC30, so I'm used to that already.
This tractor is put together for working, not for showing. The only thing I did not like is that the loader is not fully removable. You can only remove the bucket. That gives me a bit of pause. Oh, the hood might feel a bit flimsy when you open it, but not bad, really. Just being a bit picky there.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts on the two series of tractors. I will likely be calling the Dealer for a test drive of the 3032E this week. We'll see if that reinforces my thoughts on that machine, or not.
Got to tell you, it was an eye opener. At least for me, it was.
First, a bit of a disclaimer. With what I am going to say here about the different models, I mean absolutely no disparagement to any model Deere tractor, or their owners. Each model has its own intended design, and uses, and each person's need will vary greatly from the needs of the next person. So, when I give my impressions, don't get offended.
Also, remember, this was a Sunday, so I did not get to drive any of these machines. That will come, hopefully, this week.
First the 2000 series. Man, these are small. I can understand why Deere has had to come up with newly designed lift arms on the three point. I had taken along a measuring tape, and was glad I did. You can get dimensions on the Deere website for outer width, but what they don't give is the inner width, or distance between the rear tires - inside tread to inside tread. I measured this at 25 inches, with the distance inside wall to inside wall at 21 inches. Tiny, no doubt. I guess if you wanted to outfit this with a belly mower and use it as a lawn mower that looks more like a tractor, this would be something to look at. The seating was also very cramped, for me. I'm 5'11" and about 200lbs. It is just not enough machine for my needs.
Now to the 3000 series. Much more to my liking, size wise. Comfortable to sit on with controls that either were where they should be, or could be gotten used to easily. You can easily see how much of your money is going for style over substance when you compare the more basic tractors to the "curved hood" series.
For my needs, which include brush cutting, maintaining fields and plowing snow from a long gravel driveway, the 3000 series fits the bill nicely.
For the price, I really like the new 3032E. No, it is not as sleek looking as the 3120 or up tractors, but I really like what I saw. For the difference in price, I can live with a more squared style. Heck, my current tractor is a New Holland TC30, so I'm used to that already.
This tractor is put together for working, not for showing. The only thing I did not like is that the loader is not fully removable. You can only remove the bucket. That gives me a bit of pause. Oh, the hood might feel a bit flimsy when you open it, but not bad, really. Just being a bit picky there.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts on the two series of tractors. I will likely be calling the Dealer for a test drive of the 3032E this week. We'll see if that reinforces my thoughts on that machine, or not.
WH401
Platinum Member
Tom, when I was searching for tractors a few months ago, I came to the same realization that you did. The 2520 is a nice tractor IMO, but it was too small for my needs. If I just needed something to cut the grass I would have definately gotten one. I don't mean that as it is only good for that though, it just to me, would be more suited for that. But I needed something with more size, power, and lift capacity so thats why I ended up with the 3320. Also I really didn't want a hydrostatic trans, I like to be able to run around with the RPMs low. The 3320 was the highest horsepower tractor, with the best lift capacity at the lowest price, that was mated to a manual trans.
Did you not find that the HST transmission was better for loader work? I've not had a loader, but have read so many people say that. I'm curious as to your thoughts about it.
WH401
Platinum Member
If you plan to do alot of loader work than an HST will be the quickest thing for that. But the PowrReverser transmission isn't far off from an HST. On the PR, you get a lever on the left side of the dash next to the steering wheel that you flip forward or reverse, to go in which ever direction you want. No clutching and no waiting, just drive in to your pile, flip the lever to reverse and you back on out.
I have driven HST transmissions and there nice, but I like the most power to the ground and being able to run around at a low RPM, usually 1500. HST's need to be run at a higher RPM, say 2000, so that the fluid pumps efficiently for them to perform properly.
The only loader I have had before this one is on an IH 340, with a regular gear mesh transmission. It never bothered me always having to clutch to go between F & R, but I got the 3320 more for mowing the grass anyway. The ability for easier and quicker loader work was like an added bonus
.