B3350SU vs L3301 vs L3901

[stonewallfarm]

I am a new member of this site, and I'm in the market for a tractor.

I have a rocky, hilly 2.5 acre field to care for (either brush hog a couple times a year or grade so I can use my zero turn up there too), 8 acres of woods to pull firewood out of, and a lot of old stone walls that have fallen over the last 2 centuries, that I'd like to rebuild. In the future, I'd like to do small scale farming in the field... probably hops. For now, I plan to get a brush hog, loader and bucket, possibly a box blade.

I'm looking at the tractors listed in the title.
After rebates, the B3350su vs. L3301 are about the same price with the B about 500 bucks cheaper.
The B has a longer wheel base, higher ground clearance, tighter turning radius, and larger loader/TPO lift capacity.
The L is 900 pounds heavier and has a bigger operator platform and larger frame.

I plan to drive them in a couple weeks, so that may be all I need to make a decision.

Not having done much tractor work, I'm wondering if the larger frame/build of the L makes up for the more appealing "numbers" on the B. And will one be unable to utilize all that lift capacity on the B because it's too light?

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

"All that lift capacity".... Bah!

I've got a B3300 with non-loaded tires and usually either the BH77 mounted or an 800 lbs concrete counter weight and wish the 504 loader was much more robust. With the 60" bucket, I can't pickup a full bucket of wet gravel. Personally, while I love the tractor, the loader is it's weak point.

$500 is a negligible difference when you are looking at a many thousands of dollars of a purchase

 

[s219]

You are right that the L is going to be more of a workhorse because of the weight and heavier frame. There is often overlap between model ranges, and for some people the largest B might make sense to stick with the smaller/lighter model series, while for others it makes sense to move into the entry level L model to get something bigger and heavier. Despite the overlap in dimensions, you'll find the L feels a lot bigger than the B. Really, you can go in whatever direction makes more sense for the work at hand. For what you describe, I'd say that's probably the L.

 

[chim]

Three years ago I considered three similar models. I think the model designations were B3300SU, L3200 and L3800 at that time. The B3300SU reminded me too much of the B7500 that I wanted to replace with something beefier. The 5HP difference between the L3200 and L3800 wasn't worth the difference in price to me. The capabilities of the L3200 are more than sufficient for anything I'll be running into. The B7500 it replaced was satisfactory most of the time for our use. There were a number of times I wanted more weigh and HP, so when I had a chance to get a new pre-Tier 4 I made the move.

 

[stonewallfarm]

...There were a number of times I wanted more weigh and HP...

Thank y'all for the feedback! When you were on your L, did you ever have a desire for less weight and horsepower?

Do the new tier 4 emissions requirements make the new tractors less desirable? The motors are more complicated (more can go wrong), they have not stood the test of time, they are more expensive, etc. On the other hand, some of that exhaust is going back into your lungs depending on the wind.

On paper it looks like the 3301 and 3901 are the exact same tractor with the same motor and everything! Is the only difference the way the motor is chipped to run, or are there other upgrades for $2000? The extra horses are likely worth the price, I admit. But it seems like the 3301 motor was electronically "handicapped" to cover a broader market with fewer novel motors to build and repair. If this is true, does this steer people toward the 33 or the 39?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

 

[mddorange]

:welcome:
To TNM Stonewallfarm.
When I went to the dealer, I was thinking about a "B" but with my requirements he said I wouldn't be happy with it. Thank goodness I listened. NO, I have never wished for less, but there have been many times I wish I had gone with the L4600.

 

[chim]

Thank y'all for the feedback! When you were on your L, did you ever have a desire for less weight and horsepower? .....................

Nope. This is the ideal tractor for me. Much beefier construction than my B7500 had. The weight is matched to the (R4) tire size, so as I mentioned in another post the L is easier on the yard where the creek swallows it a few times each year. When the water goes down I can mow sooner and leave fewer marks. I don't find myself wishing for more power. The horsepower is sufficient to run a 6' RFM in HI range.

 

[TheWedge]

I currently have the L3301 and previous to it I had the B3200. Because most of the work I do uses ground engaging implements, I was never hp limited but rather weight (always spinning the tires - I had loaded rears and most of the bh attached). That is the primary reason I upgraded to the L. No real difference in hp but start moving dirt either in front or in back and you will see a notable difference in performance.

 

[stonewallfarm]

I went to the dealer today to drive both tractors, and I liked both of them. The B felt fast and agile, but I really liked the extra weight of the L as well as the wider stance in the front. Neither had loaded tires or any weight on the back. The L felt much more stable handling a bucket full of dirt, and it dug deeper before spinning the wheels as TheWedge mentioned above. The tractors are not dissimilar in overall size or HP, but they handle very differently. The 3 point hitch is also slightly different. I'm going with the L rather than the B based on weight, build, and wider stance; and I've selected the 3301 over the 3901 b/c the only difference appears to be 4 hp for 2000. I'd rather buy some implements with the money.

Speaking of implements, I'm getting a 60' rotary cutter, LA524 loader with bucket, and a box scraper. My question for the community is whether it is worth the extra 550 or so to get a quick attach bucket over the pin on bucket. I do not currently anticipate getting palate forks or a grapple bucket or blades in the future, but one never knows the future, and it may increase the appeal of the tractor to a future buyer if I need to sell at some point. Is it advisable to go ahead and get this feature up front even if I don't anticipate ever taking the bucket off? Is there any functional downside to the quick attach? Can it be easily added down the line if I do end up with other loader attachments?

 

[k0ua]

I went to the dealer today to drive both tractors, and I liked both of them. The B felt fast and agile, but I really liked the extra weight of the L as well as the wider stance in the front. Neither had loaded tires or any weight on the back. The L felt much more stable handling a bucket full of dirt, and it dug deeper before spinning the wheels as TheWedge mentioned above. The tractors are not dissimilar in overall size or HP, but they handle very differently. The 3 point hitch is also slightly different. I'm going with the L rather than the B based on weight, build, and wider stance; and I've selected the 3301 over the 3901 b/c the only difference appears to be 4 hp for 2000. I'd rather buy some implements with the money.

Speaking of implements, I'm getting a 60' rotary cutter, LA524 loader with bucket, and a box scraper. My question for the community is whether it is worth the extra 550 or so to get a quick attach bucket over the pin on bucket. I do not currently anticipate getting palate forks or a grapple bucket or blades in the future, but one never knows the future, and it may increase the appeal of the tractor to a future buyer if I need to sell at some point. Is it advisable to go ahead and get this feature up front even if I don't anticipate ever taking the bucket off? Is there any functional downside to the quick attach? Can it be easily added down the line if I do end up with other loader attachments?

I urge you in the strongest possible terms to get the SSQA..

I put it on later... follow my journey if you like.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...ng-pin.html?highlight=so+you+think+converting

I know... I know.. you don't want any forks,, don't want no grapple.... now... but you will.. you will.. Besides, just removing the bucket. (in a few seconds) is sometimes helpful in mowing instead of taking the time to remove the entire loader. You can live an learn, or you can learn from the mistakes of others...

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

Yes, get the QA bucket for exactly the reasons kOua said. I've got their pin on QA as it only added $150 compared to $800 when I purchased but for $500 I'd go with the SSQA

 

[bumperm]

SSQA for sure. I have it on my B3350, and for now all I use it on is bucket, pallet forks (you'll be amazed at how handy they are - there have been whole threads on different uses and it's all true.

I purchased a spare Quick Attach plate to which I welded a couple of 2 X 4 rectangular tubes. It works sort of like pallet forks to pick up a 500 lb man lift to conveniently move it around. The man lift has a platform that goes up to 24' high (working height 30'). Problem with the man lift's built in wheels is it would only roll or handle conveniently on almost level smooth hard surfaces (i.e. concrete). Being able to move it with the tractor is quite useful as it can traverse soft ground.

 

[s219]

I went to the dealer today to drive both tractors, and I liked both of them. The B felt fast and agile, but I really liked the extra weight of the L as well as the wider stance in the front. Neither had loaded tires or any weight on the back. The L felt much more stable handling a bucket full of dirt, and it dug deeper before spinning the wheels as TheWedge mentioned above. The tractors are not dissimilar in overall size or HP, but they handle very differently. The 3 point hitch is also slightly different. I'm going with the L rather than the B based on weight, build, and wider stance; and I've selected the 3301 over the 3901 b/c the only difference appears to be 4 hp for 2000. I'd rather buy some implements with the money.

Speaking of implements, I'm getting a 60' rotary cutter, LA524 loader with bucket, and a box scraper. My question for the community is whether it is worth the extra 550 or so to get a quick attach bucket over the pin on bucket. I do not currently anticipate getting palate forks or a grapple bucket or blades in the future, but one never knows the future, and it may increase the appeal of the tractor to a future buyer if I need to sell at some point. Is it advisable to go ahead and get this feature up front even if I don't anticipate ever taking the bucket off? Is there any functional downside to the quick attach? Can it be easily added down the line if I do end up with other loader attachments?

I skipped the quick attach when I bought my L3200 (previous model) and still haven't really needed the function. However, I have looked into getting it now, and it will definitely cost a lot more *and* I'd have an extra bucket to sell/trade/store/whatever. If you buy it at the time of purchase, you're saving about $500 over doing it later. So maybe the best comparison is to look at it costing $550 now or $1050 later!!

The other option would be to buy the Kubota QA for the FEL and then weld a QA plate on the existing bucket. Due to the way the stock L bucket is reinforced (angle iron across the whole back) that is easier said than done. You would almost need to rig it up with extra pins and plates to make it easily doable, but then it will stick out farther forward.

Anyhow, if you think you might ever want it, get it at the time of purchase. If you really have no foreseeable need, you could skip it, but know that saving $550 now will cost you that $550 and another $500 in the future!

 

[Will_C]

My B2620 does not have a SSQA, but my next tractor will have one. I don't know if it will another B or a L, or even another make-but it will have a SSQA bucket arrangement.

Will

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

I went to the dealer today to drive both tractors, and I liked both of them. The B felt fast and agile, but I really liked the extra weight of the L as well as the wider stance in the front. Neither had loaded tires or any weight on the back. The L felt much more stable handling a bucket full of dirt, and it dug deeper before spinning the wheels as TheWedge mentioned above. The tractors are not dissimilar in overall size or HP, but they handle very differently. The 3 point hitch is also slightly different. I'm going with the L rather than the B based on weight, build, and wider stance; and I've selected the 3301 over the 3901 b/c the only difference appears to be 4 hp for 2000. I'd rather buy some implements with the money.

Speaking of implements, I'm getting a 60' rotary cutter, LA524 loader with bucket, and a box scraper. My question for the community is whether it is worth the extra 550 or so to get a quick attach bucket over the pin on bucket. I do not currently anticipate getting palate forks or a grapple bucket or blades in the future, but one never knows the future, and it may increase the appeal of the tractor to a SSQAfuture buyer if I need to sell at some point. Is it advisable to go ahead and get this feature up front even if I don't anticipate ever taking the bucket off? Is there any functional downside to the quick attach? Can it be easily added down the line if I do end up with other loader attachments?

Yes, yes! Get the SSQA! I just upgraded from a b3300su to a MX4800. Might of lasted a little longer with the B if it had QA.
Also, if there is any chance you want a grapple (extremely useful), get a front 3rd function and finance it. That way it's covered by kubota's finance warranty.

Also, biggest surprise for me was that chains won't fit on most B and smaller L tractors without expensive wheel spacers.
Have fun!

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

Also, biggest surprise for me was that chains won't fit on most B and smaller L tractors without expensive wheel spacers.
Have fun!

That might be a bit too broad of a statement. I know its accurate on the B3300 with the big tire package (have that problem myself) but I'm pretty sure there are many combinations of B or L machines and tires that will accept chains without spacers

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

That might be a bit too broad of a statement. I know its accurate on the B3300 with the big tire package (have that problem myself) but I'm pretty sure there are many combinations of B or L machines and tires that will accept chains without spacers

You may be correct. I only know for sure on the b3300 with R4s. Dealer told me it was problem with other models. Something to check on though. I ended up putting ATV studs in the tires for ice and frozen ground.
Overall I was supper impressed with the tractor. (that goes for the mx4800 too)!

 

[CanuckPT]

You may be correct. I only know for sure on the b3300 with R4s. Dealer told me it was problem with other models. Something to check on though. I ended up putting ATV studs in the tires for ice and frozen ground. Overall I was supper impressed with the tractor. (that goes for the mx4800 too)!

I have some Bro-Tek wheel spacers for my B3300SU & they were a great value!

Bro-Tek

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

I have some Bro-Tek wheel spacers for my B3300SU & they were a great value!

Bro-Tek

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

Nice! The OP probably lives in Florida and is like "ice... Snow... Chains?" Not an option in Northern New Hampshire!

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

I have some Bro-Tek wheel spacers for my B3300SU & they were a great value!

Bro-Tek

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

I'll have to look into that for next winter.

I'd looked at the L also when I was shopping, never did think about chains. I did notice that my B has a much more complete floor which was a consideration for a future cab. Not sure about the newer 01 L series, but on the L3200 and L3800 I really don't like how the tie rod is exposed out in front of the axle. I've managed to pretzel one on the B3300 with its tighter mounting. Pretty sure I'd have taken out more than one on the Ls