3203 vs 3320

JimParker · Oct 1, 2006

Guys,
We finally closed the deal on the purchase of 10.5 acres that is mostly fairly rough pasture, with a couple of gullies that have trees in and around them. The entire thing is gently sloping (less than 10 degrees) with a few areas where it was terraced, and the "berms" from the terracing are more like 20 degrees, so I'm a bit worried about mowing/cutting "across" them - probably go up/down instead. There are several downed trees (up to 18" - big for this part of Texas) that I will need to cut up with a chainsaw and move to the woodpile.

We've got about 600 feet of gravel road/driveway to maintain, and at least 1600 feet of fence to build (including the front gate and one or more cross-fences with gates). We're also planning the construction of a barn and at least one "3-sided shelter" for horses, donkeys, etc. to get out of the summer thunderstorms we have around here.

I'd like to smooth out the pasture somewhat so that we can cut it without jarring the teeth quite so badly... My wife would like to have a garden, and wants me to get a tiller for the tractor - and I was I'm thinking maybe we can rent one for the 2X a year she might want something tilled. Someone said that the tiller would be just the ticket for helping with leveling the pasture - just till in both directions and the ground would more-or-less level itself. Others have said to use the box scraper (scarifiers at full-down, scraper just skimming the ground) to do this leveling. I'm very interested in comments on this, as I'm totally inexperienced with this type of work.

Anyway, here's my dillema. Both the John Deere and New Holland dealers have recommended 25-35 HP tractors for my property. Both state that the 25 HP models would do the job, but that the 30-35 HP models would be quicker, at the expense of maneuverability, weight, etc. I've pretty well settled on a John Deere. I just seem to "fit" better and all the controls fall more readily to hand, though I did like some of the features of the NH TC26DA and TC34DA a lot - especially the swiveling seat. (Also I'd like to stay married to my wife, and she is a Deere fanatic). The question is "Which Deere?"

Right now, the local JD dealership (whom I've dealt with for the past 10 years, with excellent results) has got some pretty decent specials going on that are causing me to re-evaluate a bit. My original thought was to go with the 3120 or 3320. This dealer sells the 3320 with hydro for only $250 more than the 3120, so I would definitely go the 3320 route. The 3320 + 300CX FEL would be $17,995. I can purchase a 7,000 # trailer that would be acceptable for the 3320 for a little less than $2K. I'm guessing the LX5 is around $1K.

The "special" deal (State Fair of Texas) is a 3203 package (3203 + 300 FEL + LX5 + trailer = $17,995). I know that the tractor itself would be just fine for me, but there are some trade-offs.

I think resale on the 3320 would be better. I really like the option to get the air-suspension seat on the 3320 - not available on the 3203 (I'm a pretty big guy). The dealer said you can get the high-back seat for the 3203, but that it costs a lot of money (this from the guy who thinks $3,300 for the 300CX is "cheap"!) - I'm afraid it may be close to 1K between parts and labor to get it installed. I'm also a bit leery of the 300 loader's limited weight-lifting capability (it's less than half that of the 300CX!), and the automotive-type cruise control would be nice when cutting the longer stretches. The 3320 hits the "magic" 25 HP (PTO) mark for some of the heavier-duty implements, including MX5 cutter, larger tillers, etc. where the 3204 falls just under the cutoff (24 HP). The lack of folding ROPS on the 3203 may or may not prove to be an issue - I'd hate to have to spend extra money to buy taller-than normal doors just to allow the tractor in the garage...

On the other hand, the 3203 weighs 200# less, and I assume the 300 FEL would also weigh less than the 300CX, both of which would help with trailering. This is only an issue until we get the barn/storage building built on the property - until then I will have to trailer back and forth approximately 20 miles on relatively level back roads. My 1/2 ton truck with trailering package is rated for 6,900 lbs max trailer weight.

So my total would be around $21K for the 3320 versus $18K for the 3203.

I will also need a box blade, but don't mind if it's "odd colored"

And of course, there's the whole "tiller" question. Sheesh, it adds up in a hurry!

Am I missing anything I should be thinking about in making this decision? Thanks a bunch!

Superduper · Oct 1, 2006

I also pondered the 3203 and 3x20 question but if it was me, I would go with the 3x20 tractor over the 3203 tractor without hesitation. $3k is nothing to sneeze at, and the machines look quite similar at first glance, but the capabilities and expansion potential are quite different. The loader is quite limited, as you've already gathered. It does appear that you've compared the tractors quite thoroughly so it all boils down to how willing you are to part with it for the difference between the two configurations.

So I'll point out the biggest differences that I'm aware of. The 3203 tractor has a little less hydraulic capacity, it's hydraulics limited to front end loader and mid mower applications. Power Beyond is an option on the 3x20 tractor, it is not with the 3203. Third Selective Control Valve is an option on the 3x20, it is not on the 3203. An hydraulic diverter valve is available on the 3x20 tractor which provides two more remotes on the rear, Deere's website shows that it is not available on the 3203. Therefore, a total of 3 possible remotes are available in addition to optionable Power Beyond with the 3x20, not so on the 3203. Needless to say, the top and tilt kit will only work when you have a minimum of 2 optional remotes at the rear, and a rear backhoe is not an option on the 3203 due to lack of power beyond. Since you are already purchasing an 18k machine, it may be of value to you to purchase one with the hydraulics befitting a machine of this size. Remember, your rear implements would be limited to non-hydraulic varieties with the 3203. I also did not think I would want or need the rear remotes. After making my purchase, I was wrong. Thank goodness I purchased the correct tractor and have the ability to upgrade. I did get the 3rd SCV but even that is not enough. I am now looking at options for upgrading to additional rear remotes. If I had purchased the 3203 instead, I would be very unhappy with the inability to implement hydraulic accessories and have an $18k machine that can't do the job I want. The whole point of paying through the nose is to make life easier.

orlo · Oct 1, 2006

Jim:

I have had a 2305 for a little over a year and just bought a 3320 about 2 months ago. A LX5 will run you about $1500 retail.

I looked at the 3203 (Prior to getting the 3320) also but the off for me was no mid pto since I wanted to put the 72" MMM finish mower on it. Also the 3303 only comes with a TWO range tranny instead of the THREE range tranny of the 3x20 series.

The mid PTO itself will add a lot to the resale value of the tractor (Not sure if your price included it but you'll get back much more than the $300-400 it costs when you sell it). I guess a front mount snow blower would be out for you in Texas but that's another mid-pto only item. If I didn't need a mid-pto I think I would have gotten the 990 just about without question. A bargain with a ton of HP. In my case ironically the deal lent me an 84" rear finish mower until my 72" MMM came in. After seeing how well that worked I might have re-considered the 990 (everyone talks about the lack of maneuverability on Rear mowers but on my lot it worked fine).

Comparing the E-Hydro to the mechanical hydro (Aside from cruise control)
(2305 vs 3320) I have to say I actually prefer the 'feel' of the mechanical hydro better.

The 300CX loader has almost twice the capacity of the 300 loader. Both take HD buckets and loader mounted blades, etc.

Also, the Air seat isn't standard. The normal spring seat on the 3320 is pretty comfy though. The seat is a little taller than I'd like (I'm a 'big and short' kind of guy at about 220

. I find the seat bouncy (comfy but makes it hard to keep my foot steady on the e-hydro).

Anyway, tough decision. I don't think you could go wrong either way but the 3320 I think is a little more flexible and refined.

Key Points:
o 3 range tranny on 3320 vs 2 range tranny on 3203
o Nicer seat, Folding Rops, more gizmos, etc. on 3320
o Mid PTO optional on 3320
o Larger (75amp) on 3320 vs 40amp std on 3320 (Doesn't make sense but web-site states this).

jcmseven · Oct 1, 2006

I would not even consider the 3203 for this type of work. Go with the 3320 and do not look back. It is a great machine. I am not against the 3203, but it really is a price point machine that can allow some that could not go the 3020 route to get into a mid frame, but to me, the 3320 and such needs a three range transmission, and the 3203 does not have one. Also, the ehydro alone is well-worth the money, and that is not the only advantage.

John M

browns40 · Oct 2, 2006

Hi Jim,

These guys bring up a lot of good points...

If a person has, and will only ever have a handful of dedicated tasks for a tractor then the 3203 is a great, cost effective route to get size, HP, and hydro... it does not have the same potential for work that the 3x20 does in that it is limited to lighter non hydraulic equipment in the back and no mid mount options.

For the extra cost, I would get the most machine you can justify the expense of/reasonably afford, and not have questions down the road of what you could have done.

JDFANATIC · Oct 2, 2006

Superduper said:
IThe 3203 tractor has a little less hydraulic capacity, it's hydraulics limited to front end loader and mid mower applications.

There is no mid-mount option for the 3203. Another disadvantage is that the 3PH has no position control.

rockyridgefarm · Oct 2, 2006

Which one is your wife more likely to operate? The 3320. So all reason suggests that the 3203 will be much better, as you will actually get to use it. Trust me. My wife stole mine and now all I get to do is change attachments for her. Maybe you should get a 990....

OK all kidding aside, get the TWENTY!!!!!!

Superduper · Oct 3, 2006

JDFANATIC said:
There is no mid-mount option for the 3203. Another disadvantage is that the 3PH has no position control.

Quite right! I knew there was a good reason I decided against the 3203.

JimParker · Oct 3, 2006

OK - you guys have convinced me to do what my "gut" told me anyway - go with the 3320.

Now I seriously doubt that I'll ever have the bucks to add a backhoe to the 3320, but I might someday want to add some other implements that might use hydraulics in the rear. What are the advantages of the Power Beyond versus a 3rd SCV or a 4th/5th SCV add-on?

I'm thinking I'll get the automotive-type cruise control and at least the 3rd SCV, but likely no mid-PTO (no snow here to speak of, and I don't think I'll use a belly mower (have a JD LX178 for the close-in stuff). The air seat is definitely on the list. I'll probably add a tooth bar to the FEL, and go with the HD bucket (just because). And of course, the I-Match. Anything else I should be deciding on now?

In all seriousness, thanks to all of the TBN members, for all the insights, suggestions, and other contributions on this thread and many others I've read over the past few months. You've really made a difference for me!

JasonMac · Oct 3, 2006

I agree, go with the 3320. That way if you ever decide that you may want to sell, now you have something that most people want, over the 3203 model. The one thing I wish I had that comes on the 3203 is the mechanical Hydro pedals. Sure I love the idea of "Loadmatch", but after having mechanical and Electronic pedals, I still prefer the mechanical... I definatly had real hyraulic feedback on the older style mechanical pedals. Because there is no feeling or feedback with the electronic pedals, I notice my tires spin a lot more while digging into a pile.