3540 vs 4530

[tbzep]

I posted for help in the general buying/pricing subforum before noticing the Mahindra specific one.
http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/buying-pricing-comparisons/347012-mahindra-3540-vs-4530-a.html

As noted in the above thread, there seems to be several pluses for the 3540 over the 4530 such as a low fuel tank for fueling with gas cans, larger AG tires, etc. The 4530 has some weight advantage according to the dealer, but the Mahindra website lists 4,367 lbs for all the utility tractors, so I don't know how much. It has about a $1500 price advantage also. Can you folks help me with other pluses and minuses to help me make a better decision? Also, are there other models in the same range that might be a better decision? I've read a few posts here and there about the 4530, but the 3540 doesn't have much written about it except for cut-n-paste stuff from the Mahindra website.

 

[DavesTractor]

The 3540 would be a good size deluxe version of a compact tractor. The 4530 is a low HP full size utility tractor. It is bigger and heavier and a little simpler. They are apples and oranges. I'd suggest you drive both, people quickly gravitate to one or the other as soon as they sit on one and drive them. We never know which way they will go, but almost always one is perceived as the clear winner.

If you have hilly terrain, I don't really like the 4530 (now called 5545) brakes. They can be a little grabby and not super powerful. If you go up to the 5555 (old 5530), you get wet brakes and a much heavier front axle. The 3540 has wet brakes, and they are pretty good. The 4530/5545 is more old school and handles heavy chores easily, but also has a larger turning radius and I think it is less comfortable to operate.

Certainly test drive one of each. I hope this helps.

 

[tbzep]

I talked with another dealer yesterday over the phone about the 3540. He said they don't carry the 35 series because they have "problems", but he had plenty of 25 series models. I searched last night and didn't notice anything unusual about the 35 series having problems.

The dealer also said that the 3540 probably wasn't big enough for large round bales. It's FEL is rated higher than the 4530, so that isn't an issue. I would think it is heavy enough at over 4,000 lbs and the axle looked fairly robust to me.

 

[tbzep]

Mahindra has too many choices. I'm leaning away from the 4530 and looking at the TYM built 2555 to compare with the M&M built 3540. The engine is rated at 55 HP and PTO at 44.5 HP, which is quite a bit higher than the 3540's 31 PTO HP. The FEL is rated more than 400 lbs higher and the lift a little more than 200 lbs. However, the 2555 weighs nearly 300 lbs less than the 3540. It isn't supposed to be as fancy as the 3500 series, but it has pretty much everything on it that the 3540 has such as tilt steer, adjustable seat, rear remote.
Can anyone comment on the reliability of the 3540's 4cyl normally aspirated engine vs the 2555's 3cyl turbo engine?

 

[DavesTractor]

I've not seen any reliability differences between those two engines. They are both reliable. A turbo has advantages at altitude of course, not so much at sea level. Not sure where you are located. The 2555 specs out really well. Just make sure you load the rear tires and haul around an implement on the back if you plan to use the loader to near capacity. Otherwise you will be doing back wheelies or worse.

 

[tbzep]

I've not seen any reliability differences between those two engines. They are both reliable. A turbo has advantages at altitude of course, not so much at sea level. Not sure where you are located. The 2555 specs out really well. Just make sure you load the rear tires and haul around an implement on the back if you plan to use the loader to near capacity. Otherwise you will be doing back wheelies or worse.

I'm only about 430 ft above sea level. Hopefully the rain is over for a while and I can make it to the two dealerships. I've seen the 3540 but the 2555 is at another dealership not too far away. The dealers said they would include filling the tires and delivering at no extra cost. I don't know if they use CaCl2 or beet juice. Either way at 75% filled it should add around 700-750 lbs in R1 tires. I'm still not 100% sure I'll go with R1 over R4. I'll cross that bridge when I decide what tractor they will go on!

 

[hugh01]

Haven't seen many issues with 3500 series tractors. As Dave said, the 4530 is a utility tractor, 2-range transmission (8F/8R), taller frame, tires, etc. 3540 is a large "super compact" utility tractor. 3-range transmission for 12 speeds, with a power shuttle option which is pretty slick as well. If you are looking at 50hp+, check out a 3550 or 2555, both are very good machines. At your altitude, an N/A tractor is a fair match to a turbo tractor.

 

[tbzep]

I looked at the 2555 today. Seemed to be a nice machine. I'm fairly tall and decided that just like Japanese motorcycles, Asian built tractors are designed for shorter people. I could scoot the seat back decently, but my knees were up pretty high. I cranked and cranked on the seat preload and still felt like I was sitting on a small stool. Reach to the FEL controls was pretty long too. Other than that, it looked really nice. I'll have to go back and look at the 3540 again to see if the seating and controls are similar. I may not have noticed it last time because it was the first time to sit on a new tractor rather than the antiques I own.

 

[tbzep]

I went back to the original dealership today where the 3540 and the 4530 are located. Turns out they have a 2555 there also. I drove both around in the lot, played with the loaders, and decided I like the 3540 better for ergonomics. The 3540 gives away about 300 lbs rated lifting capacity on both ends, but gains about 300 lbs in weight. It sits a little lower but the COPS doesn't break down as low. Both seemed to turn about the same and the specs show that they are close. I didn't do anything to load the engines so I didn't really notice anything different about the two other than the sound of 3cyl turbo vs 4cyl regular engine, and that wasn't even very noticeable because both were running side by side at the same time and were pretty quiet at low RPM.

The 3540's PST shuttle lever was positioned better for me and was easier to use. I found myself using the clutch even though it isn't needed. Tilt steer was nice to have on both models. It would be nice if they telescoped a few inches. The FEL control was located much better on the 3540, allowing me to keep my elbow on the arm rest, where I have to completely extend my arm or lean foward a bit to use it on the 2555.

Both dealers said that they expect the incentives to change for the worse Monday so I need to sit down tonight and decide on the model and then work out R1 vs R4 tires. If I didn't feed hay, I'd go with R4 hands down.

 

[hugh01]

Sounds like you did well. The 3540 is definitely a slick tractor, ergonomics are a strong point on them. If its just tire type, that's easy enough.

 

[tbzep]

Well, I didn't buy the 3540. I got a good deal on the 3550! It gives me about 10 more PTO HP and puts the tractor weight up near 5,000 lbs. With the tires loaded and the FEL, it will probably weigh around 7,000 lbs. I decided on R4's. Everybody I talked to said that if I've been feeding hay with a little R1 shod 2wd tractor all these years and never got stuck in the mud, I should do fine with R4's on a 4wd. I'll find out soon! The main reason I went with the more expensive 3550 instead of the 2555 or 4530, which have better FEL and lift specs is because they just didn't work well ergonomically for me. I don't see myself overloading the 3090 lb lift capacity and I doubt I'll hit the 2700 FEL capacity, especially considering I keep a roof over my hay. The 3540 and 3550 gave me the best cockpit layout and seating position of the bunch. I looked at other manufacturers but to get similar specs, I would have had to pay more. The Massey Ferguson 2706E's paint was really pretty, but that color belongs on a Ducati. :laughing: I think I'm going to be happy with my choice assuming it doesn't have any mechanical issues.

 

[hugh01]

Great job! The 3550 is a great tractor, the cream of the crop as far as 50hp CUT's go. Did you go with the PST?

 

[tbzep]

Great job! The 3550 is a great tractor, the cream of the crop as far as 50hp CUT's go. Did you go with the PST?

Yes, the PST.

 

[rback33]

Excellent choice! You will LOVE it!

 

[tbzep]

The tractor was delivered Saturday morning in the rain. I immediately swapped over to the spear, took it to the barn, and shoved it in a hay bale. I tilted it back and lifted it at idle. I was hollering! No more fighting with a worn out, antique, under weight tractor with a 3 pt hitch rated less than the hay bales!!! :cool2:

I crossed a decent size muddy ditch to experiment with the R4 tires and 4wd and used the bucket to smooth out a truck load of dirt I had dumped a couple months ago. If it hadn't been raining, I would have probably stayed on it all day. Needless to say, I'm extremely happy about its performance so far.

 

[Uncle Hulka]

Congrats! Sounds like you made the right choice for your needs. I'm sure you will be more than thrilled with her performance. I know I am!!!

 

[My Hoe]

Subscribed.

 

[tbzep]

Quick update on the new 3550. I've put out several bales with it and continue to enjoy its capability to lift the big round bales to full height with ease. I can move the hay rings with the spear and not have to slog around in the muck and move them by hand anymore. I can maneuver around amongst the cattle in mid-range 3rd gear and go up moderate slopes with the bale on the spear and the 6ft cutter on the back, literally at idle. The medium duty Kodiak made bush hog is quiet compared to the ~50 year old 5 footer on the old 8N. Haven't run it enough to even fool with setting up the slipper clutch. Recent weather has turned the feed lot into a muddy mess, but I haven't needed 4wd with the R4 tires yet.

 

[mcfarmall]

I recently changed my mind from the 2555 to the 3550 based on the manufacturer of the tractor (TYM vs. Mahindra) and it's nice to see the positive reviews of the 3550.