Differences between B3200 and B3030 - Buying comparison?

[jim_wilson]

Differences between B3200, B3030 & L3200 - Buying comparison?

Note: I just edited this post - I went to the dealer today and sat on an L3800 (same size as the L3200) , and the L has me interested. It doesn't actually seem all that much bigger than the B3200 and the FEL capacity is a little bit higher.

I'm wondering what the differences are between the B3200 and the B3030 - and now the L3200

First one - what's the price difference?

I would be equipping this with a loader and backhoe - any major differences between the LA403 on the 3030 and the LA504 on the 3200?

Any major differences betwen the 76 and 77 backhoes?

I noticed in the specs that the dimensions, wheelbase, etc on the two tractors are pretty much the same. But the 3030 weighs a bit more - and the Kubota spec sheets say that the 3pt on the 3030 lifts more.

I would mostly be using this for dirtwork. Initially at least - I would not have a mower for it.

Basically I'm wondering what the differences and tradeoffs are from one tractor to the other - and what the price difference is.

 

[magicheater]

The LA403 loader has a wider frame than the newly designed LA504 model. Lift capacities are slightly higher on the LA403, 1091lbs. vs. 1065lbs. The B3200 has more H.P., 32 vs. 30. A cab is available for the 3030 but not for the 3200, as far as I know.

 

[Ductape]

From the other thread:

Some of the differences I can think of off the top of my head..... I'll probably forget a few. The B2630 and B3030 have the same wheelbase as the B3200, but are considered 'deluxe' models.

B3030 has:

Hydrostatic steering
Tilt steering column
suspension seat w/arm rests
position control on the 3ph
hydraulic PTO clutch
no clutch between engine / transaxle
extendable lower 3ph arms
telescoping sway links
cruise control
Backhoe less integrated w/ seperate operators seat

B3200

Steering box w/power assist
fixed steering column
basic seat
quarter inching 3ph
clutch
fixed 3ph lower arms
turnbuckle style sway links
cruise control ???? not sure .....
backhoe more integrated with single operators seat that swivels to operate hoe.
clutch between

Also, as far as the loaders go....... the B3030 will have the hydraulic valve on the loader mast, making you reach forward for the joystick. You can order the tractor with the loader stick from the cab model at a small price increase, putting the joystick at your right thigh. The 3200 already has the joystick at your right thigh.

 

[jim_wilson]

Thanks for the replies. I stopped by the dealer today to pick up some parts for the BX - and they had a B3200, a B3030 - and an L3800 (same size as L3200) - on the lot. I sat on all three. And I noticed that the L really isn't that much bigger than the B3200.

After sitting on the B3200 and the B3030 - I think I would lean towards the B3200 over the 3030.

But now I'm wondering if I should be considering the L3200. Any input on that model vs the B3200 would be appreciated.

Price comparison also - I did some searching and it doesn't look like the base L3200 is any more expensive than the B3200 - I'm assuming the loader on the L is more expensive than the loader on the B - but it uses the same hoe so that the B uses so that is a wash.

 

[jim_wilson]

Answering my own question, if the posts in this threat are any indication:

Kubota L3800 pricing - TractorByNet.com


Looks like the L would run me about $1500 or so over what I would end up paying for a B3200.

 

[archerynut]

Here's the differences between the 3030 and the b3200:
The 3030 has these the 3200 does not
- telescopic 3ph arms for easier hookup to implements
- position control for the 3ph
- cruise control (I think)
- filter panels around the seat
- the BH setup has its own dedicated seat where the 3200 seat swivels.

The price difference when I was looking was $1800 between the two b series. I chose the b3200 because I liked the more compact BH set up.

 

[General Lee]

As a previous B3200 owner myself, Get the L32 or 3800. You said its primary use will be dirt work and the L would be better suited. Its heavier than the B which is a plus with dirt work. Main reason I got rid of the B3200 was it was to light for my taste for ground engaging work. Also are you aware of the B3200 vibration issue at elevated rpm's. The 3030 and L's don't have that issue. You may not mind the vibration, some do. Also if you consider one of the L's check the 3 point hitch for jerkiness with a heavy implement attached. Lots of info on here about that issue, not sure if you read about it or not.

Edited to add: This is just my opinion I shared, either tractor is a great machine. I was just trying to give some real word perspectives since I had a B3200.

 

[SPMMD]

My b3200 was delivered thanksgiving and now has 16 hrs on the clock. I have the 504 loader and the BJ77 which I removed for the 1st time 2 weeks ago to start bush hogging. My property is heavily wooded, hilly, and the machine needed to be small enough and nimble enough to navigate between trees as I work cleaning and clearing the forest. After only 4 mos, I have come to appreciate my B3200 more than I thought I would. While still tight, I can navigate through the trees and get the work done. I have only this tractor experience for reference, but the vibration complaints I have seen mentioned by others have been a non issue for me. The spin around seat keeps the working length of the tractor shorter than what I have seen with tractors set up with dedicated driving and backhoe seating. I too thought about an L series machine, but so far appreciate the smaller size, more nimble stance, and the equal HP between the B3200 and what I perceived in the L series.

 

[jim_wilson]

My b3200 was delivered thanksgiving and now has 16 hrs on the clock. I have the 504 loader and the BJ77 which I removed for the 1st time 2 weeks ago to start bush hogging. My property is heavily wooded, hilly, and the machine needed to be small enough and nimble enough to navigate between trees as I work cleaning and clearing the forest. After only 4 mos, I have come to appreciate my B3200 more than I thought I would. While still tight, I can navigate through the trees and get the work done. I have only this tractor experience for reference, but the vibration complaints I have seen mentioned by others have been a non issue for me. The spin around seat keeps the working length of the tractor shorter than what I have seen with tractors set up with dedicated driving and backhoe seating. I too thought about an L series machine, but so far appreciate the smaller size, more nimble stance, and the equal HP between the B3200 and what I perceived in the L series.

Thanks for the info.

I'm actually moving up from a BX23 - and I also appreciate the small size. What I'm really working on here is a 1/2 acre suburban lot. The B - of any size - is probably ridiculous overkill for maintaining the lot, but - I have a lot of digging I still need to do. And - my next project is a few hundred feet of rock walls. The BX23 got me this far (610 hours) - but I really feel the need for something bigger to speed up the work. At some point in the future I also hope to acquire other property - and I think the B (or an L) would work better for that too.

For the last week or so I've been tossing around and thinking about all the options: B3200, B3030, L3200, L3800 - and now I'm also thinking B3300. Actually - as it stands right now I think I'm actually leaning towards the B3300. I think I've ruled out the L's. The tractor is just physically too big for what I need to do here. I could definitely use the increased loader capacity - but I managed to get by with the BX23 for 8 years, so even the B would be increased capacity over that. And the backhoe is the same on the L3200 and 3800 - and the B3200 and B3300 - so that's a wash. The B might even be better because of the swivel seat - it makes the hoe more of an integrated unit.

I could save $1000 by going with the B3300 - and put it towards the rock grapple I want to get for the loader. I never used the midmount PTO on the BX - and other than a front blower - I can't see using the mid-mount PTO on the B either. I could always mount a blower on the back - or just put a hydraulicly driven blower on the FEL (saw one of those a while back - VERY cool!). Plus the published Kubota specs say the B3300 has some increased capacity on the 3pt over the B3200 so that is an added capacity I might actually use - vs the mid-PTO which I will likely not use.

 

[1savoy]

Hey Jim,

I just got done wrestling with the same decision as you. I really started off looking at the B3300SU, but finally decided on the L3800. I really like the B3300, but I was worried about the lift capacity of the loader, especially with the Kubota quick attach, as it pushes the bucket or forks out a few more inches forward. The extra reach is nice with that, but I am not positive the amount of reduced lift capacity. I also did not like the 1/4 inching 3-pt. The L3800 is over kill for me as well with only 2.25 acres, but a ton of projects to do. The L3200/ 3800 also has the skid steer style quick attach available which is very nice. I had one in the past and loved it. I looked at a L3800 and B3300 side by side at the dealers lot a few days ago and as you said, the size is almost identical. The B3300 did not have a loader on it. I think if you compare the loaders, the loader on the L's just extends out further which gives you better reach and lift heights. Also, makes the whole set up longer, which may be a negative for you. The same dealer had a used B3300 with 17 hrs on it that came back and traded in on an L3800. Here is a link to a thread, if you have not seen it already, that has an L3800 w/FEL picking up an approx 1,800 lb. bale.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-owning-operating/221013-l3800-front-end-loader-lift.html

Good luck in your decision,
Russ

 

[bilrus61]

Re: Differences between B3200, B3030 & L3200 - Buying comparison?

I think the B series have a aluminum transmission in the rear and the L is cast iron. This is to save weight for mowing the yards with a belly mower. If your not going to mow the yard get the L. You can use a magnet to check what it is back there at the rear.

 

[magicheater]

Hey Jim,

I just got done wrestling with the same decision as you. I really started off looking at the B3300SU, but finally decided on the L3800. I really like the B3300, but I was worried about the lift capacity of the loader, especially with the Kubota quick attach, as it pushes the bucket or forks out a few more inches forward. The extra reach is nice with that, but I am not positive the amount of reduced lift capacity. I also did not like the 1/4 inching 3-pt. The L3800 is over kill for me as well with only 2.25 acres, but a ton of projects to do. The L3200/ 3800 also has the skid steer style quick attach available which is very nice. I had one in the past and loved it. I looked at a L3800 and B3300 side by side at the dealers lot a few days ago and as you said, the size is almost identical. The B3300 did not have a loader on it. I think if you compare the loaders, the loader on the L's just extends out further which gives you better reach and lift heights. Also, makes the whole set up longer, which may be a negative for you. The same dealer had a used B3300 with 17 hrs on it that came back and traded in on an L3800. Here is a link to a thread, if you have not seen it already, that has an L3800 w/FEL picking up an approx 1,800 lb. bale.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-owning-operating/221013-l3800-front-end-loader-lift.html

Good luck in your decision,
Russ

Here is the spec sheet for the L3200/L3800/L4600. Are you able to get the LA764 on the L3800? Lifting an 1850 LB. bale is pretty good on a Loader with an 1131 LB. rating!

 

[1savoy]

Here is the spec sheet for the L3200/L3800/L4600. Are you able to get the LA764 on the L3800? Lifting an 1850 LB. bale is pretty good on a Loader with an 1131 LB. rating!

Hi magicheater,

I know??? I have looked at the Kubota spec's for the 524 and wonder the same thing. The tractor in the thread was definitely the 524 if you zoom in. I have read a couple of posts where the bypass setting was turned up to allow more lift capacity. The other interesting thing is the Kubota literature from 2011 lists the lift capacity-full height @ pivot pins to be 1490 lbs. I can scan the page if you are interested in seeing it. I wonder what what has changed, if anything.

Thanks,
Russ

 

[magicheater]

Hi magicheater,

I know??? I have looked at the Kubota spec's for the 524 and wonder the same thing. The tractor in the thread was definitely the 524 if you zoom in. I have read a couple of posts where the bypass setting was turned up to allow more lift capacity. The other interesting thing is the Kubota literature from 2011 lists the lift capacity-full height @ pivot pins to be 1490 lbs. I can scan the page if you are interested in seeing it. I wonder what what has changed, if anything.

Thanks,
Russ

Yes, I would like to see that and I am sure others would too.

 

[1savoy]

Hi magicheater,

Just scanned it in. After looking at the spec's again, I would think it was probably a typo in the old Kubota literature and 1490 lbs is the spec at 1500 mm height @ pivot pin like the current literature. Sorry I did not catch this before. Here it is anyway.

Thanks,
Russ

 

[jim_wilson]

Here is the spec sheet for the L3200/L3800/L4600. Are you able to get the LA764 on the L3800? Lifting an 1850 LB. bale is pretty good on a Loader with an 1131 LB. rating!

I think if you look at the specs on the 524 loader on an L3800 - it's explainable.

At full height the lift spec is like 1131.

At half height the lift spec is 1430 or something like that.

My guess is that when the loader is at the bottom - the lift capability is right in the 1800 pound range.

My BX23 was the same way. I once loaded up the FEL bucket with weightlifting weights to get an idea of it's capacity. I could lift about 630 pounds or so - to half height - and that was it. Judging by some of the rocks I've moved with the BX - I would guess that the FEL capability of the BX was in the 800 pound range - at the bottom of it's travel.

 

[magicheater]

I think if you look at the specs on the 524 loader on an L3800 - it's explainable.

At full height the lift spec is like 1131.

At half height the lift spec is 1430 or something like that.

My guess is that when the loader is at the bottom - the lift capability is right in the 1800 pound range.

My BX23 was the same way. I once loaded up the FEL bucket with weightlifting weights to get an idea of it's capacity. I could lift about 630 pounds or so - to half height - and that was it. Judging by some of the rocks I've moved with the BX - I would guess that the FEL capability of the BX was in the 800 pound range - at the bottom of it's travel.

I guess that is a feasible explanation, depending on which numbers are correct.

 

[LD1]

I can see it lifting the bale, but also keep in mind that the weight of the bale is also just estimated.

But the loader has more force down low. The higher you lift something, the more pressure it takes. IE: the higher it goes, the lift capacity is diminished. I can go into why, but it really dont matter.

So when a MFG lists a spec TO FULL HEIGHT, you betcha it can lift a good deal more than that down low.

I have lifted and moved a 500 gallon propane tank with 15% propane before with my L3400. Nearest estimation was ~1450lbs. And this was with the loader about 6' in the air (had to so I could clear the tank and hook chains. The tank wasnt 6' in the air:confused2. and with only having a 8' lift height, I was already near the top where capacity diminishes pretty quick.