300cx is H165 and 320R, and 300x is H160 and 300R. I do not believe there are any differences. I'm VERY excited about the hydraulic ( and exhaust) tube bender! Jankiest? I agree. ..but I'm not sure how to spell it.
Good stuff. Maybe some day I'll go from the 2038R to a 3039R or just add a 3039R to the fleet. Cab only available for the 2R series in Europe (2036R)... stupid on Deere's part.
You spent some time talking about the mounting style of the loader, but (and it may be my fault) I missed which problem you're looking to solve. Are you looking at reducing the loose fit/slop in the mounting, or in reducing the flex in the whole loader system? As I'm sure you're aware, by adjusting the mast locking bolt the sloppy fit can be mitigated pretty well, but the "tighter" the loader fits, the more difficult it is to release/engage the locking mechanism for removal/installation. Your talk about preload being applied by the springs somewhat leads me to this being your goal, but I think just properly setting up the loader per the manual (which I don't think dealerships do well) solves this issue sufficiently. If I had to guess I think (and hope) your goal is to help solve the flex in the whole loader. Personally I'm curious if your idea will also apply to the 400X/400CX loaders used on the 4x20 series tractors, which was the same design style as the 3x20 and 3R loaders. I was under the impression that the springs in this design are intended to mechanically perform the same function as a hydraulic accumulator/damping system that is now offered on the rigidly mounted H180/440R loaders on the 4R series tractors. If this is your goal, I'd love something that is adjustable or can be engaged/disengaged so that the springiness could be "disabled" for things like grading work.
I"m not actually looking to address the "wobble" or "flex" in the loader. It's just something that has been mentioned to me by those interested in the future upgrades to the cylinders and pump. My goal, which maybe I should have stated explicitly, was just to explain the differences between this style loader and what is more commonly used when the loaders are redesigned (1, 2, & 4 series) So far, I find no fault in this design, and if I were guessing, it seems to be a stronger approach given it has 2 points of contact to apply pressure...but that's a guess with no engineering data to prove it. Are the redesigns to make the loader stronger and more reliable, and therefore better, or are they to save money, and the older, heavier designs are the better option? I don't know that answer.
@@HydrosPlus I guess I read too much into including the discussion in your video 😅. Maybe it's just because you can flip the locks on the open station tractors with your feet so you don't have to get off.
@@tylerstanley7775 If true I wonder how much different the 4 series are from the 3 series. I think I may have had a particularly acceptable 3320 (compared to others at least) because I didn't think there was really any change going from my 3320 to my 4720 (or maybe my 4720 is just as bad as the 3 series...).
any upgrades coming for the 3039r open stations MY 2025 this year like maybe more ergonomically placed Loader joy stick, or maybe arm rest. or fuel fill location, come on john Deere it's a premium tractor with a premium price
