Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo Auction Link (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Tractor Talk Discussion Forum

4320 vs 4020

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Raleigh Boulwar

01-03-2007 11:03:50




Report to Moderator

What are the biggest advantages or disadvantages between these two tractors? I have located a 4320 near by for a reasonable price, and I would like to consider it. Is there anything to beware of on these Machines?
Also the owner tells me there is problem with the hydrolics in that when you mash the clutch the hydrolics go out. Have any of you exprianced this?




[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
David in MD

01-04-2007 05:01:06




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
We used a pair of 4320"s, one as a loader tractor, and the other as a tillage tractor for years. Main complaint was they both were hard starting and when worked hard would run hot. Also broke the front end out of the loader tractor once. The 4320 is bigger and isn"t as handy getting around as the 4020. Given the choice for an all around chore tractor I"d take the 4020 but a 4320 may be quite a bit cheaper and there really isn"t anything wrong with them. Might want to look for a 30 series which would have a heavier front end, wet clutch, and possibly quad range.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
John A.

01-03-2007 21:25:28




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
Raleigh, The main weak point on a 4010/4020, When used for loader work other than the ones allreay mention is the Front end! way toooo light for loader work. I have seen too many that been folded up while moveing large round bales. If that 4320 has the heavier 30 series front then Go for it! if not and you really like this tractor concider changeing it out before it lays down on you in a real critical time.
When you sentence a tractor to loader work it will allways be expected to do the near impossible. Have to get things done that will put the rest of your fleet back in the shed. In the crappiest weather, Mud, Sleet/Snow, Ice,or Sunshine! Hope this helps.
Later,
John A.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
buickanddeere

01-03-2007 19:41:39




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
Not an issue. Unless something is busted and the tractor not up to spec. If so, repair it. This is 99% an old wives tale told by Bubba down at the diner. He's the local JD hater and IH Torque Amplifer fan. Tell Bubba to go b*gger off. The hydraulics ( Spelling ) do not stop the instant the clutch is pushed. There is ample reserve time while inching into a pile while loading. Or to continue lifting the loader while changing gears and turning the steering wheels and using the brakes.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
edchainsaw

01-03-2007 19:17:19




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
we had 4020's with turbo's and a 4620 and used the neighbors 4320 all the time..

I didn't like the lack of torque rise on the 46 and 43's... the 43's I thought were worse in that regard.

there is a slight problem in the rearends-- a pin can fall out inside that will cause the gears to lock up...( happend to both of those tractors I drove)

the 4020's were peppier to me.. and I loved that 4620 it was awsome for a 10yr old to run that thing ( we had one of the very first 4620's)

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Dean Barker

01-03-2007 16:54:08




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
The charge pump that supplies oil under pressure to the variable displacement piston pump in the front of the tractor is driven by the transmission and only pumps oil when the clutch is engaged. As these tractors get older, the quicker the hydraulics quit when the clutch is disengaged. This shouldn't be a problem most of the time.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
two mile

01-03-2007 15:55:34




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
We had both, a 4320 and a 4010. Hands down the 4320 was the best tractor we ever owned. It had a balance of power and proportion that just agreed with me. We made the decision several years ago to go with all cabbed tractors for health reasons. At the time I wandered if I would regret trading the 4320. I have, many times over. May still buy another one some day. Now we use a JD 4250 for the jobs that the 4320 did. It's a great tractor too, just doesn't have the same feel to it.
The tractor we owned was not without fault. Almost 7000 hours when we purchased it. We used it about 1500 hours. We rebuilt the injection pump, some final drive gearing, and replaced the turbo. Hydraulics were OK. Occasionally, the three point did have difficulty lifting anything really heavy. If I had chose to keep the tractor I would have replaced the 34" rubber with 38" But we still had good tread. Sure is strange how we get attached to a piece of iron that has treated us well.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
low budget

01-03-2007 13:14:25




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
John Deere called it a "Super 4020 with Dynamic Power Reserve" and thats exactly what they are. Few inches wider and longer over the hood for more fuel tank and radiator, few hundred lbs heavier from stronger gears in the tranny. Improvements in the engine to handle the power. One note; If you use it a lot on the loader (light work) you will get "diesel dribble" all over the side of the engine. This is not serious, just hook 'er up to a plow for a couple of hours and let 'er rip. These tractors love to work. Also the clutch is a wee bit weak for the power so be a little careful not too slip it too much. Yeah, I like these tractors, grew up on one!

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Glen in TX

01-03-2007 12:16:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
4320 came out after the 4020 and were only made in 71 & 72 before the generation II tractors came out. For most part just a much improved turbocharged more powerful 4020. 4320 has a turbo built 404 and not a wanna be 404 like some 4020s with add on turbos and the older style fuel pumps. Yeah I don't like 4020s because most here always started hard and didn't pull what others said but that's my opinion and most 4320s although rated at 116 hp will dyno out in the 125 to 130+ range not being turned up. The hydraulic problem can be fixed and if engine is in good shape it should be much better than the 4020. Any tractor approaching 40 years old is going to have something wrong with it. You will still see more 4320s around with many many more hours on them with engines never being touched than you will on 4010 or 4020s.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Gerald J.

01-03-2007 11:37:51




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Raleigh Boulware, 01-03-2007 11:03:50  
The 4320 is basically a 4020 with a turbo. No intercooler, that was the 4620. My new generations book says it used slightly bigger gears in parts of the transmission by not having reverse gear synchronized. I'd guess the axle diameters may be bigger. The engine is the same displacement, but probably made stronger and probably has better piston cooling, like oil jets spraying on the undersides of each piston.

I have experienced the loss of hydraulics with the clutch pushed on my 4020. There is a Service Information about it on my web page linked below. In those its due to loss of a check valve deep in the transmission and the cure is converting an elbow to a check valve where its easy to get at. In later 4020, there was a check valve in a T at the hydraulic oil reservoir up front according to a service bulletin I have. I don't know if that covered 4320, since I've not had any interest in the 4320. One other service bulletin of that era suggests there might be a leak from the high pressure circuit to cause that rapid loss of hydraulic with the clutch pushed. I know on another forum last week that someone found a bad O-ring in some assembly in the transmission case that was the cause of his pressure leak in a late 4020. That was harder to find and to get to than adding the check valve to the elbow which would not have fixed his problem.

With the SI number from my web page you should be able to get a print out of it (just text, no pictures) from a JD parts computer to see if it covers that vintage of 4320. A really good old time JD shop supervisor might remember service informations or bulletins on the problem in the 4320.

Gerald J.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Reaver

01-03-2007 15:48:29




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Gerald J., 01-03-2007 11:37:51  
I have the same hydraulics loss problems on my 4620...would the fix be the same? and how hard to do it?
Thanks Reaver



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
low budget

01-04-2007 04:32:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Reaver, 01-03-2007 15:48:29  
The syncro side consoles have a hyd engaged PTO, still the dry clutch but uses a slave cylinder to engage it. The control valve may be leaking, not cheap but should be easy to get to. The slave cylinder may leak too, I have a 4020 with that problem in the shop for future repair, need to split it for that. I've heard the differential lock valve and lines can leak too. That gets invoved in tearing the differential apart I believe. Also on the side of the transmission, where Gerald puts his external check valve on his early models, is a valve body that contains check and surge pressure relief valves, could be a problem there. Could also be a very weak transmission pump or one thats drawing air for some reason. The newest of the 20 series are now 35 years old and all these things wear out eventually, the hyd system is so integral to the operation of these tractors that it can be a real headache trouble shooting and repairing things, but it can be done.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Gerald J.

01-03-2007 19:31:23




Report to Moderator
 Re: 4320 vs 4020 in reply to Reaver, 01-03-2007 15:48:29  
I don't know. My notes don't say 4320 or 4620. A good JD shop man should know. Or look for that Service Information number from my web page and see if it covers your tractor. I also referenced some service bulletins of the era on my web page.

The fundamental problem is that the oil cooler and a reservoir up front hold more than a couple gallons of oil. If the check valve in the early 4020 in the transmission or near the reservoir of the late 4020 leaks the front pump runs out of oil quickly. That's the function of making the elbow into a check valve to replace one that's hard to get to in the depths of the tranmission. But if there's a high pressure leak bypassing oil from the output of the main pump it will use up that reserve fast too. I know putting the check valve in the elbow on my '68 4020 did fix the loss of hydraulic with the clutch pushed in. More than once I've let it set for months, pushed in the clutch, started it, and raised the loader before letting the clutch out. Working in a basement hole, I'd seat the loader bucket in the dirt on th side, and push in the clutch shift gears while I was turning the steering and rocking the bucket to break the bite loose and beginning to lift before letting the clutch out in reverse to back away. Busier than a one armed paper hanger, but the hydraulics kept up.

Gerald J.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy