L3560 opinion...

LA555 here and it's excellent!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I haven't yet but don't forget this is my first tractor! [emoji12]

I have done some pretty serious work though and my buddy who builds pools for a living and runs a big Case loves this tractor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have an LA805 on mine, and no complaints. Wouldn't really want smaller or less lift.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

jryser said:

I haven't yet but don't forget this is my first tractor! [emoji12]

I have done some pretty serious work though and my buddy who builds pools for a living and runs a big Case loves this tractor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Now come on, big Cases are not used to build swimming pools. They wouldn't have enough room to turn around!

Oh, you mean he builds swimming pools. He also has a large Case he farms with? OK. I'm going to bed.

Got mine with the LA555 loader with the 72" bucket.

North Idaho Wolfman said:

I think he means this kind of case for pool work:

And not this kind of Case:

Click to expand...

LOL YES!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

North Idaho Wolfman said:

Yes the L3560 has a slightly smaller (thinner) frame than the L4060, even though oddly they list them as the same weight????

Sheepfarmer points out that there is a difference in length, height, and width but most of this difference is because the L4060 is equipped with taller, fatter tires.
The frame height and possibly length appear to be the same but could be inches longer if anything.

Now here is my slight dilema with the issue:
That frames only job is to hold the front axle to the engine, it does give the rear any more or less strength, that's all done with the clutch housing.
It's not like a Truck that the frame extends from the front to the rear.
This is why it's super important to get a good BH subframe to keep the strength up.
That transfers the force to the strongest point which is the rear of the engine.

Now will a heavier front frame help, Yes, but are you going to be pushing and lifting so much weight across uneven/rough ground that it's going to greatly effect you, probably not.

Click to expand...

I am curious why the 3560 and 4060 don't use the same front frame. Based on the diagrams of the frame, the 3560 looks thinner but has some doubler plates that the 4060 does not have. Looks like you could bolt a 4060 front frame to a 3560 as it mounts forward of the extra cylinder on the 4060 with what looks like similar bolt patterns from motor to motor.

Some other things I have noticed between the 3560 and 4060 models, based on looking at the parts diagrams:

They share the same front axle with difference in gearing at the ring and pinion as well as the upper bevel gears at the upper end of the steering "knuckle". Stepping up to the next horsepower level of the Grand L(4760) gets you the next size front axle. The 3560 has a 2.56:1 R&P vs 2.63:1 in the 4060. Upper bevel gears in the outers is 11-16 in the 3560 and 10-17 in the 4060. My guess is that the front axle weight capacity dictates the loader. That is why you can get the LA805 on both the 3560 and the 4060. When you go to the next horsepower level up from the 4060, you get a bigger front axle and the option for a loader with more capacity. The one thing I cant figure out is if the loader on the 3560 is mounted further forward of the axle than the 4060. If true, the front axle on the 3560 will see more stress from the same load on the loader.

The engines are obviously different with 3 vs 4 cylinder. I think bore and stroke is the same. Kubota does make a turbo version of the 3 cylinder that makes 49 hp. Too bad they dont mount that in a Grand L. The difference in length between the 3560 and 4060 appears to be based on the extra cylinder in the 4060. The hood/bonnet is stretched on the 4060.

Engines are bolted to a flywheel housing. Same part number from the 3560 to the 4060.

The flywheel housing is bolted to the "clutch housing" or HST unit. 3560 to the 4060 is a different part number for this unit, but appears to have the same housing, and is physically the same size. Different internals. Makes sense.

The "mid case" bolted to the "clutch housing" is the same part number between the two. The mid case has a shaft connected to the output of the HST with a countershaft. Gear ratio between the 3560 and 4060 is different here.

The trans case is bolted to the mid case. Part number for the trans case is the same between the 3560 and 4060. Ring and pinion for the rear axle is the same between the 3560 and 4060. 6.17:1 ratio. The "bull" gears at each axle are differnt between the 3560 and 4060, as well as the housing for them. The pinion is actually the same but the large bull gears is different number of teeth and requires different shaft spacing, so different housing. 60 tooth on the 4060 and 53 tooth on the 3560. 11 tooth for pinion on each.

The thing I find strange about the trans case is the gear for the 4wd on the rear pinion of the 3560 is listed as 18 teeth and the 4060 is 19 teeth. Now the idler for both is 29 teeth with the 4wd driveshaft being 24 teeth for both. Now, how does that work, unless it is a misprint??? The case is the same, meaning the shafts are spaced the same for each. They must just not mesh the same??? Hmmm.........

The cabs are the same for both if you get a cab.

I purchased a 3560 two weeks ago, and started second guessing myself about not getting the 4060. In the end I am good with my choice. Spent a few hours going thru the parts diagrams, and found the information I posted above. I have no idea how accurate the Kubota diagrams are. I am over 6000 ft in elevation, and am still happy with the power of the 3560 so far. Have not used the PTO yet.