Combines l2 vs l3

We have owned an l,two l2s' and a l3.The difference between the Very late model l2 and the l3 was almost nil however there is a lot between the early l2s' and late model l2s',the later versions have longer sieves for a start and some other areas were updated.The bigger moter makes a lot of difference to thses combines as well.

Would a 77 l2 with the big engine be a short shoeIJ I have looked over newer l2's a l3 and cannot visibly see any size difference in the shoe. I always assumed that the 77, since it was one of the first build would be a short shoe. Also, I looked over a R50 and noticed how small of a shoe it had. What kind of capacity does this machine have compared to the l2IJ Thanks

I ran an R50 and an l2 side by side in wheat one year. The R50 had an engine that was badly needing overhauled and it still had about 50% more capacity than the l2. Plus it threshed better and cleaned a little better too. Rebuilt the engine that winter and traded it before I got to use it so don't know what an R50 with a decent engine would do. As far as the smaller shoe on the rotary; keep in mind that the accelerator rolls take most of the chaff load off the shoe. You really don't need as much area if you're mostly dealing with clean wheat to start with

The first l2s had mesh on their grain tanks the same as the ls (180 bus.) then they went to the fold up extensions that as the bin filled they folded up (200 bus.)I can't remember the year they went to the longer sieves (T-Bran would know) but the earlier l2s had a black cab interior and the later models had a brown upholstery.

I believe it was 1979 when the longer shoe came,the l-3 has forklift chain on the auger swing instead of plain roller chain,late l-2'sand3's had external hydralic filter.

Thanks guys for your comments, that helps clear it up.

The l3 has the AMBAC inj. system, better economy and lots less smoke, the main shaft is also built stronger. Have owned both the l2 and the l3 through the years. If finances permit update to 1990 or newer R50. (new style hydraulics) I also owned a 1991 R50 and it would do anything a "l" could do plus more. Better grain sample ,easier adjustments, more capacity. In their day the "l's" were king, presently own a 1998 R52. Good luck, Mike