I actually have both types, a PF 3000 in a 9750 STS and the Lexion yield monitor in my 485R. I like both, they have similar accuracy. The Lexion system is much less time consuming to calibrate (no separate loads to simulate different flow rates) and does not require different calibrations between different types of crops (i.e., corn and beans) and swings in moisture levels (i.e., dry no. 2 corn vs. wet corn for feed) either. I notice that the Lexion's yield monitor read out changes very frequently, probably at nearly the same rate that it takes a reading, whereas the Ag Leader monitor appears to avg. x-number of readings into one over a longer period of time so that it doesn't appear to be constantly changing (to each their own, preference really). At the end of the day, the per field bulk totals recorded by each monitor (combine), when running side-by-side, resemble each other within 0.5% and often times much less. The Ag Leader PF3000 has a variable data logging interval that I run at 3 seconds, while the Lexion's is fixed at 5 second intervals but, I have yet to see where either rate is an advantage or disadvantage, as I said, they are always within 0.5% or less of each other. With the Lexion system, because it is a volumetric system, you will need to enter a test weight value to ensure accuracy. I usually do this step 4-5 times a day as the weights are radio'd back to me from the scale house, nothing major. In crops that are harvested within a couple %'s of storage moisture (usually my last two to three weeks of harvest and all white corn is at storage), I simply use an avg. test weight and do not change it and still the Lexion's results end up within 0.5% of the PF3000's. I have noticed a few times on the PF3000, that when the STS gets into tough greenstem beans and starts to spike load or ROMP, the PF3000 accuracy starts to diminish slightly due to the fluctuation in RPM of the elevator causing a changing rate of grain into the flow sensor. Lexion does not experience this: One, the Lexion can handle tough conditions better than the STS can, and Two, the Lexion monitor is measuring volume not flow, so, it's yield sensors could care less what the conveying rate is. The Ironic part about both monitors is that each one converts to the other. The Lexion monitor converts to mass flow and the Ag Leader converts to volume. Which is better? Why won't a yield monitor hold up in court? I would love to see how either one of these two systems uses "fudge factors" to come up with their "accurate estimations." Oh well, i've installed quite a few Ag Leaders, they all work for me. A friend of mine actually runs an Ag Leader and the Lexion system on his 470R because the 470R came with its own monitor and my friend wanted to continue mapping with his Ag Leader and upgraded it to the Insight. Those two systems working simultaneously make for some interesting and thought provoking conversation for another time.

     The PF3000 is more functional meaning that it is interoperable with other applications (I use it for planting too), whereas the Lexion system is for yield monitoring and mapping only and operates through the Lexion's single combine monitor. The only other yield monitor that I know of that requires a single batch to calibrate is the John Deere Greenstar system with its zero cal. function. The Lexion system also has a zero cal. funtion too. Hope this helps.