ALLIS-CHALMERS FD-3 or Ford 1000?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the FD-3 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1000 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “the same stated configuration”. Measured figures are compared only with measured, claimed only with claimed, at the same test condition; differences within each figure’s tolerance are not called.
What decides it, question by question?
| Question | FD-3 | 1000 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 18.4 kW (24.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 18.4 kW (24.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FD-3 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1000 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft. |
| Which turns a litre of fuel into more work at the shaft? | — | — | No figureNo call on fuel efficiency at the shaft: no figure on record for the FD-3 and the 1000. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the FD-3 and the 1000. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 15.9 L/min (4.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the FD-3. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 800 kg (1,764 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 770 kg (1,698 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | EvenEven on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,430 kg (3,153 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 1,220 kg (2,690 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The ALLIS-CHALMERS FD-3 is 17% heavier (210 kg / 463 lb) than the Ford 1000 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the FD-3 and the 1000. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 9Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the FD-3 and the 1000. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | AheadThe ALLIS-CHALMERS FD-3 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford 1000 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1000. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers FD 3” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1000” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1962–1965 | 1973–1976 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 1000 is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The ALLIS-CHALMERS FD-3 is 17% heavier (210 kg / 463 lb) than the Ford 1000 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The ALLIS-CHALMERS FD-3 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford 1000 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Ford 1000 is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on three-point lift (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FD-3 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1000 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources