ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD or Ford NAA?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the Modell-WD has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the NAA has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Ford NAA suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 117% (5.5 L/min / 1.5 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Ford NAA suits road haulage better on this data: 25% (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) more top speed.
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 | Modell-WD | NAA | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 22.5 kW (30.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 22.4 kW (30.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Modell-WD has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the NAA 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 Modell-WD and the NAA. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the Modell-WD and the NAA. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 4.7 L/min (1.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 10.2 L/min (2.7 gpm) to 22.7 L/min (6.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | AheadThe Ford NAA has 117% more hydraulic flow (5.5 L/min / 1.5 gpm) than the ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,630 kg (3,594 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 750 kg (1,653 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the Modell-WD: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD”); the NAA: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,537 kg (3,389 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 1,289 kg (2,842 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD is 19% heavier (248 kg / 547 lb) than the Ford NAA (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 Modell-WD and the NAA. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 4Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 4Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | 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 Modell-WD and the NAA. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 16 km/h (9.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | AheadThe Ford NAA has 25% more top speed (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) than the ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 548 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the Modell-WD. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the Modell-WD and the NAA. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1948–1953 | 1953–1954 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford NAA is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Ford NAA has 117% more hydraulic flow (5.5 L/min / 1.5 gpm) than the ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD is 19% heavier (248 kg / 547 lb) than the Ford NAA (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Ford NAA has 25% more top speed (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) than the ALLIS-CHALMERS Modell-WD (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Ford NAA is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 drive: all two-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the Modell-WD has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the NAA has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the Modell-WD: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers WD”); the NAA: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford NAA”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources