ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 or Ford 2610?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the One-Sixty / 160 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2610 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 17% (3.6 L/min / 1.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow and 42% (587 kg / 1,294 lb) more three-point lift.
- The Ford 2610 suits road haulage better on this data: 16% (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 | One-Sixty / 160 | 2610 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 30.2 kW (40.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 30.2 kW (40.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the One-Sixty / 160 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2610 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 One-Sixty / 160 and the 2610. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the One-Sixty / 160 and the 2610. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 25.4 L/min (6.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 21.8 L/min (5.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | AheadThe ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 has 17% more hydraulic flow (3.6 L/min / 1.0 gpm) than the Ford 2610 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,000 kg (4,409 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 1,413 kg (3,115 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | AheadThe ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 has 42% more lift (587 kg / 1,294 lb) than the Ford 2610 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,595 kg (5,721 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 1,804 kg (3,977 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 is 44% heavier (791 kg / 1,744 lb) than the Ford 2610 (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 One-Sixty / 160 and the 2610. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 6 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the One-Sixty / 160 and the 2610. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 29 km/h (18.0 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | AheadThe Ford 2610 has 16% more top speed (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) than the ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 2610. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Allis-Chalmers 160” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1970–1975 | 1981–1983 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 2610 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 One-Sixty / 160 has 17% more hydraulic flow (3.6 L/min / 1.0 gpm) than the Ford 2610 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 has 42% more lift (587 kg / 1,294 lb) than the Ford 2610 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 is 44% heavier (791 kg / 1,744 lb) than the Ford 2610 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 2610 has 16% more top speed (4.0 km/h / 2.5 mph) than the ALLIS-CHALMERS One-Sixty / 160 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 2610 is newer: production began 11 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
- Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the One-Sixty / 160 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2610 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, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources