Fahr D 17 NHA or International Harvester Farmall A/AV (International Harvester)?
Which should you choose?
On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level. On features, the Fahr D 17 NHA is ahead on forward gears.
Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “similar machines”. 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 | D 17 NHA | Farmall A/AV | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 12.5 kW (17 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | 12.8 kW (17.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC Farmall Super-A” | EvenEven on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, too small to call. |
| 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 D 17 NHA and the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the D 17 NHA and the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the D 17 NHA and the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 690 kg (1,521 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,330 kg (2,932 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | 1,082 kg (2,385 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall Super-A” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Fahr D 17 NHA is 23% heavier (248 kg / 547 lb) than the International Harvester Farmall A/AV (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 2,000 kg (4,409 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 6Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | 4Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall Super-A” | AheadThe Fahr D 17 NHA has 50% more forward gears (2 gears) than the International Harvester Farmall A/AV (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 19.8 km/h (12.3 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick Farmall Super-A” | 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 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | 541 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall Super-A” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the D 17 NHA and the Farmall A/AV. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Fahr D 17 NHA” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IHC Farmall Super-A”; Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick Farmall Super-A”; Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall Super-A” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1953–1955 | 1947–1954 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Fahr D 17 NHA is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Fahr D 17 NHA is 23% heavier (248 kg / 547 lb) than the International Harvester Farmall A/AV (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Fahr D 17 NHA has 50% more forward gears (2 gears) than the International Harvester Farmall A/AV (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Fahr D 17 NHA is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on power at the PTO shaft (both power at the PTO, claimed): the difference is under the 10% threshold for claimed figures, 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.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources