Ford 1510 (A) or Ford 1520 (A)?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 1510 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1520 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

  • The Ford 1520 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 35% (225 kg / 496 lb) more three-point lift.

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?

Buyer questions for Ford 1510 (A) and Ford 1520 (A), with the call on each
Question1510 (A)1520 (A)Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?16.2 kW (21.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”17.7 kW (23.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 1510 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1520 (A) 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 1510 (A) and the 1520 (A).
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?——No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1510 (A) and the 1520 (A).
Which pumps more oil for implements?25.0 L/min (6.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”27.3 L/min (7.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?650 kg (1,433 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”875 kg (1,929 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”AheadThe Ford 1520 (A) has 35% more lift (225 kg / 496 lb) than the Ford 1510 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?1,036 kg (2,284 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”986 kg (2,174 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”EvenEven on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
Which may carry more ballast and load?——No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 1510 (A) and the 1520 (A).
Which has the wider choice of gears?12Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”9Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”AheadThe Ford 1510 (A) has 33% more forward gears (3 gears) than the Ford 1520 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
Which offers a creeper range?——No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 1510 (A) and the 1520 (A).
Which is faster on the road?20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”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, “Ford 1510”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?—independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1510 (A).
Which drives on both axles?Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1510”Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1983–19861987–1998EvenSame era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Ford 1520 (A) has 35% more lift (225 kg / 496 lb) than the Ford 1510 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The Ford 1510 (A) has 33% more forward gears (3 gears) than the Ford 1520 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • Even on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
  • Even on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% 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 PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
  • Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
  • Same era: production began within 5 years of each other. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 1510 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1520 (A) 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