Ford 1520 (A) or Ford 1700 (A)?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Ford 1700 (A): three-point lift. It is also ahead on forward gears.

  • The Ford 1700 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 98% (855 kg / 1,885 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 1520 (A) and Ford 1700 (A), with the call on each
Question1520 (A)1700 (A)Call
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?15.8 kW (21.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”17.2 kW (23.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”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 1520 (A) and the 1700 (A).
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1520 (A) and the 1700 (A).
Which pumps more oil for implements?27.3 L/min (7.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”29.5 L/min (7.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”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?875 kg (1,929 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”1,730 kg (3,814 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”AheadThe Ford 1700 (A) has 98% more lift (855 kg / 1,885 lb) than the Ford 1520 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
Which is heavier, for traction?986 kg (2,174 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”1,110 kg (2,447 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 1700 (A) is 13% heavier (124 kg / 273 lb) than the Ford 1520 (A) (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 1520 (A) and the 1700 (A).
Which has the wider choice of gears?9Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”12Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”AheadThe Ford 1700 (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 1520 (A) and the 1700 (A).
Which is faster on the road?20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”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 1520”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”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 1700 (A).
Which drives on both axles?2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1520”2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1700”EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1987–19981979–1982Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 1520 (A) is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.

What does this mean in plain words?

  • The Ford 1700 (A) has 98% more lift (855 kg / 1,885 lb) than the Ford 1520 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
  • The Ford 1700 (A) is 13% heavier (124 kg / 273 lb) than the Ford 1520 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The Ford 1700 (A) has 33% more forward gears (3 gears) than the Ford 1520 (A) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
  • The Ford 1520 (A) is newer: production began 8 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 hydraulic flow (both pump flow, 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.
  • 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