Ford 1720 (A) or Renault 351 M?
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 Renault 351 M is ahead on top speed.
- The Renault 351 M suits road haulage better on this data: 14% (3.0 km/h / 1.9 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 | 1720 (A) | 351 M | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 17.6 kW (23.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | 18.8 kW (25.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | 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 1720 (A) and the 351 M. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1720 (A) and the 351 M. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 24.6 L/min (6.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 1720 (A). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,107 kg (2,441 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 351 M. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,130 kg (2,491 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | 1,960 kg (4,321 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Renault 351 M is 73% heavier (830 kg / 1,830 lb) than the Ford 1720 (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 1720 (A) and the 351 M. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | 10Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | 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? | — | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 1720 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 22 km/h (13.7 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | AheadThe Renault 351 M has 14% more top speed (3.0 km/h / 1.9 mph) than the Ford 1720 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 1720” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Renault 351 M / R 7411” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1987–2000 | 1977–1981 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 1720 (A) is newer: production began 10 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Renault 351 M is 73% heavier (830 kg / 1,830 lb) than the Ford 1720 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Renault 351 M has 14% more top speed (3.0 km/h / 1.9 mph) than the Ford 1720 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 1720 (A) is newer: production began 10 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 forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- 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 and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources