Ford 2610 or Ford 2910?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the Ford 2910: hydraulic flow.
- The Ford 2910 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 33% (7.2 L/min / 1.9 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
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 | 2610 | 2910 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 26.9 kW (36.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 26.9 kW (36.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | 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 2610 and the 2910. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 2610 and the 2910. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 21.8 L/min (5.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 29.0 L/min (7.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | AheadThe Ford 2910 has 33% more hydraulic flow (7.2 L/min / 1.9 gpm) than the Ford 2610 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,413 kg (3,115 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 2,682 kg (5,913 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 2610: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610”); the 2910: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,804 kg (3,977 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 2,200 kg (4,850 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 2910 is 22% heavier (396 kg / 873 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 2610 and the 2910. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | 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? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 2610 and the 2910. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 29 km/h (18.0 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 30.0 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | 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 2610” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 2610. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1981–1983 | 1983–1991 | EvenSame 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 2910 has 33% more hydraulic flow (7.2 L/min / 1.9 gpm) than the Ford 2610 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 2910 is 22% heavier (396 kg / 873 lb) than the Ford 2610 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- 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 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: all two-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 three-point lift: the 2610: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2610”); the 2910: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 2910”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- 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