Ford 4.000 or Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 4.000 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Universal-4 (4 DM) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 81% (12.2 L/min / 3.2 gpm) more hydraulic flow and 126% (717 kg / 1,581 lb) more three-point lift.
- The Ford 4.000 suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 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 | 4.000 | Universal-4 (4 DM) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 40.5 kW (54.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 40.2 kW (53.9 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 4.000 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Universal-4 (4 DM) 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 4.000 and the Universal-4 (4 DM). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 4.000 and the Universal-4 (4 DM). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 15.1 L/min (4.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 27.3 L/min (7.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | AheadThe Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) has 81% more hydraulic flow (12.2 L/min / 3.2 gpm) than the Ford 4.000 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 567 kg (1,250 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 1,284 kg (2,831 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | AheadThe Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) has 126% more lift (717 kg / 1,581 lb) than the Ford 4.000 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,434 kg (3,161 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 2,243 kg (4,945 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) is 56% heavier (809 kg / 1,784 lb) than the Ford 4.000 (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 4.000 and the Universal-4 (4 DM). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 4 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 5Traktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 4.000 and the Universal-4 (4 DM). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | AheadThe Ford 4.000 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | AheadThe Ford 4.000 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the Universal-4 (4 DM). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 4000 (USA)” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Nuffield Universal 4 (1954-1961)” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1962–1965 | 1954–1961 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 4.000 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 Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) has 81% more hydraulic flow (12.2 L/min / 3.2 gpm) than the Ford 4.000 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) has 126% more lift (717 kg / 1,581 lb) than the Ford 4.000 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) is 56% heavier (809 kg / 1,784 lb) than the Ford 4.000 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 4.000 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 4.000 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Nuffield Universal-4 (4 DM) does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Ford 4.000 is newer: production began 8 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 4.000 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Universal-4 (4 DM) 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