Ford 7400 or VALMET 1102 (-4)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 7400 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1102 (-4) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The VALMET 1102 (-4) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 54% (12.3 L/min / 3.2 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The VALMET 1102 (-4) suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: four-wheel drive.
- The VALMET 1102 (-4) 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 | 7400 | 1102 (-4) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 73.5 kW (98.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 75.0 kW (100.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 7400 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1102 (-4) 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 7400 and the 1102 (-4). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 7400 and the 1102 (-4). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 22.7 L/min (6.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 35.0 L/min (9.2 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | AheadThe VALMET 1102 (-4) has 54% more hydraulic flow (12.3 L/min / 3.2 gpm) than the Ford 7400 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 7400 and the 1102 (-4). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,750 kg (8,267 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 3,900 kg (8,598 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | 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 7400 and the 1102 (-4). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 14Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | 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 7400 and the 1102 (-4). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | AheadThe VALMET 1102 (-4) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Ford 7400 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1102 (-4). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7400” | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 1102” | AheadThe VALMET 1102 (-4) is available with four-wheel drive; the Ford 7400 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1970–1975 | 1973–1980 | 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 VALMET 1102 (-4) has 54% more hydraulic flow (12.3 L/min / 3.2 gpm) than the Ford 7400 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The VALMET 1102 (-4) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Ford 7400 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The VALMET 1102 (-4) is available with four-wheel drive; the Ford 7400 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- Even on weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- 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 7400 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1102 (-4) 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources