Ford 7700 (A) or International Harvester Farmall 826?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 7700 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Farmall 826 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
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 | 7700 (A) | Farmall 826 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 67.7 kW (90.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | 67.7 kW (90.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 826” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 7700 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Farmall 826 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 7700 (A) and the Farmall 826. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 7700 (A) and the Farmall 826. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 41.0 L/min (10.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the Farmall 826. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,670 kg (5,886 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the Farmall 826. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,767 kg (8,305 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | 4,472 kg (9,859 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 826” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester Farmall 826 is 19% heavier (705 kg / 1,554 lb) than the Ford 7700 (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 7700 (A) and the Farmall 826. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16 forwardTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | Stepless (CVT)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 826” | DifferTransmissions differ in kind: the Ford 7700 (A) has 16 forward gears and the International Harvester Farmall 826 is stepless (CVT) — not called. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 7700 (A) and the Farmall 826. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 826” | 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? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 826” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the Farmall 826. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 7700” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 826” | AheadThe Ford 7700 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the International Harvester Farmall 826 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1976–1981 | 1969–1971 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford 7700 (A) is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The International Harvester Farmall 826 is 19% heavier (705 kg / 1,554 lb) than the Ford 7700 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Ford 7700 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the International Harvester Farmall 826 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Ford 7700 (A) is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Transmissions differ in kind: the Ford 7700 (A) has 16 forward gears and the International Harvester Farmall 826 is stepless (CVT) — not called.
- 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, 1000 rpm).
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 7700 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Farmall 826 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, hydraulic flow, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources