Ford 8000 or IMT 5100/5106?
Which should you choose?
The figures split: the Ford 8000 is ahead on hydraulic flow; the IMT 5100/5106 is ahead on three-point lift, PTO speeds and drive.
- The IMT 5100/5106 suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 540 rpm.
- The IMT 5100/5106 suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: 12% (544 kg / 1,199 lb) heavier and four-wheel drive.
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 | 8000 | 5100/5106 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 70.4 kW (94.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 68.9 kW (92.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | 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 8000 and the 5100/5106. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 8000 and the 5100/5106. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 45.4 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 39.0 L/min (10.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | AheadThe Ford 8000 has 16% more hydraulic flow (6.4 L/min / 1.7 gpm) than the IMT 5100/5106 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,200 kg (7,055 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 3,630 kg (8,003 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | AheadThe IMT 5100/5106 has 13% more lift (430 kg / 948 lb) than the Ford 8000 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 4,526 kg (9,978 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 5,070 kg (11,177 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The IMT 5100/5106 is 12% heavier (544 kg / 1,199 lb) than the Ford 8000 (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 8000 and the 5100/5106. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 10 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | 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 8000 and the 5100/5106. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | 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? | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | AheadThe IMT 5100/5106 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford 8000 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford 8000” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “IMT 5100/5106” | AheadThe IMT 5100/5106 is available with four-wheel drive; the Ford 8000 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1968–1972 | 1982–1992 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The IMT 5100/5106 is newer: production began 14 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Ford 8000 has 16% more hydraulic flow (6.4 L/min / 1.7 gpm) than the IMT 5100/5106 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The IMT 5100/5106 has 13% more lift (430 kg / 948 lb) than the Ford 8000 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The IMT 5100/5106 is 12% heavier (544 kg / 1,199 lb) than the Ford 8000 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The IMT 5100/5106 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford 8000 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The IMT 5100/5106 is available with four-wheel drive; the Ford 8000 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The IMT 5100/5106 is newer: production began 14 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- 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 independence: every PTO is independent.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources