Ford TW-20 (A) or WHITE 2-150?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the TW-20 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2-150 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The WHITE 2-150 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 25% (15.1 L/min / 4.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
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 | TW-20 (A) | 2-150 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 107.4 kW (144.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 108.1 kW (145.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TW-20 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2-150 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 TW-20 (A) and the 2-150. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TW-20 (A) and the 2-150. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 60.6 L/min (16.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 75.7 L/min (20.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | AheadThe WHITE 2-150 has 25% more hydraulic flow (15.1 L/min / 4.0 gpm) than the Ford TW-20 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 3,680 kg (8,113 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 2,722 kg (6,001 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the TW-20 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20”); the 2-150: lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 5,828 kg (12,849 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 7,684 kg (16,940 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The WHITE 2-150 is 32% heavier (1,856 kg / 4,092 lb) than the Ford TW-20 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 8,165 kg (18,001 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 2-150. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 14 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 6 to 18Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | 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 TW-20 (A) and the 2-150. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “White 2-150” | AheadThe Ford TW-20 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the WHITE 2-150 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1979–1983 | 1974–1976 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Ford TW-20 (A) is newer: production began 5 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The WHITE 2-150 has 25% more hydraulic flow (15.1 L/min / 4.0 gpm) than the Ford TW-20 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The WHITE 2-150 is 32% heavier (1,856 kg / 4,092 lb) than the Ford TW-20 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Ford TW-20 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the WHITE 2-150 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Ford TW-20 (A) is newer: production began 5 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 top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TW-20 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 2-150 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the TW-20 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 20”); the 2-150: lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “White 2-150”) — 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 and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources