Ford TW-30 (A) or Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the TW-30 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MB-trac 1800 intercooler has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler suits road haulage better on this data: 33% (10.0 km/h / 6.2 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 | TW-30 (A) | MB-trac 1800 intercooler | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 130.2 kW (174.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 132 kW (177 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TW-30 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MB-trac 1800 intercooler 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-30 (A) and the MB-trac 1800 intercooler. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TW-30 (A) and the MB-trac 1800 intercooler. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 57.0 L/min (15.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the TW-30 (A). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,410 kg (9,722 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the TW-30 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30”); the MB-trac 1800 intercooler: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 6,634 kg (14,625 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 6,350 kg (13,999 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | 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? | 8,990 kg (19,820 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the MB-trac 1800 intercooler. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 14Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 14Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | YesTraktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the TW-30 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | AheadThe Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler has 33% more top speed (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) than the Ford TW-30 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | AheadThe Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford TW-30 (A) does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the MB-trac 1800 intercooler. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1979–1983 | 1990–1991 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler has 33% more top speed (10.0 km/h / 6.2 mph) than the Ford TW-30 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the Ford TW-30 (A) does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Mercedes-Benz MB-trac 1800 intercooler is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the TW-30 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the MB-trac 1800 intercooler 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-30 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 30”); the MB-trac 1800 intercooler: lift at an unstated point, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1800 intercooler”) — 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, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources