Ford TW-35 or J.I. Case 3294?
Which should you choose?
On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level. On features, the Ford TW-35 is ahead on forward gears and PTO speeds.
- The Ford TW-35 suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 540 rpm.
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-35 | 3294 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 121.2 kW (162.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | 121.3 kW (162.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | 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 TW-35 and the 3294. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the TW-35 and the 3294. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 87.1 L/min (23.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the TW-35. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,556 kg (10,044 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | 2,993 kg (6,598 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the TW-35: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35”); the 3294: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 7,412 kg (16,341 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | 8,126 kg (17,915 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | 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 TW-35 and the 3294. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | AheadThe Ford TW-35 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the J.I. Case 3294 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the TW-35 and the 3294. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | 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 TW 35” | 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | AheadThe Ford TW-35 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the J.I. Case 3294 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 3294” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1983–1989 | 1984–1985 | 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 Ford TW-35 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the J.I. Case 3294 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Ford TW-35 offers 540 rpm at the PTO, which the J.I. Case 3294 does not (as stated by the sources).
- 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 weight (both unladen weight, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- 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.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- 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 three-point lift: the TW-35: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Ford TW 35”); the 3294: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case 3294”) — 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 and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources