International Harvester 444 USA or Volvo T-320?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 444 USA has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the T-320 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Volvo T-320 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 24% (5.4 L/min / 1.4 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 | 444 USA | T-320 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 27.1 kW (36.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | 27.2 kW (36.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 444 USA has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the T-320 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 444 USA and the T-320. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 444 USA and the T-320. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 22.5 L/min (5.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | 27.9 L/min (7.4 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | AheadThe Volvo T-320 has 24% more hydraulic flow (5.4 L/min / 1.4 gpm) than the International Harvester 444 USA (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 1,050 kg (2,315 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 444 USA. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,846 kg (4,070 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | 1,570 kg (3,461 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester 444 USA is 18% heavier (276 kg / 608 lb) than the Volvo T-320 (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 444 USA and the T-320. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | 5Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | AheadThe International Harvester 444 USA has 60% more forward gears (3 gears) than the Volvo T-320 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 444 USA and the T-320. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | 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, “IHC 444 USA” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | AheadThe International Harvester 444 USA offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Volvo T-320 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the T-320. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 444 USA” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Volvo 320 D (Buster)” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1967–1971 | 1961–1964 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester 444 USA is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Volvo T-320 has 24% more hydraulic flow (5.4 L/min / 1.4 gpm) than the International Harvester 444 USA (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester 444 USA is 18% heavier (276 kg / 608 lb) than the Volvo T-320 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester 444 USA has 60% more forward gears (3 gears) than the Volvo T-320 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester 444 USA offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the Volvo T-320 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The International Harvester 444 USA is newer: production began 6 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 drive: all two-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 444 USA has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the T-320 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, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources