International Harvester 453 or WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45 A?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 453 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-45 A has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 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 | 453 | WT-45 A | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 33.1 kW (44.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 33.1 kW (44.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 453 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-45 A 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 453 and the WT-45 A. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 453 and the WT-45 A. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 28.7 L/min (7.6 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the WT-45 A. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,410 kg (3,109 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 1,800 kg (3,968 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 453: lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453”); the WT-45 A: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,180 kg (4,806 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 1,950 kg (4,299 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester 453 is 12% heavier (230 kg / 507 lb) than the WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A (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 453 and the WT-45 A. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | 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 453 and the WT-45 A. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 20 km/h (12.4 mph) to 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | AheadThe WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the International Harvester 453 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A” | AheadThe WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A is available with four-wheel drive; the International Harvester 453 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1971–1975 | 1968–1970 | 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 International Harvester 453 is 12% heavier (230 kg / 507 lb) than the WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the International Harvester 453 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The WARCHALOWSKI-MC CORMICK WT-45A is available with four-wheel drive; the International Harvester 453 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- 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 power at the PTO shaft: the 453 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the WT-45 A 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 453: lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 453”); the WT-45 A: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Warchalowski WT 45 A”) — 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