International Harvester 624 (A) or VALMET 702 (A)?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the VALMET 702 (A): three-point lift. It is also ahead on top speed and PTO speeds.
- The VALMET 702 (A) suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: offers 1000 rpm.
- The VALMET 702 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 26% (450 kg / 992 lb) more three-point lift.
- The VALMET 702 (A) 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 | 624 (A) | 702 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 41.2 kW (55.2 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 40.8 kW (54.7 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | 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 624 (A) and the 702 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 624 (A) and the 702 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 28.3 L/min (7.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 26.0 L/min (6.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,700 kg (3,748 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 2,150 kg (4,740 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | AheadThe VALMET 702 (A) has 26% more lift (450 kg / 992 lb) than the International Harvester 624 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,529 kg (5,575 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 3,365 kg (7,419 lb) to 3,450 kg (7,606 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The VALMET 702 (A) is 33% heavier (836 kg / 1,843 lb) than the International Harvester 624 (A) (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 624 (A) and the 702 (A). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 12Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | 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 624 (A) and the 702 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 20 km/h (12.4 mph) to 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | AheadThe VALMET 702 (A) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the International Harvester 624 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | AheadThe VALMET 702 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the International Harvester 624 (A) does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick 624 (A)” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Valmet 702” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1965–1972 | 1972–1980 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The VALMET 702 (A) is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The VALMET 702 (A) has 26% more lift (450 kg / 992 lb) than the International Harvester 624 (A) (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The VALMET 702 (A) is 33% heavier (836 kg / 1,843 lb) than the International Harvester 624 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The VALMET 702 (A) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the International Harvester 624 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The VALMET 702 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the International Harvester 624 (A) does not (as stated by the sources).
- The VALMET 702 (A) is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- 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 hydraulic flow (both pump flow, 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO independence: every PTO is independent.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- 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