International Harvester Farmall 756 or Massey Ferguson MF 194 (A)?
Which should you choose?
On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the International Harvester Farmall 756: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on top speed. On features, the Massey Ferguson 194 (A) is ahead on drive.
- The International Harvester Farmall 756 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 70% (18.8 L/min / 5.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The International Harvester Farmall 756 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 | Farmall 756 | MF 194 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 53.5 kW (71.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | 53.3 kW (71.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | 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 Farmall 756 and the MF 194 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the Farmall 756 and the MF 194 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 45.5 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | 26.7 L/min (7.1 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | AheadThe International Harvester Farmall 756 has 70% more hydraulic flow (18.8 L/min / 5.0 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 194 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 1,875 kg (4,134 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the Farmall 756. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,946 kg (8,699 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | 2,700 kg (5,952 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester Farmall 756 is 46% heavier (1,246 kg / 2,747 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 194 (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 Farmall 756 and the MF 194 (A). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | 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 Farmall 756 and the MF 194 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | AheadThe International Harvester Farmall 756 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 194 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the Farmall 756. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Farmall Farmall 756” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Massey Ferguson MF 194” | AheadThe Massey Ferguson 194 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the International Harvester Farmall 756 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1967–1971 | 1980–1983 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Massey Ferguson 194 (A) is newer: production began 13 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The International Harvester Farmall 756 has 70% more hydraulic flow (18.8 L/min / 5.0 gpm) than the Massey Ferguson 194 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester Farmall 756 is 46% heavier (1,246 kg / 2,747 lb) than the Massey Ferguson 194 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester Farmall 756 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the Massey Ferguson 194 (A) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Massey Ferguson 194 (A) is available with four-wheel drive; the International Harvester Farmall 756 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Massey Ferguson 194 (A) is newer: production began 13 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 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, 1000 rpm).
- 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