International Harvester FG (MC Cormick-Deering) or John Deere Modell-M?

Which should you choose?

The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the FG has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Modell-M has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.

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?

Buyer questions for International Harvester FG (MC Cormick-Deering) and John Deere Modell-M, with the call on each
QuestionFGModell-MCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?14.6 kW (19.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”15.2 kW (20.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FG has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Modell-M 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 FG and the Modell-M.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the FG and the Modell-M.
Which pumps more oil for implements?16.1 L/min (4.3 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the FG.
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the FG and the Modell-M.
Which is heavier, for traction?1,780 kg (3,924 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”1,782 kg (3,929 lb) to 1,947 kg (4,292 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”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 FG and the Modell-M.
Which has the wider choice of gears?4Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”4Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 25% threshold, too small to call.
Which offers a creeper range?No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the FG and the Modell-M.
Which is faster on the road?15 km/h (9.3 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”16 km/h (9.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”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?550 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”546 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the FG and the Modell-M.
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is dependent.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick FG”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere Modell M”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1940–19511947–1952Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The John Deere Modell-M 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 John Deere Modell-M is newer: production began 7 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
  • Even on weight (both unladen weight, 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 difference is under the 25% 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 dependent.
  • Even on drive: all two-wheel drive.
  • Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FG has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the Modell-M 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, hydraulic flow, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO speeds.

← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources