International Harvester FU-237 or SOMECA SOM-312?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the FU-237 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the SOM-312 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The International Harvester FU-237 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 31% (5.1 L/min / 1.3 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 | FU-237 | SOM-312 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 22.1 kW (29.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 22.1 kW (29.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the FU-237 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the SOM-312 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 FU-237 and the SOM-312. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the FU-237 and the SOM-312. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 21.6 L/min (5.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 16.5 L/min (4.4 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | AheadThe International Harvester FU-237 has 31% more hydraulic flow (5.1 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the SOMECA SOM-312 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 900 kg (1,984 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the FU-237. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 1,680 kg (3,704 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 1,710 kg (3,770 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | 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 FU-237 and the SOM-312. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 6Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 6Traktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | 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 FU-237 and the SOM-312. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | 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? | 547 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the FU-237. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the FU-237 and the SOM-312. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick FU-237” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Someca SOM 312” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1961 | 1964–1965 | 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 FU-237 has 31% more hydraulic flow (5.1 L/min / 1.3 gpm) than the SOMECA SOM-312 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- 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 drive: all two-wheel drive.
- 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 FU-237 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the SOM-312 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, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources