International Harvester 504 or J.I. Case 510-B?

Which should you choose?

On performance, every comparable figure that differs favours the International Harvester 504: hydraulic flow. It is also ahead on top speed.

  • The International Harvester 504 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 299% (34.1 L/min / 9.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
  • The International Harvester 504 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?

Buyer questions for International Harvester 504 and J.I. Case 510-B, with the call on each
Question504510-BCall
Which puts more power through the PTO shaft?32.9 kW (44.1 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”33.1 kW (44.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”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 504 and the 510-B.
Which pulls harder at the drawbar?No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 504 and the 510-B.
Which pumps more oil for implements?45.5 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”11.4 L/min (3.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”AheadThe International Harvester 504 has 299% more hydraulic flow (34.1 L/min / 9.0 gpm) than the J.I. Case 510-B (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
Which lifts more on the three-point hitch?No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 504 and the 510-B.
Which is heavier, for traction?2,022 kg (4,458 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”1,735 kg (3,825 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester 504 is 17% heavier (287 kg / 633 lb) than the J.I. Case 510-B (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 504 and the 510-B.
Which has the wider choice of gears?5 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”4 to 8Traktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”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 504 and the 510-B.
Which is faster on the road?30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”20 km/h (12.4 mph) to 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”AheadThe International Harvester 504 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the J.I. Case 510-B (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
Which offers more PTO speeds?540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm).
Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive?dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is dependent.
Which drives on both axles?2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 504”2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 510-B”EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive.
Which is newer, and what about parts?1961–19681958–1959EvenSame 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 504 has 299% more hydraulic flow (34.1 L/min / 9.0 gpm) than the J.I. Case 510-B (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
  • The International Harvester 504 is 17% heavier (287 kg / 633 lb) than the J.I. Case 510-B (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
  • The International Harvester 504 has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the J.I. Case 510-B (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
  • 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 rpm).
  • Even on PTO independence: every PTO is dependent.
  • 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.
  • No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, three-point lift, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.

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