International Harvester 606 or Leyland 384?
Which should you choose?
On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level. On features, the Leyland 384 is ahead on PTO independence.
- The Leyland 384 suits PTO-driven implements (mowers, balers, pumps) better on this data: an independent PTO.
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 | 606 | 384 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 39.9 kW (53.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | 40.2 kW (54.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 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 606 and the 384. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 606 and the 384. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 606. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 1,520 kg (3,351 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 606. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,365 kg (5,214 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | 2,140 kg (4,718 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The International Harvester 606 is 11% heavier (225 kg / 496 lb) than the Leyland 384 (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 606 and the 384. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 5 to 10Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | 10Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 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 606 and the 384. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 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? | 543 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the 606. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | dependent (stops with the clutch)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | AheadThe Leyland 384 has an independent PTO; the International Harvester 606’s is dependent (stops with the clutch). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 606” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1961–1967 | 1969–1972 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Leyland 384 is newer: production began 8 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 606 is 11% heavier (225 kg / 496 lb) than the Leyland 384 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Leyland 384 has an independent PTO; the International Harvester 606’s is dependent (stops with the clutch).
- The Leyland 384 is newer: production began 8 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 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.
- 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