International Harvester 856 (4WD) or Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100?
Which should you choose?
On performance, no comparable figure differs by more than its threshold: on this data the machines are level.
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 | 856 (4WD) | MB trac 1100 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 70.3 kW (94.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 71.3 kW (95.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | 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 856 (4WD) and the MB trac 1100. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 856 (4WD) and the MB trac 1100. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 45.5 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 44.3 L/min (11.7 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | EvenEven on hydraulic flow (both pump flow, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | 4,500 kg (9,921 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the 856 (4WD). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,901 kg (8,600 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 5,540 kg (12,214 lb) to 6,000 kg (13,228 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is 42% heavier (1,639 kg / 3,613 lb) than the International Harvester 856 (4WD) (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 856 (4WD) and the MB trac 1100. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 14Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | 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 856 (4WD) and the MB trac 1100. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 856 (4WD) and the MB trac 1100. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “IHC 856” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1967–1971 | 1976–1986 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is newer: production began 9 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is 42% heavier (1,639 kg / 3,613 lb) than the International Harvester 856 (4WD) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Mercedes-Benz MB trac 1100 is newer: production began 9 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 hydraulic flow (both pump flow, 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 figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- 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