International Harvester WD-9 or J.I. Case 401?
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 J.I. Case 401 is ahead on forward gears; the International Harvester WD-9 is ahead on top speed.
- The International Harvester WD-9 suits road haulage better on this data: 30% (6.0 km/h / 3.7 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?
| Question | WD-9 | 401 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 34.6 kW (46.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick WD-9” | 36.8 kW (49.3 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | 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 WD-9 and the 401. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the WD-9 and the 401. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | — | 45.4 L/min (12.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the WD-9. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | — | — | No figureNo call on three-point lift: no figure on record for the WD-9 and the 401. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,654 kg (5,851 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick WD-9” | 2,986 kg (6,583 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 401 is 13% heavier (332 kg / 732 lb) than the International Harvester WD-9 (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 WD-9 and the 401. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 5Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick WD-9” | 8Traktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | AheadThe J.I. Case 401 has 60% more forward gears (3 gears) than the International Harvester WD-9 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the WD-9 and the 401. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 26 km/h (16.2 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “McCormick WD-9” | 20 km/h (12.4 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | AheadThe International Harvester WD-9 has 30% more top speed (6.0 km/h / 3.7 mph) than the J.I. Case 401 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 538 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick WD-9” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | No figureNo call on PTO speeds: no standard PTO speed stated for the WD-9. |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the WD-9 and the 401. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “McCormick WD-9” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 401” | EvenEven on drive: all two-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1940–1954 | 1955–1957 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The J.I. Case 401 is newer: production began 15 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The J.I. Case 401 is 13% heavier (332 kg / 732 lb) than the International Harvester WD-9 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 401 has 60% more forward gears (3 gears) than the International Harvester WD-9 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The International Harvester WD-9 has 30% more top speed (6.0 km/h / 3.7 mph) than the J.I. Case 401 (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The J.I. Case 401 is newer: production began 15 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 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, PTO speeds and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources