Leyland 384 or OLIVER 1450 (4 WD)?
Which should you choose?
The figures split: the Leyland 384 is ahead on hydraulic flow and top speed; the OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) is ahead on three-point lift and drive.
- The OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: 27% (580 kg / 1,279 lb) heavier and four-wheel drive.
- The Leyland 384 suits road haulage better on this data: 30% (7.0 km/h / 4.3 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 | 384 | 1450 (4 WD) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 40.2 kW (54.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 40.3 kW (54.0 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 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 384 and the 1450 (4 WD). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 384 and the 1450 (4 WD). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 30.0 L/min (7.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 26.5 L/min (7.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | AheadThe Leyland 384 has 13% more hydraulic flow (3.5 L/min / 0.9 gpm) than the OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 1,520 kg (3,351 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 1,825 kg (4,023 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | AheadThe OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) has 20% more lift (305 kg / 672 lb) than the Leyland 384 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,140 kg (4,718 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 2,720 kg (5,997 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) is 27% heavier (580 kg / 1,279 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 384 and the 1450 (4 WD). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 10Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 7 to 14Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | 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 384 and the 1450 (4 WD). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 23 km/h (14.3 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | AheadThe Leyland 384 has 30% more top speed (7.0 km/h / 4.3 mph) than the OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | EvenEven on PTO independence: every PTO is independent. |
| Which drives on both axles? | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “Leyland 384” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Oliver 1450” | AheadThe OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) is available with four-wheel drive; the Leyland 384 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1969–1972 | 1967–1969 | 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 Leyland 384 has 13% more hydraulic flow (3.5 L/min / 0.9 gpm) than the OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) has 20% more lift (305 kg / 672 lb) than the Leyland 384 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) is 27% heavier (580 kg / 1,279 lb) than the Leyland 384 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Leyland 384 has 30% more top speed (7.0 km/h / 4.3 mph) than the OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The OLIVER 1450 (4 WD) is available with four-wheel drive; the Leyland 384 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- 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 independent.
- 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, maximum permissible mass and a creeper range.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources