TRACTOR PARTS Allis Chalmers Case & David Brown Farmall & International Ferguson Ford & New Holland John Deere Massey Ferguson Massey Harris Minneapolis Moline Oliver & Cockshutt Kubota / Yanmar

TRACTOR MANUALS

Allis Chalmers	Case	Farmall IH	Ford 8N,9N,2N	Ford
Ferguson	John Deere	Massey Ferguson	Minn. Moline	Oliver

Attention Forum Users: On the 28th of December 2023 at 9:00am Central Time, we will be taking the forums down for maintenance while we prepare the new forums for your use. Please click here for more information.

Discussion Forum

John Deere A versus Allis WC

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register

Author

Bud

12-01-2001 18:50:23

Report to Moderator

I just purchased a 1936 A and was surprized to find out that the horsepower rating ( according to Rummy's site ) is less than on my 1938 Allis WC. The A has a 309 ci engine rated 18.7/24.7 ( drawbar/belt ) while the Allis on gas is rated 24.2/29.9 with rubber tires and it only has a 201 cu in engine although it does turn at 1300 rpm versus 975 on the A.

Does this sound correct to you guys? I always thought the A was the more powerful tractor but apparently not.
Thanks

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Bozo

12-02-2001 23:41:28

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

Kerosene, diesel etc have a higher fuel value than gasoline or LP. The engine efficiency is the ability to extract mechanical energy from the heat of combustion and is related to the difference between the combustion temperature (hot) and the exhaust temperature (relatively speaking cold). The difference between the combustion temperature and the exhaust temperature is related to the compression ratio. Thus if one takes three engines of identical displacement and speed, the gas or LP engine (at 6 to 1 compression ratio) will develop let us say 50 HP, The diesel has usually be adjusted to develop 50 HP also but at much smaller fuel consumption (higher fuel value and 16 to 1 compression ratio). An all fuel, spark ignited engine will usually develop approximately 40 hp primarily due to the lower compression ratio required to avoid preignition or knocking. The Deere D had a water injection valve to limit this knocking. Looking at the Nebraska test for the D you see that it consumed relatively large amounts of water. The diesel also uses fuel injection which eliminate the preignition problem.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Handsome Jim

12-02-2001 19:22:14

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

I'm wondering how they compare torque wise. that's where the rubber meets the road

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Chuck McDonald

12-02-2001 07:19:14

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

Hey,
Another thing you are forgetting is that the WC's rated HP is at 1300 rpm or whatever...the A is at 975 rpm. A tractor burning kerosene will put out lower #'s than one on gas because its lower compression for one thing and also gas is a more powerful fuel. Also torque is not taken into consideration...there is something to be said for that HUGE flywheel spinning! The A is heavier also...so in my opinion the A actually is more powerful. If you reved it up to do a comperabe comparison...the A would put out more power than the WC...however you would loose some of the beauty of the slow running 2-cyl JD. I am kinda partial to the A myself....some guys complain about the hand clutch...but then i look at like a WC and see that they have two levers for the brakes and mine are on the floor. Kinda partial to foot brakes!!! Heheh. Have a good 'en gentlemen and keep em chugging...or purring if not a JD!
Chuck
AKA "Chuck Diesel"

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

The Fuel Man

12-02-2001 08:13:30

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Chuck McDonald, 12-02-2001 07:19:14

Everything sounds good except the gas is more powerful part. Actually kerosene has more BTU's per gallon than gasoline and in a low compression engine made to run on kerosene will make slightly more power all else being equal.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Chuck McDonald

12-02-2001 10:54:30

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to The Fuel Man, 12-02-2001 08:13:30

It may make slighly more power, however the #'s will be lower on a tractor on k1 than one on gas. Gas is more easily combusted than k1 as well.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

The Fuel Man

12-02-2001 13:12:52

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Chuck McDonald, 12-02-2001 10:54:30

It kinda boils down to how much energy is in the fuel everything else being equal. alchahol ignites \combusts\ as you say easier than kerosene and makes less power than kerosene or gasoline so does propane they both need a higher compression ratio to make more power. Gasoline will make more power than kerosene in a high compression engine so will propane kerosene will make slightly more power in an engine designed to burn it. If you don't believe me put an all fuel A, H or B on a dyno with stock compression and stock timing then get it hot and adjust the carburetor for best power and read the numbers.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Chuck McDonald

12-02-2001 13:29:36

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to The Fuel Man, 12-02-2001 13:12:52

Hey,
i am not doubting what you say, however a good example of a tractor on K1 putting out less power is a 520 JD all fuel vs 520 gas. Nebraska test #'s
Test 592
520 all fuel
D.b. horsepower - 18.58
pto/belt horsepower - 22.62

Test 597 520 Gas
D.B. horsepower - 25.73
pto/belt horsepower - 32.79
I am not trying to start an arguement at all. Also all my knowledge is from books and talking to folks, i have never actually compared a tractor designed for k1 vs the same one designed for gas on gas. All the people i have ever talked to said that the gas tractors put on more "HP" on paper, but actually a k1 tractor felt like it had more power...felt like a diesel. One thing that does hurt all fuled tractors is that the use of cast iron pistons which are heavier than aluminum. as well as being lower compression. I hope i have cleared some stuff up and not made a big mess
chaz

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

The Stranger

12-02-2001 14:52:30

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Chuck McDonald, 12-02-2001 13:29:36

The weight of cast iron pistons makes little if any difference in a relatively slow-speed engine, such as a JD 2-cylinder, since you are not accelerating the engine at a high rate of speed. The Fuel Man is correct when he says that an engine designed for kerosene or distallate will actually make more power than a distallate engine burning gasoline. However, the issue is really not more horsepower, but a more even and smoother torque curve, due to the fact that the heavier fuels burn slower, and provide combustive pressure against the piston for a longer time relative to gasoline. Gasoline combusts faster, and provides a faster burn and slightly more initial combustion pressure, but does not last as long with low compression ratios. Putting gasoline in an engine with the low compression ratio required for the heavier fuels will not in most cases produce an increase in horsepower, and in field usage, the all-fuel tractor will outpull it, all else being equal. Of course, the equation changes when the compression ratio is raised, cold manifold, and other engine components are optimized for gasoline. The example of the 520 gasoline vs. 520 All-Fuel is like comparing apples to oranges---the 520 All-Fuel would not have made significantly more horsepower with gasoline as the fuel.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Chuck McDonald

12-02-2001 18:45:27

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to The Stranger, 12-02-2001 14:52:30

Hey,
I see where yall are coming from now and agree with you entirely. I think that we were both right we were just trying to talk about two different things and compare them. Thanks for the great conversation
chaz

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

The Fuel Man

12-02-2001 14:37:14

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Chuck McDonald, 12-02-2001 13:29:36

You are not comparing apples to apples with a 520 all fuel vs. a 520 gas. The gas tractor has a higher compression engine. You need a test where the same all fuel engine is tested on both gaoline and kerosene.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

John

12-02-2001 14:34:08

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Chuck McDonald, 12-02-2001 13:29:36

first of all, look at the compression ratio of an all-fuel A, then look at the compression ratio of a gas A. you'll find the gas has about 6:1 and the all-fuel has about 4.5:1 and that is what he's talking about. put gas in the all-fuel engine, and you'll have less power than with kerosene. same way if you put kerosene in a gas engine, you'll have LESS power then with the gas in it. The diferent manifolds are designed for different things. hope this helps some.

John

p.s.: I like conversations, there fun to "listen" to!! thanks for having it!

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

newgen

12-02-2001 05:39:04

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

Horsepower ratings can be decieving. When the WC starts losing rpm it's done. The A will hang in there longer on a heavy load. "good to the last pop"

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

john

12-01-2001 23:36:27

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

your wc wont take the "lug" as the a will. It has 4 small cylinders, the A has 2 "big" cylinders and it has alot of "LOW END TOURQUE."
the unstyleds had around 28-29hp by the time they broke in completly, the nebraska tests were too close to the making of the tractor for it to be 100% accurate. but...like all 2-bangers, none of them are "the same!"

John

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Lucky

04-01-2002 11:49:10

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to john, 12-01-2001 23:36:27

That must mean the WC would have about 35 hp after breakin. Just because an engine is running slow doesn't mean it's pulling more.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Deere Jon 2000

12-01-2001 22:47:36

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

Iu just did some quick checking from the Nebraska tests. The "A" HP (18.72/24.71) was for a tractor on steel, burning distillate (1935-test 222). The comparable test for the "WC", on steel, burning distillate, puts its HP at 17.68/24.21 (1938-test 303.) They really are very similar tractors. Then too, this is a very early "A", most people are more famillar the latter "A" after the engine was made larger 28.93/24.64 (1939-test 335). I do however, have a warm spot in my heart for a "WC"; even if I've always been a John Deere man most of my life. I've spent a lot of hours baling hay with "WC" on the head end. Even with its hand brakes, it would hold its own, against an IH Supper H. A very persistent engine, even if it didn't had the tires for our sandy, hilly land.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

Bud

12-02-2001 06:46:55

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Deere Jon 2000, 12-01-2001 22:47:36

Thanks for the explaination. I grew up Allis Chalmers in northern Kansas ( Unstyled WC's thru WD45's )but always liked the sound of the two cylinders JD's. Now that I'm retired ( not from farming-went to college and never looked back at farming )I have started collecting tractors and I love the looks and sound of my unstyled A. I do find it interesting tha AC was able to get the same horsepower out of an engine with only 2/3 the cubes.
Thanks
Bud

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

The Dukester

12-02-2001 19:32:56

Report to Moderator

Re: Re: Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-02-2001 06:46:55

What 'cha gotta consider is the fuel/air mix inhaled by each engine in a minute. Say the A at 309 cu. in. and 950 rpm, and then the WC at 201 cu. in. and 1400 rpm. Then consider the compression ratio of each tractor too. My stock '48 A will destroy any stock WC or WD on a pto dyno, but it should, it's 321 cu, in. and 5.6:1 c.r. with a different cam grind and a cyclone head design, it's just made "hotter" 'cause it's got a straight gasoline engine, not a "soup burner". But it can't handle a WD-45. In the field with it's larger diameter tires it will pull heavy loads through more difficult situations than the 28 inch wheel Allis's can.

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

walt from w.tn.

12-01-2001 22:12:25

Report to Moderator

Re: John Deere A versus Allis WC in reply to Bud, 12-01-2001 18:50:23

thats right, the wc has more horse, but will spin out sooner than the a

[Log in to Reply] [No Email]

[Options] [Printer Friendly] [Posting Help] [Return to Forum] [Log in to Reply]

TRACTOR PARTS	TRACTOR MANUALS

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home | Forums

Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy