|
They were both pretty good tractors. I agree with the last writer who said an IH 400 comparison would be closer. On implements, to be fair "M" had access to only pull type unless he was specially equipped with three point hitch. IH had their own line of machinery. WD-45 had snap coupler unless he was specially equipped with three point hitch. So, Allis had a special line of machinery. So I think this is a red herring. Most WD-45's I saw in Canada were wide front end standards. Most "M"'s I saw in Canada were high arch row crop. A lot of aspects affecting manouvreability and handling would be tied up in this. I always thought the WD-45 gas had a snappy governor, so they did real well on highly regulated work like running a combine. They had a hand clutch which was ideal to run a roto baler as you had to stop to tie every bale. Great power too. I bet the later buda diesels were awesome. I wouldn't even compare one of those to an "M"gas. Old "M" was hard to beat just the same. Pull type equipment has it's limitations just like no live power. But the basic tractor remained unchanged since 1939 whereas WD-45's appeared in the early 50's. Ironically, both types of tractors began to be displaced by tractors like 35 Massey's and 504 IH's and D-15/17 Allis, around 1959-60 with high power to weight ratios. We all know what has evolved since then. If I was a betting man I'd say it'd be a draw. I liked features of both the WD-45, and M. By the way I currently run a small farm with an "H", and 135 MF diesel.
I like both of them too. Also have a restored Allis "B" as a collector.
| 
