- Thread starter souNdguy
- Start date
Janicholson
Well-known Member
In OOMPH terms each has one third more. Jim
Factory HP is 34 vs 25 (36% more for the M) in round numbers. Weight is 1000 lbs+ or 25%+ in favor of the M. M is a true 3 plow tractor, H is a true 2 plow, in silt loam soil. 300 has 33 hp as opposed to 34 for the M and is maybe only 300 lbs lighter. 300 has the advantage of a TA, but for grunt I would favor the M.
Zachary Hoyt
Well-known Member
The other nice thing about a 300 is that they could come with the fast hitch and IPTO as well as the TA, though some were ordered without some or any of those features. I am looking forward to haying with my 300 this year, I think it should be much handier than the H I have been using. I personally like the look of the H and M better and parts for them are very widely available and even cheaper than 300 parts.
Zach
Zach
Stumpy(NH)
Member
Chris, I was bowled over when I started to realize the power in my M. The low end tourqe is wild. My H is a decent machine that will go most places in 5th weighig around 4000 lbs. some hills require a downshift to 4th. The M? Mine weighs in around 6600 lbs and will go in 5th gear whereever I point it!
In my opinion they are twice the pull to an H.
Stumpy
In my opinion they are twice the pull to an H.
Stumpy
SadFarmall
Member
When working the M has far more pulling power than the H. We always had the Farmall M for working and I had never driven a Farmall H until last year. Nice tractor and very capable, but nowhere near the power of the M.
SadFarmall
SadFarmall
mike1972chev
Well-known Member
NOT to "stir the pot" ,but I plowed with a Super H that would plow with a 3x14 behind it well and had power like an M,but like the owner was telling me,It was HIGHLY MODIFIED to do such a feat.(MAJOR engine work!!!! 
Just thought it was "cool" to mention!)
But like has been said below by all, STOCK H VS STOCK M: you are looking about the difference of being able to pull 1 more bottom on a plow with the M on average IMHO.
Just thought it was "cool" to mention!)But like has been said below by all, STOCK H VS STOCK M: you are looking about the difference of being able to pull 1 more bottom on a plow with the M on average IMHO.
John M
Well-known Member
- Location
- Nunyafn business
Ill let you drive up here and try both if ya want to!!!! M is going to seem like a different tractor compared to the H. You can get an H up into the numbers of an M, but its just going to have that grunt the M has. The one 300 we had would do everything the Ms would do around our place, and us a little less gas. I guess it depends on what youre wanting to do as to which one would be better.
Not many tractors left that have engine parts the same as they left the factory. That said a M is going to have at least 50 foot pounds of engine torque and some with more than a average 300. Unless the M is in bad shape. If you don't need the weight or power a H uses less fuel.
If you want live hydraulics and a IPTO a 300 equiped like that may do.
If you want live hydraulics and a IPTO a 300 equiped like that may do.
Super-H-Mike
Member
I have both also. The M is heavier and has way more pulling power or pushing power with a loader attached. The M also has great lugging power when working hard like plowing. An H is handy though, steers easier, less gas , and very capable too.
Prolly not MAJOR motor work...our Super H has an overbore kit...only mod, it"ll haul our JD 555 3X14" plow in most ground, but ya are kinda limited to 2nd gear...once just cuz I was told it wouldn"t I made a couple passes with our 3x16" IH plow (made sure it was purrrrrrfect ground) but as a rule I have her pullin the lil genius 2x14" so I don"t strain her...let the strainin" get done on the sled! LOL Course that wasn"t as impressive as the time this guy kept ribbin" my Father who was plowing with his 2N ford with a Ferguson 2x14" 3pt plow...guy has a beautifully restored 600 Ford with and 800 engine (was an industrial stationary unit) in it..."Hey you"re holding me up with that lil thing and I"m pullin" 3 bottoms!" Dad finally told him to pull out and unhook, backed the 2N in hooked adjusted and went to plowin! LOL Beautiful river ground, was a 3x12" 3pt Ferguson plow, and the 2N DOES have a lil engine work...but Dad never got ribbed by him again!
mike1972chev
Well-known Member
I do not wanna "thread hack" Soundguy's post on here. But yea, I was using second gear on the MODIFIED Super H to pull the 3x14s and it was doing it all day long in "mucky" ground.(And I do mean it was going all day.)
But still I say STOCK H = 2 bottom plow STOCK M = 3 bottom plow (Unless ground conditions really "SUCK" and then I have seen an M have to "drop down" use a 2 bottom plow to break the hard ground.) IMHO!
But still I say STOCK H = 2 bottom plow STOCK M = 3 bottom plow (Unless ground conditions really "SUCK" and then I have seen an M have to "drop down" use a 2 bottom plow to break the hard ground.) IMHO!
Anonymous-0
Well-known Member
An M is a beefcake compared to an H. I have run H's and M's both. Have also worked on both. M is taller, heavier, more powerful, etc. My grandfather farmed til the early 70's with an M and an H. The M did all the grunt work on about 200 acres of crop. Mounted corn picker, pulling silage chopper and wagon, plowing. The H did the cultivating, disc, pulling wagon, running augers. Even then, the H was not a go to tractor for power, it was the smaller model, practical because you have to make a profit and it burned less gas, and was cheaper to purchase. I did some plowing this summer with a H, breaking new ground, 2 X 14 is all it can do, and that was taxing its ability in that dry sod. Now adays I would use an H for a 5 ft mower, pulling wagons, and light tasks. If I had a choice between the 2 I would 100% choose an M if I were getting another one. The scale of everything got bigger these days, # acres, size of augers, etc, The H just cannot offer what an M can as a chore tractor on a farm these days.
Oh I agree totally...big dif btween H and M, when ya start mixin the Supers in it's a whole different ball game...plowing is a good measure of comparison though: like when ya compare a Super C to a straight H...the weight makes a difference: plowing and holding back a load are about the only two instance where a straight H is better at anything than a Super C, and the same can be said of the Super H vs straight M comparison!
There is no set rule. They all run different. A lot of guys barely scratch the soil when plowing. We always turn the top of the clay up here in Pa.
There is no SH that will pull a 3 x 16 plow in sod all day long. Maybe in 1st on a dry day with about 8 lbs of air in the tires per side. Fact is if you don't plow deep enough, the crop roots don't do well becasue the soil is compacted. Also the old 300 plows nicely with the torque and all of the new features they had. The 300 will out plow a SH also.
flambeauone
Member
My M loafs with a 2-16 around here in clay but, that's the only plow I have. I don't believe you are gonna find very many truly stock tractors to compare any more though. My experience is only with the H and M. The M I have rarely has to downshift on the road around here,Its pretty hilly also.The H definately didnt lugging capability the M does. In my opinion I would rather have an M if I needed a smaller farmall than that I would want a Super C.
SadFarmall
Member
I don't have great knowledge of 5th gear driving on a Farmall H. Only ever used on our farm driveway to get up to the road. On the Farmall M I have done many miles in 5th gear. It won't go up various hills in top gear and I have an iron clad rule. If it doesn't go up in 5th gear, it NEVER goes down it in 5th gear either. I remember when I started driving on the road the difference between the M and AW-7 Diesel, with its 264 cubic inch diesel, which climbed most inclines, within reason, where the M just wouldn't. I'm pretty wary of 5th gear at any time. There is very little difference between getting there faster and not getting there at all.
SadFarmall
SadFarmall
I now have both an h and an M (just bought an M 3 weeks ago). IMOP It would be nice if 5th gear on both was more in 12.5 mph range instead of the 16.5 mph range. Would be much safer as well as provide 25% more torque that is otherwise lacking in road gear. (Comparable vintage Deere's were more in the 11 mph range for road gear)
While I am being picky an additional gear in the 6.5 - 7 mph range would be nice too. I realize Supers gained that but they also lost a lower field speed gear to do it which I do not want to sacrifice any of those. I do not really want an M&W or Heisler 9 speed either since they overspeed PTO and hydraulics. Oh well - nothing like wishful thinking. Regardless, for a design originating in the 1930's they still did get quite a bit right.
While I am being picky an additional gear in the 6.5 - 7 mph range would be nice too. I realize Supers gained that but they also lost a lower field speed gear to do it which I do not want to sacrifice any of those. I do not really want an M&W or Heisler 9 speed either since they overspeed PTO and hydraulics. Oh well - nothing like wishful thinking. Regardless, for a design originating in the 1930's they still did get quite a bit right.
International marketed the Farmall h as the do everything tractor and perfect size for farms up to 160 acres. Of course that was back during a time when men were men and lots of hours were spent in the tractor seat day after day sunrise to dark.
The Farmall M was marketed as 33% more tractor than the h.
The Farmall M was marketed as 33% more tractor than the h.
Similar threads
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.
Copyright © 1997-2024 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