Image not recorded
Ascot UniversalModel A
Ascot Universal 300
Sub-Compact
- power
- 27.5 hp
- displacement
- 95.2 ci
- Cylinders
- 2
- Forward gears
- 9
Head to head · Sub-Compact
Ascot Universal 300 vs Ford 1620
Image not recorded
FordModel B
Ford 1620
Utility
- power
- 27.4 hp
- displacement
- 81.2 ci
- Cylinders
- 3
- Forward gears
- Not recorded
Ascot UniversalAscot Universal 300
vs
FordFord 1620
How they compare
Headline specs vs. the whole Sub-Compact
Engine Power
▲ 300 higher · +0.1 hp (<1%)30027.5 hp
162027.4 hp
Median Sub-Compact Tractor26.9 hp
300 is in the 51st percentile; 1620 is in the 51st · 816 models
Engine Displacement
▲ 300 higher · +14 ci (+17%)30095.2 ci
162081.2 ci
Median Sub-Compact Tractor91.4 ci
300 is in the 55th percentile; 1620 is in the 42nd · 757 models
Cylinders
▲ 1620 higher · +1 (+50%)3002
16203
Median Sub-Compact Tractor3
300 is in the 11th percentile; 1620 is in the 50th · 802 models
Operating Weight
▲ 300 higher · +1,567 lb (+70%)3003,800 lb
16202,233 lb
Median Sub-Compact Tractor2,700 lb
300 is in the 73rd percentile; 1620 is in the 41st · 711 models
300 (A)1620 (B)Median Sub-Compact Tractor
Full comparison
Every spec, side by side
General Information
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | Ascot Universal | Ford | — |
| Model | 300 | 1620 | — |
| Category | Sub-Compact | Utility | — |
Engine
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | UTB | Shibaura | — |
| Power Output | 27.5hp | 27.4hp | ▲ 300+0.1 hp · <1% |
| Rated RPM | 2,400RPM | 2,600RPM | ▲ 1620+200 RPM · +8% |
| Cylinders | 2 | 3 | ▲ 1620+1 · +50% |
| Displacement | 95.2ci | 81.2ci | ▲ 300+14 ci · +17% |
| Bore | 3.7in | 3.3in | ▲ 300+0.4 in · +12% |
| Stroke | 4.3in | 3.2in | ▲ 300+1.2 in · +39% |
Transmission
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Constant Mesh | Hydrostatic | — |
Dimensions & Weight
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length | Not recorded | 112in | — |
| Width | Not recorded | 48.4in | — |
| Height | Not recorded | 84.3in | — |
| Operating Weight | 3,800lb | 2,233lb | ▲ 300+1,567 lb · +70% |
Hydraulics
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| System Type | Open Center | Open center | Same |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Power | — |
Power Take-off (PTO)
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Not recorded | Live | — |
| Speed 1 | Not recorded | 540rpm | — |
| Speed 2 | Not recorded | 2,000rpm | — |
Hitch & Towing
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hitch Type | Three-Point Hitch | Three-Point Hitch | Same |
| Hitch Category | II/I | I | — |
| Hitch Position | Rear | Not recorded | — |
| Hitch Capacity | Not recorded | 1,930lb | — |
Chassis & Drive
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chassis Type | 4x2 2WD | 4x2 2WD | Same |
| Drive Type | 2WD | 2WD | Same |
| Steering Type | Hydrostatic Power | Power | — |
| Brake Type | Not recorded | Wet disc | — |
Electrical
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter Type | Electric | Electric | Same |
Operator Station
| Spec | Ascot Universal 300 | Ford 1620 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Not recorded | Two-post ROPS | — |
Category context
Both models against the field
Engine Power
median 26.9 hpA · 51st percentile (27.5 hp)B · 51st percentile (27.4 hp)
Engine Displacement
median 91.4 ciA · 55th percentile (95.2 ci)B · 42nd percentile (81.2 ci)
Cylinders
median 3A · 11th percentile (2)B · 50th percentile (3)
Operating Weight
median 2,700 lbA · 73rd percentile (3,800 lb)B · 41st percentile (2,233 lb)
A · 300B · 1620Median Sub-Compact Tractor