If it can go wrong it will.

They suposedly put that swept back axle on the 300 Utility to give it manuverability, yet a Farmall with narrow front would out manuver it everytime. Then add those 28" tires versus the 38" on the Farmall and the Utility became a useless piece of horsepower.

IH sold the Utility for less money than a Farmall. I'm certain they didn't build them for any less. I guess they figured since they destroyed the productivity they better give the buyer a break. For the most part the Utilities went to small farms and saw limited use. The power train which is exactly same as the Farmall except for rear axles, would make good parts tractors for badly worn Farmalls.

My point is - Different tractors for different jobs. My Utility mows, rakes and bales hay, plows 3 bottoms and runs all my equipment nicely, and I don't need a ladder to climb onto it. It's superior for woods work to most every other tractor. (For small jobs, of course. It ain't a skidder.) With double ring chains and loaded tires, I NEVER run out of traction in anything but deep soupy clay mud. Sure, the clutch is stiff, but so what? I don;t sit there holding in in all day.

Yes, I have a loader for it, and used it several years. My clutch leg noticed it, but not any worse than any other part of my body after loading manure for 7 hours.

IH wasn't trying to compete with Ford. They wanted and produced something an order of magnitude better! I had 4 Fords (at various times). Underpowered, poorly designed transmissions, weak hydraulics and no guts at all. THe only use I have for a N series is to part them out to buy IH parts.

I had 3 different Farmall Row Crops. Best use for them is to fix them up, give them a nice paint job and sell them to someone that doesn't know enough to buy a Utility. My last Farmall will be ready for sale in a few Months. 450 with ALL the bells and whistles. It'll sell for enough to finish the restoration on my 544 utility.

Interesting discussion! I had fun, anyway.

Later on I added Farmalls 560D and 656D to the lineup, never duplicated that two day total again. Mainly due to availability of labour. I have baled and stored 4,500 bales numerous times in a given day, but was never able to do it two days in a row.

My dad started farming with a team of horses and a Fordson. I don't remember the Fordson but he claimed it only added to the horses workload, tow starting it. For all it achived when going horses were faster. In 1942 he bought a new W4, traded that off for a new H in 1951. He said it unbelievable the difference between the standard and row crop with basically same power train. H was twice the tractor W4 was. The 300s are no different. IH thought that swept back axle was the cats meow. I suppose it could have been had they built a good steering system. I take notice, there has not been a lot of swept back axle tractors built in the past 20 years. About as usless as a pig on ice is what they were.