Dumb Question after following threads

[Dr_Zinj]

Consider this. The old Ford 8N tractor was about 25 horse, and was considered a full-sized tractor. Yet it's dimensions and hp would place it in the compact utility tractor range today. So those terms of SCUT, CUT, UT, AG, etc. are rather loose and fluid. jeff9366 gives a nice breakdown in his first post in this thread, but you don't have to take it as Gospel.

 

[Trillium Farm]

I agree with you TSO, SCUT & CUT are determined by size & weight and not HP

 

[KennyG]

Consider this. The old Ford 8N tractor was about 25 horse, and was considered a full-sized tractor. Yet it's dimensions and hp would place it in the compact utility tractor range today. So those terms of SCUT, CUT, UT, AG, etc. are rather loose and fluid. jeff9366 gives a nice breakdown in his first post in this thread, but you don't have to take it as Gospel.

Time marches on. When the 8N was built you would have been hard pressed to find a tractor with more than 50 hp. However, even in those days the 8N was considered a "small tractor" and did not sell well in certain areas. It wasn't the HP that was the problem it was the weight. The heavier Farmalls, Olivers, Allis Chalmers, etc considerably our performed it. I know the small Fords had huge overall sales numbers but in the Midwest where I grew up they were considered an oddity.

I see the differences more as weight and 3 point capability than horsepower.