About 70% of farmers here in Lancaster County use mules for working the fields, while the remaining 30% use modern day tractors. Those farmers that use the mules, always seem to be working the fields and have their corn planted a lot sooner than those using modern day tractors. When I asked one of the local farmers that uses tractors, why this is the case, he states that the tractors are much bigger than the mules, and will get stuck more easily than the mules will. The mules cover more area so all of their weight isn't concentrated to just a little area like a tractor would be. He also stated that a tractor has either two wheels or four wheels that drive, but never the less, the wheels are in line front to back, so they are pretty much using the same path. A team of 6 mules on the other hand, are covering a width of say 12 feet wide, and can not only distribute their weight across an area more uniformly, but they also have more traction as they aren't following each other in a single line. Makes sense I guess.
Anyhow, that got me to thinking. Engines and Motors have always been rated by the amount of horse power they produce. Someone along time ago, decided that they can tell how many horses it would take to be equivalent to each size engine or motor. Are they accurate on their assumption? Is one horse equivalent to a one horse power rated engine or motor?
What's your thoughts?