AGCO-ALLIS 8785 or J.I. Case 1694?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 8785 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1694 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 18% (640 kg / 1,411 lb) more three-point lift.
Generated by rule set compare@4 from the figures on the side-by-side table, allowed by route “the same stated configuration”. Measured figures are compared only with measured, claimed only with claimed, at the same test condition; differences within each figure’s tolerance are not called.
What decides it, question by question?
| Question | 8785 | 1694 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 82.4 kW (110.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 82.4 kW (110.5 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 8785 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1694 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft. |
| Which turns a litre of fuel into more work at the shaft? | — | — | No figureNo call on fuel efficiency at the shaft: no figure on record for the 8785 and the 1694. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 8785 and the 1694. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 109.0 L/min (28.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the 1694. |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 4,270 kg (9,414 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 3,630 kg (8,003 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | AheadThe AGCO-ALLIS 8785 has 18% more lift (640 kg / 1,411 lb) than the J.I. Case 1694 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 4,917 kg (10,840 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 4,350 kg (9,590 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 is 13% heavier (567 kg / 1,250 lb) than the J.I. Case 1694 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | — | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 8785 and the 1694. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 32Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | AheadThe AGCO-ALLIS 8785 has 167% more forward gears (20 gears) than the J.I. Case 1694 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 8785 and the 1694. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the 1694. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “AGCO-Allis 8785” | 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case 1694” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1998–1999 | 1984–1985 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 is newer: production began 14 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts. |
What does this mean in plain words?
- The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 has 18% more lift (640 kg / 1,411 lb) than the J.I. Case 1694 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 is 13% heavier (567 kg / 1,250 lb) than the J.I. Case 1694 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 has 167% more forward gears (20 gears) than the J.I. Case 1694 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The AGCO-ALLIS 8785 is newer: production began 14 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- Even on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm).
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 8785 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the 1694 has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources