AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) or Case-IH CS-68 (A)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the 80-66 (DT) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the CS-68 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 29% (9.3 L/min / 2.5 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) suits road haulage better on this data: 20% (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) more top speed.
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 | 80-66 (DT) | CS-68 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 50 kW (67 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 50 kW (67 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 80-66 (DT) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the CS-68 (A) 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 80-66 (DT) and the CS-68 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | — | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 80-66 (DT) and the CS-68 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 32.1 L/min (8.5 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 41.4 L/min (10.9 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | AheadThe Case-IH CS-68 (A) has 29% more hydraulic flow (9.3 L/min / 2.5 gpm) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,192 kg (4,833 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 1,800 kg (3,968 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the 80-66 (DT): lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66”); the CS-68 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 2,520 kg (5,556 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 2,820 kg (6,217 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CS-68 (A) is 12% heavier (300 kg / 661 lb) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (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 80-66 (DT) and the CS-68 (A). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 12Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 16 to 32Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | AheadThe Case-IH CS-68 (A) has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the 80-66 (DT) and the CS-68 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 25 km/h (15.5 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph) to 40 km/h (24.9 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | AheadThe Case-IH CS-68 (A) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | AheadThe Case-IH CS-68 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | independentTraktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the CS-68 (A). |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66” | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1980–1986 | 1994–2004 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CS-68 (A) 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 Case-IH CS-68 (A) has 29% more hydraulic flow (9.3 L/min / 2.5 gpm) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) is 12% heavier (300 kg / 661 lb) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) has 20% more top speed (5.0 km/h / 3.1 mph) than the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) (both top speed forward, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the AGRIFULL 80-66 (DT) does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Case-IH CS-68 (A) is newer: production began 14 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the 80-66 (DT) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft; the CS-68 (A) has only engine power (gross or net not stated), claimed — a different quantity from power at the shaft.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the 80-66 (DT): lift 610 mm behind the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Agrifull 80-66”); the CS-68 (A): lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CS68/a”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- No figure on record for every machine, so no call on: fuel efficiency at the shaft, drawbar power, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources