Case-IH CX 50 or David Brown 1194?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the CX 50: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1893); the 1194: power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- The Case-IH CX 50 suits loader and hydraulic implement work better on this data: 100% (26.5 L/min / 7.0 gpm) more hydraulic flow.
- The Case-IH CX 50 suits heavy draft work (ploughing, cultivating) better on this data: 53% (1,115 kg / 2,458 lb) heavier and four-wheel drive.
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 | CX 50 | 1194 | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 31.7 kW (42.5 hp)OECD Test 1893 | 28.8 kW (38.6 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the CX 50: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1893); the 1194: power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| 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 CX 50 and the 1194. |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | 26.4 kW (35.4 hp)OECD Test 1893 | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the 1194. |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 53.0 L/min (14.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 26.5 L/min (7.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | AheadThe Case-IH CX 50 has 100% more hydraulic flow (26.5 L/min / 7.0 gpm) than the David Brown 1194 (both pump flow, as stated by the source). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,019 kg (4,451 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 990 kg (2,183 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the CX 50: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50”); the 1194: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,225 kg (7,110 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 2,110 kg (4,652 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CX 50 is 53% heavier (1,115 kg / 2,458 lb) than the David Brown 1194 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source). |
| Which may carry more ballast and load? | 6,000 kg (13,228 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the 1194. |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16OECD test report 1893, 2000 | 12Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | AheadThe Case-IH CX 50 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the David Brown 1194 (both forward gears, as stated by the source). |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the CX 50 and the 1194. |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | EvenEven on top speed (both top speed forward, as stated by the source): the difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call. |
| Which offers more PTO speeds? | 540/1000 rpmOECD test report 1893, 2000 | 540 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | AheadThe Case-IH CX 50 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the David Brown 1194 does not (as stated by the sources). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the CX 50 and the 1194. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 2WDTraktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194” | AheadThe Case-IH CX 50 is available with four-wheel drive; the David Brown 1194 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources). |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1998–2000 | 1984–1985 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CX 50 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 CX 50 has 100% more hydraulic flow (26.5 L/min / 7.0 gpm) than the David Brown 1194 (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 50 is 53% heavier (1,115 kg / 2,458 lb) than the David Brown 1194 (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 50 has 33% more forward gears (4 gears) than the David Brown 1194 (both forward gears, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 50 offers 1000 rpm at the PTO, which the David Brown 1194 does not (as stated by the sources).
- The Case-IH CX 50 is available with four-wheel drive; the David Brown 1194 is two-wheel drive (as stated by the sources).
- The Case-IH CX 50 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 difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- Not comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the CX 50: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1893); the 1194: power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the CX 50: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50”); the 1194: lift through the full range 610 mm behind the ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “David Brown 1194”) — 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