Case-IH CX 50 or John Deere 1750 (A)?
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 1750 (A): power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- The Case-IH CX 50 suits road haulage better on this data: 50% (2,000 kg / 4,409 lb) more maximum permissible mass.
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 | 1750 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 31.7 kW (42.5 hp)OECD Test 1893 | 33.1 kW (44.4 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | 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 1750 (A): power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750”) — 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 1750 (A). |
| 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 1750 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 53.0 L/min (14.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 22.0 L/min (5.8 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | AheadThe Case-IH CX 50 has 141% more hydraulic flow (31.0 L/min / 8.2 gpm) than the John Deere 1750 (A) (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” | 2,400 kg (5,291 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | AheadThe John Deere 1750 (A) has 19% more lift (381 kg / 840 lb) than the Case-IH CX 50 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source). |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,225 kg (7,110 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 2,560 kg (5,644 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CX 50 is 26% heavier (665 kg / 1,466 lb) than the John Deere 1750 (A) (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” | 4,000 kg (8,818 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | AheadThe Case-IH CX 50 has 50% higher maximum permissible mass (2,000 kg / 4,409 lb) than the John Deere 1750 (A) (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16OECD test report 1893, 2000 | 8 to 16Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | EvenEven on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap. |
| Which offers a creeper range? | — | — | No figureNo call on a creeper range: not stated for the CX 50 and the 1750 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | 25 km/h (15.5 mph) to 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | 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 rpmOECD test report 1893, 2000 | 540 rpm / 1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | independentTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the CX 50. |
| Which drives on both axles? | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX50” | Two-wheel or four-wheel driveTraktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1998–2000 | 1987–1994 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CX 50 is newer: production began 11 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 141% more hydraulic flow (31.0 L/min / 8.2 gpm) than the John Deere 1750 (A) (both pump flow, as stated by the source).
- The John Deere 1750 (A) has 19% more lift (381 kg / 840 lb) than the Case-IH CX 50 (both lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 50 is 26% heavier (665 kg / 1,466 lb) than the John Deere 1750 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 50 has 50% higher maximum permissible mass (2,000 kg / 4,409 lb) than the John Deere 1750 (A) (both maximum permissible mass, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 50 is newer: production began 11 years later. We hold no parts-availability data, so there is no call on parts.
- Even on forward gears (both forward gears, as stated by the source): the figures vary by configuration and the ranges overlap.
- 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 CX 50: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1893); the 1750 (A): power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “John Deere 1750”) — 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, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources