Case-IH CX 60 or Hürlimann H-466 (A)?
Which should you choose?
The data can’t decide this. Power at the PTO shaft cannot be compared: the CX 60: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1894); the H-466 (A): power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
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 60 | H-466 (A) | Call |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which puts more power through the PTO shaft? | 42.1 kW (56.5 hp)OECD Test 1894 | 42.4 kW (56.8 hp)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | Not comparableNot comparable on power at the PTO shaft: the CX 60: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1894); the H-466 (A): power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466”) — 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 60 and the H-466 (A). |
| Which pulls harder at the drawbar? | 35.5 kW (47.6 hp)OECD Test 1894 | — | No figureNo call on drawbar power: no figure on record for the H-466 (A). |
| Which pumps more oil for implements? | 53.0 L/min (14.0 gpm)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60” | — | No figureNo call on hydraulic flow: no figure on record for the H-466 (A). |
| Which lifts more on the three-point hitch? | 2,020 kg (4,453 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60” | 2,294 kg (5,058 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | Not comparableNot comparable on three-point lift: the CX 60: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60”); the H-466 (A): lift through the full range at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition. |
| Which is heavier, for traction? | 3,140 kg (6,923 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60” | 2,840 kg (6,261 lb)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CX 60 is 11% heavier (300 kg / 661 lb) than the Hürlimann H-466 (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 CX60” | — | No figureNo call on maximum permissible mass: no figure on record for the H-466 (A). |
| Which has the wider choice of gears? | 16OECD test report 1894, 2000 | 15 to 24Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | 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 60 and the H-466 (A). |
| Which is faster on the road? | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60” | 30 km/h (18.6 mph)Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | 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 1894, 2000 | 540/1000 rpmTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | EvenEven on PTO speeds: the same speeds (540, 1000 rpm). |
| Which PTO runs independently of the ground drive? | — | — | No figureNo call on PTO independence: not stated for the CX 60 and the H-466 (A). |
| Which drives on both axles? | 4WDOECD test report 1894, 2000; Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60” | 2WD / 4WDTraktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466” | EvenEven on drive: every machine is available with four-wheel drive. |
| Which is newer, and what about parts? | 1998–2000 | 1983–1986 | Ahead (a fact, not an advantage)The Case-IH CX 60 is newer: production began 15 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 60 is 11% heavier (300 kg / 661 lb) than the Hürlimann H-466 (A) (both unladen weight, as stated by the source).
- The Case-IH CX 60 is newer: production began 15 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 difference is under the 10% threshold, too small to call.
- 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 60: power at the PTO, measured by a laboratory at maximum power (OECD Test 1894); the H-466 (A): power at the PTO, claimed (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466”) — not the same quantity, basis and condition.
- Not comparable on three-point lift: the CX 60: lift at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Case-IH CX60”); the H-466 (A): lift through the full range at the hitch ends, as stated by the source (Traktorenlexikon, “Hürlimann H 466”) — 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, hydraulic flow, maximum permissible mass, a creeper range and PTO independence.
← Every figure for both machines, side by side, with sources